Prometheus/MVAM

posted on January 23rd, 2011, 4:27 pm

The speed increasesd are well known and included in multiple backstage sources, and it's canon that ships from TNG an onward moved much faster than TOS and earlier.

Whether you call it bad writing or not, the increases are canon.

[Anonymous]

posted on January 23rd, 2011, 4:37 pm

Last edited by Anonymous on January 23rd, 2011, 4:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.

The speed increasesd are well known and included in multiple backstage sources

it could be in 100 backstage sources, doesnt make it canon.

and it's canon that ships from TNG an onward moved much faster than TOS and earlier.

no its not. the following is sourced from the memory alpha article on warp factor, which cites the episode where a distance and time were given in order to determine speed.

canon: in tos warp 8.4 was given as 765,000c ie 765000 times the speed of light. at that speed voyager would be home from the delta quadrant in 33 days, not 75 years. sounds to me like tos was faster....

canon is a muddled mess of inconsistency, you cant derive any meaningful figures from it. and you definitely cant derive anything from non canon sources like tech manual.

these explanations of recalibrations were desperate attempts to try cobble together some continuity and silence the geeks. but it cant be done.

[Tyler]

posted on January 23rd, 2011, 4:48 pm

Last edited by Tyler on January 23rd, 2011, 4:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Canon is inconsitent but still canon all the same, inconitencies and non-Threshold flaws included. One or two odd entries doesn't change that the scale was different; I don't recall any Warp 14 in later series, despite those being valid as 'fast but not infinate' originally.

Non of that discounts changing warp factors, though. The next paagraph after your info also mentions environmental issues effecting speeds as a potential explanation. A little creativity goes a long way.

posted on January 23rd, 2011, 4:55 pm

Canon is inconsitent but still canon all the same

indeed, doesnt allow you to change canon at whim, which is what you are trying to do by considering tech manual recalibration as canon. its not. the recalibration doesnt exist in canon.

One or two odd entries doesn't change that the scale was different

thats not the reason the scale recalibration isnt canon. the reason it isnt canon is because, quite simply, it isnt canon. it was never mentioned in canon. it came from a tech manual, which isnt canon.

you tried arguing from canon examples that the recalibration existed, and i showed you 1 easy to find example of canon contradicting you. there are plenty of others to find if i had the time. so arguing from canon is a mistake since canon cant make up its mind on warp factors.

Canon is inconsitent but still canon all the same, inconitencies and non-Threshold flaws included. One or two odd entries doesn't change that the scale was different; I don't recall any Warp 14 in later series, despite those being valid as 'fast but not infinate' originally.

Non of that discounts changing warp factors, though. A little creativity goes a long way.

nothing confirms it either, as the evidence is contradictory. we have no evidence to reject the null hypothesis (which is that nothing happened, no recalibration happened). a little creativity is not allowed, there is no creativity in canon.

posted on January 23rd, 2011, 8:10 pm

well the most probable reason it was not made into production is ;it was built to fight ......the fed needed warships with the dominion war ......with the dominion war over .....the fed would go back to building well rounded ships that can preform light duty , patrol, civilian stuff , research/ science missions and it is well known that the fed prefer not to build warships.

posted on January 23rd, 2011, 10:03 pm

I agree. It is a production ship. No evidence to the contrary exists. In the official star trek universe, it was used after NX stage, therefore it's in production. and I aint so silly to believe that it would have went into production with the ability to separate and then was told, "now don't you go using that potentially unsafe manouvre when you are being shot to pieces now..."
and I also don't believe they redesigned the whole ship without it, or used a damn failed prototype in combat after they decided not to produce it. (the borg ship coming out of transwarp in endgame was expected to be combative)

This is said by going by what WAS seen. We only saw certain ships once on screen, or not at all, and we never debate whether those ships exist as stated. But the one they made an entire episode about we argue might be not accurate???

Eh, I'm done with this silly argument. You guys do what you want, but MY Prometheus class will be able to separate, because no amount of silly arguing will undo centuries of military strategy. Three is always better than one, assuming similar or better armament, and no EVIDENCE exists that it wasn't better armed and shielded when separated. The fact is, it would take you destroying three ships to end the battle, when they are separated. A good pot-shot can potentially take out weapons, propulsion, warp core, you name it, but ONLY on one ship. the other two, keep shooting at your tail.

posted on January 23rd, 2011, 11:06 pm

I agree.

agree with whom on what? cyrax gave a reason for the prommie NOT being a production ship.

It is a production ship. No evidence to the contrary exists

no evidence supporting it exists either. lack of evidence here makes it impossible to know for sure. that is why i chose my words carefully and said its plausible it wasnt put into production.

just as a logical side note, lack of evidence disproving it, doesnt prove it. if you want to say for certain that the prommie went into production, you must prove it, not say it cant be disproven. its the common argument religious people use to say god exists, athiests cant disprove god's existence doesnt imply a god/gods exist(s)

In the official star trek universe, it was used after NX stage, therefore it's in production. and

that never happened in canon, as tyler said the prommie in endgame shared the registry of the prommie, so it didnt leave the nx stage.

and I aint so silly to believe that it would have went into production with the ability to separate and then was told, "now don't you go using that potentially unsafe manouvre when you are being shot to pieces now..."

and what if there is a 99% chance that using mvam will cause a warp core breach? would u use it?

and I also don't believe they redesigned the whole ship without it, or used a damn failed prototype in combat after they decided not to produce it.

the excel did exactly that, it failed its original purpose yet got redesigned and went into production.

(the borg ship coming out of transwarp in endgame was expected to be combative)

im sure starfleet would send anything against that borg ship. even ice cream space vans.

This is said by going by what WAS seen. We only saw certain ships once on screen, or not at all, and we never debate whether those ships exist as stated. But the one they made an entire episode about we argue might be not accurate???

what examples of certain ships are you getting at here? take the steamy for example, we saw it rarely. vanilla had it as an artilerry ship, not its canon use. fleetops kept that spirit. plenty of people have argued about whether it should go back to its canon roots as a normal ship.

the one episode we saw had a prototype. if writers could change the steamy into arty they could remove mvam from the prommie easily enough.

MY Prometheus class will be able to separate

fine by me i dont have to play your mod.

no amount of silly arguing will undo centuries of military strategy

centuries of military strategy? yeah because sun tzu had a boat that could separate into two boats. and in WWII we saw many tanks separate into smaller tanks. there has never been a military strategy of having a war machine separate into smaller war machines. its simpler just to built 3 war machines. we have boats carrying planes, and planes carrying tanks etc. but thats carrying like an avalon, not sepping.

Three is always better than one, assuming similar or better armament, and no EVIDENCE exists that it wasn't better armed and shielded when separated.

no evidence exists that it does either i raised many points earlier in this thread about why i believe mvam makes you less effective as a fighting force. such as powering 3 separate systems which were 1 when not sepped etc

The fact is, it would take you destroying three ships to end the battle, when they are separated.

another fact is that each ship may be less than 33.33333% as strong as the whole and would be weaker overall.

A good pot-shot can potentially take out weapons, propulsion, warp core, you name it, but ONLY on one ship. the other two, keep shooting at your tail.

congratulations, that is the only reason you have given me which i cant counter. i dont believe the meagre benefits from that will justify the downsides i listed. especially since pot shots arent that common in canon.

[Tyler]

posted on January 23rd, 2011, 11:14 pm

Last edited by Tyler on January 23rd, 2011, 11:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I will have to disagree with the 'lack of potshots' part; that's pretty much how they disable systems most of the time in canon, firing a single shot at a central area to take out the entire system.

Naturally Voyager was the worst, with even Borg ships having the same 'system hub' to target.

posted on January 23rd, 2011, 11:25 pm

I will have to disagree with the 'lack of potshots' part; that's exactly how they disable systems most of the time in canon, firing a lone shot at a single area to take out the entire system.

Naturally Voyager was the worst, with even Borg ships having the same 'system hub' to target.

usually when systems go down in these cases its just a problem with scaling how powerful different ships are.

most of the time when subsystems start going offline its when shields are getting really low. like shields will drop below 30 and then systems start taking the hits.

this can appear to happen fast sometimes cos they dont balance how long it should take a lot of the time. some battles last way too little time.

bridge commander overcompensated and had battles take all day.

[Tyler]

posted on January 23rd, 2011, 11:35 pm

Last edited by Tyler on January 23rd, 2011, 11:37 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Voyager wasn't alien to disabling weapons (or losing theirs) with the first shot. Usually involving the 'ship-of-the-week'.

I always just put it down to them not wanting to waste time on decent shots people might like so they could show more Janeway shots. That, and to force the plot along a specific route with the least effort on their part.

posted on January 23rd, 2011, 11:38 pm

lol they probably want more time for janeway to use catchphrases.

its time to out the

posted on January 24th, 2011, 8:02 am

As much as I don't want to really go near this 'train-wreck' again, that remark regarding the Prometheus being in production or not because it was in Endgame, regarding/ignoring the serial number, could have literally been that the thing was mothballed in Stardock, and when the "throw everything at them to protect Earth" order came through, they beamed a janitor on board, or whomever, and scrambled it along with anything else.

By the way, did they ever refer to it as the only proto, because there could have been a few, possibly even with variances themselves.