Maybee the info is on the same page, with nice pictures ...
The only screen where u see the ring lowered is in the docked stage as in the picture ..
"When the warp drive was not in use, the ship's annular-warp nacelle was dropped into the vertical position; when the engines were powered down, or preparing to launch its auxiliary craft, the nacelle was folded horizontally into the primary hull."
Apparently this was seen in 3 different episodes of enterprise
"The D'Kyr-type starship docked at the station in "Bounty" had its "warp ring" tucked in the lower position. In "Impulse", the Seleya appears to have its warp drive partially recessed as well, as does the damaged Tal'Kir in "Future Tense". "
As for the other screen shots, there are several on there where it shows combat with or without a tal'kyr docked where it shows the ring up, and not lowered, which obviously takes place when not traveling at warp.
So without doing a review of the mentioned episodes and others featuring the vessel, it would seem that the ring is lowered when launching the support craft, and when docked, but is up when in normal flight or combat.
So in essence, screenshots would prove as much in this case as only a certified tech manual could prove more.
Hehe yeah, funny thing is it was a picture on that page that had me confused, this one:
My only issues with the fleet leader adjustment are the cases where one person has many alts as fleet leaders.
Can a fleet leader with multiple characters just change character and rescue themselves? One issue as a fleet leader that most fleets have is managing alts, why can't the system manage by @handle instead of by character?
I would like to see a consensus provision in fleet leadership, not applicable in our fleet, but if a certain number of different accounts confirm or agree to the kick the 2 week term could be removed. Mostly the reason being is some fleet don't want drama, but you can't control that, sometimes its best to cut off a head clean instead of letting trouble linger.
We still need a fleet provision option on a case by case basis instead of by fleet ranks. Or a whole lot more fleet ranks to make things work safely.
I applaud the fleet leader adjustments. They are a step in the right direction and can help resolve issues of both inactive fleets and hostile fleet takeovers. Killing two birds and perhaps more with one stone. Fist-bump for the dev team. Now all that's left is to implement the change live.
There's a lot that needs clarification from these patch notes, and no clarification seems to be forthcoming. I agree something needed to be done to help secure fleets, but these changes seem overly restrictive and prohibitive. If this 2 week cycle activates in the case of just pure demotion to Tier 6 of fleet ranks or with straight out kicking the leader, then this could take years to kick one leader if they have a lot of alts. And as has been put out there, many leaders of fleets have many alts. All it takes is one hacker to get in and have one of the alts kicked to put the fleet in lockdown for 2 weeks, plus if one of the hacked accounts toons gets kicked, there are still 5 more that could just revert the changes.
In summary, the biggest issues I see are:
1) 2 weeks is too long of a probationary period, especially if you can only kick one alt at a time.
2) There does not seem to be an ability to kick an entire account's alts and primary at once, which leaves the system as vulnerable to hacks and griefing as always.
3) Kicking and demoting seem to be wrapped into one in the patch notes. If you have to wait 2 weeks to demote a leader's alt (all the while not being able to promote/demote anyone else), big fleet's could get locked into long periods of administrative activity.
"That hurts worse than the uniform." - Dr. McCoy on the Vulcan salute
"On Vulcan, the teddy bears are alive. And they have six-inch fangs." - Spock on sehlats
When creating a new project, the allegiance selector will no longer list allegiances that are not supported
OK... Ive been saying this since the get go but the Foundry seems a black hole communication wise.
The "allegiance" needs to go or needs reworking entirely.
It prevents us from creating "content" and is a needless roadblock.
It makes people have to "fake" a lot of stuff.
Here is what I mean. Say I am doing a KDF map. You cant have Klingons as enemies. You can have Orions as enemies. So you cant do a House vs House mission. Or suppress a Gorn Uprising. You would have to pick Starfleet and then pick alien and then create a costume to "fake" it. But then your fake Klingons or Gorn would be using phasers and not use Klingon specials like Bathleths or Targs.
It also creates issues where we must have KDF maps and FED maps even though the actual content might be neutral and anyone technically could play it.
Do away with "factions". Simply make it so we the authors tag something as Enemies or Neutral or Friendly rather than the editor using a very narrow predetermined set of enemies.
This is especially constrictive now since we have Romulans forced to be Feds or KDF.