|
Actium
|
 |
« Reply #15 on: August 17, 2009, 11:17:21 AM » |
|
well at least it has same limitations at the warp engines
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
[EXC] 1337_64M3R
The Forums official Necromancer.
 Offline
Posts: 2464
Ehh... Romulan Ale anyone?
|
|
« Reply #16 on: August 31, 2009, 02:28:34 PM » |
|
Well, this is what I call a cheap get away of a new class. Put some javalins sticking out of the lower hull and give it a new name.  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Current Projects:
- Fleet Ops: Generations (Pending)
- Warp-in Project (On Hold)
- Cardassian Race (In Progress)
- 8472 (Pending)
|
|
|
Pappy63
Offline
Posts: 330
|
|
« Reply #17 on: September 17, 2009, 04:27:58 AM » |
|
If it looks likes a Definat call it Defiant class Version 2.0.0
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Greatgreengoo
Offline
Posts: 41
|
|
« Reply #18 on: October 09, 2009, 04:23:24 AM » |
|
Wow amazing. I actually stoped following STO a few years ago after I thought it got scrapped. I guess I was mistaken. I about wet my self when I saw the trailer. It looks like its going to be everything I hoped for and more. I still would like to know more about how ship to ship combat will work. I need to explore the site a little.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
quaddmgtech
Offline
Posts: 787
|
|
« Reply #19 on: November 11, 2009, 06:21:22 PM » |
|
Either lack of creativity or their going with what works.
Probably a combination of both.... but people tend to bitch when you stray too far from 'normal' ship design. I too am guilty of this... especially when it comes to the ent.-J dear god may we never see that ship anywhere! EVER! |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
THE BORG CAN ASSIMILATE THIS!!!
|
|
|
Atlantisbase
Offline
Posts: 281
USS Hime NCC - 78509
|
|
« Reply #20 on: December 02, 2009, 02:16:00 AM » |
|
Thank god I'm not the only one who finds these "new" ship designs completely disgusting. Starfleet ships have never incorporated these strange curved, wishy-washy shapes; they have always been very clean and very sharp. These designs are weird and un-Starfleet. Leave the sweeping curves to the Romulans and the un-smooths hulls to the Klingons. Besides, all they're doing is taking existing designs and modifying them to be consistent with the design styles seen in the latest movie (which, frankly, I do not accept into the Star Trek cannon) and giving them new names. File these designs along with all the rejected 50s/60s product designs and get back to traditional forms.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Kittamaru
Offline
Posts: 34
|
|
« Reply #21 on: December 04, 2009, 03:20:55 PM » |
|
Part of the probem is they're building on existing designs and up-rating them Take the galaxy -> Galaxy-X class conversion. All it does is increase power generation capability, add a third warp nacelle to it's back, and throw a big-ass phaser cannon on it  The Vigilant has dual 12cm layers of ablative armor according to the site... 24cm of armor... damn... no wonder it looks funky.! |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
navyguy
AMBASSADOR CLASS LOBBYIST- CONSERVATIVE
Offline
Posts: 212
"THE WAR IS GOING VERY BADLY FOR THE FEDERATION"
|
|
« Reply #22 on: January 13, 2010, 07:14:16 AM » |
|
I myself also like the old stlye of Starfleet ships, like the Galaxy, the Ambassador, etc, does anyone think the Galaxy Class in old mod , look better than the one in this new mod. I saw a game, wont mention the name, but all the ships are rounded and overlaping engines, just cant get use that, i like the traditonal Star Fleet ship. Galaxy Class refit now that was sweet.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: January 13, 2010, 07:19:09 AM by navyguy »
|
Logged
|
THE AMBASSADOR CLASS WAS ONCE HAILED AS THE ULTIMATE IN STARFLEET DEASIGN, "WE BUILD WE FIGHT" UNITED STATES NAVY SEABEE. USS AMBASSADOR-NCC10521, USS ENTERPRISE NCC-1701-C, USS EXCALIBUR NCC-26517, Type Heavy Cruiser. Modernized Ambassadors are said to be on par with early Galaxy Class models .
|
|
|
navyguy
AMBASSADOR CLASS LOBBYIST- CONSERVATIVE
Offline
Posts: 212
"THE WAR IS GOING VERY BADLY FOR THE FEDERATION"
|
|
« Reply #23 on: January 21, 2010, 06:30:04 AM » |
|
Why does the Ambassador Class have a "short", WEAPONS RANGE, and yet the Excelsior has a long range, i know the Ambassador Class was a better ship then the Excelsior, and yet its stats are close to a Galaxy Class. Ther ship doesnt seem to hold its own at all? this ship is better than this. The Ambassador is a heavy cruiser, imagine this if you will, H.M.S. Hood, a heavy battlecruiser with 5' guns, now that would be short. Cruisers are meadium, my point it should be no shorter than meadium range, how does a heavy battle cruiser have a short weapons range? back in the day, during ww2, the smallest gun would have been a 5' the next size you would find on a cruiser 8' and up, and so on. If the upgraded Ambassador Class was on parr with the early Galaxy Class would that not make her weapons range at least meadium, thats all iam trying to clear up?
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: January 21, 2010, 07:42:24 AM by navyguy »
|
Logged
|
THE AMBASSADOR CLASS WAS ONCE HAILED AS THE ULTIMATE IN STARFLEET DEASIGN, "WE BUILD WE FIGHT" UNITED STATES NAVY SEABEE. USS AMBASSADOR-NCC10521, USS ENTERPRISE NCC-1701-C, USS EXCALIBUR NCC-26517, Type Heavy Cruiser. Modernized Ambassadors are said to be on par with early Galaxy Class models .
|
|
|
Boggz
In Soviet Russia, FleetOps plays YOU!
Offline
Posts: 1911
If I had wheels I'd be a wagon!
|
|
« Reply #24 on: January 21, 2010, 06:39:08 AM » |
|
The Speed and range changes were because different kinds of vessels got different uses. Say what you want about which vessel is supposed to be "cooler" or more badass, the reason is because those were chosen by the devs for those purposes. And no, I like the New Galaxy model more.  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
  Dom and Mal are A FIRIN' THEIR LAZARS! BWAAAAAAAAAAARRRRR!!!!! |
|
|
|
Forum 