Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 867
# 31
01-17-2013, 02:38 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by stirling191 View Post
1) The Galaxy class measures out at about 650 meters long, 200 meters high and 470 meters wide. An Akira comes nowhere near that size (roughly 1/5th the volume).
That would be 77% of the length of a Galaxy class ship or nearly the length, as I correctly stated.

Quote:
Originally Posted by stirling191 View Post
2) On more than one instance the Defiant, a ship that is in reality quite small, is shown being dwarfed by an Akira.
Screen shots really are irrelevant because size is only determined by relative distance and ships in Star Trek visuals are usually seen in space, so you have no idea what the distances are, and since Star Trek was filmed using two dimensional cameras, it is impossible to use parallax.



Quote:
Originally Posted by stirling191 View Post
3) Are you seriously claiming that dimensions created by, signed of by and verified by the creators and producers of the shows in which said ships appeared are not canon simply because they contradict your claims, or that you don't like them?
If it is not stated on the show, it is not canon. Heck, even the length of the Defiant is not necessarily canon since there are shots where the size clearly seems different from the canon diagram shown on screen and, as stated in the link you so helpfully provided, the stated lengths differ.

Quote:
Originally Posted by stirling191 View Post
4) STO is terrible when it comes to small ship scale. Shuttles, fighters and smaller starships (raiders, BoPs, Defiants, etc) are incredibly oversized. Cruiser and larger ships are mostly to scale to each other, but not at all to smaller craft.
Shuttle craft are not to scale for gameplay reasons.


The bottom line, I see no convincing argument that a window on a Federation starship would ever be more than about 3 meters long, and if those windows are that height then there is no way the ship can be 500 meters long, or even close to that.
Captain
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 3,465
# 32
01-17-2013, 02:43 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by logicalspock View Post
The bottom line, I see no convincing argument that a window on a Federation starship would ever be more than about 3 meters long, and if those windows are that height then there is no way the ship can be 500 meters long, or even close to that.
So you're going to make the argument, with zero corroborating evidence beyond a window that you think is too big, that the Akira is 250 meters long, despite being presented with a mountain of evidence to the contrary.

Following your own example, why should any of us believe the claim of 250 meters then?
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 867
# 33
01-17-2013, 02:55 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by stirling191 View Post
So you're going to make the argument, with zero corroborating evidence beyond a window that you think is too big, that the Akira is 250 meters long, despite being presented with a mountain of evidence to the contrary.

Following your own example, why should any of us believe the claim of 250 meters then?
The only evidence I have seen you present demonstrates quite clearly that the size is not stated in canon and various canon and non-canon sources are highly contradictory.

Being logical, I must therefore use reductio ad absurdum. The width of the saucer is about 24 window widths.

The width of the saucer is about 64% of the length of the ship.

So even being very liberal and granting the saucer 30 window widths, the size of those windows would have to be about 11 meters, or 35 Feet in length if the ship is 500 meters long.

Ergo, via reductio ad absurdum, that disproves the claim of the ship being that big, unless you want to accept the premise of such huge saucer windows.

Q.E.D.

Last edited by logicalspock; 01-17-2013 at 02:59 PM. Reason: Decided to be even more liberal in my estimation of window-width of the primary hull
Captain
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 3,465
# 34
01-17-2013, 03:06 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by logicalspock View Post
The only evidence I have seen you present demonstrates quite clearly that the size is not stated in canon and various canon and non-canon sources are highly contradictory.
Then you clearly weren't paying attention.

DS9 Technical Manual (you don't get much more canon than that) dimensions of the Akira class:

470m x 320m x 90m

Quote:
Originally Posted by logicalspock View Post
Being logical, I must therefore use reductio ad absurdum. The width of the saucer is, at most, 24 window widths.

The width of the saucer is about 64% of the length of the ship.

So even being very liberal and granting the saucer 24 window widths, the size of those windows would have to be over 13 meters, or 43 Feet in length if the ship is 500 meters long.

Ergo, via reductio ad absurdum, that disproves the claim of the ship being that big, unless you want to accept the premise of such huge saucer windows.

Q.E.D.

And we're back to "I don't like the size of the windows from a specific model, therefore I'm going to argue that the ship is half the size the creators of the ship tell me it is".

That is what your entire argument is based on. Not facts from the creators and producers. Not an analytical analysis comparing the ship to other known ships sizes that it appears on-screen with. A dislike of the appearance of the ship.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 867
# 35
01-17-2013, 04:08 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by stirling191 View Post
Then you clearly weren't paying attention.

DS9 Technical Manual (you don't get much more canon than that) dimensions of the Akira class:

470m x 320m x 90m




And we're back to "I don't like the size of the windows from a specific model, therefore I'm going to argue that the ship is half the size the creators of the ship tell me it is".

That is what your entire argument is based on. Not facts from the creators and producers. Not an analytical analysis comparing the ship to other known ships sizes that it appears on-screen with. A dislike of the appearance of the ship.
Now you are just restating your previous claims, which I previous found unconvincing. You completely ignored me pointing out the irrefutable mathematical theorem that it is logically impossible to compare the dimensions of two ships on a two dimensional screen unless you have a third point or object which is a fixed distance reference point between the two objects you are comparing.

The only thing regarding the Akira's size that is canon (id est, actually appeared on screen) is the relative dimensions. My conclusion about the size of the ship is based on irrefutable deductive logic based on the premises that the model is accurate. Now, if you can provide a good explanation as to why the Akira would have windows longer than the height of many three story buildings (despite there being no evidence of any other Starfleet ship having such huge decks or gigantic windows), then I might be convinced that the Akira could be half a kilometer in length.


But if you simply restate your argument from authority logical fallacy ad nauseum , I think the discussion is was over two posts ago.

Last edited by logicalspock; 01-17-2013 at 04:10 PM.
Lieutenant
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 46
# 36
01-17-2013, 04:32 PM
This all has nothing to do with the topic. I understand its Star Trek so obviously there will be people who care about every tiny detail, however, it is also just a game. The topic is about revamping Federation carriers and cruisers. I think having cruisers become half-carriers like the Vesta line would be just a bad idea.

About the size of the ships... It really doesn't matter. They aren't real, they are just stages in some warehouse somewhere. Things don't always line up. They make it look close enough for that scene and that's it. When it comes to the size of a ship and having the ability to be a carrier or not really doesn't matter either. A ship is either a carrier or it is not. These ships are not empty space where they can just stash some fighter ships if they want. They wouldn't make a ship bigger than they had to, so all that space is being used by something, like engineering and crew living areas. A ship can be small and be a carrier or it can be large and not be a carrier, it all comes down to how it was built. If size determined how a ship worked, why can the smaller ships use the biggest weapons? How can a level 30 escort have more weapons than an Atrox? Simply put, it's because that is how it was built.

The main flaw with carriers in the game is the hangar ship AI. Some seem worse than others, but the main problems involve not flying away from an exploding ship and getting stuck on large enemy ships like cubes and unimatrix vessels, which then get exploded by the first problem I mentioned. If fighters didn't latch on to large ships, that would be nice. If they didn't fly straight through an exploding ship, that would be amazing. I'd say about 85% of the deaths of hangar ships comes from enemy ships exploding.

I think a good alternative to the topic would be to have a Bridge Officer skill in the Commander spot that when used would have that Boff launch and pilot the players Small Craft. Using the skills of that Bridge Officer would apply to the small craft it is flying. If/when it dies, add a 1min cooldown to all their skills so they are temporarily unavailable. Using the skill while the Boff is out will call it back and then it resumes duty.

Back to the whole size/scale thing... Sometimes you just have to accept that this game is the closest you will have to Star Trek. I'm not a Trekkie, but I know a lot of people are. What must be kept in mind is that when they were making the shows and movies, they didn't set everything in stone. They didn't have research crews and engineers calculating the sizes of everything perfectly. What happened was they made something that looked cool and they wanted to use it. All the physical models of ships could probably fit in your hand. The 3d ones can be scaled at the push of a button. They did what looked right at the time. Look at the planets in STO. They are tiny and have no atmosphere. If it was drawn to scale they would take up your whole screen. Then you could say why do I have to fly within a few kilometers in order to beam down? In the series they could beam further than that right? Then there is the whole... how come I can't fire until I'm within 10km, but when I miss the enemy ship, my beam/torpedo goes way further? Theeeeen theres the whole energy cannon projectiles following a moving target thing.

Seriously, if you tweak out at every thing poking at the realism of a game, you are missing the point. A game is meant to be fun. If you treat it like life or death you are doing two things wrong. One of them being that you fight over a Star Trek game... I mean come on that's self explanatory. The other point is that these things do not exist in real life. You can not say "This is how it is. This is law. This is the word of God" when it comes to science fiction.

The game is well done for the most part, even if you aren't a big fan of Star Trek. Be happy you at least have this. Until someone else comes out with a better Star Trek game or you make it yourself to the exact specifications in your head... you won't be happy.

Last edited by vyktori; 01-17-2013 at 04:52 PM. Reason: Changed Lt. Commander to Commander. My bad~
Career Officer
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 562
# 37
01-17-2013, 04:49 PM
A serious question regarding ship sizes because I haven't seen every episode of Trek.


Have any of the ships' sizes been stated on screen?
Most JJ Trek hate = IDIC fail.
Quote:
Most who don't like the new Star Trek either didn't like TOS, don't remember TOS, or didn't see TOS
Captain
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 3,465
# 38
01-17-2013, 04:58 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by lordagamemnonb5 View Post
A serious question regarding ship sizes because I haven't seen every episode of Trek.


Have any of the ships' sizes been stated on screen?
In a word, no.

The only one that might have been would be Voyager, given the five minute flyby Paris get's in the pilot, but even then I don't believe so.

Edit: Just pulled up the sequence, no listing of size beyond the number of decks.

Last edited by stirling191; 01-17-2013 at 05:09 PM.
Captain
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 3,465
# 39
01-17-2013, 05:01 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by logicalspock View Post
Now you are just restating your previous claims, which I previous found unconvincing. You completely ignored me pointing out the irrefutable mathematical theorem that it is logically impossible to compare the dimensions of two ships on a two dimensional screen unless you have a third point or object which is a fixed distance reference point between the two objects you are comparing.

The only thing regarding the Akira's size that is canon (id est, actually appeared on screen) is the relative dimensions. My conclusion about the size of the ship is based on irrefutable deductive logic based on the premises that the model is accurate. Now, if you can provide a good explanation as to why the Akira would have windows longer than the height of many three story buildings (despite there being no evidence of any other Starfleet ship having such huge decks or gigantic windows), then I might be convinced that the Akira could be half a kilometer in length.


But if you simply restate your argument from authority logical fallacy ad nauseum , I think the discussion is was over two posts ago.
You clearly didn't read the Ex Astris piece. They did an incredibly thorough job (much better than I could do in a few minutes for a forum disagreement) of running through every on screen appearance of the Akira, through every variable range of the ships dimensions, and list all known production sizes, technical specs and appearance angles. They even quibble a bit about window size.

None of which changes the conclusion that the listed technical specifications are at worst plausible, and at best accurate for the vessel. Wanting it to be otherwise doesn't make it so, especially in the face of compelling evidence.

Last edited by stirling191; 01-17-2013 at 05:22 PM.
Rihannsu
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 948
# 40
01-17-2013, 05:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by syberghost View Post
Just add more fighter consumable devices. That's easy, and it gives other ships this capability without radically shifting their balance.
the bad thing about that is that fighter devices share a cooldown with Fleet Support. which I find insanely stupid.
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 08:12 AM.