Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 121
05-07-2010, 01:35 PM
I thought the proposed explanation was that these odd-number designs where in fact somehow two-in-one designs, and so despite the Hermes having one housing, there were doubled internals within...

I of course admit this is stretching things, merely furthering the conversation.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 122
05-07-2010, 01:35 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phoxe
Well here's the thing. Franz Josephs designs with odd numbers of nacelles have always been a tricky thing, but they HAVE been shown on displays in the movies, so it becomes tough to claim they CAN'T be canon.

Here they are in Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan - though this is the one-nacelled Hermes class not the three-nacelled Federation class.
Indeed. Pretty sure the bits that rotated through onscreen did include the 3-nacelled dreadnaught, too.

For 3-nacelle designs, though, I much prefer the ones that have them out at about 120 degrees to each other or at least spread over a 180 degree-ish, like that one from the Wolf 359 graveyard that I can't remember the name of and the DSSVs (at least the ones where the pod resembles a nacelle).
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 123
05-07-2010, 02:59 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by squidheadjax View Post
that one from the Wolf 359 graveyard that I can't remember the name of
Niagra class.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 124
05-07-2010, 03:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phoxe
Well here's the thing. Franz Josephs designs with odd numbers of nacelles have always been a tricky thing, but they HAVE been shown on displays in the movies, so it becomes tough to claim they CAN'T be canon.

Here they are in Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan - though this is the one-nacelled Hermes class not the three-nacelled Federation class.
Phoxe, can you please answer me this. Why name the Fleet Escort the Hermes-class when you had the one from TOS?

Anyhow, I'm anxious to see if the Galaxy X is going to be just another Tier 5 ship, or if she's going to be somewhat unique.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 125
05-07-2010, 03:38 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Azurian View Post
Phoxe, can you please answer me this. Why name the Fleet Escort the Hermes-class when you had the one from TOS?

Anyhow, I'm anxious to see if the Galaxy X is going to be just another Tier 5 ship, or if she's going to be somewhat unique.
Multiple reasons, but it basically comes down to this:

The name sounds cool, and that ship is not technically canon, so the name is available.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 126
05-07-2010, 03:55 PM
I won't lie, I want a Galaxy-X...

But I don't have any friends who will play a Star Trek Game. soooo... I'm SOL.

Tell you what Cryptic... You move it to the C-Store, and I will give you the moneies for the costume. You can give the Recruiter boyz some other awesome perk that you won't have a rabid fan boi attack over. ;-)
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 127
05-07-2010, 04:15 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phoxe
Multiple reasons, but it basically comes down to this:

The name sounds cool, and that ship is not technically canon, so the name is available.
Yeah, it does sound cool and Cryptic's ships aren't technically canon either. Guess you could say its a nice nod to the Franz Jospeh Community.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 128
05-07-2010, 07:50 PM
I like it, I want it, I'll never be able to get it, but I have no problem with the way it is being offered. Every MMO has referral rewards like this.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 129 Thoughts on the Galaxy X
05-08-2010, 07:59 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kilawpilath View Post
I might be a little fuzzy on it, but I do not recall what the Galaxy X looked like enough to warrent like or dislikeing the design..

Also, Just because ONE SHIP was shown to have a cloaking device, does not mean that if some one uses all of the Galaxy X "costume peices" they would automatically get a cloaking device..

I sware every chance some people get they try to find an excuse to give a Federation ship a Cloaking device.. All because Sisko had one I bet..
Having read the first few pages of this forum, I have to agree with just this part: Yes. I do want a Federation ship that cloaks because Sisko had one.

Additionally, while it is true that the Galaxy X is from a timeline that might never come to pass, it does not make it irrelevant. let's not kid ourselves with words like "canon" or "gene's rules". This is a game for entertainments sake. Would I fly a Galaxy X: No. to me it's ugly as sin. however it doesn't mean i want to rob other people who want to fly one of that right. I do however find the argument over who should get it....funny really.

I doubt you will see....let's say more than 10 of those ships in game. ever. Assuming the current guidelines are accurate with regards to who will have one. That said, it would not preclude Cryptic from offering it later through the C-Store or a different promotional program. I do however think giving the people who CAN recruit players into the game something for their trouble is a good idea. So, no don't delete it, don't make overly available at this time. Let the people who complete this task, impossible though it may seem have the ship. Just make sure they actually EARN it please.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 130
05-08-2010, 08:14 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by dramerus View Post
That said, it would not preclude Cryptic from offering it later through the C-Store or a different promotional program.
*sigh* Plenty of ways for them to sell off something with unique gameplay factors when anything like that should be earnable in game (even if gated behind some obscenely difficult requirements).
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 08:08 AM.