Ensign
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 16
# 51
01-20-2013, 05:09 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by capnmanx View Post
It's possible to rationalize just about anything, if you put a little effort into it.

This is precisely my angle - I'm not trying to say that an intergalactic spacefleet would REALISTICALLY use a piece of tech designed 160 years ago. I'm trying to think of a semi-realistic excuse to involve a ship design which I like in a video game. Like I've said, STO forces you to suspend your Trek disbelief, sometimes. Starfleet would not in reality be made up 50% by Vice Admirals, which it has come to be on STO. Not would it realistically have a system whereby officers had to purchase their own ships, and swap tech in and out. They have shipyards for that. Starfleet's apparently got very lax with it's uniform code in the 25th century, as well - if the modern Royal Navy allowed the same sort of thing then you'd have officers dressed like Nelson serving with officers dressed like Jackie Fisher serving with officers dressed in modern blacks.

I'm not saying it needs to be realistic, I'm trying to say I want it, and so do many other players, and there are some reasonably plausible excuses that could be used for why a retro ship could still be present in 2409, in game. Like the many excuses that I and other people here have offered.

Picard once said that "Things are only impossible until they're not..." I would add that things are only unrealistic until they are made real.

I would much rather be flying around in a Federation-class (brought back due to some need for it's firepower) or a Defender class (having remained in the fleet as a ceremonial/diplomatic ship) or something else along the same lines - those are just my suggestions - and if not that, then a Tier 5 Constitution class fleet retrofit. But if none of that happens, the holoemmitter idea would suffice. So long as it was a permenant skin change or ship device that I didn't have to keep topping up like a greedy jukebox. I'm not made of money! But I would be much more likely to pay a large fee for a good retro T5 ship.

Last edited by commanderxon; 01-20-2013 at 05:16 PM.
Captain
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 968
# 52
01-20-2013, 06:47 PM
For those who think the constitution class was decommissioned, you are incorrect. The wreckage of one is seen at the battle of wolf 359, and you should feel terrible about dismissing it's sacrifice.

We are not being pushy or outlandish, we are just want to give cryptic our money.

And about the hologram option, that would be a terrible insult. For every video someone wanted to make, or for every fantasy someone wanted to experience, you would have to spend an hour or more at the dabo tables. That sounds like torture to me, it would kill your doffing schedule and drain your wallet. If you think ec is worthless you have been playing forever or you don't want to use amazing pvp builds.
The Somraw, K'tinga, D'Kyr, D7, Kumari, Xindi carrier, Xindi escort, and the T'Varo are all older than the Constitution Refit and yet they are tier 5. The rule needs to change.
Ensign
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 12
# 53 T-4
01-20-2013, 11:49 PM
At least push for a T-4 Connie/exeter. That would be enough.

They say NO T-5......fine give us T-4.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,691
# 54
01-21-2013, 01:23 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by utilyan View Post
At least push for a T-4 Connie/exeter. That would be enough.

They say NO T-5......fine give us T-4.
I think a fleet Exeter (or whichever is the modern looking one) would be a fine way to get in a Connie at endgame.... so long as the connie fans were willing to bend a little. Sadly I think the cries for a full TOS T5 connie would not stop.
Ensign
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 16
# 55
01-21-2013, 02:19 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by cidstorm View Post
For those who think the constitution class was decommissioned, you are incorrect. The wreckage of one is seen at the battle of wolf 359, and you should feel terrible about dismissing it's sacrifice.

We are not being pushy or outlandish, we are just want to give cryptic our money.

And about the hologram option, that would be a terrible insult. For every video someone wanted to make, or for every fantasy someone wanted to experience, you would have to spend an hour or more at the dabo tables. That sounds like torture to me, it would kill your doffing schedule and drain your wallet. If you think ec is worthless you have been playing forever or you don't want to use amazing pvp builds.



I'm possibly stealing your signature now. SOLIDARITY!
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 730
# 56
01-21-2013, 02:48 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by cidstorm View Post
For those who think the constitution class was decommissioned, you are incorrect. The wreckage of one is seen at the battle of wolf 359, and you should feel terrible about dismissing it's sacrifice.

We are not being pushy or outlandish, we are just want to give cryptic our money.

And about the hologram option, that would be a terrible insult. For every video someone wanted to make, or for every fantasy someone wanted to experience, you would have to spend an hour or more at the dabo tables. That sounds like torture to me, it would kill your doffing schedule and drain your wallet. If you think ec is worthless you have been playing forever or you don't want to use amazing pvp builds.
Obviously they need to make dabo allow for higher stakes. But since $25 for a C-Store ship or the ~$80-250 for a lock box ship are not viable for a Constitution class at least, it would be a possibility.
Fleet holding costs | Accolade Points: 18020 (Fed Engineer), 16400 (KDF Tactical)
Subscribe to Accolade thread | Join channel Accolades | Idea: Mail Revamp
New on STOwiki: Spire projects | STO Timeline | Fed-KDF Disparity | upcoming content
Fed Fleet: Section 31 (level 20) | KDF Fleet: Klingon Intelligence (level 20)
Captain
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 968
# 57
01-21-2013, 03:24 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by commanderxon View Post


I'm possibly stealing your signature now. SOLIDARITY!


Phyrexion, yeah it might be nice if they messed with the dabbo/holo rules. Most ftp rental systems are a lot more approachable.

Maybe all the ships cost millions in gpl because you're not supposed to play non fed ships often, and any fed ships added wouldn't suffer from that burden.
The Somraw, K'tinga, D'Kyr, D7, Kumari, Xindi carrier, Xindi escort, and the T'Varo are all older than the Constitution Refit and yet they are tier 5. The rule needs to change.
Captain
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 11,997
# 58
01-21-2013, 03:49 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by cidstorm View Post
For those who think the constitution class was decommissioned, you are incorrect. The wreckage of one is seen at the battle of wolf 359, and you should feel terrible about dismissing it's sacrifice.
Yep, the last Connie...blown up 42 years ago. People should remember her sacrifice.
Maal, Klingon, Mogh - Vegar, Orion, Marauder - R'ebel, Romulan, Haakona
Willard the Rat, Reman, F.T'varo - Rave, J.Trill, Kar'Fi - Mysk, Gorn, Varanus
Kopor, Nausicaan, Guramba - Nivuh, Ferasan, B'rel - Venit, Lethean, M.Qin
Starfleet Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 742
# 59
01-21-2013, 03:56 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by virusdancer View Post
Yep, the last Connie...blown up 42 years ago. People should remember her sacrifice.
Yep, most likely full of cadets on a training exercise, too.

I've always thought of that Connie as a ship that was kept functional for use as hands on starship operations training that got thrown at the cube in a last ditch act of desperation.
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/image.php?type=sigpic&userid=91851990000&dateline=  1341951426
Captain
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 968
# 60
01-21-2013, 03:59 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by virusdancer View Post
Yep, the last Connie...blown up 42 years ago. People should remember her sacrifice.
I liked how you used the time stamp of a sto perspective, a universe where the Connie is still all over the place.
The Somraw, K'tinga, D'Kyr, D7, Kumari, Xindi carrier, Xindi escort, and the T'Varo are all older than the Constitution Refit and yet they are tier 5. The rule needs to change.
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 10:47 AM.