![]() |
USS ENTERPRISE 1701-F for FAIL
Personal Log:
To me this ship looks to much like the Enterprise E. Every other Enterprise A to E was a big change that everyone noticed. The Enterprise F is to close of a look to the Sovy. Which I don't like the look of the Sovy, it's to small compared to the Galaxy Class, every Enterprise ship over the years has gotten bigger then they bring out the Enterprise E assault cruiser ends up smaller then a Galaxy class. Doesn't make any sense. Now they are saying the Enterprise F will be bigger then a Galaxy class, I'll believe it when I see it. Honestly I'm thinking about just sticking to my Galaxy Refit or Galaxy Dreadnought unless this new Enterprise F has some impressive stats or special ability that might get me interested. End Log: |
As the flagship I dunno but as a cruiser I like it. TBH i don't think it looks too much like the sov.
|
To be nitpicky: If this is a personal log, why are you sharing it with everyone? They're supposed to be.. Personal.
On topic: Its all about how large they create the model.. Also, just because the Sovereign was smaller than the Galaxy doesn't mean it wasn't more advanced than the Galaxy. The Bio Neural gel paks, the warp core, the "hull hugging" shields.. ect. |
CapnLogan's E to F side-by-side comparison
Also, just FYI, the Sovereign was 685 m and the Galaxy was 642 m. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
You're mistaken. He was retweeting Adam Ihle's own tweet showcasing the picture.
You don't have to believe me, though. You can just look up Ihle's own post over at the TrekBBS: http://trekbbs.com/showpost.php?p=51...postcount=1838 My point was, I wouldn't take it as gospel that the measurements Ihle is sticking to are the ones that will be reflected in-game. By admissions of the Devs, they planned to make it somewhat larger than that. |
You are correct. I assumed it was CnL's tweet but it was, in fact a re-tweet. Hopefully Logan can give us an in-game comparison for us to chew on.
|
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:21 PM. |