I would like to know when will we get the TOS weapons and the ones used in the new movie? Also why can't the weapons be seen like in the ahow on our belts? I think you should be able to sit in your captains chair on the bridge also. Other than that I love the game and I am a new player.
You get access to more weapons types as you advance in rank. Plasma, Ploron, Anti-Proton, Chronoton, etc.
If you look around at the other Fed players some of them should be showing gear. Some but not all of your gear will show, if your character is Federation, if you are wearing it, and you have set "show kit" (or something like that), and you are not wearing Off-duty clothes. Go see the tailor.
If you want to walk around the space station with your weapon drawn hit the "H" key (H = holster).
Pretty sure the new movie took place well in advance of the current time period of the game. So those phasers would have been phased out by now.
...no pun intended...
First, huh? The last movie (JJ Abrams) was set quite a long time ago in the past, according to lore, but you're right, they'd have gotten rid of those weapons by now.
And no, I can't imagine keeping those older weapons around. By comparison, the standing militiaries across the world store weapons in armories jsut in the event of wartime. However, I'm reasonably certain the British Army doesn't have a stockpile of Lee-Enfield rifles someplace to be handed out, nor the US Army a stash of M-14s. They're old technology, that would be woefully inadequate. Phasers would be the same, I'd expect, particularly if you accept the STO conceit that personal armor and shields have a place in the ST universe. Older phasers would have much less effectiveness against "modern" personal defenses....
Ok, I'm game for TOS hand phasers or TOS movie phaser pistols, in fact I'd love to have some lying around, but I beg of you cryptic, distance yourself from JJ Abrams' abomination.
Regardless of it's popularity, it doesn't take the series in a better direction, it merely takes it in a direction that appeals to the vast multitude of young views who dislike deep plot and cerebral stimuli and prefer explosions, sex, T&A and sexy explosions. This is the generation that should gladly trade a story that is complex or challenging for 90 minutes of HD explosion and a bad a$$ lead who rips people's heads off like some deranged psychopath.
Yeah it sell, that great. But it only sells because people's expectations have fallen and their tolerance for deep stories is all but gone. Numeral popularity doesn't necessarily reflect a product's quality. And a paradigm shift in preference from deep stories and adventure to mindless explosions and T&A doesn't suddenly mean that making movies devoid of a deep and rich story is a way to make good movies, just movies that sell.
The JJ Abrams stuff sells, because people like it.
The fact that you and a handful of other trekkies dislike Abrams Trek and everything to do with it means nothing. Abrams Trek made more money than any two other Star Trek movies combined. Because it was the best Star Trek movie ever made.
Asking a business to ignore that because it doesn't fit in with 'your vision' of what Star Trek is supposed to be like, makes no sense.
The fact that you and a handful of other trekkies dislike Abrams Trek and everything to do with it means nothing. Abrams Trek made more money than any two other Star Trek movies combined. Because it was [i]the best Star Trek movie ever made.
And yet contains a glaring plot hole.
Spock's plan was to create a black hole to contain a supernova's energy to save the galaxy and Romulus. If he was successful, wouldn't a black hole of that size eventually destroyed Romulus anyways? Or was there a secret plan to destroy said black hole after it ate the energy?
Also, how did Kirk go from being a third year cadet (essentially a junior in college) to being a starship captain with the rank of full Captain? Over Spock who was already a Commander!?!