Survivor of Romulus
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 136
# 11
11-16-2012, 02:52 AM
The box a over the planet says its the second one to be named Archer, is the original one in the Regulas sector?
Commander
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 433
# 12
11-16-2012, 03:24 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by unangbangkay View Post
*ahem*

Dillithium dilithium grrr grrr Cryptic ripoff sellout Perfect World Vesta Ambassador T5 connie we're all getting ignored game will die in 3 months grind grind Z-store or C-store fix my bridge this isn't canon I want bridges I want skins feature episodes STFs FAs KDF PVP this ship is OP this ship is UP Battle Cloaks for all
You forgot Lockbox, Lobi scam, everything is Z store, P2W, too many currency, Jack Emmert said..., PWE hates KDF, not real trek, Gene would be mad.
Empire Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 803
# 13
11-16-2012, 04:51 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by azurianstar View Post
Archer supposed to be 31 Light Years from Earth, which puts it in Regulus Sector. But Cryptic went with the Star Trek Star Charts that came before Enterprise.
If they would go with what Enterprise said, it would place Qonus about 1 light year away from Sol....

-= ISE: 12:19 -=- CSE 12:41 -=- KASE 11:59 -=- HSe 8:06 total =-
-= KAGE 5:43 =-
[7:07] [Combat (Self)] Your Dual Disruptor Banks - Overload II deals 123086 (41096) Disruptor Damage(Critical) to Assimilated Carrier.
Ensign
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 18
# 14
11-16-2012, 06:24 AM
Artwork is great!

The core game designs underlying this patch, however, can go suck a donkey.
Starfleet Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 69
# 15
11-16-2012, 07:03 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by azurianstar View Post
Anything seen or mentioned in Star Trek is 100% canon.



STO is based on the IP and Cryptic can't change Star Trek canon.

Enterprise said the Archer System is 31 Light years away, guess what Cryptic has to put it 31 light years away.

And BTW, the text clearly said that it's the system Archer visited in 2151.
And how is this relevant to the game play?
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 208
# 16
11-16-2012, 07:11 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by azurianstar View Post
Anything seen or mentioned in Star Trek is 100% canon.
If that's true, everyone in the Alpha quadrant loves Dirty Pair. Even the Iconians.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 5,448
# 17
11-16-2012, 07:19 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by delsaberedux View Post
Star Trek has never been entirely consistent about its maps in or out of canon. I don't recall TNG ever showing us anything in detail, and if you're going by Okudagram stuff on monitors, then you'll have to canonize a ton of little in-jokes, too.

Besides, STO is a non-canon property along with everything else that isn't on a TV or movie screen, so as long as it meets with CBS approval, Cryptic could put Archer IV in Gamma Orionis if they really wanted to. A moot point anyway, since this Archer is a different system entirely according to the tooltip text.
They went with the idea that there are multiple planets named after Archer, didn't they?

(Which is also the J.J.-verse comics' explanation for Delta Vega. That there are multiple planets with that name.)
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 5,448
# 18
11-16-2012, 07:41 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by azurianstar View Post
Anything seen or mentioned in Star Trek is 100% canon.
Not really. Especially when you look at ship scales in DS9 or the weird varying MSD for the Defiant.

Canon is derived from the scripts. Stuff the writers weren't involved with, like Okudagrams, is basically in nebulous soft-canon territory. If you have to freeze frame and zoom to see it, it wasn't meant to be seen.

That said, I wouldn't object to STO building on the personnel files from the Mirror episodes of Enterprise. Those actually established a lot about what happened to characters after the shows.

For example:

Kirk grew up on Tarsus IV, where Kodos the Executioner imposed eugenics based food rationing. Hoshi Sato and her family were killed there. It's an interesting notion that some of the tragedies from TOS claimed the Enterprise crew.

The Shatnerverse has an interesting swerve on this that the food shortage was caused by a virus launched by an eco-terrorist movement that Sarek was a part of before turning his back on and that his Bendii syndrome was actually an assassination tool to silence him. It was one of the better Shatnerverse novels. The notion was that young Kirk, terrified by Kodos' police state, ran away and spied on Sarek. The eco-terrorists wanted to kill Kirk but Sarek intervened and mindmelded with him.

In the mindmeld, Kirk picked up some of Sarek's repressed feelings for Spock. Sarek erased Kirk's conscious memory of the event but, in order to keep him from running off on his own (where it might be unsafe), implanted him with the telepathic suggestion that he would die alone. (Explaining the bit in STV.) Kirk lived his whole life with an added feeling of invincibility because he didn't feel like he would die as long as he was with people. In the Shatnerverse books, Kirk eventually learns all of this, forcing him to take mortality more seriously but also accepting that he didn't have to die alone, which enabled him to have more healthy friendships and relationships, get married, and settle down, setting the stage for the wackier events of the later books.

I suppose if you accept this biographical detail, it also helps explain why J.J.-verse Kirk is so different, having been born in space and raised in Iowa.
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 518
# 19
11-16-2012, 09:23 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by stoleviathan99 View Post
I suppose if you accept this biographical detail, it also helps explain why J.J.-verse Kirk is so different, having been born in space and raised in Iowa.

JJ Trek is so different because JJ Abrams is admittedly not a Trek fan. Which is why his movies crap all over the franchise. He's a Star Wars fan.

Quote:
"Look, Star Wars is one of my favorite movies of all time," Abrams told Hollywood Life when asked about the rumors [of directed the Disney Star Wars films]. "I frankly feel that -- I almost feel that, in a weird way, the opportunity for whomever it is to direct that movie, it comes with the burden of being that kind of iconic movie and series. I was never a big Star Trek fan growing up, so for me, working on Star Trek didn't have any of that, you know, almost fatal sacrilege, and so, I am looking forward more [than] anyone to the next iterations of Star Wars, but I believe I will be going as a paying moviegoer!"
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 12:12 AM.