Enterprise-F Design Diary 1

[Archived Post]

There is no new tv series in production. And considering the LAST tv series they made was pre-Trek "enterprise" I think you all need a reality check.

I'm not wrong here. Hard canon is hard canon. The JJ verse is hard canon.

Everything else has been shoved off into a divergent timeline. Which currently only exists in reruns.

The next tv series? It might be able to pick up where something like Voyager or Deep Space 9 left off.

Or it might be a complete retcon itself.

CBS might work something out with Paramount involving the current state of the license. Right now they don't need to because the movies are movies and there are no new tv shows being made.

You all live in an alternate universe. I could quote Quinto-Spock from the film if you'd like, it could clear up your issues regarding this.

But again, it's all off-topic.

The Enterprise F has two pylons on its neck. Starfleet has decided that the Voyager look is in the past! And the new look for cruisers is to have the fancy new neck pylon design. Yay for starfleet!

[Archived Post]

'm not wrong here. Hard canon is hard canon. The JJ verse is hard canon.

No one denies this. The 2009 movie is hard canon, just like all the other TV shows and movies that were made before it. They are all hard canon.

[Archived Post]

There is no new tv series in production. And considering the LAST tv series they made was pre-Trek "enterprise" I think you all need a reality check.

I'm not wrong here. Hard canon is hard canon. The JJ verse is hard canon.

Everything else has been shoved off into a divergent timeline. Which currently only exists in reruns.

The next tv series? It might be able to pick up where something like Voyager or Deep Space 9 left off.

Or it might be a complete retcon itself.

CBS might work something out with Paramount involving the current state of the license. Right now they don't need to because the movies are movies and there are no new tv shows being made.

You all live in an alternate universe. I could quote Quinto-Spock from the film if you'd like, it could clear up your issues regarding this.

But again, it's all off-topic.

The Enterprise F has two pylons on its neck. Starfleet has decided that the Voyager look is in the past! And the new look for cruisers is to have the fancy new neck pylon design. Yay for starfleet!

Please see my previous response. It works just as well as a response to this post as it did to your previous post.

[Archived Post]

I'm not wrong here. Hard canon is hard canon. The JJ verse is hard canon.
...
Everything else has been shoved off into a divergent timeline. Which currently only exists in reruns.
...
You all live in an alternate universe. I could quote Quinto-Spock from the film if you'd like, it could clear up your issues regarding this.

1- No one is debating this. So, quit repeating yourself. It's like the third time you've said this, everyone's said they're not arguing your particular point here, and by now it's just starting to come off as a half-hearted attempt at justifying your other, misguided, points.
2- You're a little mixed up here. It's even pointed out in that movie itself that the timeline that that particular movie takes place in is the divergent timeline. The "Prime" universe is still a thing, and it hasn't been "shoved off" to anywhere. It's just no longer in focus, and there is a difference in what those two things mean.
3- See "2"; you're pretty much wrong. The JJ-verse is the alternate universe. Again, mentioned in that movie itself. After all, look at old Spock: He doesn't remember any of that movie's events happening in his past, because technically, it wasn't his. And he still exists, memories unchanged, because he's in an Alternate Universe.

[Archived Post]

The point here seems to be that Superchum believes (in a religious meaning) that the JJA movie is The Holy Canon of Trekdom, and anything else is non-canon.

Well, I'm sorry but you are wrong:

1 The JJA defines a NEW timeline and IS canon
2 Everything in the old timeline is still canon, specially for TV series

[Archived Post]

Wow, this old topic again.

Some facts to help clear a few things up:

1) CBS holds the IP for the Star Trek brand ... meaning anything to do with Star Trek still has to go through them. Yes, that means the 2009 movie still needed a green light from CBS. CBS also holds the rights to create Star Trek TV series, if they so choose to. So long as it does not involved JJverse, CBS has leway to create whatever they want. And in essence, whatever CBS says is canon, then it's canon (whoever holds the IP, makes that call).

2) Paramount holds the movie rights to make Star Trek movies for now. So yes, JJverse is considered canon. BUT, it DOES NOT replace the already established canon before it (referred to as Prime Universe).

Consider JJverse to be another Mirror Universe. IF the 2009 movie was based on the Mirror Universe, would you actually consider the Mirror Universe to be the Prime Universe? By all accounts, the answer is no BECAUSE of already established canon dating back to TOS. Just because there isn't a new show or movie based on Prime Universe, doesn't mean it's dead & replaced by JJverse's Trek Wars.

JJverse .... I just wanted to say it one more time :p

[Archived Post]

Wow, this old topic again.

Some facts to help clear a few things up:

1) CBS holds the IP for the Star Trek brand ... meaning anything to do with Star Trek still has to go through them. Yes, that means the 2009 movie still needed a green light from CBS. CBS also holds the rights to create Star Trek TV series, if they so choose to. So long as it does not involved JJverse, CBS has leway to create whatever they want. And in essence, whatever CBS says is canon, then it's canon (whoever holds the IP, makes that call).

Actually, the rights were divided in 2006. CBS has the rights to the TV shows only, and Paramount has the rights to the movies. So CBS does not hold the IP for the ST "brand", only the TV shows.

[Archived Post]

Actually, the rights were divided in 2006. CBS has the rights to the TV shows only, and Paramount has the rights to the movies. So CBS does not hold the IP for the ST "brand", only the TV shows.

Actually, I had to check on this to be sure when the 2009 movie came out. CBS holds the brand AND the TV rights. Paramount just holds the movies. I'll find that link ASAP & send it to you.

Edit:
"While the Star Trek film library and rights to make feature films sits with Paramount, it is CBS Corporation that owns the Star Trek brand."

http://trekmovie.com/2010/02/11/star-trek-helps-bring-big-profits-to-viacom-paramount/

[Archived Post]

The point here seems to be that Superchum believes (in a religious meaning) that the JJA movie is The Holy Canon of Trekdom, and anything else is non-canon.

Well, I'm sorry but you are wrong:

1 The JJA defines a NEW timeline and IS canon
2 Everything in the old timeline is still canon, specially for TV series

That's not at all what I've posted or said.

What I've said is the JJ-verse is the ONLY Trek being made right now that is hard canon.

The tv shows are dead. Static. An IP that is not growing or being used.

Maybe when a new TV show gets made, this changes. Until then, the divergent timeline that is the "prime" universe is dead in terms of moving star trek forward. Star Trek took a huge leap back, rebooted itself to Kirk and Spock and said let's go from there.

So any type of discussion that tries to say star trek ships are moving towards getting rid of neck pylons is misinformed. Star Trek moved alllllllll the way back to old designs. With the JJ-verse ships. That's what we move forward from.

This game is soft canon.

And even this game is moving away from the no-neck style you all claim the federation was all about. The Intrepid design? Dated and last century. The F is something new. Something cool. And I'm glad to see it moving forward with cruiser design style. I can't wait to see this ship in game with how cool it looks.

[Archived Post]

So any type of discussion that tries to say star trek ships are moving towards getting rid of neck pylons is misinformed. Star Trek moved alllllllll the way back to old designs. With the JJ-verse ships. That's what we move forward from.

Your problem is you are confusing RL with in game story. While you are right in all that you have said about how the franchise is being handled ATM, this game is set in the prime timeline not the JJ-verse. That being the case, the ships and storyline and everything else are based on what the future of the prime timeline would be, and the designs of the ships in the JJ-verse have nothing to do with that.

And just so we're all clear here: I really like the JJ-prise design :D

[Archived Post]

Your problem is you are confusing RL with in game story.

Game story? Game story is really quite obvious. The design you see with the two neck pylons? That's the game story. That's the winning design. That's what's being made. There is nothing to discuss in that area at all.

The game story already says that starfleet is a-ok with two neck pylons, because that's what the dev team is making.

What's so confusing about that? If anyone is getting confused about game story, it is the people trying to say starfleet wouldn't make the kind of ship that Cryptic has already showed us they are definitely making.

I'm on board with the game story. I want this ship to go live. I'm excited about it. It looks fun to fly.

[Archived Post]

It's been rebooted as a whole. There's the movies. And ... the movies. That's all right now.

The JJ verse IS the trek verse. That's hard canon. And all you're getting being made.

This game? The books? The reruns?

They're not what's moving the universe forward. For some of you I understand how hard that can be to accept. But that's how hollywood goes sometimes.

Actually, given this game's 'tie in's' to the ST2009 feature film - while STO isn't 'hard canon' per se - it is the only 'Original Star Trek Univese' set in the post Nemesis era (the browser based game in based in the Federation/Dominion War era, pre-Nemesis); thus I disagree that the JJ Verse (which I as an old TOS fan since 1969 I actually like a lot, honestly) is the only thing moving the the 'Universe' of Star Trek forward - as withoput 'Spock Prime' - we would have the situation as presented in the Star Trek 2009 feature film, thus the 'old universe' is still dorectly linked to the new one.

So, again, yes, STO isn't 'hard Star Trek canon'; but technically, neither is the old [b]Star Trek Animated Series of the 1970ies (which I also saw first run ;)); and yet A LOT of non-canon elements from that series managed to work their way into 'hard' Star Trek canon because of various writers across all the 'modern' (aka post 1987) TV aseries (TNG - ENT) and later TNG feature films.

CBS is VERY hands on with STO; and I would lay odds that future Star Trek project (be they in the JJ-verse; or the 'Original Star Trek Universe') could indeed make elements of STO in 'hard Star Trek canon' in the future. And IMO I'd say both Paramount and CBS are thinking and looking for ways to use STO to help promote the new Star Trek feature film when it nears release; and that'll be good for the film, the game, and the overall Star Trek franchise.

But in te end, no, the JJ-verse is not the only thing still moving the Star Trek Universe/Franchise forward by a long shot.

[Archived Post]

Cool, it a little guys ;)


In response to someone saying someone could sit inside the open area where the traditional neck would be, the underside saucer arrays would have that area in its firing arc. Also, having the torps mounted to a lower deck of the saucer, rather than the aft part of the hull may be possible.

Plus, maybe the ship launches support craft, and the bays "drop" the ships from under the saucer, rather than having them fly out an exposed bay.

Just because the model looks the way it does in this iteration, doesn't mean it will continue that way.

And damnit, I want the Tahoe Cryptic!!!!! You know what I'm talking about :mad:

[Archived Post]

Game story? Game story is really quite obvious. The design you see with the two neck pylons? That's the game story. That's the winning design. That's what's being made. There is nothing to discuss in that area at all.

I completely agree as far as this new Ent goes.

[Archived Post]

Heh..

Well, I still don't like it. At least as a ship carrying the name of Enterprise.

As a Starfleet design is OK.

But the decision has been made, and I just have to live with. Eeeew.

[Archived Post]

Personally, I find the design intriguing. So long as there's actually enough room for crew to use the dual necks to move between the hull and the saucer, the design is fine with me. I'm worried the ship will be TOO Oberth-like, however.

[Archived Post]

They simplified the deflector dish too much, and the saucer is a little too thick. And they messed with the curves a bit...I liked the original concept better...they almost seem to be tainting the design with the current clay model. I still like it, but I liked the original concept better than Cryptics modifications.

[Archived Post]

I'm just really really excited about this project. There's so many aspects of it that have tons of potential to make this game exciting while moving forward.

- The game story! A new enterprise gives Cryptic an amazing chance to tell the game's story with an Enterprise crew involved. I'm on board with that. Instead of waiting for small cameos of bit characters (Naomi Wildman or Josh Riker or Miral Paris) and mentions of more major characters in the timeline (O'Brien developing the personal shields for Starfleet Corps of Engineers) ... we get an Enterprise crew. Ahhhhhhh, I can't wait.

- Getting to fly that ship too! So while this new Enterprise can be used to push the story forward in a Star Trek way, we as players get the chance to fly the same make of ship. It just gets back to feeling like we're part of the show. That's the part I like best about the feature episodes you know? Flying in with the title screen appearing onscreen. This builds on that for me.

- Advancing ships past what we already have. Let's face it, Tier 5's been pretty boring. At least for me. And Cryptic really did go on a long strange path with endgame ships. Nebulas, Excelsiors, Galaxy X's and Galaxy Retrofits ... all these ships that I'm glad they made but it's like, we're in the 25th century and we've spent most of the time in-game flying old ships from the old shows. This is a chance to ... heh ... boldly go past that. With a new Enterprise.

- Fan involvement! Following through. I mean come on, they held a contest. To design the new Enterprise. And someone won the contest. And their ship is being made. That's just the most amazing thing ever. I really want them to follow through on that. And not make too many drastic changes from the winning design. That, to me, would be like pulling the rug out from under the contest winner. Making the winning ship, that's just too awesome.

So I'm hyped up. And full on board with this new Enterprise. I am eagerly awaiting the next update to this development diary. It's probably the most exciting thing I've got going for me in the game since they first said they were going to release a Nausicaan ship last summer/fall.

[Archived Post]

Having class variants in the tailor with a traditional "neck", or no neck at all, would help please the crowd (I think;)).

[Archived Post]

Having class variants in the tailor with a traditional "neck", or no neck at all, would help please the crowd (I think;)).
as long as the one neck or no neck options come with a trade off of some sort :) i'd totally be up to it

[Archived Post]

I like the original sketch better then the clay model. The clay model saucer looks too close to the -E and would look better if it was a little rounder. The saucer is too close the secondary hull and the saucer pylons look really thick from the front. Finally the secondary hull looks really fat and rounded compared to the drawing.

[Archived Post]

I like the original sketch better then the clay model. The clay model saucer looks too close to the -E and would look better if it was a little rounder. The saucer is too close the secondary hull and the saucer pylons look really thick from the front. Finally the secondary hull looks really fat and rounded compared to the drawing.
while the secondary hull is a bit fat, it's actually less so in the clay model, at least from what i see
as for me, i'd actually prefer it if the secondary hull's underside was a bit more like the side-view from the submission (that curved way it is now in the clay model... is a little awkward-looking to me)

[Archived Post]

as long as the one neck or no neck options come with a trade off of some sort :) i'd totally be up to it

:rolleyes:

There's no reason to be petulant about people wanting the devs to make full use of the multiple-appearance tech for ships in the game.

[Archived Post]

I think it's a little too early to be saying what I like or dislike about Cryptic's take on the design, since, as dStahl mentioned, this is the first of several design diaries, and I feel that the finished product will look different enough for me not to base my opinion of it on the current clay model.

[Archived Post]

:rolleyes:

There's no reason to be petulant about people wanting the devs to make full use of the multiple-appearance tech for ships in the game.
While I kinda hope there will be some customization options, the dual neck would probably exist in all variations of the ship, just like the moveable warp pylons exist for all Intrepid Class Ships, Saucer Seperation for all Galaxy-Retrofit variants, quad nacelles for the regular Tier 3 Cruiser and Advanced Escorts.

Which I personally don't mind, as the dual neck thing is an interesting feature that doesn't bother me. I don't expect Startrek ships to look realistic, I expect them to look different and unique to the franchise.

[Archived Post]

just like the moveable warp pylons exist for all Intrepid Class Ships

As an aside, I really wish they'd make that a toggle or change the main orientation for the Discovery pylons - they used to be my favorite, but now they look ooky when out of combat.

[Archived Post]

As an aside, I really wish they'd make that a toggle or change the main orientation for the Discovery pylons - they used to be my favorite, but now they look ooky when out of combat.
Well, I can certainly agree with that. :)

[Archived Post]

as long as the one neck or no neck options come with a trade off of some sort :) i'd totally be up to it

You know, considering the fact the devs give us so many options as is, I would not be surprised if there is going to be a version we can make in the ship editor that will have less than or more than 2 necks.

Example: Difficulty slider (remember that debacle)!

[Archived Post]

I really like the concept of the new J. I think it really grabs and the old and new puts them together nicely....

Heck I think I heard that before. LOL!!!

Anyway I think we can beat this bird to death with what if's, like my grandpa use to say "If a Bull Frog had wings it wouldn't bump it's but everytime it jumped!!"

[Archived Post]

:rolleyes:

There's no reason to be petulant about people wanting the devs to make full use of the multiple-appearance tech for ships in the game.
how was my response in any way pelutant?

[Archived Post]

I really like the concept of the new J. I think it really grabs and the old and new puts them together nicely....

Heck I think I heard that before. LOL!!!

Anyway I think we can beat this bird to death with what if's, like my grandpa use to say "If a Bull Frog had wings it wouldn't bump it's but everytime it jumped!!"
this isn't the new J, it's the Enterprise-F
if Star Trek goes that far, we'll still have the G, H and I before we even get to the J (and if i remember correctly, the J we saw was from an alternate universe, and therefore not the prime universe's Enterprise-J)

[Archived Post]

if i remember correctly, the J we saw was from an alternate universe, and therefore not the prime universe's Enterprise-J)

Daniels took Archer into the prime universe's future, a time where the Federation would battle the Sphere Builders and win.
The Xindi storyline were the Sphere Builders attempting to change the prime universe's timeline by destroying Earth and preventing the Federation from being created to oppose them in 26th century.

[Archived Post]

You rasie a great point, even at Wolf 359 or Chintoka, most of the ships that "bought the farm" so to speak had their primary hull get smashed to bits. In fact, the only time I've seen a neck get done in was when Jem'Hadar attack ships were making kamikaze runs, and it's a Vor'cha that we saw it happen to. Even the super fragile Oberth mostly died conventionally, not from pylon exploitation shots/damage.

In my "internal fluff manual" I'm guessing most people don't shoot at nacelles/pylons in a firefight because it wouldn't actually hurt the targets sub-warp combat ability. If you wanted to run away, sure, but if you want to kill a ship it isn't a valuable target since all you've done is crippled FTL travel...the target would still be moving and shooting.


For the neck...honestly, considering what structural integrity fields are supposed to do, I would think the main targets in an attack are *always* going to be A) Weapon systems B) Shield Systems C) Energy generation/distribution D) Sub-warp maneuvering capacity E) Command and control. Once any of those go down, you've won 90% of the fight.

From the fluff, as long as a ship has a working energy source and it's power distribution grid is solid, breaking chunks off of a given ship is not trivial, even for the 'skinny' bits. In Wrath of Khan the Enterprise took damage at the neck but she wasn't cut in two or anything, and that was a sustained, full power phaser cannon attack from point blank range. In fact, I don't think structural integrity even came up after that attack. In the movie it was a good target though, since the neck attack hit engineering (power distribution/generation).

Once you have managed to disrupt power/shields on your target you are going to be shooting at weapon hard points, power distribution nodes, anti-matter tanks, warp cores, impulse engines, etc.


Anyway, TL;dr: Because of structural integrity fields, direct structural damage is not crippling to a target unless it is dramatic and if you have the weapon power to overwhelm shields/SIF and shear off a nacelle/neck, you'd have the weapon power to snipe a warp core or bridge and pop the ship immediately.

[Archived Post]

how was my response in any way pelutant?

Demanding that there be a penalty for people who want to change how it looks.

[Archived Post]

Demanding that there be a penalty for people who want to change how it looks.
i'm just trying to consider the gameplay balance, and i didn't demand it (i said if there was a tradeoff, i'd be okay with it, not demanding it happen)

[Archived Post]

Daniels took Archer into the prime universe's future, a time where the Federation would battle the Sphere Builders and win.
The Xindi storyline were the Sphere Builders attempting to change the prime universe's timeline by destroying Earth and preventing the Federation from being created to oppose them in 26th century.
i stand corrected (and not just your quote, but from a little research)

[Archived Post]

The Dev Diary actually made me perfectly hate this design.....sorry, but I now find it more ugly than ever :rolleyes:

The shape of it, and seeing that it's almost like an Ent E, Oberth, Typhoon, combo......just blah :eek:

[Archived Post]

EDIT: Darn double post :o

[Archived Post]

The Dev Diary actually made me perfectly hate this design.....sorry, but I now find it more ugly than ever :rolleyes:

The shape of it, and seeing that it's almost like an Ent E, Oberth, Typhoon, combo......just blah :eek:
well, that may be your opinion now, but reserve your final judgement for the fully detailed version
that's what i'm doing, even as i like the look now :)

[Archived Post]

Redundant warp cores. Space for slipstream drive components. Larger size due to bulked up structure and armor. Repair drone storage. Heavily armored torpedo storage for torpedo turrets. Living quarters and storage bays for mechanized infantry. Enlarged fighter bays.


Whee....that's fun.

Of course it is, but I still want to see some sort of explanation in the game.

The STO writers may not be good in the sense that I would want to read a novel written by them, but the dev team as a whole generally does a good job of letting stories unfold within the context of the game (using more than just text to tell a story, which is what most MMORPG developers fail to do).

[Archived Post]

even though this dev diary came less than a week ago, i do wonder... when will the next one be, approximately?
anyone know?

[Archived Post]

i'm just trying to consider the gameplay balance, and i didn't demand it (i said if there was a tradeoff, i'd be okay with it, not demanding it happen)

It's only a visual change. It doesn't have an effect on in-game balance. xD

[Archived Post]

I think you are thinking about it way to hard. Speculating about the design intentions of fictional engineers and fictional ships is just a bit 'obsessive". The star trek universe is filled with designs to please our human sensibilites, to evoke emotions. The Akira looks the way it does because an artist said 'that looks cool" and then went about the justifications. Do you think an engineer sat down and designed any of these ships?

Calling people's concerns about the technical design issues "obsessive" is uncalled for. For people like this, which includes myself, the internal structure of Federation Starships are just as important as the aesthetics of the ships appearance. Even with the exessive technobabble and made up particles, Star Trek writters and design staff have made efforts to keep their designed rooted in reality. The technology and ship designs are believe extensions of past and current technology. The TNG and beyond art departments where "obsessed" when designing the ships interior and design details when the scripts called for them. The obsessions designers and other outside of the ST production staff (Starting with Matt Jefferies) is a major part of my love for Star Trek. The starships are beautiful designs in the aesthetic sense, and totally believable that they could in fact exist in the future. I don't have to "suspend belief" (that much) to accept the "reality" of Star Trek.

[Archived Post]

I think this diary was a great idea. I look forward to following the trials and tribble-ations toward a final design.

Having read some of the critical observations thus far, I'm reminded of a debate I got into with a fellow fan when The Next Generation first aired on television.

Me: So what do you think of the Galaxy-class?

Friend: How could they? It flies in the face of warp dynamics!

Me: Warp dynamics according to who, exactly?


Were his initials J.D.?

[Archived Post]

Yoyodyne Division? I assume they were testing an Oscillation Overthruster too? ;)

Didn't you know that the Overthruster is an integral part of technology in the 22nd Centry and onward.

The ST production staff were big fans of the "Buckaroo Banzai" films. They stuck overthrusters all over the the place. Take a gander at Doug Drexlers: Drexfiles to see (link below).

http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Adrexfiles.wordpress.com+overthrust er&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a.

[Archived Post]

LOL
oh wow.

Anyway, for everyone complaining about the neck. The Enterprise J looked kinda flimsy on the pylons, right?

http://suricatasblog.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/universe.png

Flimsy, yes, flimsy.

The reason for the thin pylons is the same reason the original NCC-1701 has thin. Matt Jeffries wanted show a ship that was almost magical in terms of it's high technology. Powerful propulsion engines set far away from the mail hull set on seemingly thin and flimsy pylons. And yet they propel this huge vessel through space at multiples the speed of light. Dough Drexler used the same aesthetic in designing the Enterprise-J.

[Archived Post]

Simply this, Starfleet as a military organization primarily a navy based organization. Evaluates its designs for new ship classes based on a number of Criteria.

1. Removal of structural defects exposed in previous classes through combat with the enemy.
2. A substantial improvement across the board in ship wide performance. In virtually every system on the ship.
3. Cost and Resource efficient construction.
4. The ability to engage in substantial long term combat actions and survive with the absolute minimal loss in crew.

Now, this new Enterprise design. Through the use of technobabble and other fictional sci fi mumbo jumbo. Can readily check off numbers 2 and 3 on my little list there. Trust me a real navy requirement list would be way longer and more extensive. However based on actual cannon, this design cannot and will not satisfy numbers 1 and 4. The Sovereign class was soundly the only Enterprise to date that could have rammed another ship, Like the Scimitar believably without tearing her own saucer off at the neck. This ship is supposed to be larger then both the galaxy and the Sovereign class. In all honesty with a saucer that huge, all an enemy would have to do is take out one of those necks. Sorry ladies and gentleman but a SIF is not doing anything at all for a neck that is structurally severed. Which two Quantum torps to one of those necks will do the job quite nicely in turning that support structure to mush. At that point all the SIFs in starfleet is not going to do a thing to keep that remaining neck from failure, structural stress from movement at impulse would be enough for failure. Which would be damning in combat. Not to mention warp would be impossible even for towing with that kind of damage. It would be an embarrassment to starfleet to spend all of those resources to build its new flagship only to watch her be taken out from a suicide strike to one of the necks....then watch the remaining one rip free and the saucer take out both nacelles and the whole ship goes up. That would be starfleet's HMS Hood moment. Only instead of having the misgivings of sending an aging under armored outdated old ship going against the most modern warship of its day. You would have the most modern ship of its day being taken out....by a stripped down kamakazi fighter loaded with two hot torpedoes. Any tactical officer with a brain would go for one of those necks. The fans who are against this dual neck design simply don't wanna see the Ent-F end up like the Ent-C where we only see her for an episode and shes gone, we want a ship that is going to stick around a while. Visually the design only has one fairly unique innovative feature and that is the dual neck. For the most part it looks like more of the same from star trek ship design....and that is another kitbash. There is nothing about this design other then the neck that screams new direction. Even the new clay model screams. Sovereign....and if we are just going to get a Sovereign with a bonnet style neck then why bother. What is it about this design that makes it so far superior to its predecessor. Every Enterprise had vast marked improvements over its predecessors that made it tactically and technically superior in every way. It takes more then a visual curiosity to make a Enterprise. You have the general shape given to you by the artist please do not, turn it into a Sovereign kitbash, which is what the new clay model is starting very much to look like. One last thing, please guys look at the other threads calling for runners up and fuzzy's ship to be put into the game. They are not the Enterprise but they do deserve to be in the game none the less, a lot of us would pay for some of these designs in the c-store!

[Archived Post]

Woah, wall of text.

Would you please break it down in legible paragraphs?

[Archived Post]

I liked some of the other designs as well, but I think this one will be fine. Also, The Necks would be structurally sound, and for all I care, they could say they're plated with 2 feet of solid neutronium for structural strength.

This ship is supposed to have saucer seperations (why, I have no clue. Never thought saucer sep was all that cool) So the dual necks would minimize the connective area. I don't know if the dev's plan to add a 3rd, smaller, neck down the middle, but its surely doable, and then the arguement about the structural stability of the outlying necks turns right around. Then what?

The detail on the top of the clay model was just to give it some texture and scale. Didn't any of you read the dev diary? lol. Most likely that'll go, replaced by something unique, and perhaps more fitting.

[Archived Post]

I, for one, don't see the necks as a structural issue - I just think it looks bad, especially with how the necks wrap and curve at the join with the saucer. It makes my eyes hurt in a 'Lovecraftian geometry' sort of way. And since the neck is the only part that isn't just a bland, lumpy mashup of Enterprises that have come before... *shrug*

The only thing I'd almost like about it is the whole 'necks as warp ring' idea that Ihle went with while refining the idea after the announcement (I can't remember if he came up with it or it was suggested to him). Then there would be something resembling a purpose. Of course, since Cryptic rejected all his input besides the concept drawing, I'm sure that won't be happening.

[Archived Post]

ah now i remember what is familiar with the ship, i used to pilot a ship similar to this back when starfleet command series was around....those were good days

http://www.google.com/search?q=Ulysses+Class+Dreadnought&rls=com.microsoft:en-us:IE-Address&oe=&rlz=&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbm=isch&source=og&sa=N&hl=en&tab=wi&biw=1916&bih=1060

[Archived Post]

ah now i remember what is familiar with the ship, i used to pilot a ship similar to this back when starfleet command series was around....those were good days

http://www.google.com/search?q=Ulysses+Class+Dreadnought&rls=com.microsoft:en-us:IE-Address&oe=&rlz=&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbm=isch&source=og&sa=N&hl=en&tab=wi&biw=1916&bih=1060

Heh! I thought that was naggingly familiar...

Y'know, I never liked that DN. Always traded up for a BB as soon as possible.

[Archived Post]

good times indeed

[Archived Post]

I almost get the impression that the existence of the new Art forum has not yet reached the community. I would have expected the conversation to continue more actively...

[Archived Post]

ah now i remember what is familiar with the ship, i used to pilot a ship similar to this back when starfleet command series was around....those were good days

http://www.google.com/search?q=Ulysses+Class+Dreadnought&rls=com.microsoft:en-us:IE-Address&oe=&rlz=&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbm=isch&source=og&sa=N&hl=en&tab=wi&biw=1916&bih=1060

IF you think that one was close ... you should have seen some of the 3-D meshes that were proposed as "BB" designs for the USS Alabama, USS Missouri, and USS Iowa in the SFC modeling forum ! Seems like Azel has some good stuff as well.

Ah yes . the good ol' days !

edit:

This one does a pretty fair job of one of the old design concepts !

http://www.dynaverse.net/forum/index.php?topic=163369603.0

[Archived Post]

I almost get the impression that the existence of the new Art forum has not yet reached the community. I would have expected the conversation to continue more actively...

It would seem another graveyard is open for business.

Anyone wanna start a pool on whether there will actually be another dev diary about this?

[Archived Post]

I liked the ship. but it's the neck that i don't like. it's look like the Oberth. but on the other way. this could work for the Enterprise. But the only ship i want too see in the game is the Ambassador Class. Becouse the circle of the Enterprise is not yet round. We got for so far the Constitution Class, The Constitution Class refit, The Excelcior Class, the Galaxy Class, and the Sovereign class. So in other words We have the U.S.S. Enterprise, The U.S.S. Enterprise A, B, D, E. Only one is missing the Enterprise C.

[Archived Post]

I am going to say it upfront, I am not a fan of the design.
However, I can see how that space between the necks can be filled while honoring the orginal Enterprise, the one that fought in the Pacific in WWII. Fill that space with a fighter bay, honor the original Enterprise, not you Archer, or the first nuclear carrier Enterprise, or the one Chekov stole Uranium from in Star Trek IV, (Although a carrier, not the original).

[Archived Post]

I am going to say it upfront, I am not a fan of the design.
However, I can see how that space between the necks can be filled while honoring the orginal Enterprise, the one that fought in the Pacific in WWII. Fill that space with a fighter bay, honor the original Enterprise, not you Archer, or the first nuclear carrier Enterprise, or the one Chekov stole Uranium from in Star Trek IV, (Although a carrier, not the original).

The original Enterprise, huh? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Enterprise_(1775)) We can go with the first proper US ship to bear the name, if you don't want to use retroactive naming conventions. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Enterprise_(1799))

[Archived Post]

Anyone wanna start a pool on whether there will actually be another dev diary about this?

I'll take that bet. ;)

[Archived Post]

Now let's bet on it being in the next 7 days

*await's response*

[Archived Post]

I ment the one Roddenberry served on

[Archived Post]

..wasn't the next DTNE entry supposed to be released yesterday according to what Stahl said over Priority One?

[Archived Post]

I'll take that bet. ;)

Cheater :p

[Archived Post]

But you mess with the odds. I'll tell the bookies on you!

[Archived Post]

But you mess with the odds. I'll tell the bookies on you!
this is why i love you devs :) you're not like every other company that keeps info on updates on a need-to-know basis, and you don't keep yourselves from the forums
the way you interact with us, it shows you're real people, which is so great it's indescribable... thank you, just... thank you for everything you do :D and hopefully everyone will realize this sooner or later

(btw, i'm wondering... is there any ETA on the next Enterprise-F Design Diary? A lot of us would really like to know, if you can of course)

[Archived Post]

I am going to say it upfront, I am not a fan of the design.
However, I can see how that space between the necks can be filled while honoring the orginal Enterprise, the one that fought in the Pacific in WWII. Fill that space with a fighter bay, honor the original Enterprise, not you Archer, or the first nuclear carrier Enterprise, or the one Chekov stole Uranium from in Star Trek IV, (Although a carrier, not the original).

The first nuclear carrier USS Enterprise CVN-65 (Enterprise-class) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Enterprise_(CVN-65)) and the one Chekov stole radioactive particles from are the same ship (though in the movie the USS Ranger CV-61 (Forrestal-class) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Ranger_(CV-61)) stood in for the "Big E") The one you are referring to is the CV-6 (Yorktown-class) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Enterprise_(CV-6)). So far there have only been two aircraft carriers to bare the name.

[Archived Post]

I ment the one Roddenberry served on

Roddenberry was in the Army Air Corps (pre-Air Force), not the Navy, and flew a B-17 Flying Fortress... which is a bit too large for a carrier anyway.

[Archived Post]

I wonder if the devs will incorporate the idea of the saucer separation and the warp ring inside the double neck. ;)

[Archived Post]

I like most of the Model but the double Neck that also goes to the outer sides of the Saucer is something i really don't like somehow. If they would end more towards the middle of the Saucer i could go with it but the outer ends...nay..not mine. I hope there's a Neck Version that looks more to the standard even if it's a double Neck.

[Archived Post]

Hmmm.....anybody find any current news when the Enterprise F will be in game or at least what the current status is?

[Archived Post]

Hmmm.....anybody find any current news when the Enterprise F will be in game or at least what the current status is?
current status is 'they're working on it" :) and actually, the next dev diary is supposed to be coming soon
according to priorty one though, dstahl said they would give us a poll that have us choose what name the Enterprise-F's class, coming in a month or so, from when the interview was (great :D)
in addition, he mentioned that while the current look would be the default look, they will be variants for it as well, though what kind were not specificed, as far as i heard (sweet! :D)

EDIT: The new dev diary's out! :D here's the link: http://www.startrekonline.com/node/2492

[Archived Post]

I liked the new dev diary. I was tempted to start a "new" topic about it, but you got the link here so I dunno, a new one might be too redundant?

Anyways, I dug the new dev diary on the continued saga of developing the F.

Thanks for the devs for sharing the process. It's fascinating to read. And it's getting me pretty excited about the ship.

And the ship continues to be something I want to fly!

As far as promotions go, this one's working on me pretty well. So you know, feedback that dev team. :)