Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 21
08-10-2011, 03:14 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blayyde
Every ship is for the most part arranged in order of size, not technology.
Hence why if fails.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 22
08-10-2011, 03:20 PM
I agree with most of what you have said above Blayyde, but I think fan wants have as much influence as dev desires. The devs put the Excelsior in the game because the fans wanted it. It went in at T5 because that is what the fans demanded it be. At the time Cryptic didn't have the backbone to say NO. It's the same with the Nebula and the D'Kyr. It was nothing more then Cryptic catering to the T5 crowd above all others. With the new ships they're catering more toward system continuity rather then fan demands.

Of course it doesn't help when canon contradicts itself. Every time you say no to a T5 Excelsior some fan will bring up the Lakota/Defiant battle. If the Defiant is supposed to a a powerful "warship" then it doesn't make sense that a century-old cruiser should be as powerful, but it is in canon. It's canon quirks like that which lead to tier quirks, IMO.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 23
08-10-2011, 03:26 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hartzilla2007 View Post
Hence why if fails.
Why is that? A Destroyer is a smaller ship than a Cruiser, which is smaller than an Aircraft Carrier. A ship's size determines its role.

All technology really does is increase the size of a given type of ship. Aircraft Carriers have gotten bigger over the years. Destroyers really haven't. There's really nothing physically different between a Destroyer from 1930 and one from 2011. But we're not talking about 1930, we're talking about different classifications of Destroyer in 2011.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 24
08-10-2011, 03:37 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cosmic_One View Post
I agree with most of what you have said above Blayyde, but I think fan wants have as much influence as dev desires. The devs put the Excelsior in the game because the fans wanted it.
Well, I could have said that it was both devs and players playing favorites. But ultimately it is the devs' decision, and their responsibility to take for their actions. Blaming the players for "they asked for it" is childish. Not to mention that the devs did their best to introduce the ship in a balanced way, they just didn't consider how much more adaptable a Lt. Commander slot that does not match your ship's primary class can be.

Quote:
It went in at T5 because that is what the fans demanded it be. At the time Cryptic didn't have the backbone to say NO. It's the same with the Nebula and the D'Kyr. It was nothing more then Cryptic catering to the T5 crowd above all others. With the new ships they're catering more toward system continuity rather then fan demands.
I disagree. As I said, I believe at the time Cryptic didn't say no because they had no viable alternative. They could not in good conscience charge the players 1200 CP for something they would not be able to use after a certain point. They had the same problem with the TOS Connie and NX Escort, but the TOS Connie was originally a FREE item, and was only made available for purchase much later.

The new ships provide a new way to give players value for their money by giving them a console. So it is not as much as catering to system continuity as going back to it. The devs are not saying NO, they are saying "no, but with compensation".
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 25
08-10-2011, 03:55 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blayyde
Well, I could have said that it was both devs and players playing favorites. But ultimately it is the devs' decision, and their responsibility to take for their actions. Blaming the players for "they asked for it" is childish. Not to mention that the devs did their best to introduce the ship in a balanced way, they just didn't consider how much more adaptable a Lt. Commander slot that does not match your ship's primary class can be.
I don't think the fact that Cryptic tries to make players happy is childish. It's not Cryptic's fault that half of their fans want what they want and the other half want canon consistency. It's like the upcoming Ambassador. You know the fans are going to be screaming for it to be T5 so Cryptic's going to have to make a decision: keep the fans happy or make it a T3 or T4 to fit within the concept of where it fits in the food chain. So they'll probably end up going the T3/T5 route to keep fans happy.

Quote:
I disagree. As I said, I believe at the time Cryptic didn't say no because they had no viable alternative. They could not in good conscience charge the players 1200 CP for something they would not be able to use after a certain point. They had the same problem with the TOS Connie and NX Escort, but the TOS Connie was originally a FREE item, and was only made available for purchase much later.
I think Cryptic can charge whatever they want as long as the fans want it. They don't have to justify a 1200 CP cost when they could have simply made a T3 version and sold it for 400 CP, and fans would've still bought it. If people are dropping 800 for an NX that they'll use for very few hours they'll pay for anything.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 26
08-10-2011, 04:41 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cosmic_One View Post
If people are dropping 800 for an NX that they'll use for very few hours they'll pay for anything.
Not necessarily. I don't think Cryptic is tossing a coin and deciding either go with the fan-of-ship-X demands (T5 ALWAYS! Its an iconic ship and if you disagree you aren't a real Trek fan!) or to go with the canon purists (I saw it get pwned in 3 seconds during episode X, therefore it is a tier 2 ship and if you disagree you aren't a real Trek fan!)

I think Cryptic probably has a pretty good grasp on where the game population spends the most time in the level bands and are now introducing ships in the tier where they have the best chance to sell the most of them. Economics is driving their decisions, not who-makes-the-most-noise-on-the-forums. AT least, I suspect that its economics, anyway.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 27
08-10-2011, 04:45 PM
I don't believe Cryptic is now making lower tier ships because that's where the fan-base is. I think they're doing it because we fans have been screaming for more lower-tier choices for over a year. They're just getting around to it now - and integrating it with their new Console system so they can charge more for it.

But when the big choices need to be made, like the Ambassador, I'm sure they'll fall back on the T3/T5 to make the most fans happy.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 28
08-10-2011, 08:27 PM
The Ambassador would be a terrible T5 ship. Ugh. That puts it right up there with ... the ship that replaced it in the line, the Galaxy. And the Sovereign. And the Excelsior.

Putting an Ambassador at T5 basically demonstrates that Cryptic itself doesn't know what it wants out of a tier system that it created.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 29
08-11-2011, 02:35 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by superchum View Post
The Ambassador would be a terrible T5 ship. Ugh. That puts it right up there with ... the ship that replaced it in the line, the Galaxy. And the Sovereign. And the Excelsior.

Putting an Ambassador at T5 basically demonstrates that Cryptic itself doesn't know what it wants out of a tier system that it created.
Well since the Ambassador ist STILL much newer then the Excelsior....
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 30
08-11-2011, 07:37 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by FirstAngelus View Post
Well since the Ambassador ist STILL much newer then the Excelsior....
True, but newer isn't always better. The TU22 wasn't much better than than the Soviet bomber it replaced for example, which is why they designed the TU22M. The HMS Hood and the Nelson class were never than the Queen Elizabeth class battleships, but the history of WWII shows that the QE class, especially the Warspite, were probably still a much better battlship. And the English Electric Lightning was the fastest jet interceptor for over a decade, and the RAF never had anything as fast until the recent introduction of the Eurofighter Typhoon.

Just as sometimes a design can be ahead of it's time, a design can sometimes fall short of expectation due to unforseen flaws in it's design that aren't noticed until it's too late. This reality, allows for the fact some ships seem arbitarily assigned a certain tier. In fact, the tier system could be explained arbitarily through all sorts of "ah, but it's only here because such and such..." so while not pleasing to all, can really be totally justified.

As for wether or not an Excelsior could be a T5 cruiser, let's take the size difference between the Galaxy and the Excelsior, most of this will have been A) the much larger crew accomodations and recreational facilities and B) far greater scientific and exploratory capability. As far as what's needed for a ship to actually fight, there's probably space on the Excelsior to mount just as powerful weaponry, just as effective an EPS system etc. It's probably the bear minimum of what a ship needs to fight at "cruiser weight" in the tier it is. The T3 to me represents the unupgraded originals.

As for where the Ambassador goes, I think T4 and/or retro'd in at T5 would work, with less hull and more speed than the Galaxy, and perhaps more of as science bias than most cruisers. A T5 retro makes the most sense to me, since whatever could be done to the Excelsior could also be done to a newer, larger ship presumably. A "non retrofit" would not sit anywhere comfortably, because it's newer than the Excelsior which is T3, but older than the Galaxy at T4. That's why I think a hybridised design would work best.

Also, a 5% chance to accidently open a temporal rift and dissapear into the future momentarily for an extra tac officer would be in line with canon.
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 01:18 PM.