Commander
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 307
# 1 Devs: Fleet Cruiser Retrofit?
07-10-2012, 10:09 AM
This is a question directly to the Devs.

There has been alot of discussion and boundless amounts of questions regarding the apparent lack of a Fleet Cruiser Retrofit.

Regardless of what the answer is, can we get a definitive answer?

Will there be a Fleet Cruiser Retrofit?

Is the Fleet Cruiser Retrofit being held back or not considered, because of the T5 Connie debate?

and...

Do the devs recognize the distinction between the Connie Refit at Tier 2, and the 2400s designs reflected by the Excalibur and the Vesper, which would seem logical candidates for a Fleet Cruiser Retrofit?

Any answer, regardless of it being Yes or No, would be most appreciated.

C_Carmichael
The account formerly known as C_Carmichael
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"You shoot him, I shoot you, I leave both your bodies here and go out for a late night snack. I'm thinking maybe pancakes." ~ John Casey
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,007
# 2
07-10-2012, 11:06 AM
probably never going to happen CBS has said no T5 connie. only way for it to happen is if they lock out the connie refit skin but then people would complain just as much demanding they unlock the skin
Commander
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 307
# 3
07-10-2012, 11:12 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by gpgtx View Post
probably never going to happen CBS has said no T5 connie. only way for it to happen is if they lock out the connie refit skin but then people would complain just as much demanding they unlock the skin
Maybe so.

But really, I'd just like to hear an official answer from Cryptic, as well as the reasoning if the answer is "No".

But Cryptic has remained silent on this, simply not answering the question. I think at the very least they could give us a definitive answer.

As I pointed out, as well as others on this board have, the Excalibur and the Vesper are NOT Connies, therefore shouldn't be subject to a T5 Connie ban, unless of course Cryptic is going to retcon their own material so these ships WEREN'T developed in the 2400's, and further retcon Star Trek canon to make them variations on the actual Connie Refit.
The account formerly known as C_Carmichael
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"You shoot him, I shoot you, I leave both your bodies here and go out for a late night snack. I'm thinking maybe pancakes." ~ John Casey
Survivor of Romulus
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 136
# 4
07-10-2012, 11:37 AM
the Exeter class is a refit of the constitution class. The stargazer class is a refit of the Constellation class. So to me it does not make sense to leave the Exeter out of the T5. TOS connie I get but the Exeter does look like a 2409 era ship
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,458
# 5
07-10-2012, 12:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by gpgtx View Post
probably never going to happen CBS has said no T5 connie. only way for it to happen is if they lock out the connie refit skin but then people would complain just as much demanding they unlock the skin
Nonsense. There are lots of people who would be willing to compromise and make do with the T5 Excalibur/Vesper/Exeter. They would be happy and it would cut the number of people who complain at least by half. Basic divide and conquer.
However, the longer Cryptic ignores the question the more I doubt the story about the Constitution ban. That CBS allows the D7, B'rel, Excelsior and D'kyr at T5 but not the Constitution COULD be believed. After all there would be a true to scale Constitution standing in Vegas if not for one stupid Paramount executive. However CBS banning the Constitution from T5 and Cryptic ignoring all questions after the Excalibur, Vesper and Exeter? That's just fishy.
FKA K-Tar, grumpy Klingon/El-Aurian hybrid. Now assimilated by PWE.
Sometimes, if you want to bury the hatchet with a Klingon, it has to be in his skull. - Captain K'Tar of the USS Danu about J'mpok.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 987
# 6
07-10-2012, 12:43 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by assimilatedktar View Post
Nonsense. There are lots of people who would be willing to compromise and make do with the T5 Excalibur/Vesper/Exeter. They would be happy and it would cut the number of people who complain at least by half. Basic divide and conquer.
However, the longer Cryptic ignores the question the more I doubt the story about the Constitution ban. That CBS allows the D7, B'rel, Excelsior and D'kyr at T5 but not the Constitution COULD be believed. After all there would be a true to scale Constitution standing in Vegas if not for one stupid Paramount executive. However CBS banning the Constitution from T5 and Cryptic ignoring all questions after the Excalibur, Vesper and Exeter? That's just fishy.
Its more than the "Old technology" logic. They didn't put the Sovereign in DS9 because they didn't want to steal the Movie's set piece. IIRC, they didn't want a Constitution in game at all (even at T2), because its the pretty little pony for TOS and its movies. So the least they can do (since its been in game for so long) is restrict from being T5.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,458
# 7
07-10-2012, 12:55 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by atatassault View Post
Its more than the "Old technology" logic. They didn't put the Sovereign in DS9 because they didn't want to steal the Movie's set piece. IIRC, they didn't want a Constitution in game at all (even at T2), because its the pretty little pony for TOS and its movies. So the least they can do (since its been in game for so long) is restrict from being T5.
Yeah, as I said, it is believable. (Even though CBS doesn't produce anything TOS-related anymore, so don't really have a reason to care.) However, the Excalibur, Vesper and Exeter never were in any movie or series and are in no danger of being mistaken for the Connie. That Cryptic simply ignores all questions about them makes the whole thing seem fishy.
FKA K-Tar, grumpy Klingon/El-Aurian hybrid. Now assimilated by PWE.
Sometimes, if you want to bury the hatchet with a Klingon, it has to be in his skull. - Captain K'Tar of the USS Danu about J'mpok.
Commander
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 307
# 8
07-10-2012, 01:00 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by atatassault View Post
Its more than the "Old technology" logic. They didn't put the Sovereign in DS9 because they didn't want to steal the Movie's set piece. IIRC, they didn't want a Constitution in game at all (even at T2), because its the pretty little pony for TOS and its movies. So the least they can do (since its been in game for so long) is restrict from being T5.
But that shouldn't apply to the Excalibur and the Vesper, should it?

Neither of those ships appeared in any series or movie. They are the direct creations of Cryptic, Inc. and their "backstory" if you will, is that they were built in the 2400's.

Being brand new ships, they share no direct link to the Constitution class, other than general shape and size.
The account formerly known as C_Carmichael
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"You shoot him, I shoot you, I leave both your bodies here and go out for a late night snack. I'm thinking maybe pancakes." ~ John Casey
Starfleet Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 662
# 9
07-10-2012, 01:04 PM
Just like someone previously said, there is a certain group of folks on this forum that will start a flame war over not getting the Connie in with that retrofit.

I understand what you're saying about having no direct link, but there are others that already take it as some sort of personal insult that the Connie isn't T5, and this will only give them more fuel for the fire. I think Cryptic knows this, which is probably why they haven't answered so far, and will probably continue not answering.
Commander
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 307
# 10
07-10-2012, 01:06 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by hravik View Post
Just like someone previously said, there is a certain group of folks on this forum that will start a flame war over not getting the Connie in with that retrofit.

I understand what you're saying about having no direct link, but there are others that already take it as some sort of personal insult that the Connie isn't T5, and this will only give them more fuel for the fire. I think Cryptic knows this, which is probably why they haven't answered so far, and will probably continue not answering.
I think we are getting off in the weeds a bit here, so let's head back to the road.

The debate about if it should or shouldn't be, wasn't the purpose of the thread.

The purpose is to attempt to get a definitive answer from Cryptic one way or the other.

(I'm just as much to blame for getting sidetracked, and will attempt to stay more on topic)
The account formerly known as C_Carmichael
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"You shoot him, I shoot you, I leave both your bodies here and go out for a late night snack. I'm thinking maybe pancakes." ~ John Casey
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 01:32 AM.