Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 21
11-26-2010, 06:43 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolidNuetronium
The naysayers have no valid reason to naysay, bottom line. The federation is fighting a shooting war in 5-6 fronts. They need to crank out simple proven designs. Quality through quantity, it works.

Like they say; "haters gonna hate".
We have one valid reason that trumphs all.
It is 100% uncanon, its not even soft canon.

And allow me to laugh at your flawed "proven design" arugment.
Sure they are proven, proven with 22nd and 23rd century Technology, not proven with 24th or 25th.
Not to mention the old designs would be vastly inferior than 24th century designs, otherwise there would be no reason to design new ships.

ENT and TOS ships would snap like twigs, 24th century ships would not as there is the ongoing trend of more robust and compact designs that make them fare more durable.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 22
11-26-2010, 06:48 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolidNuetronium
Yes, send in the galleys! Ramming speed! Here we go again with the old boat anology. I have an idea let's take pre-WW2 ships, retrofit them and use them in battle in a current conflict.........oh wait.

Haters ganno hate I tell ya.
So you can't argue with what I said? Whats wrong with the old boat analogy? I was pointing out that because something was proven in its own time doesn't mean its proven now.

Your other mistake is in assuming that the Connie and the NX were in fact simple and proven. The Connie was used for quite a while, so I'll grant it proven, but we don't know how long the NX was used for. We also have no idea how simple they were, for all you know they were both pains in the ass to build.

In soft canon, the NX was being phased out in the Romulan war due to its high cost to build. That means it was launched in 2151 and dumped in 2156, a mere 5 years. Hardly simple and proven at all.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 23
11-26-2010, 06:58 AM
Quote:
So you can't argue with what I said? Whats wrong with the old boat analogy? I was pointing out that because something was proven in its own time doesn't mean its proven now.

Your other mistake is in assuming that the Connie and the NX were in fact simple and proven. The Connie was used for quite a while, so I'll grant it proven, but we don't know how long the NX was used for. We also have no idea how simple they were, for all you know they were both pains in the ass to build.

In soft canon, the NX was being phased out in the Romulan war due to its high cost to build. That means it was launched in 2151 and dumped in 2156, a mere 5 years. Hardly simple and proven at all.
Not fueling either side of the argument. Just giving some facts. The NX ran for 10 years in space. The NX was retired and put into the SF museum when the crew returned from their last mission, just before Archer gave his speech at the signing in 2161. The other NXs probably were still active after that: they didn't all get retired and put into museums.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 24
11-26-2010, 07:01 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain_Solok
I honestly couldn't care less. It's going to be a starter ship that someone is going to use for 3 days in this easy to level game.


You won't spend enough time in it to even appreciate the interior.
I'm currently Lt Cmdr 5 and still using mine.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 25
11-26-2010, 07:02 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alexraptor View Post
We have one valid reason that trumos all.
It is 100% uncanon, its not even soft canon.

And allow me to laugh at your flawed "proven design" arugment.
Sure they are proven, proven with 22nd and 23rd century Technology, not proven with 24th or 25th.
Not to mention the old designs would be vastly inferior than 24th century designs, otherwise there would be no reason to design new ships.

ENT and TOS ships would snap like twigs, 24th century ships would not as there is the ongoing trend of more robust and compact designs that make them fare more durable.
You laugh at his argument when you're backing your argument up by fictional technology ithat's used in a game? Really?
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 26
11-26-2010, 07:08 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alexraptor View Post
We have one valid reason that trumos all.
It is 100% uncanon, its not even soft canon.

And allow me to laugh at your flawed "proven design" arugment.
Sure they are proven, proven with 22nd and 23rd century Technology, not proven with 24th or 25th.
Not to mention the old designs would be vastly inferior than 24th century designs, otherwise there would be no reason to design new ships.

ENT and TOS ships would snap like twigs, 24th century ships would not as there is the ongoing trend of more robust and compact designs that make them fare more durable.
1) The game is not canon, the devs say it and everyone knows it. To invoke canon/uncanon is pointless.

2) Modern materiel and techniques are used to build these so modern equipment would not be a problem.

3) You misunderstand, these ships would be built alongside new designs to bolster the fleet.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 27
11-26-2010, 07:13 AM
please keep the debate civil.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 28
11-26-2010, 07:27 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolidNuetronium
1) The game is not canon, the devs say it and everyone knows it. To invoke canon/uncanon is pointless.

2) Modern materiel and techniques are used to build these so modern equipment would not be a problem.

3) You misunderstand, these ships would be built alongside new designs to bolster the fleet.
Your right, the game is not canon, its based on canon, you don't create a game based on a franchise and then completely ignore the established canon.
But many Cryptic just needs approval from CBS for every single thing they do, every single ship they add, just for the fun of it.

Clearly you also do not know anything about materials and construction.
Materials can compensate fair amount but they will never be able to overcome inherent flaws in an old design.
That is assuming Starfleet even has any new materials that would be dramaticly different from what they had decades ago, as the materials used have changed little over 200 years.
The NX-01 used Duranium in its hull construction as did the Intrepid class over 200 years later.

There is no concievable reason why Starfleet would ever mass produce new productions of ancient relics, something which they did not even do by the 24th century.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 29
11-26-2010, 07:28 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolidNuetronium
1) The game is not canon, the devs say it and everyone knows it. To invoke canon/uncanon is pointless.
This makes no sense at all, just because the game is not canon they should not draw on the canon of the shows? Can we add wings to Romulans then? Can we bring back Kirk as a 50m tall robot? Can we get Daleks added to the game? None of this is canon, and neither is the game!

Quote:
2) Modern materiel and techniques are used to build these so modern equipment would not be a problem.
Granted, but it would probably require a redesign of the ships to use new materials, and that redesign would be taking time away from other important things they could be doing.

Quote:
3) You misunderstand, these ships would be built alongside new designs to bolster the fleet.
And every old design built would be taking up space in the shipyards that could be better used building new designs.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 30
11-26-2010, 07:29 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Feanor12345 View Post
So you can't argue with what I said? Whats wrong with the old boat analogy? I was pointing out that because something was proven in its own time doesn't mean its proven now.

Your other mistake is in assuming that the Connie and the NX were in fact simple and proven. The Connie was used for quite a while, so I'll grant it proven, but we don't know how long the NX was used for. We also have no idea how simple they were, for all you know they were both pains in the ass to build.

In soft canon, the NX was being phased out in the Romulan war due to its high cost to build. That means it was launched in 2151 and dumped in 2156, a mere 5 years. Hardly simple and proven at all.
1) A galley, lets retrofit its hull to a modern aluminum one. Retrofit the oarsmen with with a turbine engine and slap a torpedo launcher or surface to surface missile launcher. Let's retrofit the swords and boards to FN F2000 and you have a proven design.

2) Compared to a Galaxy, Sovereign or Luna they are simple to 25th century technology. So yes a cost effective supplement to the fleet.
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:36 AM.