Go Back   Star Trek Online > Feedback > Klingon Fleetyards
Login

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Captain
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,273
# 11
04-04-2013, 10:28 PM
The way I see it, the factions are supposed to be like this:

Klingon ships specialize in firepower, maneuverability, and maybe some 'electronic warfare'.

Federation ships specialize in durability, scientific capability, and a bit into firepower (ostensibly for self-defense).

For the most part, the game roughly holds true to that. KDF doesn't have a dedicated science ship line, Federation doesn't have battlecruisers. The escorts are where it all falls apart. Federation has BETTER escort-level ships than the KDF, firepower-wise. They're slightly more maneuverable and crunchy, and they also have 5 tac-console escorts. This should not be the case. I can see Federation having escorts, but not escorts that are stronger than the KDF raptors.

The Federation's true strengths should be in its cruisers and science ships. The science ships undermine the defenses of the enemy, and the combined ability of the cruisers and escorts proceeds to try finishing them off. The KDF should be more focused on the attack, trying to find weaknesses in the enemy defenses while deploying stealth, maneuverability, and some offensive sci to open holes in said defenses.

As it stands, we're probably not gonna get that kind of subtle setup, where the two factions are truly different in how they approach things.
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,241
# 12
04-05-2013, 10:08 AM
The excuse is that the borg and dominion wars woke up starfleet into thinking: Hmm all this Picard pansyness needs to change..we need to go back to Kirk's phaser-what-i-cant-womanize tactic.

Hence the Defiant class paved the way for Federation Warships.

Plus, Sisko designed the Defiant.

Sisko punched Q in the face.

A Q. In the Face.

What better omen?
http://media.tumblr.com/160cacdb395f8340dac90864182ebe16/tumblr_inline_mx9yxhItkb1qg9pkt.jpg
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 186
# 13
04-05-2013, 11:42 AM
Klingon raiders are their science ships, that's the beauty. Why produce a whole line of single purpose ships when the Bird of Prey range can do all the surveillance, electronic warfare, and debuffing you could possibly hope for?

As for the range of ships available to each faction being wildly different, I don't see this as being particularly useful or realistic. Just look at military history on our own planet: One side comes up with a powerful new innovation, and rival tribes, nations and cultures rush to adopt it or replicate it.

I DO agree that Fed don't quite fit the Fed philosophy of being able to take a punch and still fight. It seems to me that even Fed escorts ought to be tougher and a bit less maneuverable than their Klingon equivalents.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 242
# 14
04-05-2013, 12:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ztempest View Post
Time for a history lesson...and a bit of enlightened questioning.

1. Name one major scientific advance that has been made that does not have a military application.

2. Name the periods of time in our history where scientific advancement was the most rapid, i.e., "bursts" or rapid scientific advancement.

3. Name one scientific advance that was made solely for science -- that was NOT done in order to gain a clear advantage, or was not made to address a state of conflict.

1) Your question is setup poorly. It begs an answer, that you already want. Prior to the 20th century, military men did not do much inventing at all. What they did was latch onto an invention made for non-military purposes and applied it for military purposes. Military industrial complexes that sought out to design better weapons for their own sake are something of a novelty in history.

2) Again that is an odd question and you give a poor answer. How do you define scientific advancement? Is it number of inventions made for their own sake? Is it by how much an invention or series of inventions changed the world? Or is it by how much the invention changed the ordinary lives of the people of the time?

I would proffer the last choice. And by that definition the time with the most scientific advancement would be the end of the nineteenth century. When people were born they rode horses to work, delivered messages by carrier pigeons, used torches/candles to see at night, could only write books with a pen or a large printing press. Yet by the time of WW1 that same generation had electric light in their houses, could record their own voices, drive cars to work, write using portable typrwriters, sew 10x faster with machines, make phone calls to loved ones, see flying machines in the sky (planes). None of that was inspired by the military in any way.

3) Glasses, Paper, written language, telephone, phonogram, cars, planes, typewriters were never intended for military purposes. That someone took a purely scientific invention and applied it to military purposes does not make it a military invention. For example: the very first steam engine was for a toy. That someone two thousand years later used a steam engine in a warship does not make the steam engine a military invention. Gunpowder is another example of a toy (fireworks) being rethought with a military application.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ztempest View Post
Who is more likely to have a robust scientific program, the Federation, who strives for peace...or the Klingons, who are in a CONSTANT state of conflict/war? I will give a well-deserved nod to the Feds for exploration...but when it comes to military science and technology...guess who I think has the edge...
Now I agree in principle with you that wars tend to fuel scientific development of weapons of war. But the only invention of war that touched everyone's life in a day to day fashion was 'the bomb'. Jet engines were not inspired by the military. Their development increased exponentially due to wartime investment. Your confusing development of an application of an existing invention/concept with completely independent discovery. Most of the time, military inventions are made in response to an opponent's invention. But you cite to wartime and peacetime examples with no distinction.

For example: you claim rockets are a military invention. They were not. They were quickly adapted to military purposes during WW2. Post WW2 they were reverted to both military and non-military purposes. Both development tracks were sped up by the wartime development. What happens with development by NASA after WW2 is not an example of military inventions. Did NASA develop ICBMS? ICBM's may have been inspired by Von Braun, who also aided NASA. But NASA didn't build or develop them. NASA's inventions were a purely non-military scientific research project.

The question I would pose to you is what invention came from the military 100% indepedently on its own that shaped the world at large in the aftermath of its development? I'll give you the bomb. Any more?
Lieutenant
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 33
# 15
04-05-2013, 12:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by benovide View Post
You really have no idea the absolute brutality, mutilation, and utter destruction that has been created with "science".

Weapons of war are discovered through science, the most devestating acts ever brought upon a single population, that lead to complete and utter genocide of several towns, in some cases entire cities, are all in the name of science.

Do not think at any time it's "peaceful". Nothing has ever come of science that didn't lead to the injury/mutilation/death of a human being or animal.

As far as the game goes, Klingons would have the biggest edge in military weaponry, capabilities, etc.
Check out the Japanese unit 731 from WW2. Probably one of the most sickening things you can find that was done in the name of science.

However, there are also plenty of cases of benign science done just for the joy of discovery. Humans are weird that way.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 186
# 16
04-05-2013, 12:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ztempest View Post
1. Name one major scientific advance that has been made that does not have a military application.
Up until the invention of rocketry, the field of astronomy had absolutely no military application, especially in the early days of Galileo and Copernicus. In point of fact, the marriage of technology and military comes only recently in our history.

Quote:
2. Name the periods of time in our history where scientific advancement was the most rapid, i.e., "bursts" or rapid scientific advancement.
I think you're confusing cause and effect. It's the advancement of science which created perceived military opportunities and capabilities not seen before. Without the creation of the modern industrial infrastructure, there's no reason to believe that total wars like World War I and World War II would ever have achieved the scale they did. The invention of Atomic fission, and the weaponry which it might be used in, for example, was theorized long before the advent of hostilities in World War II. (By Leo Szilard in 1933). Simply put, science changed how we waged war, war did not change how we conduct science.

Quote:
3. Name one scientific advance that was made solely for science -- that was NOT done in order to gain a clear advantage, or was not made to address a state of conflict.
Virtually all of math, astronomy, biology, and 90% of human ingenuity prior to the industrial age. The problem here is that it's difficult to separate conflict from human advancement, because human history has been festooned with conflict. But it's a mistake to assume that because Empires have rivals that their scientists devote their works to gaining the upper hand in those rivalries. Just look at our own scientific community: Nearly to a man they're pacifist, promoting not the supremacy of one culture or nation over another, but cooperation towards the improved commonwealth of humanity.

Look, I agree with your assertion that there's little reason for the Klingon Empire to eschew applied sciences, but I do think it's reasonable to suggest that the Federation, with its avowed dedication to improve the standard of living for all of its members, might be a bit more well-disposed to devote more of their resources to pure research and discovery than the superstitious and belligerent Klingon Empire. (And before you accuse me of being a Fed Troll, my main is a Klingon Engineer).
Commander
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 392
# 17
04-05-2013, 02:23 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by canisanubis View Post
Up until the invention of rocketry, the field of astronomy had absolutely no military application, especially in the early days of Galileo and Copernicus. In point of fact, the marriage of technology and military comes only recently in our history.

That is False, Astronomy's primary focus was the use of the stars to determine distances traveled and directional movements. Even the Spartans used the stars to determine how many Hectas (Greek for miles, don't know if I spelt that right) they traveled, based on angles of certain constellations. They used the location of the moon to determine time spent.

Even before rocketry, Astronomy was been a massive focus point for military advances and purposes, the single invention of the airplane and nightime raids, caused massive requirements to utilize the stars to determine where they were at night, how far they've travelled, etc. And Astronomy has been one of the larger sciences of war next to mathematics, due to finding out "why" a black hole forms, "how" an anomoly forms that did such and such, to make attempts to fabricate the same results but on smaller scales in controlled labs.



I think you're confusing cause and effect. It's the advancement of science which created perceived military opportunities and capabilities not seen before. Without the creation of the modern industrial infrastructure, there's no reason to believe that total wars like World War I and World War II would ever have achieved the scale they did. The invention of Atomic fission, and the weaponry which it might be used in, for example, was theorized long before the advent of hostilities in World War II. (By Leo Szilard in 1933). Simply put, science changed how we waged war, war did not change how we conduct science.

Again, false. During WW1 and WW2, entire economies converted into what were known as "Total War Economies", the infrastructure didn't exist until war broke out. Horizontal and Vertical Flight theories never existed until military application saw a need to try and do it. Even the Wright Brothers were funded by the military.

The car you drive, Henry Ford, Chevrolet, even BMW were funded by their nations militaries to create a less required logistical means of transpiration. (The car)

Calculus, never existed before a means of determining mass, size, and effects were needed, when explosives were needed to perform a task. (Military application) Even to break down a code for Cryptos to encode messages, and decode messages, thousands of math formulas, even in trig, and geo were never existent until military application was needed, and a method of calculating them were needed.

Einstein never created the mathematics for nuclear physics had it not been for the US Military pushing for the ability to control what they had. Einstein would have never had the time, or ability to pursue his push for mathematics. Even major universities have their math departments largely funded by DoD funds.


Virtually all of math, astronomy, biology, and 90% of human ingenuity prior to the industrial age. The problem here is that it's difficult to separate conflict from human advancement, because human history has been festooned with conflict. But it's a mistake to assume that because Empires have rivals that their scientists devote their works to gaining the upper hand in those rivalries. Just look at our own scientific community: Nearly to a man they're pacifist, promoting not the supremacy of one culture or nation over another, but cooperation towards the improved commonwealth of humanity.

False, the pursuit of biology was to determine the better ways of killing someone, or something. That's how we know today that if you stab someone in the armpit with a sharp instroment, you'll put them in shock, severe the artery, incompacitate, and kill them in just minutes. Because Julius Caesar pushed for the studies of human anatomy and physiology to learn the fastest, and quickest, and easiest ways to kill men on the battlefield. He had slaves scliced and diced just to document anatomical findings. You're talking thousands of men and women tortured and mutiliated in the name of "science".

The push of understanding anatomy and physiology, has had military applications long before medical applications. Ancient world was more concerned about how to kill Joe than they were about healing joe. Biological sciences such as Marine Biology, originated via means to kill or poison people. Such as certain squid and octopus species found in the mediteraenon were naturally hostile, they found they had poison glans which could be used to tip arrows, causing huge pain in a person who was shot by said arrow.

Learning species of insects, taught them how to utilize (romans) Scorpions in hay bails they'd catapult into villages. There isn't a single biological, mathematical, astrological, or any science that didn't have backing via a military orgenization. Even psychology is pushed by ancient empires. The first forms of psychological studies, were determining methods of interrogation and tortures that helped in gaining information.

Even Horticulture and Agriculture has been pushed for thousands of years, primarily for the means of feeding and breeding military power. (See Hittites, Babylonians, and Haburabi)

Look, I agree with your assertion that there's little reason for the Klingon Empire to eschew applied sciences, but I do think it's reasonable to suggest that the Federation, with its avowed dedication to improve the standard of living for all of its members, might be a bit more well-disposed to devote more of their resources to pure research and discovery than the superstitious and belligerent Klingon Empire. (And before you accuse me of being a Fed Troll, my main is a Klingon Engineer).
Federation has pushed so many things in show that outlaws and bans majority of military based research, Klingons push for military research, more than 90% of everything we use today, originated in the military's labs.

Meaning the KDF is more likely to make scientific breakthroughs, than the federation ever is.

Even today btw, everything we know now, is a result of someone dying, being mutilated, or an animal sharing the same fate.

Last edited by benovide; 04-05-2013 at 02:25 PM.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 242
# 18
04-05-2013, 04:13 PM
Regardless of whether Spartan soldiers navigated at night by stars, they didn't invent how to navigate or read star constellations. Sailors navigating across oceans also navigate by the stars. Does that prove they invented astronomy? Or more importantly the compass? Did the vikings invent their form of navigation to sail the seas or raid villages in England? It just so happens that once you can navigate, the next step is to raid villages in England.

Newton invented calculus to prove gravity. Archimedes learned how to determine mass in a bathtub to determine if a crown was legit or not. Hippocrates pushed biology for the sake of saving people not killing them. History channel is interesting but really take it with a grain of salt. A number of professors role their eyes at conclusions drawn in those shows. The Wright Brothers were not military scientists. They made bicycles for a living. Thomas Edison was a corporate entrepeneur. As was Henry Ford and his assembly line so invaluable to WW2 production. Guess what, that was made to sell more cars in peacetime.
Capitalism pushes more inventions than any military could afford to research. Even today.

Also look at the cold war. Both Soviet Russia and the US pushed military science for better weapons. In the beginning, the Soviets had the lead in many fields. By the end the US led in nearly every field. There is alot more to science research than the purpose of the research (build bigger bomb/ stronger tank, etc.)

Besides, Klingons won't utilize thalaron weaponry or research in game. So KDF has its own limits as well. Just saying . . .
Lieutenant
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 33
# 19
04-05-2013, 04:23 PM
You can play 7 degrees of seperation to find a link between any scientific advance and the military. Like your astronomy example -
People charted stars for navigational purposes.
Militaries need to go places.
Therefore it was a military application.

Not really what anyone else is saying. Just because the military adapts a technology at some point doesn't mean said technology was developed with military purpose in mind.
Lieutenant
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 37
# 20 Klingons v Federation
04-05-2013, 04:36 PM
Maybe this is offbase, and I'm gonna get flamed for this, but it always seemed to me that the producers of Star Trek seemed to be making the Federation likened to the US and her allies, and Klingons, Romulans and other "enemy races" similar to the Germans of WW II and the Russians of the Cold War. So, extend this don't the starships of the Feds seem like the P-51, P-38 and B-17s? This would then make the KDF ships feel like either German FW-190 and ME-109 and ME-262.

Does anyone feel me on this, or am I completely 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 03:49 PM.