Go Back   Star Trek Online > Feedback > Klingon Gameplay
Login

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 51
01-06-2011, 04:41 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by PrincessKatrina View Post
http://memory-alpha.org/wiki/Scorpion_class And, they were Attack Fighters.
Careful. What's the source for this classification? Just because some fan wrote it into the wiki this doesn't make it true - I for one cannot recall them ever being called like this in the movie.

Not saying it isn't true, just saying that the sources on the Scorpion are a bit ... hazy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PrincessKatrina View Post
This may be nitpicking, but then, you're sorta nitpicking as well. Runabouts are Runabouts, not "shuttlecrafts" or "shuttlepods." My statement was refering specifically to shuttlecraft (and shuttlepods, really) and not to Runabouts, which were designed more in line with the concepts of larger ships than regular shuttlecraft and shuttlepods, which were designed primarily for short-term and short-range use.
Granted. In that case we still have the on-screen statement that Peregrines have been called shuttlecraft.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PrincessKatrina View Post
Um, they were primarily one-shotted by dominion ships, which were also devastatingly powerful compared to anything the Federation had fought before. Just because they were being destroyed easily by the dominion ships doesn't mean they were easily destroyed by alpha quadrant ships.
Actually, Sisko had the fighter waves concentrate on the Cardassian ships - which the Federation had fought before.

It was also a comment about fighters in general, though. As you pointed out, they have been used by other races throughout Trek occasionally - with the same result.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PrincessKatrina View Post
If you're refering to encounters involving the Maquis, well, the Maquis had obtained them -very- second hand, and often were using rebuilt engines that were decades old.
Speculation. When the Maquis was able to procure the same kind of craft used by Starfleet itself, they can just as well get their hands on the same kind of engines. Not to mention the secret support they received from the KDF, including the supply of military-grade cloaking devices.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PrincessKatrina View Post
Also, many of the pilots of Maquis ships were civilians. They may have been good by civilian standards, but they weren't starfleet trained pilots.
Point. Although the lead ship of the Peregrine wing was commanded by a veteran Starfleet officer.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PrincessKatrina View Post
And we also saw Mirandas do just as poorly. I even recall some BoPs doing just as poorly.
Of course, those were extremely old ships, with the Mirandas even having already been relegated to freighter duty at that time.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PrincessKatrina View Post
Also, it's been about 40 years since the Dominion War. I'm pretty sure that the technology for Fighters would've advanced a good bit in the meantime.
Just like the technology against fighters, meaning more powerful weapons, more reliable targeting systems and stronger shields.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PrincessKatrina View Post
Aside from their view of Mind Melds, the Vulcans really haven't changed much between the 22nd century and the 24th century.
I do believe a cultural change from an aggressive military regime (ENT, "Awakening") to a peaceful society that does not believe in warships (TNG, "Unification") or the enforcement of peace with weapons (TOS, "Journey to Babel") does implicate coming a long way.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PrincessKatrina View Post
Regardless, he's arguing that -Fighters- do not exist at all in Star Trek, when they very clearly do.
There I agree - just not for the Federation.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PrincessKatrina View Post
They're classified as Federation Attack Fighters. They were used as civilian couriers prior to 2370, but the Maquis modified theirs to be more useful beyond simply being couriers, and it's absurd to think that Starfleet didn't modify the ones they were using as well, and they had much better resources for that purpose than the Maquis did.
They're classified as nothing just because Sisko dubbed them so. It still is just a repurposed civilian shuttlecraft with integral limitations on how much you can do with them. If Starfleet did not bother to equip its Runabouts or other shuttlecraft with better equipment, I don't see why they would do so for the Peregrines - aside from the fact that the entire fleet was put together in a hurry. When you include the travel times I doubt that the engineers spent months pondering about the best refit.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PrincessKatrina View Post
First off, Aircraft Carriers are a part of Naval Combat, so your whole "naval style combat" idiocy is simply that, idiocy.
I thought it would be clear from the context that I was referring to the kind of naval combat revolving around the big ships, considering what we have seen in TOS, TNG and every single movie. Apologies if I presumed too much.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PrincessKatrina View Post
Second, DS9 may have moved things in a somewhat different direction in certain respects, but it didn't give up anything that makes Star Trek Star Trek.
I suppose this is a matter of perception.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PrincessKatrina View Post
First off, you're mistaken in calling the Fighters "shuttlecrafts."
Not at all. This is from a line in the DS9 episode "The Jem'Hadar". And of course it makes sense. Why would a civilian courier fly a fighter?

Quote:
Originally Posted by PrincessKatrina View Post
The Runabouts were also specifically designed for more long-term use.
Just like a warp-capable courier ship, one would assume.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PrincessKatrina View Post
Even as couriers, the "Peregrine-class" ships would not have been designed as significantly for "comfort" or long-term single-trip use.
Comfort? Perhaps not. That said, why would fighter pilots need comfort?

As for the range, I disagree. The sole purpose of a courier is reach and speed, no?

Quote:
Originally Posted by PrincessKatrina View Post
The Maquis weren't using the Fighters in that way either. You're getting confused with the raiders, which were the larger ships like Chakotay's.
It seems you have watched neither the DS9 episode "Heart of Stone" nor "The Maquis", the latter of which I already mentioned (the dogfight). It is even possible that this was also the ship appearing in "Preemptive Strike", though the evidence is inconclusive - they used the model of a Ju'day, but the interior of a Peregrine cockpit for the shots. Messy Trek consistency again.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PrincessKatrina View Post
Additionally, you're still being a complete idiot by talking about the fighters going poof so easily. Mirandas and BoPs were being one-shotted by the Dominion ships as well. The Dominion ships were massively more powerful than anything the Federation had encountered before, except for the Borg.
Again, the fighters were shot down by Cardassian ships. Maybe you want to re-watch that episode before calling names. Also, I tend to dismiss contradictions, and since the Birds-of-Prey performed much differently in other instances I would give them the benefit of the doubt and explain it with dramatization. As for the Miranda: again, hopelessly outdated.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PrincessKatrina View Post
Also, since they were utilizing ships that had up until that decade been primarily civilian ships, it's not unreasonable that they would decide to develope much more advanced Fighters for future use, since it would've become obvious that those civilian designed ships weren't good enough.
Or rather that fighters per se weren't good enough. Starfleet fared well for centuries without using waves upon waves of suicide ships, going through several wars and winning them by their proven multi role capital ship doctrine. Added to that comes the fact that both fighters as well as a carrier are utterly useless in peacetime - just like the Defiant which was left in storage until the Dominion War. With the exception that a fighter corps would require constant training, putting an unnecessary strain on Starfleet manpower that could just as well be used elsewhere.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PrincessKatrina View Post
It's the same reason behind the development of ships like the Defiant-class. They realized their current ships just weren't good enough.
Correction: Not good enough against the Borg. I daresay that fighters would not have fared much better there.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 52
01-06-2011, 07:01 PM
Quote:
Actually, Sisko had the fighter waves concentrate on the Cardassian ships
As I said before, the Cardassian ships were likely upgraded by the Dominion.

Quote:
Careful. What's the source for this classification? Just because some fan wrote it into the wiki this doesn't make it true - I for one cannot recall them ever being called like this in the movie.

Not saying it isn't true, just saying that the sources on the Scorpion are a bit ... hazy.
Personally, I recall it being said by Picard in the movie.

Quote:
Speculation. When the Maquis was able to procure the same kind of craft used by Starfleet itself, they can just as well get their hands on the same kind of engines. Not to mention the secret support they received from the KDF, including the supply of military-grade cloaking devices.
First off, that's not speculation. It's made clear in quite a few episodes dealing with the Maquis, both in TNG and DS9. The Maquis were a "terrorist" organization, composed mostly of civilians. They did not have the resources that Starfleet had. The fighters that the Maquis had were built prior to 2370, when they started being used by Starfleet.

As for the KDF supplying them with cloaking devices, I'm curious about your source for that, as I know that wasn't ever mentioned in TNG or DS9.

Quote:
I do believe a cultural change from an aggressive military regime (ENT, "Awakening") to a peaceful society that does not believe in warships (TNG, "Unification") or the enforcement of peace with weapons (TOS, "Journey to Babel") does implicate coming a long way.
I do not think it's accurate to call them an aggressive military regime. There was one leader who leaned that way, but he was also being influenced by the Romulans.

Quote:
Granted. In that case we still have the on-screen statement that Peregrines have been called shuttlecraft.
And the Defiant is a -warship- that gets classified as an "escort" because the Federation doesn't like to admit when it designs something purely for war due to their attempts at maintaining at least some semblance of being focused on peace.

Quote:
They're classified as nothing just because Sisko dubbed them so.
Sorry, but no. If they were called Fighters in the series, that makes it "hard canon" that they are Fighters.

Quote:
I thought it would be clear from the context that I was referring to the kind of naval combat revolving around the big ships, considering what we have seen in TOS, TNG and every single movie. Apologies if I presumed too much.
That's just it. You're being far too narrow in your reasoning.

Quote:
Just like a warp-capable courier ship, one would assume.
No. A courier is not the same as a runabout which is 1) a far newer design than the Fighters/Couriers and 2) built for "mid-range" scientific research and exploration.

Quote:
As for the range, I disagree. The sole purpose of a courier is reach and speed, no?
I said "long-term," not "long range."

Quote:
Again, the fighters were shot down by Cardassian ships. Maybe you want to re-watch that episode before calling names. Also, I tend to dismiss contradictions, and since the Birds-of-Prey performed much differently in other instances I would give them the benefit of the doubt and explain it with dramatization. As for the Miranda: again, hopelessly outdated.
You can't legitimately dismiss the BoP performance as "dramatization" while also condemning the Miranda and Fighter that performed exactly the same as being "crappy."

Also, the Excelsior is not -that- much newer than the Mirandas and much older than the Peregrines, and has been seen to perform quite well.

Quote:
Added to that comes the fact that both fighters as well as a carrier are utterly useless in peacetime - just like the Defiant which was left in storage until the Dominion War
1) The Defiant wasn't -useless- in peacetime.

2) The Defiant wasn't "left in storage until the Dominion War." For one, it was put into service quite sometime before the Dominion even entered the Alpha Quadrant. Second, the Defiant wasn't actually -complete- when it was put into service. They hadn't been able to get it to work entirely right. O'Brien was the one to finally get it fully functional.

Again, my personal argument is not that the Federation had Carriers, but that Carriers -are- canon to the Star Trek Universe, which is all that matters. The Federation doesn't have Carriers in STO, either, and the devs had made it pretty clear that the federation won't be getting carriers.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 53
01-06-2011, 07:06 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by mister_dee
All of them?

Besides, either fighters need carriers to get somewhere because carriers have more range and are faster, which would mean they could not operate as a CAP while the fleet is in transit or they are as fast and have as much range as the larger ships which would defeat the point of carriers and the CAP because then the fighters would be 'out' the entire time.



SFB canon?
Good joke, really.
SFB operates under a very strange license.
They cannot use the name Star Trek (which clealy shows how canon it is) they cannot mention persons from the Original series (Spock is referred to as a prominent science officer, Kirk is referenced by a Klingon captain as a tin-plated dictator) and their entire storyline diverged in 1978 with the first movie.
They are not allowed to use any material outside the Original Series and some aspescts of the Animated series and vice versa material from the "Star Fleet Universe" cannot be used by canon Trek.
They even state as much in their various publications and also explicitly discourage anyone from submitting material that is in any way connected to Trek outside the Original Series because they could not use it anyway.
So how canon can it be?
The only reason Interplay could use material from SFB for SFC was because they got both licenses otherwise even that would not have been possible.
So canon?
You're joking right?
Take the time to read the history... I will even link the generic wiki page for you... game is even referenced in TNG
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Fleet_Battles
I was mentioning it because Gene actually played and endorsed it in Jacksonville, Florida when i was stationed down there. Somehow in shouting everyone down, you are completely missing the point of carriers. They are a projection of power. Instead of having to commit 30-40 warships in an area, a simple carrier task group of 10-12 ships carries the firepower of that large force because of the fighters and SUPPORT craft it also carries.
Now, the orig question was "Removing carriers- What would you do?" Same answer as before, continue with my Gorn sci or Bird and listen to people cry nerf about them too
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 54
01-06-2011, 09:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by PrincessKatrina View Post
As I said before, the Cardassian ships were likely upgraded by the Dominion.
Speculation again. Based on what? They did fire with the same orange-coloured phasers they always had, not the distinctively purple Dominion polaron beam. One would assume that a weapons upgrade at the hands of Dominion engineers would incorporate ... well, a different weapon. Way more practical than trying to jury-rig Dominion "energy boosters"(?) into a Cardassian phaser bank. If that is even possible.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PrincessKatrina View Post
First off, that's not speculation. It's made clear in quite a few episodes dealing with the Maquis, both in TNG and DS9. The Maquis were a "terrorist" organization, composed mostly of civilians. They did not have the resources that Starfleet had. The fighters that the Maquis had were built prior to 2370, when they started being used by Starfleet.
With all those turncoat Starfleet officers I wouldn't be so sure about that. The Maquis dished out some real hurt to the Cardassians, which doesn't really seem possible unless they would use military grade equipment. Thanks to DS9 we also know it isn't really hard to procure this kind of stuff if you just know the right people.

Also, your argumentation seems to be based entirely on Memory Alpha. Careful with the interpretation of these articles. Just because the Peregrine did not appear in Starfleet service on screen prior to 2370 that doesn't automatically qualify as a fact.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PrincessKatrina View Post
As for the KDF supplying them with cloaking devices, I'm curious about your source for that, as I know that wasn't ever mentioned in TNG or DS9.
Apparently it was: http://memory-alpha.org/wiki/Maquis#...ating_strength

Quote:
Originally Posted by PrincessKatrina View Post
I do not think it's accurate to call them an aggressive military regime. There was one leader who leaned that way, but he was also being influenced by the Romulans.
Annexing entire planets sounds pretty aggressive, not to mention the Vulcans almost going to war with Andoria and Earth. And I hope that you don't really believe that only a single person is to blame when his authority is based on his support by the military and his henchmen in the government.

The High Command was dissolved and power transferred to a civilian institution, and centuries later there's no trace of Vulcan warships. That's a pretty major social change there.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PrincessKatrina View Post
And the Defiant is a -warship- that gets classified as an "escort" because the Federation doesn't like to admit when it designs something purely for war due to their attempts at maintaining at least some semblance of being focused on peace.
Exactly. Which means there would be an even stronger prejudice against fightercraft, whose capabilities are even more focused. You can at least claim that an escort is there to escort. What does a fighter do?

Quote:
Originally Posted by PrincessKatrina View Post
Sorry, but no. If they were called Fighters in the series, that makes it "hard canon" that they are Fighters.
Sorry, but no. If they were designedas Couriers in the series, that makes it "hard canon" that they are Couriers. Regardless of how a character calls them.

Of course you may argue that the fact that they were used as fighters qualifies as sufficient for calling them such, and in a way you're right. But at the same time you cannot deny their origin and say it's wrong when I point this origin out.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PrincessKatrina View Post
I said "long-term," not "long range."
In terms of maximum range it boils down the same thing, even if you have to fly longer. And you still owe an explanation for why "long term" is actually a requirement for either a courier or a fighter. And what you actually mean when you say "long term" - for obviously other Peregrine-sized shuttlecraft were fine with housing a dozen people for weeks.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PrincessKatrina View Post
You can't legitimately dismiss the BoP performance as "dramatization" while also condemning the Miranda and Fighter that performed exactly the same as being "crappy."
What's the alternative? My reasoning is that I am dismissing contradictory evidence as unreliable. Your reasoning seems to twist what we have seen on-screen into the exact opposite, stating that the Peregrines - which were never designed to perform in such a role in the first place - apparently are oh so superior despite blowing up every time we see them in action? And with this kind of argumentation you have the gall to call me an idiot AND claim that my reasoning is too narrow? Some nerve you've got there.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PrincessKatrina View Post
Also, the Excelsior is not -that- much newer than the Mirandas and much older than the Peregrines, and has been seen to perform quite well.
Unlike the Mirandas and the Peregrines, the Excelsior underwent some major refits, in case you didn't notice the extra impulse engines etc on the Lakota.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PrincessKatrina View Post
1) The Defiant wasn't -useless- in peacetime.
Yeah right, they just put her into storage because Starfleet was short of work at the time.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PrincessKatrina View Post
2) The Defiant wasn't "left in storage until the Dominion War." For one, it was put into service quite sometime before the Dominion even entered the Alpha Quadrant.
Says so here, though: http://memory-alpha.org/wiki/Defiant_class
And here is the scene in question: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HilM3M9PWs8#t=04m30s

The shakedown cruise was in 2370. Sisko got the ship in late 2371. Where do you think the Defiant was when Starfleet abandoned the project in 2370? Time paradox?

No matter. I guess our .. perception is just too different. As we likely won't get anywhere here, I'll "abandon ship" at this point, before you find some more nice terms to describe my supposed level of intelligence.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 55
01-06-2011, 10:30 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MustrumRidcully View Post
What would you do? You can't just rip out 2 end-game ships and existing art assets and play styles and give nothing in return. This would lead to murder and mayhem.

So, what would you do? What kind of ship class would you come up with? What would you do with the existing Carrier models? How can they be reused?
Well there is SOME precedent for there being carriers in the game and in Star Trek, but that's not at issue here. Honestly I've always felt that carriers are not really....Klingon, the idea of keeping 4,000 warriors at bay while sending a small number to fight at a distance that's capable of being out of range for the enemy to fight back just doesn't strike the right cord with me when I think of Klingons.

If anything I would have given carriers to the Federation and heavy battleships/dreadnoughts to the Klingons; however it's not that way and it won't ever be that way.

But to answer the question, I would simply give both sides Dreadnoughts: Massive, heavy armed, heavily armored capital warships that have exceedingly limited maneuverability and speed but can brawl like no other. Give the ships a 5/5 or a 6/4 weapon layouts with console layouts of either 4/2/3 or 3/2/4 with large hulls and 125-150% shields.

With BOs, assuming that Cryptic would want to keep things in line with what is currently in the game, then something like: Cmdr Tac, Lt. Tac; Lt. Cmdr Eng; Lt. Cmdr Sci.

A lumbering giant that if commanded by a competent person would require multiple people to bring down, but then again that's the carrier today....

As for the ship models, the Vo'Quv hull could be re-tasked as a heavy battleship easily enough, but the Kar'Fi......I know that some people like it but person I hate it so I say let it rust....
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 56
01-06-2011, 10:55 PM
Quote:
Speculation again. Based on what? They did fire with the same orange-coloured phasers they always had, not the distinctively purple Dominion polaron beam.
Actually, while they were the same color as federation phasers, they were frequently referred to as disruptors. The same is true of hand-held cardassian weapons.

Quote:
The High Command was dissolved and power transferred to a civilian institution, and centuries later there's no trace of Vulcan warships. That's a pretty major social change there.
There's no less trace of Vulcan warships than there is of Andorian Warships. Both races joined the Federation and the primary fleet of the Federation became Starfleet. If you recall, there were no Andorian, Vulcan, Tellarite, etc. ships in the fleet that fought the Dominion, despite all three races being prominant members of the Federation.

It's pure speculation on your part that the lack of Vulcan "warships" and "fighters" is purely due to a change in the command structure of the Vulcans. Also, the Fighters were created due to Vulcan logic, which was just as much in effect before ENT as it was after ENT.

Quote:
Sorry, but no. If they were designedas Couriers in the series, that makes it "hard canon" that they are Couriers. Regardless of how a character calls them.
Except that, 90% of the time, all we even have to go by is what a character calls them. And while they may have been designed as X, that doesn't mean they weren't repurposed as Y, which makes them into Y, in addition to having been X.

Quote:
Of course you may argue that the fact that they were used as fighters qualifies as sufficient for calling them such, and in a way you're right. But at the same time you cannot deny their origin and say it's wrong when I point this origin out.
I haven't said you're wrong for saying they were created as Couriers. I've said you're wrong for calling the ones used as Fighters "shuttlecraft." And, as I recall, your reference to them being called "shuttlecrafts" is merely a character referring to them as such, the same as the claim that they're fighters.

Quote:
for obviously other Peregrine-sized shuttlecraft were fine with housing a dozen people for weeks.
The cockpit/crew area of a Class-2 Shuttle is larger than that of a Peregrine, from what I recall. You'll need to show a source on that.

Either way, you're referencing "what one character said," which you yourself have stated is "unreliable." Considering Tom Paris' personality, it's likely he was using hyperbole. Granted, that is speculation, but it's -at least- as plausible as the idea that he was being exactly truthful, which is rather unlikely.

Quote:
Your reasoning seems to twist what we have seen on-screen into the exact opposite, stating that the Peregrines - which were never designed to perform in such a role in the first place - apparently are oh so superior despite blowing up every time we see them in action?
Hmm? Care to point to where I said that the Peregrines are superior to anything? I said that Carrier+Fighter has certain advantages in space combat versus simply a single cap ship.

Though, I would note that while we do frequently -see- them explode on screen, there is also a significant amount of time during which they are in combat, without direct support from the main fleet, and surviving rather well. This merely occurs while the screen is showing us inside the Defiant, since the main characters of the series were the crew of the Defiant, not the pilots of the Peregrine Fighters.

Quote:
Unlike the Mirandas and the Peregrines, the Excelsior underwent some major refits, in case you didn't notice the extra impulse engines etc on the Lakota.
While there may have been no obvious changes externally to the Mirandas and the Peregrines, it is highly unlikely that they would still be functioning with the exact same equipment as they had when they were first built.

Quote:
The shakedown cruise was in 2370. Sisko got the ship in late 2371. Where do you think the Defiant was when Starfleet abandoned the project in 2370? Time paradox?
Yes, it was put in storage, because it wasn't working right. Just because a ship had a "shakedown cruise" doesn't mean it's functioning correctly or complete. The USS Enterprise-B had its shakedown cruise before it was completed. As did the Enterprise NX-01, though that was for more extenuating circumstances than the Enterprise-B.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 57
01-07-2011, 03:05 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Droidarr View Post
Take the time to read the history... I will even link the generic wiki page for you... game is even referenced in TNG
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Fleet_Battles
I was mentioning it because Gene actually played and endorsed it in Jacksonville, Florida when i was stationed down there. Somehow in shouting everyone down, you are completely missing the point of carriers. They are a projection of power. Instead of having to commit 30-40 warships in an area, a simple carrier task group of 10-12 ships carries the firepower of that large force because of the fighters and SUPPORT craft it also carries.
Now, the orig question was "Removing carriers- What would you do?" Same answer as before, continue with my Gorn sci or Bird and listen to people cry nerf about them too
I am well aware of this page, thank you.
But appearently you did not read it properly:

"With the rebirth of Star Trek as an active film franchise, the 'SFU' started diverging sharply from canon Star Trek, as the producers ignored anything from fan productions, and SFB's own licence did not allow them to use the new material. Due to several factors, the SFU has re-interpreted several things, and in some places only bears a passing resemblance to the show that gave it birth."

Additionally there is another thing to consider that clearly shows how canon, or rather non-canon this game is:
It's based on the old Star Fleet Technical Manual by Franz Joseph.
Even though I'm proud to have two copies of it on my shelf (the first one that I got my hands on is not really pretty but I'd nontheless never throw it away) Roddenberry had a serious agreement with Joseph sometime after the creation of the first movie and as a result deliberatly laid out rules for "The Next Generation" the made the ships in that book non-canon.
So when he stopped endorsing the old Manual, he also stopped endorsing material based on it.
Also several aspects of SFB are actually the exact opposite of canon like the fact that warp-power is produced inside the nacelles not inside a warpcore or that Photon Torpedoes are charged with warp-energy and not actually guided weapons like we saw in Star Trek VI.
So even if he once endorsed it (despite the strange license), that ended abruptly between the first and second movie.
So no, it's non-canon.

As for power-projection:
We had a similar discussion a while back in another thread:
Starfleet is not like several Earth militaries and it does not do power projection since it does not create peace, it enforces piece.

"Power projection (or force projection) is a term used in military and political science to refer to the capacity of a state to conduct expeditionary warfare, i.e. to intimidate other nations and implement policy by means of force, or the threat thereof, in an area distant from its own territory."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_projection

Is this what Starfleet does? I don't think so.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 58
01-07-2011, 04:11 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by PrincessKatrina View Post
The issue comes in maintaining such close proximity at such high velocity.
They managed to do it with a Class-( Probe in TNG "Emissary" (not to be confused with the TNG Pilot) so it would not be a problem with a far more sophisticated ship.
Additionally you could simply link the fighters' computer to the larger ship's and there would be no rpoblem coordinating them unless the helmsman of the larger ship did something stupid it would be no more difficult that holding formation.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PrincessKatrina View Post
I would note that identical model doesn't equate to identical ships. Also, the ships used by the Maquis were refit with whatever they could obtain and used old rebuilt engines. I can't say for certain if this is the case or not, but it would not be unreasonable for the Maquis to have upgraded the fighters to be warp capable, since they themselves would definitely not have had access to Carriers.
Sisko was surprised in "The Maquis" Pt1 that they were armed, he was NOT surprised that they were warp-capable.
Besides what purpose would those blue-glowing nacelles serve when they were not warp-engines?

Quote:
Originally Posted by PrincessKatrina View Post
They could be, sure, but it was usually the cargo bays that were converted into triage centers. Also, they wouldn't have been able to evacuate personal from badly damaged ships, since they wouldn't be able to beam anyone aboard due to having their shields up, since they'd be in a combat situation.
I was referring to the time after the battle.
Besides:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yUG8zUHDRic#t=01m20s

The first step was not to convert the cargo, but the shuttlebays.
Particularly in a post-battle situation where transporters would not be reliable you might want to use the more easily accessable shuttlebays instead.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PrincessKatrina View Post
I'd like to see where you're getting those numbers. Shuttlecraft, which carry more than 2 people, were only 3-6 meters in length, for example. Some were smaller (such as the shuttles designed to be carried by Defiant-class starships). I would agree that the fighters were larger than the shuttlecraft, but frankly, "over 30 meters long and wide" seems a bit much.
Look at the size of the fighter's cockpit here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jafezSTt9dM#t=07m25s

and here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c-8qXl2xEqg

Also note that Bernie Casey, the actor playing Cal Hudson, is 6' 4" (1.93 m) so the cockpit is not for midgets.

And now compare the size of the cockpit with the entire fighter:

http://www.shipschematics.net/startr..._peregrine.jpg

Quote:
Originally Posted by PrincessKatrina View Post
They knew the fleet was out there. They knew they were going into battle. They may not have known the exact position or exact numbers, but they knew it was there.
Their total suprise says otherwise.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PrincessKatrina View Post
I said that's a possibility, not a definitive "that's what happened." The existence of federation fighters implies the existence of either federation Carriers or the capability of other ships to act as pseudo-Carriers, but it is only an implication, not an absolute.

However, that really isn't much of an issue when it comes to the carriers in STO, considering that the only support they need is Carriers existing -at all- in the Star Trek universe, which they do, as seen in Nemesis and Voyager in particular. Whether or not someone -likes- them existing is irrelvant. They are canon.

Considering that the Federation was dedicated to peaceful exploration and preferred to avoid war whenever possible, it is not at all inconcievable that the Federation -would- choose not to construct dedicated Carriers. Of course, that would also make it conceivable that the Federation would choose not to construct Fighters, but they did construct them.
They did not construct them.
They constructed "trainers" and "couriers" that were repurposed.
There is no indication they were new-construction for the Dominion War.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PrincessKatrina View Post
However, that really has nothing to do with the existence of KDF Carriers. While the Federation is a strong advocate of peace, the Klingons are strong advocates of war and combat. Even in "peace" times, they still have lots of in-house fighting, and there's really not much in the way of a true "peace time" for the Klingons anyway.
One of the intended additions to the Klingon fleet that never made it to the viewscrren was a new kind of BoP for DS9

http://johneaves.wordpress.com/2009/03/19/97/

Because appearently the PTB thought that the Klingons would rather develop a better BoP, they did not entertain the idea of Klingons using fighters in any capacity.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PrincessKatrina View Post
Again, I point to the fact that it is canon for Carriers to exist in the Star Trek universe. The Remans and the Trabe both felt that Carriers were appropriate ships to build, for example.

For the purpose of "Escorts," it is more promising, at least in theory. However, we only know of the prototype in regards to the Prometheus-class, at least "in canon." The purpose of a prototype is to determine if the concept works. Just because it seems "more promising" doesn't mean that it actually is. We don't actually know which way their research goes after the 2370s.
Well the at least one Prometheus was around in Voyager "Engame".
Whether that was the original prototype or not is not clear.
There was also a Propmetheus in "Azati Prime".
Even if we discount this apearance as a feverish nightmare it clearly shows the direction towards escortish ships (is this a real word?) and not towards fighters.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PrincessKatrina View Post
*shakes her head* Actually, I don't think the Kazon ships are ever actually -called- Carriers in the series. But they do carry Kazon Fighters. A Carrier doesn't have to be -effective- to be a Carrier. The Kazon used technology they'd stolen from the Trabe after their successful revolt as well as technology they could manage to steal from anyone else. Doesn't mean they used it well or new how to be particularly quick in replacing their Fighters when they were destroyed.
http://memory-alpha.org/wiki/Kazon_carrier_vessel

They were called carrier in Voyager, however so was the Botany Bay in Star Trek 2, so because something is called carrier does not mean that it has even remotely anything to do with modern naval carriers.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PrincessKatrina View Post
Even if their primary purpose was for in-atmosphere situations, that doesn't change the fact that the Scimitar was a Carrier equipped with a large supply of Fighters.
So every ship that has some kind of armed shuttlecraft is a carrier, even when in a battle situation where the ship is at stake noone would bother to launch them, which is the actual mark of a true carrier.
Then the Intrepid would be one, too.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PrincessKatrina View Post
Regardless, they weren't used against the Enterprise E in Nemesis largely because Shinzon was cocky and because it wasn't long after the cloak was disabled that the Enterprise rammed the Scimitar, destroying the fighter/shuttle bay. http://memory-alpha.org/wiki/Scorpion_class And, they were Attack Fighters.
Data referred to them as flyers not fighters.

Also between the disabling of the cloak and the ramming there were 6 minutes of screentime so there would have been enough time particularly since we can clearly see the the bay was manned (Remans running from the saucer coming towards them) and not empty when the Enterprise crashed into it.

Also after his claok was gone, he started to get frustrated, talked through his teeth and also began to scream orders ("Get.The.Cloak.Back!") so appearently he felt a little cast...in bad light without his cloak.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PrincessKatrina View Post
I never said that Fighters necessitate Carriers. I've only stated that Fighters in interstellar space imply Carriers. I have never stated that the Federation absolutely has Fighters, only that there is reason to suspect they might. In regards to Carriers existing, I have only referenced Carriers that definitely appeared on-screen, such as the Scimitar and the Kazon Carriers.
The former was not referred to as a carrier, even through the entire scanning of the ship noone cared for the Scorpions, only for the armaments of the ship.
The latter was a so-called carrier "armed to the teeth" that never launched anything to protect itself, even though in "Basics" Voyager crippled one of them.
So what kind of a carier can it actually be?

Quote:
Originally Posted by PrincessKatrina View Post
This may be nitpicking, but then, you're sorta nitpicking as well. Runabouts are Runabouts, not "shuttlecrafts" or "shuttlepods." My statement was refering specifically to shuttlecraft (and shuttlepods, really) and not to Runabouts, which were designed more in line with the concepts of larger ships than regular shuttlecraft and shuttlepods, which were designed primarily for short-term and short-range use.
I used Runabouts as a reference because they're the only other known "ship" even remotely of a similar size as the fighters/couriers.

take a took at the "shuttlecraft chart"

http://ex-astris-scientia.org/fleet-charts.htm
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 59
01-07-2011, 06:32 AM
*groans* I really, really didn't plan on posting here anymore, but since you're calling me out ...

Quote:
Originally Posted by PrincessKatrina View Post
It's pure speculation on your part that the lack of Vulcan "warships" and "fighters" is purely due to a change in the command structure of the Vulcans. Also, the Fighters were created due to Vulcan logic, which was just as much in effect before ENT as it was after ENT.
This is not speculation, this is stated on-screen by the Ferengi arms dealer in "Unification" ("I deal in warships, the Vulcans are pacifists!") and in line with what both Spock and Surak said several times in TOS.

Also, you seem to confuse logic with agenda. It is logical that you build warships when you want to wage war. This, in combination with the Vulcan willingness for sacrifice and to forego personal safety for the greater good, led to the development of these picket ships.

By the time of TOS and TNG, however, the situation has changed:
- The Vulcans are still willing to sacrifice themselves for the greater good, but they do not believe in arms.
- The Federation believes in arms, but is not quite as willing to throw the lives of their people away.
The "split" of the aforementioned necessity for fighters results in the non-existence of said ships in Starfleet, only strengthened by the fact that Starfleet did well without them for centuries.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PrincessKatrina View Post
I've said you're wrong for calling the ones used as Fighters "shuttlecraft."
Which is similar to the statement that it would supposedly be wrong to still call a truck a truck even if you mount a TOW on its back.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PrincessKatrina View Post
The cockpit/crew area of a Class-2 Shuttle is larger than that of a Peregrine, from what I recall. You'll need to show a source on that.
What does the cockpit have to do with this? The type-2 is overall smaller than a Peregrine, regardless of its cockpit size. I hope you did not assume they put a dozen people into the cockpit?

Quote:
Originally Posted by PrincessKatrina View Post
Either way, you're referencing "what one character said," which you yourself have stated is "unreliable."
No. I stated it becomes unreliable when it is contradicted.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PrincessKatrina View Post
Hmm? Care to point to where I said that the Peregrines are superior to anything? I said that Carrier+Fighter has certain advantages in space combat versus simply a single cap ship.
ad·van·tage
/ædˈvæntɪdʒ, -ˈvɑn-/ [ad-van-tij, -vahn-]
noun, verb, -taged, -taging
#3 superiority or ascendancy (often fol. by over or of): "his height gave him an advantage over his opponent"
#4 a position of superiority (often fol. by over or of ): "their advantage in experienced players"

Quote:
Originally Posted by PrincessKatrina View Post
Though, I would note that while we do frequently -see- them explode on screen, there is also a significant amount of time during which they are in combat, without direct support from the main fleet, and surviving rather well. This merely occurs while the screen is showing us inside the Defiant, since the main characters of the series were the crew of the Defiant, not the pilots of the Peregrine Fighters.
So you're surmising that because we did not see them explode, they did not explode even though they do every time we do see them? With Sisko being forced to send "wave after wave of his best fighters"?

Quote:
Originally Posted by PrincessKatrina View Post
While there may have been no obvious changes externally to the Mirandas and the Peregrines, it is highly unlikely that they would still be functioning with the exact same equipment as they had when they were first built.
What leads you to this theory? The Mirandas surely worked fine as freighters, just as the Peregrines worked fine as couriers - though I do indeed agree that the latter were likely upgraded from their civilian counterpart. This only makes their use as fighters look even more inefficient, of course.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PrincessKatrina View Post
Yes, it was put in storage, because it wasn't working right. Just because a ship had a "shakedown cruise" doesn't mean it's functioning correctly or complete. The USS Enterprise-B had its shakedown cruise before it was completed. As did the Enterprise NX-01, though that was for more extenuating circumstances than the Enterprise-B.
Every ship has a shakedown cruise. This is part of normal naval procedure. The fact that Starfleet couldn't be arsed to finish the ship and instead opted to put her away (at least we got that sorted now!) does kinda point to the assumption that they did not really believe the Defiant to be useful in peacetime, no?
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 60
01-07-2011, 07:17 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by mister_dee
.....

"Power projection (or force projection) is a term used in military and political science to refer to the capacity of a state to conduct expeditionary warfare, i.e. to intimidate other nations and implement policy by means of force, or the threat thereof, in an area distant from its own territory."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_projection

Is this what Starfleet does? I don't think so.
Actually a very good liberal/textbook answer and will give you that point since i know which angle you are coming from. In the "Star Trek orig concept" there were no actual Federation Warships because back in the 60s it was determined that 'enlightened/well educated' societies did not fight battles which is why the Federation had very durable ships, they never fired the 'first shot'. The Federation in it's 1960s "enlightened" mentality would not project a show of force which makes your text valid.
On the flip side, you would be crazy not to build carriers and use fighters and drones if for nothing else, cost and efficiency. Replacing fighters is cheap, replacing cruisers and destroyers is not.

And one of us is just going to agree to disagree on SFB since Gene signed my copy and was called it the best "Kick in the butt the Star Trek Fanchise got to keep the dream alive". I don't believe canon is whatever some yahoo writes into the show to save his/her job for ratings. But obviously this comes from growing up on the orig and meeting them all in person so my view is "jaded" from the kids today that think Nemesis and DS9 (although was okay for a generic TV show going against Babylon 5) are the "core" of the orig concept.

Back to somewhat on topic...
Since this is a game, which means like Star Trek Combat Simulator, SFB, etc.. means it is not cannon in your opinion... carriers, borg parts bungie corded to your ship, ESD full of people creating their own uniforms is perfectly acceptable. The only drawback to carriers is that it is only after you create them and put them in game do you realize how incredible they are. Then you have to figure out how to scale them back and balance them with other ships so you basically have to take a ship with the firepower of a large fleet (thru its air wing) and nerf it from hell. Cryptic did a pretty good job on it.

And if they took it away...
I'd fly my gorn sci or bird and listen to people cry about them..
Anyway, try to have fun and remember that this is a game and designed to have something in it for everyone to enjoy and they've done a pretty good job.
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 04:30 AM.