Star Trek Online thread

[Dalek]

All of this could've been settled over PM's...I as a member don't want to see the forums filled with arguments...Just as a piece of friendly advice and nothing moderatorish in the slightest (my apologies if the following comes out that way), candle and DT, if you want to continue the EVE argument, could you possibly continue it over PM's? Many a time this thread has been culled of its posts.

[Hopefully] moving on...

[086gf]

Is that blue stuff on that warbird the shield?

Also you forgot one.

[Barihawk]

I play EVE. EVE's graphics are simply smoke and mirrors. They are extremely dated, graphically (except for ship models). They will be upgrading graphics in the next few expansions, but the engine itself is as old as Bridge Commander's.

[majormagna]

I actually like the look of that Intrepid (Yay! Canon!) and the Borg Cube, although the textures on the cube could be a bit more... Borg-y?
 On a side note, Eve's graphics are a tad out-dated, but the requirements are still rather high, if you don't thik you can handle it, get the light version.

Okay, end of Eve discussion now, if you want any more; why not make a new thread?

[Nebula]

anyone else recognize this ship ;)

[Billz]

Damnit!  :mad

I was really hating this game, then they had to go add the beautiful Luna Class to it!

Undecided again if I want to get this game.

Could always wait until the Luna avaliable for BC gets a texture upgrade though .

[Dalek]

You know, the Luna class actually fits STO.

[Tuskin38]

anyone else recognize this ship ;)
http://common.allakhazam.com/images/d/b/db129d9f81b3f9a049a88e2f11c10ea2.jpg

Oh, meh, gah

awesome.

[NeoSilverThorn]

anyone else recognize this ship ;)

I want to weep with joy night now....

[Tuskin38]

Has this been mentioned?

http://www.startrekonline.com/ships

They updated their site with what ships you can get at what rank. (well all the ships they've shown so far)

I don't see the Cheyenne Class mentioned there... All I see is Stargazer (WTF?) and Constellation Class.

Uh-Oh. Hopefully thats just an Oversight.


http://common.allakhazam.com/images/f/7/f7a4c70188f0d28cd49b5998e0a69059.jpg

They Akira looks like their best looking ship.

[Darkthunder]

Ambassador Class
Cheyenne Class
Excelsior Class
Nebula Class

are all suspiciously missing. Meanwhile they have

Constitution Class
Constellation Class
Soyuz Class
Stargazer Class

Why the double entry? The original "Stargazer" was a Constellation Class. Both the Constitution and the Constellation Classes should definitely be decommissioned by 2409, as should the Soyuz Class (Miranda Class variant).

[Barihawk]

The Excelsior is in. On Massively there's a picture of a horrendous customized Excelsior (with connie elements...barf). I think I'll do a better job on mine.

The also have a nice Soyuz variant and the utterly ugliest Intrepid design I've ever seen.

[Darkthunder]

If your thinking of the so called "Excalibur Class", that ones nothing more than a bastardized Constitution Class. Afaik, the Excelsior has yet to make an appearance.

[NeoSilverThorn]

If your thinking of the so called "Excalibur Class", that ones nothing more than a bastardized Constitution Class. Afaik, the Excelsior has yet to make an appearance.

DT, you feeling okay?  You've been a whole new grade of caustic over things these last few weeks.

The truth is probably that they just wanted retro-looking ships without having to deal with the established canon for that spot in time.

[Darkthunder]

I am not bitter about ST:O. On the contrary, i'd love for a new Star Trek game to succeed where others have failed. The problem is that I have yet to see any actual success in regards to this game. I'm willing to try it out and give it a chance, but annoys the hell out of me that companies like Cryptic, or Bethesda before them, throws in a bunch of non-canon ships and forgets several of the canon designs.

Furthermore, there is absolutely no realistic reason to include ships like the Constitution, Constellation or "Soyuz" Class ships by the time of 2409 since all of these would definitely be far beyond their prime. I do not accept that Starfleet would design new 25th century ships, and name them exactly the same as the ships that came before. And keep the ships "relatively" same style.

If I come off as being bitter or upset in any way, it is definitely not my intent. I will continue to strive to provide comments and input where necessary. I can't help if others don't share my opinions on certain matters

[Barihawk]

If your thinking of the so called "Excalibur Class", that ones nothing more than a bastardized Constitution Class. Afaik, the Excelsior has yet to make an appearance.

This.

It stands to reckon that if they included Excelsior parts, the Excelsior is in there. Else I'm building one, damnit.

[Nebula]

That's not an Excel that's one of the configs the Connie can turn into...
They showed it on one of the game play vids like 2 months ago.

[Barihawk]

It features an Excelsior secondary hull and nacelles, so I am confident that the ship will be in there.

[Darkthunder]

Barihawk, the ship you linked is the "so called" Excalibur Class (thou with a custom configuration)

http://www.startrekonline.com/ships/excalibur

Neither the nacelles, or the stardrive are based on the "Excelsior", and until I see a GENUINE Excelsior Class in ST:O, i'll just assume that Cryptic won't have the ship as playable. Which saddens me, since the Excelsior is one of my favorites.

[martyr]

if the centaur is in then there will be an excelsior