Starfleet Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 188
# 221
04-07-2013, 01:52 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jexsamx View Post
Calling it now - Ha'apax will have a three-ship bundle in C-Store ala Oddy/Bortasqu', with special consoles whose set bonus will lean more towards science (where Oddy favors Eng and Bort favors Tac).
At the absolute bare minimum the auxiliary craft will be C-store only. I don't think it'll be a bundle since we're apparently being forced to use the free version (if we want to use an actual romulan ship and not steal crap from our glorious masters), so it'd be a bit weird to have a 5000 zen bundle for it. There was an event to get a free oddy/Bortas but it wasn't part of the standard ship progression.
Ensign
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 4
# 222
04-07-2013, 02:16 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by azurianstar View Post
If you scroll down to the production notes, we learn that the D'Deridex model used in TNG: Tin Man was different than the B-Type used in TNG: Defector. So given the B-type came before TNG: Defector, one could say that the B-Type was the name Starfleet given D'Deridex's, before they learned the official name. That or the B-Type was the second production models of the D'Deridex and the D'Deridex we know are the C-Type. (Similar to how modern fighters go like F-15A, F-15B, F-15-C, etc).


But with "Warbird Battlecruiser", again it's stupid Cryptic slapping two ship types names like they did. It's no different saying something like "Cruiser Destroyer" or "Frigate Escort"



I really like it too.

And you know what? There are some similarities with the Romulan T2 ship with this. Seems like Cryptic stole aspects of this person's design. Pretty low Cryptic.
There is nothing wrong with arists drawing on inspiration from other artists. You would most likely do the same if you was in the same position. And in fairness to them, that's some great inspiration if that's the case.
Ensign
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 20
# 223
04-07-2013, 04:58 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by darkelfofficer View Post
"Balance of Terror" was based on (if not ripped directly from) World War II submarine movies, especially The Enemy Below. Cloaking was just a way for the writers to make a space-submarine, and like submarines and anti-submarine warfare, it stands to reason that the technology to conceal them and the technology to detect them both advance in a technological arms race.
In which case, it's worth mentioning that in real life there has not been a single advance in submarine detection since WW2. Indeed, neither the Americans nor the Russians can track their own submarines even when they know where they are. So the idea of a continual Red Queen arms race doesn't actually always hold up in fact.

--

You point about the cloak merely being a device to tell a particular story is a good one, however. In fact, everyone commenting on these and similar issues should bare that in mind. The writers of Trek did not set out to build a perfectly coherent, consistent universe. They set out to tell stories, and resorted to many expediencies, and some idiocies, to do so.

Therefore it is an exercise in futility to set up faithfulness to the canon as the yardstick top measure a game. A game HAS to be more coherent, more consistent than a story, because the audience for a game is inside it, bushing buttons and twiddling knobs. You can;t control what the audience, the players, do, in the same way you can control what a linear stories audience sees.

Let the game be the game. Sometimes games can even feed back into a franchise because they do have to impose such higher standards for consistency - the material West End Games wrote for the Star Wars RPG ended up being used by George Lucas himself as reference material.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 242
# 224
04-07-2013, 06:44 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by relatavisticbomb View Post
In which case, it's worth mentioning that in real life there has not been a single advance in submarine detection since WW2. Indeed, neither the Americans nor the Russians can track their own submarines even when they know where they are. So the idea of a continual Red Queen arms race doesn't actually always hold up in fact.
Just not accurate at all. Subs can be found and tracked. Since WW2, sonars have moved from active sonar to passive sonar for instance. Active is better at locating other ships, but it betrays your current position. However, the development in passive sonars had reached the point where it was more advantagous to find you enement without giving away your own position. Sonar bouys did not exist in WW2. Nor did the ability of submarines to stay underwater for months at a time. And the most important submarine development of all time would be the ballistic missile. Complete game changer for the Cold War.

Stealth and detection do revolve around technology. Something to consider is that the US is the only naval superpower today. So there isn't much of an arms race at the moment. Up to the 1980's, however, both sides were trying to track the other's ballistic missile submarines all the time. Red October isn't voodoo science, both sides tried to develop that kind of technology. The goal was slipping submarines under the nose of an opponent inside 200 miles off a major city. Apparently, it was hard to do

Quote:
Originally Posted by relatavisticbomb View Post
You point about the cloak merely being a device to tell a particular story is a good one, however. In fact, everyone commenting on these and similar issues should bare that in mind. The writers of Trek did not set out to build a perfectly coherent, consistent universe. They set out to tell stories, and resorted to many expediencies, and some idiocies, to do so.

Therefore it is an exercise in futility to set up faithfulness to the canon as the yardstick top measure a game. A game HAS to be more coherent, more consistent than a story, because the audience for a game is inside it, bushing buttons and twiddling knobs. You can;t control what the audience, the players, do, in the same way you can control what a linear stories audience sees.

Let the game be the game. Sometimes games can even feed back into a franchise because they do have to impose such higher standards for consistency - the material West End Games wrote for the Star Wars RPG ended up being used by George Lucas himself as reference material.
Ok I agree with this. One could argue that STO could at least try to stick to canon a little more though. Its not necessary to recreate the JHAS as the greatest escort of all time other than a plain grab for money. Most divergences that bug people in STO are in the interest of money grabs, not in making better gameplay experience, IMO.
Career Officer
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 4,645
# 225
04-07-2013, 07:05 AM
it seems i wont be playing the romulans at this point, the game keeps crashing after the login screen during loading and only music is playing, no other sounds. dunno what the problem is, ive upgraded everything minus the ati driver as that refuses to cooperate with any of my monitors, so it will probably be a driver from last year sometime ntil they fix that issue on their end. adjusted a few things like admin settings or loosing the shadows, post precessing, compatibly to xp and such, no such luck. never had that before and i hope its resolved before the romulan adventure.

Last edited by mirrorchaos; 04-07-2013 at 07:08 AM.
Captain
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 844
# 226
04-07-2013, 07:39 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by azurianstar View Post
If you scroll down to the production notes, we learn that the D'Deridex model used in TNG: Tin Man was different than the B-Type used in TNG: Defector. So given the B-type came before TNG: Defector, one could say that the B-Type was the name Starfleet given D'Deridex's, before they learned the official name. That or the B-Type was the second production models of the D'Deridex and the D'Deridex we know are the C-Type. (Similar to how modern fighters go like F-15A, F-15B, F-15-C, etc).


But with "Warbird Battlecruiser", again it's stupid Cryptic slapping two ship types names like they did. It's no different saying something like "Cruiser Destroyer" or "Frigate Escort
OK first off the D'Deridex is a battlecruiser not a battleship scimitar is a romulan battleship

And refering to warplane designations was not a great analogy

The F-15 just like many warplanes has many variants one for more ground attack one for spyplane one for electronic warfare etc etc.

Using and letter designation at the end of the F-15 (or whatever warplane) such as F-15 A etc etc helps distinguish them from one another so its far easier to deploy them.

Also helps assinging them to the proper theatre of battle .

If they release a D'Deridex battleship later then they could add a designation like lets say D'Deridex B-Type (I used B-Type as an example only) this would distinguish between the battlecruiser and the battleship of the D'Deridex class.
Ensign
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 20
# 227
04-07-2013, 07:48 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by alopen View Post
Sonar bouys did not exist in WW2.
Wrong, they were deployed by RAF Coastal Command in 1942.

We have better, more sensitive, more precise, electronic gear, but fundamentally we're still using the same techniques that originated in 1916.

Quote:
The goal was slipping submarines under the nose of an opponent inside 200 miles off a major city. Apparently, it was hard to do
My point is that it turned out not to be evenly balanced. It was possible to make submarines significantly stealthier, it was not to be possible to improve detection enough to find them. Yes, it's dependent on technology, but there is no law that says that it has to be even.

Consider as another example the 300 years that went by before materials technology could come up with an effective answer to the bullet. For that period, armies stopped wearing armour, something they had done with great consistency for the previous two millenia. You can't just assume that the same balance will always be maintained.

Quote:
Ok I agree with this. One could argue that STO could at least try to stick to canon a little more though. Its not necessary to recreate the JHAS as the greatest escort of all time other than a plain grab for money. Most divergences that bug people in STO are in the interest of money grabs, not in making better gameplay experience, IMO.
I haven't been around long enough to have an opinion on the specifics here, but I have seen similar accusation levelled at designers in other games. I'm wary about that sort of thing because I personally suspect that, with some caveats, the designers probably DO want to improve gameplay. People complain about the grinding and farming, but really without it, what would you do? And why would you do it, if you didn't have something to look forward to?

That perhaps is another discussion; my point though is that while discussion of the established canon can be useful, and it should not be outright ignored, everything has to be subordinated to what will make gameplay better.
Community Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,659
# 228
04-07-2013, 08:47 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by relatavisticbomb View Post
Wrong, they were deployed by RAF Coastal Command in 1942.

We have better, more sensitive, more precise, electronic gear, but fundamentally we're still using the same techniques that originated in 1916.
Somehow I don't think the latest generation of US and Russian spy satellites using radar interferometry qualify as 1916 techniques.

Admittedly, the ones looking for submarine wakes are effectively just really really high altitude airplane cameras; but not the above.
Volunteer Community Moderator for the Star Trek Online Forums. My views do not represent those of Cryptic Studios or Perfect World Entertainment.
If you wish to speak to someone on the community team, file a 'forums and website' support ticket here, as we are not able to respond to PMs regarding moderation inquiries.
Follow me: Twitter,Google
Rihannsu
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 240
# 229 Great Ship Designs!
04-07-2013, 09:36 AM
Ships look great dev team! On another note, as much as the Scimitar would be a great ship to have as a Captain, due to the awesome magnitude of the vessel, in both size and firepower...I fear Cryptic would not be able to give it justice in specs, due to fair play for both the Federation and Klingons. If it was created, it would have to be dulled down...which may be more disappointing then anything.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 2,579
# 230
04-07-2013, 09:45 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by wayofdera View Post
Ships look great dev team! On another note, as much as the Scimitar would be a great ship to have as a Captain, due to the awesome magnitude of the vessel, in both size and firepower...I fear Cryptic would not be able to give it justice in specs, due to fair play for both the Federation and Klingons. If it was created, it would have to be dulled down...which may be more disappointing then anything.
I've been thinking about that myself. I think a good way to handle it would be to leave the full blown Scimitar as an NPC ship. Cryptic could then create their own Scimitar inspired version for players. The justification would be that the Scimitar was a prototype and only a few of them were made, which is why they stay as NPC ships. The ones that the players would get would be more of a production model similar to how cars are made today. I think that would be a reasonable compromise.

-Lantesh
Since Feb. 2009
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 04:38 AM.