Excelsior - Lakota Model for Warp-in.

Post ideas and suggestions on new features or improvements here.
1, 2, 3, 4
posted on February 1st, 2010, 6:50 pm
Tyler wrote:Not taking sides, but the incomplete Enterprise-B was built with the altered look from the start. The Lakota had the same look, just with different colors.


Which underlines the "subtype-theory".
posted on February 1st, 2010, 6:54 pm
Quad the USS Lakota itself that your quote is referring to is THE Lakota from "DS9: Paradise Lost".

It is NOT representative of the Model that the Enterprise B uses.

I tried to clarify earlier so let me do so again:  There is no actual label for that model of Excelsior.  The model used for the Enterprise-B in Generations has no designation of it's own besides "Excelsior", which doesn't distinguish it at all from the other two versions of Excelsior's.

Thus, people end up calling it "the Lakota Refit" because hey - there's a name we can call it.  The ACTUAL version of vessel that the USS Lakota in Paradise Lost is though, is a REFIT version OF THAT VESSEL.  In that episode the USS Lakota was refitted on it's own to be stronger because it was being used by the Changeling to try and start a civil war.  The other Excelsior Class vessels using hte spaceframe that the USS Lakota and USS Enterprise-B are not TECHNICALLY Lakota's nor "refits" because Lakota is just the name of the USS Lakota.  However, since it's the only name we've ever been given in accordance with that model, that's just what we ended up calling it.


 I think we're actually both on the same page, we just are misunderstanding.  I think I see that you're stating that the USS Lakota IS a refit and yes, you're right.  The USS LAKOTA WAS REFIT WITH STRONGER WEAPONS, but the model it uses itself is not a refit.  It is it's own class of Excelsior without a designation for us to refer to.

 
 When I said that you gyus should back your statements up it was because you were all throwing out wild assertions about what it's USE was and WHY Starfleet would use them and blah blah  blah ... which doesn't have any canon reference.  :)

Sorry for the wordy response.  Just wanted to make sure we were on the same page.
posted on February 1st, 2010, 7:12 pm
Boggz wrote:Sorry for the wordy response.  Just wanted to make sure we were on the same page.


:thumbsup: I prefer wordy... it leaves less up to interpretation.
1, 2, 3, 4
Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 34 guests