Oslo Class comments

[THORN74]

well starfleet just rediscovered the CIRCUIT BREAKER Improvements in the Oslo include an improved power transfer grid that is shielded from surges normally caused by overloads or damage to the ship's plasma conduits.

and its able to use plasma weapons....... can we say hint hint the rommies are coming to town. :eek:

[Lence]

Meh, it looks more like an Akira class ship, then the good ol' Norway.

[Prospero]

I look forward to smashing them to bits.

[dr.watson]

I think the ship looks sweet and sounds exactly like what I would want. Does anyone else think the new ship designs are leaning more toward the predator look that klingons always used?

[TreffnonX]

it is because they are tactical vessels. The casual science and exploration vessel has nothing of a raptor or predator design i think.

[phifur]

Wow I mean WOW That ship have a ton of information. I love it :D It give a ton of hints about other stuff too!!!!!!!
I like this part While Starfleet attempts to use diplomacy before taking aggressive action, ships such as the Oslo are designed to have strong defenses. The Oslo features rodinium-alloy hull plating and improved shield generators that can withstand phaser fire, torpedoes, disruptors and even plasma weapons. My playing style going to Defenses first and then engineering. And the information said There will be Engineering ship :D. I have to read it a few more times but. There is a lot of information. Good job writing this Two Thumbs UP :)

[-Rufus-]

That looks actually really cool ... And there is a lot of info in the description as well. Now all we need is the rest of the game play info to put it in context.

[phifur]

The sad thing is. This Ship give information then all of Champions online information put together <.<;

[Dahakra]

I kinda like it and I'll enjoy smashing 'em to bits also :p
Although, did anyone else get the impression someone maybe stepped on the middle and kinda made it arch a bit?

- Dahakra

[phifur]

I kinda like it and I'll enjoy smashing 'em to bits also :p
Although, did anyone else get the impression someone maybe stepped on the middle and kinda made it arch a bit?

- Dahakra

It have a Akira shape but I think it look cool ;)

[Manta2015]

Zephyr class in the story ~ can't wait to see what this looks like ~


-Manta-

[Corehaven22]

It has the exact same torpedo module as the Akira, as well as the connections to the saucer.. shaped like a Norway... which eh ~ not bad.

But out of all the dozen+ designs, we get this?

Call me a bit disappointed ~ because I am ~

Oh well, can't please everyone I guess.


-Manta-

I wont argue with you. Not that I necessarily agree.

Im just glad an addition was made. Plus this ship had an actual class name! Not some NX blah blah blah number. Sure I want to see more. But Im not going to start harping on that again for at least another couple of weeks. They could have added some crappy shuttle pod and I probably would have been happy.

[Ruzzell]

I look forward to smashing them to bits.

THe only bits you will see is the bits of your Klingon flagship, AKA a garbage barge.

[Manta2015]

I wont argue with you. Not that I necessarily agree.

Im just glad an addition was made. Plus this ship had an actual class name! Not some NX blah blah blah number. Sure I want to see more. But Im not going to start harping on that again for at least another couple of weeks. They could have added some crappy shuttle pod and I probably would have been happy.

Very true, I guess I got my hopes a bit high -- Something new should always be something good, and the interchangeable parts of this ship makes for good potential customization.. I probably jumped to conclusions a bit ~


-Manta-

[-Rufus-]

Having re-read the info ... this seems to be the "damage dealer" in group situations. Can pack a punch, can also withstand some fire but not so much as other heavier armed ships (read "tanks") ...

[The.Grand.Nagus]

well starfleet just rediscovered the CIRCUIT BREAKER

and its able to use plasma weapons....... can we say hint hint the rommies are coming to town. :eek:

FYI, "plasma conduits" and "plasma weapons" are NOT the same thing.

[Deyvid]

I like this ship. It does look like the offspring of an Akira and Norway.

And that is a cool story to go with it. That's the longest entry so far. I hope they keep being longer entries with lots of info about the ships and how they fit into the overall fleets.

It makes sense that it would look somewhat similar to the Akira since they are considered sister ships and are able to swap out parts without going to a starbase or shipyard.

I like the idea that some of the ships will be similar and reminiscent of each other while having noticeable differences -- so that you won't see the exact same ships repeated over and over but ships that have similar looks. Put this Oslo next to an Akira and they will look generally similar at a glance but when you actually look at them you notice the differences. It will simultaneously add diversity but keep the ships all looking like part of the same fleet.


I look forward to seeing this ship in my targeting scanners.

[Vorador]

Having re-read the info ... this seems to be the "damage dealer" in group situations. Can pack a punch, can also withstand some fire but not so much as other heavier armed ships (read "tanks") ...

Why do people insist on comparing STO to other mmos. This isn't WoW, Warhammer or Everquest. Its a heavy escort, not a damage dealer.

[THORN74]

FYI, "plasma conduits" and "plasma weapons" are NOT the same thing.

i was reffering to this :

While Starfleet attempts to use diplomacy before taking aggressive action, ships such as the Oslo are designed to have strong defenses. The Oslo features rodinium-alloy hull plating and improved shield generators that can withstand phaser fire, torpedoes, disruptors and even plasma weapons. It retains the Norway class's distinctive phaser array on the dorsal bow, and adds five Type XII phaser arrays and two torpedo launchers that can fire photon or quantum torpedoes. The Oslo can be retrofitted to carry plasma weapons, although they are not standard Starfleet issue on this class of starship.

this SCREAMS ...... romulans joining the federation .......HINT HINT !!!!!

[The.Grand.Nagus]

i was reffering to this :



this SCREAMS ...... romulans joining the federation .......HINT HINT !!!!!

Some Federation ships had plasma weapons in Starfleet Battles (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starfleet_Battles), and the Romulans were not a part of the Federation. TBH, I think you are seriously jumping the gun in thinking the Romulans will be part of the Federation, especially considering the Devs have already said that the Romulan faction will be added later(GameInformer article). Oh, and when you get a sec, scroll up to the top of the page and take a look at the forum header :o

[stat]

I kinda like it and I'll enjoy smashing 'em to bits also :p
Although, did anyone else get the impression someone maybe stepped on the middle and kinda made it arch a bit?

- Dahakra

Yeah, it does look a little misshapen.

/shrug

[jagerbolt]

Looks cool! Lots of information in there! This part intrigued me the most:

<<Being able to coordinate with an engineering vessel >>

Engineering Vessel eh? Me want to see! And makes me wonder how group combat will work in the game. :D

[Loekii]

Why do people insist on comparing STO to other mmos. This isn't WoW, Warhammer or Everquest. Its a heavy escort, not a damage dealer.

However the last part certainly sounds like a 'HEALER':
Being able to coordinate with an engineering vessel will keep the Oslo fighting for longer than it could without such support, making it an ideal vessel for battle groups and fleet actions.


Now I am not a Trekkie, so I have never heard of an 'Engineering Vessel' that helps keep ships fighting longer. As a MMO player, I have heard about Healers (Priests/Shamans) that help keep other classes fighting longer via their 'HEALING' spells.

I really, really hope not, but it sounds like special 'healing beams' or 'healer drones'. :(

[USS_Parallax]

I don't know why it's based off the Norway. It's obviously more based on the Akira. :P

[Vorador]

However the last part certainly sounds like a 'HEALER':



Now I am not a Trekkie, so I have never heard of an 'Engineering Vessel' that helps keep ships fighting longer. As a MMO player, I have heard about Healers (Priests/Shamans) that help keep other classes fighting longer via their 'HEALING' spells.

I really, really hope not, but it sounds like special 'healing beams' or 'healer drones'. :(

I'm starting to get worried that this is going to be WoW in space.

[Azurian]

I like the Oslo.

However, seems Cryptic is just throwing rollbars on ships and calling it a new class. And frankly, it's showing a lack of imagination on their part.

And BTW whoever written the history, obviously rushed. I noticed some bad grammar in it. :p

[Varrangian]

Why do people insist on comparing STO to other mmos. This isn't WoW, Warhammer or Everquest. Its a heavy escort, not a damage dealer.

You didn't read the GI article did you? While I'm not suggesting STO will follow the MMO trends letter for letter. They made it clear that there will be defined roles in space combat. Which you have to have for any multi-player game.

[Wildfire30]

kitbash anyone? I think that the bridge should be depressed in to the saucer a little more. The Sovereign class before Nemesis had a brindge module that was raised about the rest of the saucer section. We sa what happened with that.

[Varrangian]

However the last part certainly sounds like a 'HEALER':



Now I am not a Trekkie, so I have never heard of an 'Engineering Vessel' that helps keep ships fighting longer. As a MMO player, I have heard about Healers (Priests/Shamans) that help keep other classes fighting longer via their 'HEALING' spells.

I really, really hope not, but it sounds like special 'healing beams' or 'healer drones'. :(

Loekii,

I think if you read it in the context of the entire paragraph it is not so clearly pointed to a healer class.

The Oslo has limited room on board for medical or scientific research facilities, and it will often work in concert with other ships that have improved sensor arrays and laboratories. Being able to coordinate with an engineering vessel will keep the Oslo fighting for longer than it could without such support, making it an ideal vessel for battle groups and fleet actions.

[Loekii]

You didn't read the GI article did you? While I'm not suggesting STO will follow the MMO trends letter for letter. They made it clear that there will be defined roles in space combat. Which you have to have for any multi-player game.

However, those roles should fit the the genre. This is Sci-Fi, and in this part, ship combat. Ship Roles should mirror Navel combat, not a Fantasy MMO.


Loekii,

I think if you read it in the context of the entire paragraph it is not so clearly pointed to a healer class.

I hope you are correct.

[Varrangian]

However, those roles should fit the the genre. This is Sci-Fi, and in this part, ship combat. Ship Roles should mirror Navel combat, not a Fantasy MMO.




I hope you are correct.

Agree completely on both counts.

A role that is roughly a "DPSer" fits the genre the Defiant is a good example. A ship that is a "tank" is a littler harder to establish, but the Galaxy and Sovie's do kind of fit this role.

They described Carrier for Klingons like a cross between "tanks" and "pet" classes, I can buy that.

I can even buy science/engineering ships having a combat control role. As I've discussed on numerous occasions electronic warfare is the perfect combat role for these ships.

[babanathie]

That is an ugly ship. LOL, it looks like a warped piece of wood in my opinion.

[Commodore_Rook]

I love it! Looks really sleek, akin to the Akira class. Can't wait to command one of these babies! Great info on it too! Well done guys!

[THORN74]

i was just looking at some screens and blueprints of the Norway class, since the Oslo is based off it, and i just realized the Norway has no Impulse engines, Phaser strips, or Torpedo launchers. Apparently she is completly unarmed and can only travel by FTL and Manuvering thrusters ?!?

[Paratus6]

Cool looking ship.
Nice write up on it, too...despite some minor grammatical errors.:rolleyes:
For being a "Heavy Escort", I find it curious that it seems to be about the same size as the Intrepid Class.

[THORN74]

Cool looking ship.
Nice write up on it, too...despite some minor grammatical errors.:rolleyes:
For being a "Heavy Escort", I find it curious that it seems to be about the same size as the Intrepid Class.

why is that curious? the constitution class was a heavy crusier and the intrepid class is larger than the connie.

size doesnt nessicarily dictate type. it would be a combination of size, function, and power.

[DarckKnight]

It's nice to see that there are new classes of ships going into the future. And really if something works you improve on it. it looks more like an Akira class and a norway had a baby and it rebelled on it's parents.

I like it, it sounds mean, It looks mean and it would be great challange for anyone if a pack of these guys came to kick you out of the solar system. :eek:

[Azurian]

i was just looking at some screens and blueprints of the Norway class, since the Oslo is based off it, and i just realized the Norway has no Impulse engines, Phaser strips, or Torpedo launchers. Apparently she is completly unarmed and can only travel by FTL and Manuvering thrusters ?!?

Since the original model was trashed, we just have to assume.

I alway assumed the Impulse Engines were in the struts like the Akira and NX-01, and the Torpedo launchers in the center (underneath the deflector) like in SFC3.

[Interdictor]

i was just looking at some screens and blueprints of the Norway class, since the Oslo is based off it, and i just realized the Norway has no Impulse engines, Phaser strips, or Torpedo launchers. Apparently she is completly unarmed and can only travel by FTL and Manuvering thrusters ?!?
Of the 5 new ships featured in First Contact, only the Sovereign and Akira had high-detail computer models made, the Norway, Steamrunner and Saber only had low-detail models. In addition, the original files for the Norway were corrupted, so most diagrams you see of the Norway is guesswork based on tiny screenshots from the movie. That's why most schematics for the ship are sketchy at best.

Anyway, I think the most logical place for the Impulse Engines would be the rear of the saucer, either one on each side or even a single engine between the nacelle struts.

[Commodore_Rook]

http://www.trekmania.net/the_fleet/utopia/fleet/norway2.jpg

Pic of the Norway...

[HighwayMan]

Looks fine to me. It’s the love child of a Norway and an Akira for sure.

For those who say it lacks imagination, just remember that you’ll be able to customize your ship to make them look a bit different. Besides you don’t want them going crazy with the designs either otherwise they won’t look like Federation designed ships.

I’m just hoping that there are lots of ship classes to pick from.

[babanathie]

Looks fine to me. It’s the love child of a Norway and an Akira for sure.

For those who say it lacks imagination, just remember that you’ll be able to customize your ship to make them look a bit different. Besides you don’t want them going crazy with the designs either otherwise they won’t look like Federation designed ships.

I’m just hoping that there are lots of ship classes to pick from.

Are you seriously saying that since we can customize that the design team doesn't have to work?

[Commodore_Rook]

I am really uncomfortable with the ability to "Customize your ship". Why is this even an option? Other than being able to upgrade weapons and systems and the like, there should never be cozmetic changes visible to alter the look of the ship. Otherwise, why even have classes and fleet ships?

[Vorador]

I am really uncomfortable with the ability to "Customize your ship". Why is this even an option? Other than being able to upgrade weapons and systems and the like, there should never be cozmetic changes visible to alter the look of the ship. Otherwise, why even have classes and fleet ships?

Yeah, I agree with you. I'd rather just have internal system customizable but the outside look of the ship to remain the same.

[angusnubangus]

I think it looks cool, very sleek.

[Hylanvahr]

I am really uncomfortable with the ability to "Customize your ship". Why is this even an option? Other than being able to upgrade weapons and systems and the like, there should never be cozmetic changes visible to alter the look of the ship. Otherwise, why even have classes and fleet ships?

Be careful with the various interpretations you read on these forums. None of us will have the whole picture on what can and can't be done in the game until game's release. Be cool until then. :cool:

The Oslo's shape and techspecs does a good job respecting traditional (canon) Starfleet design lineage, as is the case with much of what Cryptic has revealed thus far. It's a creative marriage of two very popular First Contact classes without preempting either of its parents. It's also an easy bet to say that this new ship is barely scratching the surface of what's yet to come. Can't wait for more! :)

[Tetok_Ito]

I like this ship a lot, very progressive looking.

[torstenw]

i think it looks cool

[USS_Parallax]

You didn't read the GI article did you? While I'm not suggesting STO will follow the MMO trends letter for letter. They made it clear that there will be defined roles in space combat. Which you have to have for any multi-player game.

I read it. They still should have said Akira as everybody is recognizing it as such. :P

[Deyvid]

Are you seriously saying that since we can customize that the design team doesn't have to work?

I am really uncomfortable with the ability to "Customize your ship". Why is this even an option? Other than being able to upgrade weapons and systems and the like, there should never be cozmetic changes visible to alter the look of the ship. Otherwise, why even have classes and fleet ships?

Yeah, I agree with you. I'd rather just have internal system customizable but the outside look of the ship to remain the same.

Many players initially wanted the ability to completely construct their ships from scratch (putting four nacelles on top of a Galaxy class saucer, or attaching a group of nacelles on either side of a stardrive section and sandwiching that between two saucer sections, and all manner of kitbashes in an effort to push the bounds of starship design). I think that would be going a little too far, because although we may actually see some interesting and creative cool ships, we'd probably see some really odd and ugly ships too.

Then there's the camp that wants only the canonical ships with no variations to the outer hull configurations. But this again I think is going too far because there would have been 30 years after Nemesis (2379) and Starfleet and the Klingons surely would have commissioned at least a few new ship classes, especially with losses on both sides at the hands of the Dominion War.

So I think offering the stock, standard canonical ships, with the ability to modify parts (saucers, nacelles, stardrive sections, etc.) within a limited pool of options is a good middle ground, a fair compromise.

The game has to be appealing to a wide range of Trek fans, and let's face it, even non-Trek fans who are just interested in a good sci-fi MMORPG that has a famous license behind it.

I'm definitely going to be flying around some (visually) stock canonical ships on both sides, can't wait for my Bird of Prey, Vor'cha, Galaxy-class, Defiant and Excelsior, but I also am curious and interested in what can be done with the ship customizations.

I like the Oslo ship, it's a good hybrid of two canon ships, and will look good side by side with both the Akira and the Norway.

[Commodore_Rook]

Be careful with the various interpretations you read on these forums. None of us will have the whole picture on what can and can't be done in the game until game's release. Be cool until then. :cool:



I understand that, but some people are under the impression that they can turn an Intripid class into an old style Constitution class and others. This is my worst fear for the game. Imagine coming up what appears to be a Galaxay class, and it is merely a Runabout or some nonsense. If it is JUST internal systems, then no worries. But if you can swap engines and primary hull for others, to look like a different class, then this game will be dead to me.

Now I have high hopes the designers are smarter than this, so my fears are not really an issue...yet. Until we know exactly what they mean by "customize your ship", then of course there is no need to freak out.

[Interdictor]

I understand that, but some people are under the impression that they can turn an Intripid class into an old style Constitution class and others. This is my worst fear for the game. Imagine coming up what appears to be a Galaxay class, and it is merely a Runabout or some nonsense. If it is JUST internal systems, then no worries. But if you can swap engines and primary hull for others, to look like a different class, then this game will be dead to me.

Now I have high hopes the designers are smarter than this, so my fears are not really an issue...yet. Until we know exactly what they mean by "customize your ship", then of course there is no need to freak out.
They have said that you CAN swap out parts like nacelles and saucer sections (Link Here (http://www.startrekonline.com/node/176)). Now, you won't be able to make a "galaxy runabout" like you suggested, but players will be able to modify the appearance of their ship to a degree (as well as internal systems).

So....hate to break it, but I guess this game is "dead to you". Oh - and time to "freak out" I guess. :p

Me? I'm looking forward to it. Bring on the customization! :D

[Deyvid]

Here's the pertinent information from the page Interdictor linked above:
How will ship modification and customization work? Will we be able to move the position of nacelles and phaser banks, or will we be issued with 'standard' vessels of a class into which we can insert equipment of our choice (additional science labs, different impulse engines etc)?

Cryptic Studios has always been the forerunner when it comes to avatar customization, and Star Trek starship customization is no exception. As you progress through the game, you will gain access to new ship configurations. Each new configuration contains several known Star Trek classes that have similar profiles and silhouettes. For instance, you may start out in a light cruiser. In this configuration, you will find ships like the Miranda class and the Centaur class. Both these ships have a prominent saucer section, and two nacelles that hang below the saucer. Both these classes have a similar configuration that is nothing like, say, a Galaxy class, Defiant or Nebula class ship.

When you have a ship that is a certain configuration, you will be able to modify all the parts – the saucer, the nacelles, the pylons, the primary hull, etc. You will also be able to modify colors, decals, and other bits. However, the configuration will remain recognizable. If you are in the light cruiser configuration, you can make it look just like a Miranda, a Centaur, or something completely unique. The combinations are massive, however, you will not be able to have 4 nacelles or make your light cruiser look like a Galaxy class ship. So your ship will be unique, but others will be able to recognize its general capabilities. People will be able to look at someone’s ship and say, “Hey, that’s like a Nebula, so I know it’s an advanced science vessel”, or ”Hey, look at that cool Prometheus variant!”

You will also be able to modify the ships systems. You will modify and upgrade primary items like your weapons, shields, deflector dish, impulse and warp engines, etc. You will also be able to add lots of enhancements to your systems, such as targeting computers for better accuracy, EPS conduits upgrades to improve power transfer rates, better biobeds for your sick bay, etc. Different ships will have different enhancement slots (so an escort vessel will have more tactical upgrade slots). Finally, the primary way you will customize your ship is by what Bridge Officers you assign to your duty stations. Your Bridge Officers will come with unique skills that can only be used if they are at a duty station.

Altogether, ship customization will be an important part of the game – both visually and strategically.”

[Commodore_Rook]

Ok, I can buy "variants" of exsisting hulls, as apposed to purely made up designs. Now the problem will be when a ship has mixed technology on it. (i.e. 22nd century on a 25th century hull). But meh, i am keeping my stock ship as is, with internal mods.

[IcarusTyler]

ohhh....shiny

[-Rufus-]

I don't get what all the fuss is about the traditional fantasy MMO roles ... do you expect Cryptic to reinvent the wheel or something? At some point you definitly will have group encounters and for that you have to have certain roles for ships.

Sure ... you don't have to strictly go after tank/healer/dmg dealer/paladin bubblehead ... but there will be an equivalent to that to a degree. And reading the info on the Oslo class only confirmes this. Sure healing beams or drones won't be the best solution ... but I'd say lets wait til we know more about the gameplay in general before we declare this game dead.

I for one can't wait to go pack hunting with these babies ... and I don't mind the similiarities to the Norway/Akira class either. The Oslo class is a cool looking ship and from the info text seems to be an interesting class.

[Awarkle]

is it just me that thinks the oslo class looks somthing similar to the enterprise nx01 than the akira ?

[Necro]

it's like a holy blessing between the norway and the akira :D

[qoona]

its NX 11/2 USS Akirway

[THORN74]

I understand that, but some people are under the impression that they can turn an Intripid class into an old style Constitution class and others. This is my worst fear for the game. Imagine coming up what appears to be a Galaxay class, and it is merely a Runabout or some nonsense. If it is JUST internal systems, then no worries. But if you can swap engines and primary hull for others, to look like a different class, then this game will be dead to me.

Now I have high hopes the designers are smarter than this, so my fears are not really an issue...yet. Until we know exactly what they mean by "customize your ship", then of course there is no need to freak out.

dont worry too much. i am sure that wont be possible.

as for the customization, IMO, its going to work one of two ways:

1: u pick from a ship type (scout, destroyer, light cruiser, cruiser, heavy cruiser, carrier) and that gets u a virtual "parts bin" that u can pick from to build ur ship. (personally i think this is a bad idea .... it will make nothing but frankenstienships)

or

2: u choose by class (nova, defiant, intrepid,galaxy, etc...) and u get the standard looking ship. u are then given access to a larger parts bin that allows for additions and substitutions, but u are locked into the basic design of the ship class u picked. (this i think is the more likely and preffered way to do this)

[CinC-UFPForces-Cardassia]

I'm as sensitive to the issue of outlandish starship modifications as many others, particularly when it comes to the matter of starships bearing fleet markings. I do think, however, it always had to have been considered a given that Cryptic would integrate its signature development feature - avatar customization - into ST:O.

I have, so far, been satisfied with the outlines Cryptic has laid out for customization, satisfied that they'll accomplish their goals without compromising the integrity of the Trek universe.

[HighwayMan]

Are you seriously saying that since we can customize that the design team doesn't have to work?

hmmm...I don't see me saying that any where in my post.

What I'm saying is that it looks fine as is and you'll be able to customize its look a bit as well. I’m also saying that the Federation ships should look like they were designed by the Federation, which this ship does, and not by the Empire, the 12 Colonies, and so on.

I don’t know what you are looking for from this game, but I for one want something that feels like Star Trek and part of that is having the ship designs look the part.

[USS_Enduring_Vengence]

I Want One!!!!

[babanathie]

hmmm...I don't see me saying that any where in my post.

What I'm saying is that it looks fine as is and you'll be able to customize its look a bit as well. I’m also saying that the Federation ships should look like they were designed by the Federation, which this ship does, and not by the Empire, the 12 Colonies, and so on.

I don’t know what you are looking for from this game, but I for one want something that feels like Star Trek and part of that is having the ship designs look the part.

I guess my main issue with the design is that it does not look fine to me. It does not look "sleek" as alot of people put; it looks ungainly. Basically, the model looks like somebody's kid was playing with an Akira starship model and bent the frame and tried to fix it. It definitely looks like a Federation starship though; since, it definitely looks like an altered version of a Akira model. However, it definitely does nothing to indicate that Cryptic's design team is capable of being creative in my opinion. I love canon; however, it thirty years after ST:N. If there is something that Cryptic can effect without the overt ire of Star Trek fans, it is the starship designs.

I'd rather have the Akira though. It looks sleeker. The only thing that would make me want this piece of unimaginative work is increased combat capability.

[JMD10222]

I really like the Idea of heavy escorts. My security teams from my fleet will be running ALOT of escort missions for the Fleet, so the Oslo fits my needs perfectly.;)

[BreachAndClear]

I love the way the ship looks, but I dislike the back story explaining that it is essentially a hybrid of the Akira class with the Norway configuration. Personally, I am not a big fan of the Akira, but I understand fully that many others are. The - out of universe - designers of the NX obviously liked the Akira and looked to it for inspiration, and apparently Cryptic is too with the Oslo and the Zephyr. Yes, I get it, the Akira is popular, but that doesn't mean I'm wild for the idea of pre-established ships being "akiracized" (hybridized with the Akira) to make them look "cooler." It really doesn't make sense in that the Akira is an older ship than the Nebula and Galaxy classes, and from what we saw on screen suffered far more casualties in the Dominion War than the Galaxy family of ships (again, referring to the Nebula and Galaxy). Why look to that older design in developing new escorts rather than looking to the more successful and younger design? The out of universe explanation seems to be because the fans love the Akira, while the in universe explanation is lost to me (the Nebula was modular too).

Yes, I love the Oslo, as I think the blending of the Akira and Norway has the cosmetic strengths of both classes but not the - what are in my opinion - aesthetic drawbacks. I guess the best way to put it is that I love the way the Oslo looks, but I dislike the idea behind the Oslo itself. And it seems that just as the Oslo is a hybridization of Akira and Norway design, the Zephyr will most likely be a hybridization of the Akira and some other class. I'm not keen on the idea of Akira design pooling over into other designs.

[Commodore_Rook]

I guess my main issue with the design is that it does not look fine to me. It does not look "sleek" as alot of people put; it looks ungainly. Basically, the model looks like somebody's kid was playing with an Akira starship model and bent the frame and tried to fix it. It definitely looks like a Federation starship though; since, it definitely looks like an altered version of a Akira model. However, it definitely does nothing to indicate that Cryptic's design team is capable of being creative in my opinion. I love canon; however, it thirty years after ST:N. If there is something that Cryptic can effect without the overt ire of Star Trek fans, it is the starship designs.

I'd rather have the Akira though. It looks sleeker. The only thing that would make me want this piece of unimaginative work is increased combat capability.

Well there are only so many ways to make a Federation ship: either with 1, 2 or 3 nacelles on top, the sides or underneath a round/oval/triangle/sphere primary hull with or without a secondary hull. Add an optional weapons pod or sensor pod, and there ya go! Bake at 345 degrees.. season for taste.

[babanathie]

Well there are only so many ways to make a Federation ship, either with the nacelles on top, the sides or underneath a round/oval/triangle primary hull with or without a secondary hull. Add an optional weapons pod or sensor pod, and there ya go!

Tell that to movie and show designers when they created the Intrepid, Akira, Steamrunner, Sovereign and numerous other starships that looked new and innovative while maintain the Star Trek feel. Oslo is nothing more than an Akira knockoff.

[BreachAndClear]

Tell that to movie and show designers when they created the Intrepid, Akira, Steamrunner, Sovereign and numerous other starships that looked new and innovative while maintain the Star Trek feel. Oslo is nothing more than an Akira knockoff.

All of those ships, except the Steamrunner and Akira with its double hulls, don't differ that drastically from the same basic configuration of the majority of Starfleet ships.

[Corehaven22]

I guess my main issue with the design is that it does not look fine to me. It does not look "sleek" as alot of people put; it looks ungainly. Basically, the model looks like somebody's kid was playing with an Akira starship model and bent the frame and tried to fix it. It definitely looks like a Federation starship though; since, it definitely looks like an altered version of a Akira model. However, it definitely does nothing to indicate that Cryptic's design team is capable of being creative in my opinion. I love canon; however, it thirty years after ST:N. If there is something that Cryptic can effect without the overt ire of Star Trek fans, it is the starship designs.

I'd rather have the Akira though. It looks sleeker. The only thing that would make me want this piece of unimaginative work is increased combat capability.

My excitement regarding a new ship being added has faded to some degree.

Im not really up to specs on all the Star Trek ships out there. I only know a handful. I looked the Akira up to see what it looked like and I recognized it right away.

I cant argue with a single point here. The Oslo does look very much like the Akira in design. Especially the nacelle configuration. I had assumed Cryptic would make ship designs as different as possible but with an underlying Star Fleet theme. This ship does not follow that philosophy. I think Im going to have to agree. Unimaginative it is.

Which brings up a thought. The NX-91001 looks extremely similar to a Sovereign class. Now this new Oslo looks very similar to the Akira class. Im beginning to see a pattern here.

[BreachAndClear]

As Commodore_Rook pointed out, there's only so much you can do with the standard saucer section, star drive section, warp nacelle pattern that makes most Starfleet ships instantly recognizable. Cryptic can, and probably will, venture into territory similar to that of the Saber, Steamrunner, and Defiant, in which they sacrifice the iconic silhouette. However, given that such configurations aren't iconic, I wouldn't expect to see them explored as much.

Some people seem impossible to please. To truly create something new and innovative I think Cryptic would have to ditch the traditional Starfleet design and start back at the drawing board making unfamiliar designs in the same way that the designers (out of universe) made the aforementioned Defiant, Saber, etc. But in doing so, they'd be sacrificing the immediately recognizable imagery of the intellectual property. Because they don't do this (or at least not overwhelmingly so), they are doomed to make ships that are "unimaginative." Personally, they're doing better than I would have figured they would in creating new designs within the boundaries established by the IP. Frankly, I expected them to rely almost exclusively on canon ships and not designs of their own making.

[Corehaven22]

As Commodore_Rook pointed out, there's only so much you can do with the standard saucer section, star drive section, warp nacelle pattern that makes most Starfleet ships instantly recognizable. Cryptic can, and probably will, venture into territory similar to that of the Saber, Steamrunner, and Defiant, in which they sacrifice the iconic silhouette. However, given that such configurations aren't iconic, I wouldn't expect to see them explored as much.

Some people seem impossible to please. To truly create something new and innovative I think Cryptic would have to ditch the traditional Starfleet design and start back at the drawing board, but in doing so they'd be sacrificing the immediately recognizable imagery of the intellectual property. Because they don't do this, they are doomed to make ships that are "unimaginative."

I disagree. The shows have a plethora of imaginative ship designs. Every one is somehow similar but looks completely different. Some do stand out more than others. But overall Im starting to see a complete lack of originality with anything Cryptic creates.

There's a lot of different looking things you can do with a couple of nacelles, a saucer section, etc. And thats just for starters. Entirely new ship designs arent entirely impossible either.

Perhaps Cryptic needs to start having art contests regarding ship designs to be featured in their games.

[Commodore_Rook]

I disagree. The shows have a plethora of imaginative ship designs. Every one is somehow similar but looks completely different. Some do stand out more than others. But overall Im starting to see a complete lack of originality with anything Cryptic creates.

There's a lot of different looking things you can do with a couple of nacelles, a saucer section, etc. And thats just for starters. Entirely new ship designs arent entirely impossible either.

Perhaps Cryptic needs to start having art contests regarding ship designs to be featured in their games.

Huh? we have seen, what two or three ships from them so far? Personally, I don't want them re-inventing the wheel. If it aint broke, don't fix it! (how many cliches can I put in here lol). Stick with established designs that are TREK, modifing them for use here. I am sure they are worried that if they make a ship TOO drasticly different, people will loose focus that this a TREK game first and foremost. You want weird unique original ships? Go play EVE or SWO. I am happy with traditional Federation designs.

[BreachAndClear]

First there's the Constitution which sets the groundwork.

There is the Excelsior which follows the same configuration but made it more streamlined. The Miranda which simply ditched the stardrive section and attached the warp nacelles directly to the primary hull.

There was the Galaxy that shortened the pylons relative to the ship, made the primary hull ovoid with a large lateral width and made the stardrive section more angular. There is the Nebula that took the Galaxy design, attached the stardrive section in a different manner and made the pylons sweep downward, a module was also added. There's the Ambassador that looks like a cross between a Galaxy and Excelsior. There's the Centaur which is to the Excelsior what the Miranda is to the Constitution. There's the Sovereign which ditched the "neck" of the Galaxy, rotated the primary hull 90 degrees (so that it's wider front to back than side to side), and added pylons more reminiscent of the Constitution refit than the Galaxy. There's the Intrepid which continued with the "no neck" configuration making the primary hull even more pointed at the front than the Sovereign, the pylons were made more stubby. There's the Nova which looks like a stocky Intrepid with upswept pylons reminiscent of the Constitution.

These are gradual changes, not unlike what Cryptic has done with the NX-91001 and Oslo. While the NX-91001 and Oslo obviously bear resemblances to canon ships, canon ships themselves often bear obvious resemblances to previously established canon ships. As time goes on even canon designs seem to become less and less inspired as designers run out of ways to think up new designs that still stick to the same basic design. Ships like the "peace sign ship" are just as creative, if not more so than some of the canon ships.

Ships like the Oberth, Norway, Akira, Steamrunner, Saber, and Defiant are honorable mentions in original design, however all but arguably the Akira sacrifices the iconic starfleet look.

[Commodore_Rook]

My all time favorite ship designs came from playing SFB and viewing the Franz Joseph Technical Manual. In it, he took the basic ingrediants of the Constitution (warp nacelles, primary hull, sensor dish) and changed them up to present four new classes (Scout, Destroyer, Tug and Dreadnought). These designs contine with the various ships seen on and off screen for TNG and beyond. I think, straying from this formula too much will impact the game negativly. Sure there are the Steamrunners and Defiants out there, but they are rare, (and really don't care much for the Defiant design, never did.) A main ship will ALWAYS have the main look of a Conny, no matter what century it is in. Shows what a timeless design it is.

[Corehaven22]

Huh? we have seen, what two or three ships from them so far? Personally, I don't want them re-inventing the wheel. If it aint broke, don't fix it! (how many cliches can I put in here lol). Stick with established designs that are TREK, modifing them for use here. I am sure they are worried that if they make a ship TOO drasticly different, people will loose focus that this a TREK game first and foremost. You want weird unique original ships? Go play EVE or SWO. I am happy with traditional Federation designs.

So in other words they shouldnt create anything new or exciting. If they make a new ship it should look extremely similar to something else already cannon.

I dont want something weird. But I guess its too much to ask for something new and original. After all, its a NEW ship. Regardless the back of the Oslo looks almost EXACTLY like the Akira. The NX-91001 almost looks identical to the Sovereign. Some of Perpetuals artwork looked very much Trek but were also completely different designs. Im not seeing that implemented so far in the three designs we've seen from Cryptic.

However, I really like some of the ship designs they've made regarding already cannon ships. The Miranda comes to mind. I like what they did with it very much. A very nice refit. But if you're going to make a new class of ship, I'd like to see something a little more original.

[babanathie]

First there's the Constitution which sets the groundwork.

There is the Excelsior which follows the same configuration but made it more streamlined. The Miranda which simply ditched the stardrive section and attached the warp nacelles directly to the primary hull.

There was the Galaxy that shortened the pylons relative to the ship, made the primary hull ovoid with a large lateral width and made the stardrive section more angular. There is the Nebula that took the Galaxy design, attached the stardrive section in a different manner and made the pylons sweep downward, a module was also added. There's the Ambassador that looks like a cross between a Galaxy and Excelsior. There's the Centaur which is to the Excelsior what the Miranda is to the Constitution. There's the Sovereign which ditched the "neck" of the Galaxy, rotated the primary hull 90 degrees (so that it's wider front to back than side to side), and added pylons more reminiscent of the Constitution refit than the Galaxy. There's the Intrepid which continued with the "no neck" configuration making the primary hull even more pointed at the front than the Sovereign, the pylons were made more stubby. There's the Nova which looks like a stocky Intrepid with upswept pylons reminiscent of the Constitution.

These are gradual changes, not unlike what Cryptic has done with the NX-91001 and Oslo. While the NX-91001 and Oslo obviously bear resemblances to canon ships, canon ships themselves often bear obvious resemblances to previously established canon ships. As time goes on even canon designs seem to become less and less inspired as designers run out of ways to think up new designs that still stick to the same basic design. Ships like the "peace sign ship" are just as creative, if not more so than some of the canon ships.

Ships like the Oberth, Norway, Akira, Steamrunner, Saber, and Defiant are honorable mentions in original design, however all but arguably the Akira sacrifices the iconic starfleet look.

You are missing the point by a couple of parsecs. You take the Oslo and compare it to the Akira; you will notice a great deal of similarities. They are similar enough that one could potentially build those two models with the same kit. There is no way you could take a Consitution (any refit) and create the Excelsior class out of it. There is an underlying theme between the Galaxy, Ambassador, Excelsior and Constitution classes; however, they are distinctive in themselves. There is no mistake that these ships were developed to be independent of each other while sharing a common history. The Oslo is not distinctive from Akira. The Oslo looks like a cheap, amatuer rip off of the Akira.

While Cryptic may or may not have an actual creative design yet to be shown, what they have showcased so far is not anything to get excited about. If you want to see what I'm talking about in terms of being creative, find the old FASA game (Federation Ship Recognition Manual - btw it is a non-canon source and based on TOS and movies) and take a look at what can be done with the "saucer, hull and warp engines". You might be surprised at what a creative mind can come up with.

[Corehaven22]

First there's the Constitution which sets the groundwork.

There is the Excelsior which follows the same configuration but made it more streamlined. The Miranda which simply ditched the stardrive section and attached the warp nacelles directly to the primary hull.

There was the Galaxy that shortened the pylons relative to the ship, made the primary hull ovoid with a large lateral width and made the stardrive section more angular. There is the Nebula that took the Galaxy design, attached the stardrive section in a different manner and made the pylons sweep downward, a module was also added. There's the Ambassador that looks like a cross between a Galaxy and Excelsior. There's the Centaur which is to the Excelsior what the Miranda is to the Constitution. There's the Sovereign which ditched the "neck" of the Galaxy, rotated the primary hull 90 degrees (so that it's wider front to back than side to side), and added pylons more reminiscent of the Constitution refit than the Galaxy. There's the Intrepid which continued with the "no neck" configuration making the primary hull even more pointed at the front than the Sovereign, the pylons were made more stubby. There's the Nova which looks like a stocky Intrepid with upswept pylons reminiscent of the Constitution.

These are gradual changes, not unlike what Cryptic has done with the NX-91001 and Oslo. While the NX-91001 and Oslo obviously bear resemblances to canon ships, canon ships themselves often bear obvious resemblances to previously established canon ships. As time goes on even canon designs seem to become less and less inspired as designers run out of ways to think up new designs that still stick to the same basic design. Ships like the "peace sign ship" are just as creative, if not more so than some of the canon ships.

Ships like the Oberth, Norway, Akira, Steamrunner, Saber, and Defiant are honorable mentions in original design, however all but arguably the Akira sacrifices the iconic starfleet look.

Nice post here, and I agree to some degree. But these ships still look very different from one another. I doubt many folks would easily confuse a Constitution class with an Excelsior. However the NX-91001 looks so similar that Im sure I will mistake it from a Sovereign myself especially at a distance.

The front of the Oslo has a great design. However the attachment of the nacelles should have looked a little different in my opinion. It looks like the Oslo stole the back of an Akira and took off. It looks EXACTLY the same.

Im not asking for ships to be radically different. But there is a huge difference between the Constitution and Excelsior. The Miranda and the Oberth. So on and so forth. These ships may have a theme that continues through all ship designs, but each one is unique and easily identifiable.

[BreachAndClear]

You are missing the point by a couple of parsecs. You take the Oslo and compare it to the Akira; you will notice a great deal of similarities. They are similar enough that one could potentially build those two models with the same kit. There is no way you could take a Consitution (any refit) and create the Excelsior class out of it. There is an underlying theme between the Galaxy, Ambassador, Excelsior and Constitution classes; however, they are distinctive in themselves. There is no mistake that these ships were developed to be independent of each other while sharing a common history. The Oslo is not distinctive from Akira. The Oslo looks like a cheap, amatuer rip off of the Akira.


With respect, then it seems that you are not familiar enough with the Akira. It bears "thematic" resemblance to the Oslo, but you can not build one from the other simply by bending parts (particularly when looking at the front half). They have many parts in common and structural similarities, but there are obvious differences other than simply being "bent."

The Nova is a "cheap knock off of the Intrepid", the Excelsior and Galaxy are clearly distinct, but then the Ambassador creates a bridge between the two making the evolution less stark.

Not only this, but my point is with each new design one would expect designs to blur together more since there is only so much you can do with the familiar Starfleet configuration.

[babanathie]

With respect, then it seems that you are not familiar enough with the Akira. It bears "thematic" resemblance to the Oslo, but you can not build one from the other simply by bending parts (particularly when looking at the front half). They have many parts in common and structural similarities, but there are obvious differences other than simply being "bent."

You're right, the saucer looks like a crossbreed between the Akira and Norway saucers. Other than that, I could bend a model of the Akira to fit the Oslo. Original, it is not, and it's still an ugly, ugly ship. Do I like similarities, yes (at least in regards to Star Trek). Do I like too similar artwork passed off as original work, no. I plan on playing STO, but (based on what's been showcased) I would definitely ask my subscription not go to the "creative" designers of the game's ships.

[Commodore_Rook]

And of course, we have seen THREE ships so far. Perhaps Cryptic are saving the truely jaw dropping designs for later! These are just the beginning, a starter as it were!

Also, why do we NEED to have lot's of different ships? The game takes place 30 years from Nemisis. I doubt Starfleet completely scrapped their fleet in order to introduce all new ships!

[SeaCadt07]

Oslo looks pretty cool.

[Azurian]

Guys, lets calm down. It's starting to get hot in here.

Look, I agree what Babs said, all Cryptic did was slap on the pod to the NX-91001 and the Oslo and called it a new ship. Surely they can do something better than kitbashing. What's the point of having artists on your staff if they don't do anything?

John Eaves, the guy who created the Sovereign and a couple of other ships for Star Trek, was working with Perpetual's STO and on his website he shows some of the ideas they were planning to use:

http://johneaves.wordpress.com/author/johneaves/


Now tell me, some of those ships wouldn't be fun flying around. ;)

[Inquizitor]

*squirms uncomforatably* On the one hand I like that they are evolving xisting classes while not gettign rid of them. On teh other hand I am very uncomforatable about it not beig any different than an Akira. MY First thought when I looked at the ship on the front page was an Akira with a custom saucer section.

How is this ship any different than an Akira ship with a custom saucer section?

EDIT: BTW. I hate that perpetual design posted above. It looks terrible. I don't think the OSlo looks terrible personally. I just don't see why they aer calling it an Oslo class instead of an Akira class.

[Azurian]

You know he made more than just the one. :p

I really love Eave's version of the NX-01.

[BreachAndClear]

*squirms uncomforatably* On the one hand I like that they are evolving xisting classes while not gettign rid of them. On teh other hand I am very uncomforatable about it not beig any different than an Akira. MY First thought when I looked at the ship on the front page was an Akira with a custom saucer section.

How is this ship any different than an Akira ship with a custom saucer section?

EDIT: BTW. I hate that perpetual design posted above. It looks terrible. I don't think the OSlo looks terrible personally. I just don't see why they aer calling it an Oslo class instead of an Akira class.

Why is the Miranda not called a Constitution without a stardrive section?

The different saucer section is enough to warrant a new class because with it come different phaser arrays, different facilities, different layout, etc.

[babanathie]

Why is the Miranda not called a Constitution without a stardrive section?

The different saucer section is enough to warrant a new class because with it come different phaser arrays, different facilities, different layout, etc.

You're right in that the Oslo is definitely a different ship class from the Akira. But, it does look and feel like a variation of that class. You ever go on a fansite with player created starships, look at a design and say that's just a xxxx class starship with some cosmetic designs? That's what I said the first time I looked at the Oslo (and NX-91001 for that matter).

[47Wasps]

Why is the Miranda not called a Constitution without a stardrive section?

The different saucer section is enough to warrant a new class because with it come different phaser arrays, different facilities, different layout, etc.

You know,the point you just made has completely altered my perception of the Oslo-class.
I like it more now,because it makes more sense now.
Its part of the Akira-family of Starship designs.

[BreachAndClear]

Personally I see continuities of design as a positive thing. I was a Star Wars fan before I was a Star Trek fan, so I know more about that franchise more than this one, since I've only recently become a fan of ST and ENT is the only series I've seen from beginning to end.

In Star Wars for instance, during the prequel trilogy the artists went to great lengths to maintain continuity. The original Jedi starfighter from Attack of the clones is dagger shaped, bearing design continuity with the Star Destroyers and the Jedi Interceptors and V-wings from Revenge of the Sith bore obvious similarities with the Tie fighter. I also tried giving the new Clone Wars show a try, given that I'm a fan of the films (ehh... it's not for me), but I managed to catch that in one episode they showed the precursor to the Y-wing as well. The continuities show change over time and how designs got to be the way they are. It's a strength, not a weakness. The developers probably sit down, look at ships established in canon and think "hmmm... how are these designs changing over time?" or more likely "what's this ship going to be in thirty years?" they then take preexisting designs as inspiration, if not as an outright template, and tweak them to show how they are evolving just as the Ambassador was added to show continuity between the Excelsior and Galaxy classes. Some ships will remain the same class, yet be modified, while others might evolve into new classes all together as they are heavily retrofitted with the newest technologies and altered hulls to accommodate those technologies.

The same process is seen in the real world designs evolve and the components that worked up to par are kept and the rest are swapped out. Why the Oslo? Because apparently the Norway had shortcomings, the Akira was a success, and so the configuration of the prior got mixed with the technologies of the latter to create a new ship equipped with the more successful technologies, but configured for a different role than the Akira. I'll go as far as to say that it does not make sense for the developers, in universe or out of universe, to just sit down and pull stuff out of the air to be creative. The Centaur might simply be a kitbash of the Excelsior, but coincidentally such a development would make more sense in the real world as both ships share common components which makes production a lot easier.

Someone made a post regarding a Perpetual employee blogging with images of Perpetual ST designs and frankly they aren't that good in my opinion. Ironically they are too original in design such that they bear no resemblance to Federation ships (with the exception of the "peace sign ship"). Continuity is important and I'm surprised as to how much people are being turned off by it. Also, I think the creativity behind canon ST ships is overstated. Yes, the Constitution and Excelsior are easily distinguishable but that doesn't go hand in hand with creativity. The Imperial class star destroyer in Star Wars is easily distinguishable from the Victory class Star destroyer, namely because the latter has two huge turret-like observation posts on the front of it. That's doesn't suggest creativity because otherwise they are very, very similar in outward appearance.

It wouldn't take much creativity to make the Excelsior from the Constitution. It's simply a matter of some guy sitting down to make a model and thinking "hmmm... what if I make the warp nacelles longer... indent the deflector a bit.... flatten out the top of the saucer section a bit.... texture it differently... and voila... Excelsior. Yes, it's readily distinguishable, but is fundamentally the same basic design. Not to mention we're conveniently ignoring ships like the Centaur, Miranda, Nebula, Nova, NX, and ambassador which were all spinoffs of prexisting designs and yet constitute a sizable portion of the known ST canon ships, and show continuities of design.

The Sovereign, while not an obvious spinoff, looks like a cross between newer technologies and older configurations.

The Norway, Steamrunner, Akira, and Saber were all designed by the same guy and just pulled out of the air and seemingly coming out of no where. Creative? Yes. But sort of dead ends in design as they don't bear any continuities, neither as precursors (until the NX was retrospectively added), nor as successors. That Cryptic would expand upon these designs and show their evolution into new ships (e.g. Norway ----> Oslo) I think is a positive thing, not something that should be criticized as unimaginative. I wouldn't say that by adding the D-5 predecessor to the B'rel in Enterprise was unimaginative.

[babanathie]

It wouldn't take much creativity to make the Excelsior from the Constitution. It's simply a matter of some guy sitting down to make a model and thinking "hmmm... what if I make the warp nacelles longer... indent the deflector a bit.... flatten out the top of the saucer section a bit.... texture it differently... and voila... Excelsior. Yes, it's readily distinguishable, but is fundamentally the same basic design. Not to mention we're conveniently ignoring ships like the Centaur, Miranda, Nebula, Nova, NX, and ambassador which were all spinoffs of prexisting designs and yet constitute a sizable portion of the known ST canon ships, and show continuities of design.

The Sovereign, while not an obvious spinoff, looks like a cross between newer technologies and older configurations.

The Norway, Steamrunner, Akira, and Saber were all designed by the same guy and just pulled out of the air and seemingly coming out of no where. Creative? Yes. But sort of dead ends in design as they don't bear any continuities. That Cryptic would expand upon these designs and show their evolution is a good thing IMO.

I don't have a problem with continuity; however, what's been presented by Cryptic (to date) is not distinctive in my opinion. When you see better designs (I'm not referring to the Perpetual designs; although there are some I like and some I dislike in the bunch) coming from fan art, it makes me question the competency of the design team. Recognizable but distinctive is a fine line, and obviously Cryptic is walking more into the recognizable side (too much on that side in my opinion). Designers in the past have successfully walked that line though; so, I don't feel it too much to ask for the design team. The way I look at it, there are a few possibilities to explain this lack of creativity.

1. They have something coming up that will be distinctive. If they do, I'll applaud them.
2. They are scared to walk that line. I have a term for that, and if they are scared; it makes we wonder.
3. They don't care. That's not a good indication for the game or any of its fans.
4. They lack creativity. That again is a bad indication.
5. They think the player base will be a bunch of hacks that will gobble up anything they put in front of them.

I'm hoping for option one; however, I'll voice my opinion to push them away from possibilities two thru five.

[Azurian]

Someone made a post regarding a Perpetual employee blogging with images of Perpetual ST designs and frankly they aren't that good in my opinion. Ironically they are too original in design such that they bear no resemblance to Federation ships (with the exception of the "peace sign ship").

That wasn't a Perpetual Employee, that was John Eaves, who was one of the model makers for Star Trek. He created the Sovereign and several other ships we seen. :p

It wouldn't take much creativity to make the Excelsior from the Constitution. It's simply a matter of some guy sitting down to make a model and thinking "hmmm... what if I make the warp nacelles longer... indent the deflector a bit.... flatten out the top of the saucer section a bit.... texture it differently... and voila... Excelsior. Yes, it's readily distinguishable, but is fundamentally the same basic design. Not to mention we're conveniently ignoring ships like the Centaur, Miranda, Nebula, Nova, NX, and ambassador which were all spinoffs of prexisting designs and yet constitute a sizable portion of the known ST canon ships, and show continuities of design.

The Sovereign, while not an obvious spinoff, looks like a cross between newer technologies and older configurations.

The Norway, Steamrunner, Akira, and Saber were all designed by the same guy and just pulled out of the air and seemingly coming out of no where. Creative? Yes. But sort of dead ends in design as they don't bear any continuities, neither as precursors (until the NX was retrospectively added), nor as successors. That Cryptic would expand upon these designs and show their evolution into new ships (e.g. Norway ----> Oslo) I think is a positive thing, not something that should be criticized as unimaginative. I wouldn't say that by adding the D-5 predecessor to the B'rel in Enterprise was unimaginative.

Sure it's practical for Cryptic to kitbash to a degree, but STO is supposed to bring something NEW to the Star Trek Environment. This is the future after all, and people (not just Trekies) want to see some new ships.

[BreachAndClear]

That wasn't a Perpetual Employee, that was John Eaves, who was one of the model makers for Star Trek. He created the Sovereign and several other ships we seen. :p



Sure it's practical for Cryptic to kitbash to a degree, but STO is supposed to bring something NEW to the Star Trek Environment. This is the future after all, and people (not just Trekies) want to see some new ships.

Then I guess what I don't understand is what you consider "new" is there a particular fan design or something - that you like - that you can show to give me a feeling of what you would consider acceptable?

[Corehaven22]

Then I guess what I don't understand is what you consider "new" is there a particular fan design or something - that you like - that you can show to give me a feeling of what you would consider acceptable?

Something that doesnt look exactly like something else already existing. Are you actually asking someone to draw a picture on paintbrush or what?

Just because Cryptic is making a Star Trek game, doesnt mean their ship designs are good or innovative. Im starting to get the feeling that any ship design they made would be great with you regardless of what it looked like.

[47Wasps]

I for one would like to see some original designs.
Ones that stand out from established vessels and make 2409 truly the next generation of Trek and era of its own.
Cryptics ships are nice,but I'd like something new as well.
I think some of John Eaves work is a perfect example of what we should see more of in STO

[BreachAndClear]

Something that doesnt look exactly like something else already existing. Are you actually asking someone to draw a picture on paintbrush or what?

Just because Cryptic is making a Star Trek game, doesnt mean their ship designs are good or innovative. Im starting to get the feeling that any ship design they made would be great with you regardless of what it looked like.

You obviously have something in mind of what constitutes creativity given that from my perspective it seems every single non-canon ship discussed has been criticized by the same 2-3 people in various threads, simply being shrugged off as "uncreative" even though the same could be said for the vast majority of ST ships, canon or otherwise, as I've elaborated.

I myself have already been critical of the Oslo in this very thread no less, and in the past I've mentioned that the "peace sign ship" is really quite ugly. I consider myself fair. You keep saying something "new" something "original" when nearly every Federation ship in ST outside of the original Constitution can be argued as unoriginal. Most conform to the same design with slight alterations. The Oslo itself conforms to a similar design of another ship but will alterations making it arguably "new" and "original." Those words are relative and are near meaningless unless you can put them in context by demonstrating what you consider falls within those parameters. The Oslo is about as different from the Akira as the Ambassador is to the Galaxy.

[Corehaven22]

You obviously have something in mind of what constitutes creativity given that every single non-canon ship you've seen here has been criticized, simply being shrugged off as "uncreative" even though the same could be said for the vast majority of ST ships, canon or otherwise, as I've elaborated.

I myself have already been critical of the Oslo in this very thread no less, and in the past I've mentioned that the "peace sign ship" is really quite ugly. I consider myself fair. You keep saying something "new" something "original" when nearly every ship in ST outside of the original Constitution can be argued as unoriginal. Most conform to the same design.

Every non cannon ship? Well there was the Raptor. Thats cannon. And the other two, the NX-91001 and the Oslo, Ive criticized to some point. So...yea its uncreative in my opinion.

And no the other ships outside of the Constitution class that are cannon look like they have the same THEME but are ORIGINAL. They cant be mistaken for anything else and have their own distinctive features. Im not the only one on this thread who has thought the same thing. And no they dont conform to the same design or they would all look EXACTLY the same. Which they dont.

[BreachAndClear]

Every non cannon ship? Well there was the Raptor. Thats cannon. And the other two, the NX-91001 and the Oslo, Ive criticized to some point. So...yea its uncreative in my opinion.

And no the other ships outside of the Constitution class that are cannon look like they have the same THEME but are ORIGINAL. They cant be mistaken for anything else and have their own distinctive features. Im not the only one on this thread who has thought the same thing. And no they dont conform to the same design or they would all look EXACTLY the same. Which they dont.

The Oslo cannot be mistaken for the Akira... they have the same THEME but have their own distinctive features.

[Varrangian]

You obviously have something in mind of what constitutes creativity given that every single non-canon ship you've seen here has been criticized, simply being shrugged off as "uncreative" even though the same could be said for the vast majority of ST ships, canon or otherwise, as I've elaborated.

I'm going to give you the truth of the matter. You can never please trekkies and most specifically you can't please STO forum trekkies.

[THORN74]

I'm going to give you the truth of the matter. You can never please trekkies and most specifically you can't please STO forum trekkies.

hey V ......... I'm pleased .... i like the Oslo. Its way better than i could have done, and i think its a nice looking ship.

[Varrangian]

hey V ......... I'm pleased .... i like the Oslo. Its way better than i could have done, and i think its a nice looking ship.

Sorry I guess I needed the :p on my post, but there is an element of truth to it is there not?

[Corehaven22]

The Oslo cannot be mistaken for the Akira... they have the same THEME but have their own distinctive features.

So you agree on the NX-91001? It looks just LIKE a Soveriegn.

And I never said the Oslo looked exactly like the Akira. I said that the back of the ship....the nacelles and the mounting, looks identical. The saucer section of the ship looks fine to me. Its the back I have a problem with. All it would have taken was some slight artistic readjustments and it would have looked completely different. No comparison would be or could be made. They could have maybe slanted the mounting a bit. Curved some of the beams. Not linked them the same way as the Akira. I dont know, there's a million possibilities that only involve changing the mounting of the nacelles. And poof. You have a different looking ship.

Again I have no problem with the saucer section. I just think the back of the ship could have used some slight but important readjustment.

[Lence]

My only problem with the Oslo class is the fact their saying its the next step up from the Norway. Other then that I have nothing I hate about it.

This ship: http://johneaves.wordpress.com/2009/03/19/starfleet-vessels/ looks more like a newer version of the Norway class then the Oslo.

[BreachAndClear]

I'm going to give you the truth of the matter. You can never please trekkies and most specifically you can't please STO forum trekkies.

Well, some people are bound not to like the design, and some are bound to be disappointed. But some have become so consistent with that opinion, from thread to thread, based on the tiniest of details, that I think it becomes something of a reflex.

[Corehaven22]

My only problem with the Oslo class is the fact their saying its the next step up from the Norway. Other then that I have nothing I hate about it.

This ship: http://johneaves.wordpress.com/2009/03/19/starfleet-vessels/ looks more like a newer version of the Norway class then the Oslo.

The link was a very original, yet still Starfleet in design. I like it. Thats exactly what Ive been talking about.

[Corehaven22]

Well, some people are bound not to like the design, and some are bound to be disappointed. But some have become so consistent with that opinion that I think it becomes something of a reflex.

As well as people who go all fanboy over anything Cryptic does because they are making a Star Trek game and argue relentlessly to defend anything they come out with. :D

[BreachAndClear]

As well as people who go all fanboy over anything Cryptic does because they are making a Star Trek game and argue relentlessly to defend anything they come out with. :D

Except for the fact that I already expressed the opinion that I dislike the idea behind the Oslo (which most likely applies to the Zephyr as well) :rolleyes:

See post #66

[Azurian]

Then I guess what I don't understand is what you consider "new" is there a particular fan design or something - that you like - that you can show to give me a feeling of what you would consider acceptable?

Okay, let me try to explain:

What Cryptic is doing with making new ships is legit with the kitbashing and altering the dimensions is fully legit, since it's been done for decades. But it's still taking the lazy road. With computers, they have more liberty in designing than the model makers did with the original designs.

And it's not lazy in creating new designs by taking the original Consitution and elongating it, stretching it either way to create a new design. Because it actually takes effort to make it work.


STO is at the start of 25th century, let's see a design that will be the next steping stone that will lead us to the Enterprise J of the Mid 26th century!

[Corehaven22]

Okay, let me try to explain:

What Cryptic is doing with making new ships is legit with the kitbashing and altering the dimensions is fully legit, since it's been done for decades. But it's still taking the lazy road. With computers, they have more liberty in designing than the model makers did with the original designs.

And it's not lazy in creating new designs by taking the original Consitution and elongating it, stretching it either way to create a new design. Because it actually takes effort to make it work.


STO is at the start of 25th century, let's see a design that will be the next steping stone that will lead us to the Enterprise J of the Mid 26th century!

Agreed. Heck maybe they will. You never know.

And again I would like to say I like what they did with the Miranda at least. The refits look great. But again, I dont appreciate anything totally "new" they've come out with.

[BreachAndClear]

So you agree on the NX-91001? It looks just LIKE a Soveriegn.

And I never said the Oslo looked exactly like the Akira. I said that the back of the ship....the nacelles and the mounting, looks identical. The saucer section of the ship looks fine to me. Its the back I have a problem with. All it would have taken was some slight artistic readjustments and it would have looked completely different. No comparison would be or could be made. They could have maybe slanted the mounting a bit. Curved some of the beams. Not linked them the same way as the Akira. I dont know, there's a million possibilities that only involve changing the mounting of the nacelles. And poof. You have a different looking ship.

Again I have no problem with the saucer section. I just think the back of the ship could have used some slight but important readjustment.

The NX has Galaxy style pylons from what I can tell, different textures on the primary hull, and nacelles that illuminate on the sides (like the Galaxy) rather than the top (as in the Sovereign), and the primary hull does not have the smoothed out edges or texturing of the Sovereign. Plus theirs the roll bar between the nacelles. The nacelles themselves, save for which part is illuminated, are Sovereign style, and the primary hull is ovoid like that of the Sovereign. Those two features give it a similar silhouette like the Sovereign, and I agree they look very much alike, but I don't see how you can honestly get them confused. The NX-91001 looks way more "busy" and it's almost instantly recognizable because of it.

[BreachAndClear]

Okay, let me try to explain:

What Cryptic is doing with making new ships is legit with the kitbashing and altering the dimensions is fully legit, since it's been done for decades. But it's still taking the lazy road. With computers, they have more liberty in designing than the model makers did with the original designs.

And it's not lazy in creating new designs by taking the original Consitution and elongating it, stretching it either way to create a new design. Because it actually takes effort to make it work.


STO is at the start of 25th century, let's see a design that will be the next steping stone that will lead us to the Enterprise J of the Mid 26th century!

Not a single ship they've made qualifies as a kitbash. Neither the NX-91001 nor the Oslo is made exclusively from the parts of pre-established ships.

[Corehaven22]

Except for the fact that I already expressed the opinion that I dislike the idea behind the Oslo (which most likely applies to the Zephyr as well) :rolleyes:

See post #66

Yet you've debated for several pages, arguing the design of the Oslo is good if not descent. I will say again the saucer section looks okay. The rest not so much.

BTW, I respect your posts. They are very well put and show some serious thought. We can disagree regardless though. If I dont agree Im going to say so. That doesnt mean I cant see your well put points.

[Azurian]

Not a single ship they've made qualifies as a kitbash. Neither the NX-91001 nor the Oslo is made exclusively from the parts of pre-established ships.

Huh? They just took a pod from the Akira and put it between the nacelles of a Sovereign, then renamed it the NX-91001.

And the Oslo, they ripped off the nacelles of the Norway and put on the rear of the Akira.

That's kitbashing by definition my friend.

[Corehaven22]

Not a single ship they've made qualifies as a kitbash. Neither the NX-91001 nor the Oslo is made exclusively from the parts of pre-established ships.

I highly disagree. Again. Sorry. :o

[BreachAndClear]

Huh? They just took a pod from the Akira and put it between the nacelles of a Sovereign, then renamed it the NX-91001.

And the Oslo, they ripped off the nacelles of the Norway and put on the rear of the Akira.

That's kitbashing by definition my friend.

Wrong on both accounts. I'd explain it (though I already have). But a side by side comparison of the NX to the Sovereign, and Oslo to the Norway makes the differences obvious. I do understand how people can look at the NX and think "Sovereign", heck I was calling it a Sovereign refit too before more info was released on it.

But in regards to the Oslo, the front only vaguely looks like the Norway. The orientation of the nacelles is the only thing 100% Norway.

[Corehaven22]

Wrong on both accounts. I'd explain it (though I already have). But a side by side comparison of the NX to the Sovereign, and Oslo to the Norway makes the differences obvious.

Yea there's a diffence, but not much. Thats the point. You take about three small things away from the NX and its a Sovereign.

The back of the Olso looks just like the back of an Akira.

Just like a tree looks like a tree. A rock looks like a rock. Deep huh? I know. I impress myself sometimes. :p

[BreachAndClear]

Yea there's a diffence, but not much. Thats the point. You take about three small things away from the NX and its a Sovereign.

The back of the Olso looks just like the back of an Akira.

Just like a tree looks like a tree. A rock looks like a rock. Deep huh? I know. I impress myself sometimes. :p

Again, I won't fight you that hard about the NX-91001 because it is obviously heavily inspired by the Sovereign. And may very well be a Sovereign refit, given that we don't know the class of the ship. However, those three small things still keep it from being a kitbash. Too much attention is being drawn to the rears of these ships and focusing on the roll bars. Remove the module on the back of the Oslo and people probably wouldn't be quick to think it looks like the Akira. It has an Akira style module, so what? That's one small trait, remove it and it doesn't really look like an Akira anymore.

http://img218.imageshack.us/img218/3880/norwayclass28zh4rx.jpg

http://media3.startrekonline.com.s3.amazonaws.com/img/ship-art-01.jpg

I'd hardly consider this a kitbash of a Norway. Nothing but the nacelles look 1-to-1 with the Norway (that's more directed at Azurian).

[Captain-Picard]

Fantastic job Cryptic I'm impressed.

[Corehaven22]

Again, I won't fight you that hard about the NX-91001 because it is obviously heavily inspired by the Sovereign. And may very well be a Sovereign refit, given that we don't know the class of the ship. However, those three small things still keep it from being a kitbash. Too much attention is being drawn to the rears of these ships and focusing on the roll bars. Remove the module on the back of the Oslo and people probably wouldn't be quick to think it looks like the Akira. It has an Akira style module, so what? That's one small trait, remove it and it doesn't really look like an Akira anymore.

Those three things do equal a kitbash. Three little things being different will do that. Yea...
Unless it very well indeed IS a sovereign refit! Then I dont see a single problem with it.

On every SINGLE thing you said otherwise in this post I TOTALLY agree with. Absolutely. 100%.
So they should REMOVE that small trait on the Oslo and put something SLIGHTLY different, and there is no reason to say squat. That was exactly my point.

[BreachAndClear]

EDIT: Nevermind, it's late, I'm calling it a night.

[Interdictor]

Those three things do equal a kitbash. Three little things being different will do that. Yea...
Unless it very well indeed IS a sovereign refit! Then I dont see a single problem with it.

On every SINGLE thing you said otherwise in this post I TOTALLY agree with. Absolutely. 100%.
So they should REMOVE that small trait on the Oslo and put something SLIGHTLY different, and there is no reason to say squat. That was exactly my point.

So? A LOT of ship classes starfleet uses are kitbashes then. The Miranda (and Constellation and Soyuz and Saladin) uses Constitution parts, the Centaur and Shelly/Curry uses Excelsior parts, the Nebula uses Galaxy parts, etc. This is not a new phenomenon for Starfleet to "recylcle" design ideas and ship parts for use in other classes.

[Corehaven22]

So? A LOT of ship classes starfleet uses are kitbashes then. The Miranda (and Constellation and Soyuz and Saladin) uses Constitution parts, the Centaur and Shelly/Curry uses Excelsior parts, the Nebula uses Galaxy parts, etc. This is not a new phenomenon for Starfleet to "recylcle" design ideas and ship parts for use in other classes.

These ships use a same theme but look completely different. Just because the ships use similar nacelles and other parts, doesnt mean they look anything alike in overall design. The nacelles were put in different places, were mounted in different ways. There is no trouble at all recognizing a Constitution from a Miranda. With the NX-91001, it looks almost identical to a Sovereign. Could be a refit. If not its cheap.

The Oslo looks exactly like an Akria in the rear. Not hardly a bit of difference. Simply mounting the nacelles in an original way would have saved the ship from any criticism.

[Azurian]

Wrong on both accounts. I'd explain it (though I already have). But a side by side comparison of the NX to the Sovereign, and Oslo to the Norway makes the differences obvious. I do understand how people can look at the NX and think "Sovereign", heck I was calling it a Sovereign refit too before more info was released on it.

I don't get the logic of this explaination.

But in regards to the Oslo, the front only vaguely looks like the Norway. The orientation of the nacelles is the only thing 100% Norway.
I'd hardly consider this a kitbash of a Norway. Nothing but the nacelles look 1-to-1 with the Norway (that's more directed at Azurian).

Because the nose of Norway was cut off, doesn't make it any less of a kitbash.

But for the sake of arguement, in comparison it does look more different than the Sovereign / NX-91001.


Also, like I said it would be nice if Cryptic made completely new designs and not rely on revamping, kit-bashing, or modificating of existing vessels in pawning them off as "new". Let's see some original designs, guys!

[babanathie]

Those three things do equal a kitbash. Three little things being different will do that. Yea...
Unless it very well indeed IS a sovereign refit! Then I dont see a single problem with it.

On every SINGLE thing you said otherwise in this post I TOTALLY agree with. Absolutely. 100%.
So they should REMOVE that small trait on the Oslo and put something SLIGHTLY different, and there is no reason to say squat. That was exactly my point.

Kitbash means different things to different people. I would put the Nx-91001 and Oslo in the hack category myself. Kitbash is not accurate enough and may be too nice of word.

[babanathie]

So? A LOT of ship classes starfleet uses are kitbashes then. The Miranda (and Constellation and Soyuz and Saladin) uses Constitution parts, the Centaur and Shelly/Curry uses Excelsior parts, the Nebula uses Galaxy parts, etc. This is not a new phenomenon for Starfleet to "recylcle" design ideas and ship parts for use in other classes.

Yeah, the only thing with those jobs; they were creative unlike Cryptic's.

[Lukasks]

screenshot 2 from oslo class http://www.sto-center.de/images/stories/simple/osloklasse.jpg

[BreachAndClear]

I don't get the logic of this explaination.

The point was that a kitbash is when parts of one ship are taken and directly attached to pieces of another ship, without any real alteration. 100% of the components belong to already established ships. The NX-91001 has some features that are unique to it and no other ship. It looks more like a refit Sovereign with some technologies not seen on any other ship (the primary hull and nacelles are different than those of the Sovereign). So even though the ship looks maybe 90% Sovereign. There are still 10% new technologies (just arbitrary figures). As I've said, the ship looks like it may very well be a Sovereign refit. We'll have to wait and see. I don't consider the ship highly creative on Cryptic's part, but despite the lack of creativity, I don't think it's a bad looking ship, since it looks like a Sovereign, and I don't think the Sovereign is a bad looking ship. And again, I don't find half of the canon ships to be all that creative in design to begin with.

For instance, if you go to

http://stdarkfate.craigcurtis.us/stdfarchivesfc7.html

and look at the fan made designs (pages 5-12) there are a lot of creative designs, but most of them are way too busy in design, in my opinion. Because of this, I do not feel most of them consistent with canon precedents of starship designs.


Because the nose of Norway was cut off, doesn't make it any less of a kitbash.

But for the sake of arguement, in comparison it does look more different than the Sovereign / NX-91001.

It's not just the front being cut off. The Norway has a much more arrow shaped primary hull, with the posterior end of it being much more broad than the front giving it a semi-triangle shape. The primary hull of the Oslo looks more-or-less the same width throughout and has that little sawed off front (like you said) which is also present on the NX, Akira, Steamrunner, and Nova. The ships look similar because they are in the same configuration but the resemblance really ends there IMO. I can't look to any single component, with the exception of maybe the nacelles, and say "that belongs to the Norway class." In contrast, as I somewhat alluded to in another post, you can look at the module on the rear end and say "that belongs to the Akira," but it's only one small feature on the ship and while it bothers me a little bit (because I don't like how the Akira design is influencing other designs) I still think the ship looks pretty awesome.

[THORN74]

The point was that a kitbash is when parts of one ship are taken and directly attached to pieces of another ship, without any real alteration. 100% of the components belong to already established ships. The NX-91001 has some features that are unique to it and no other ship. It looks more like a refit Sovereign with some technologies not seen on any other ship (the primary hull and nacelles are different than those of the Sovereign). So even though the ship looks maybe 90% Sovereign. There are still 10% new technologies (just arbitrary figures). As I've said, the ship looks like it may very well be a Sovereign refit. We'll have to wait and see. I don't consider the ship highly creative on Cryptic's part, but despite the lack of creativity, I don't think it's a bad looking ship, since it looks like a Sovereign, and I don't think the Sovereign is a bad looking ship. And again, I don't find half of the canon ships to be all that creative in design to begin with.

For instance, if you go to

http://stdarkfate.craigcurtis.us/stdfarchivesfc7.html

and look at the fan made designs (pages 5-12) there are a lot of creative designs, but most of them are way too busy in design, in my opinion. Because of this, I do not feel most of them consistent with canon precedents of starship designs.




It's not just the front being cut off. The Norway has a much more arrow shaped primary hull, with the posterior end of it being much more broad than the front giving it a semi-triangle shape. The primary hull of the Oslo looks more-or-less the same width throughout and has that little sawed off front (like you said) which is also present on the NX, Akira, Steamrunner, and Nova. The ships look similar because they are in the same configuration but the resemblance really ends there IMO. I can't look to any single component, with the exception of maybe the nacelles, and say "that belongs to the Norway class." In contrast, as I somewhat alluded to in another post, you can look at the module on the rear end and say "that belongs to the Akira," but it's only one small feature on the ship and while it bothers me a little bit (because I don't like how the Akira design is influencing other designs) I still think the ship looks pretty awesome.


yeah that site is pretty kool ..... i like the Interceptor (http://stdarkfate.craigcurtis.us/images/stsfc0000InterceptorM.jpg) its a ship i think fit with in the look of canon ships

[Inquizitor]

Why is the Miranda not called a Constitution without a stardrive section?

The different saucer section is enough to warrant a new class because with it come different phaser arrays, different facilities, different layout, etc.

Because the Miranda is radically different from a Constitution class. The Oslo is not Radically different from an Norway Class. Especially when Cryptic is telling us we can customize hulls and nacelles and God knows what else.

If I choose to have an Akira in the game and modify the saucer section to look like a Norway how is that class any different from the Oslo? Heck that NX ship is a Sovereign pure and simple. Why did they slap on a small accessory and proclaim it a new ship? This goes back to my problem with the over customization of the game. Small changes like what was added to the NX class, Starfleet class(?), is what I see as an acceptable level of customization for a ship. In itself that small change does not warrant a new class name. It is a refit at most.

now we look at the Oslo. It is differnt enough to warrant a new class name. Where my disconnect happens is that we are told that different saucer section used on the Oslo is something you will be able to do anyway with a normal Akira. That level of customization drastically changes the design and silhouette of the ship. However we are also told the class will not change when we make these customizations. So this is where I question the ship.

If I was beign predented the Oslo in an enviroment where customizing the ship was somethign that wasn't goign to happen I would be thinking It's a pretty cool ship. New classes are beign designed to meet the challenges of the future as I would expect the Star Trek Universe to do. We are not in such an enviroment though. ALL ships from an Oberth to an Oslo is going to have alot of customization capabilities. I won't be able to add a second saucer or more naucelles but I will be able to change how they look. The Saucer is a very big and very relevant part of most Starfleet ships. If I can change the saucer to look different, be it a Galaxy shape, a constitution shape, a Norway shape, or even that Peace sign shape, I am making very relevant structural changes that makes the ship unrecognizable from its previious version.

Now there are two angles I can look at this and accept the design. First. We are being shown a custom Akira and they are just naming it as it's own class. That would explain the Sovereign. Alternativly The Akira and Oslo are going to have unique saucer sections that will follow the same basic shapes. On this we have no real data. As it stands now based on what we do know I just have to wonder what is the point of this new class fo ship? It is a Custom Akira much as the Starfleet class is a Custom Sovereign.

EDIT: Heck. As I take another look at the Norway Class All the Oslo is is a Norway class ship with the extra impulse engine between teh naucells. It's the same change they made to the Sovereign. Why are they showing us a Norway class ship and calling it an Oslo?

[Azurian]

The point was that a kitbash is when parts of one ship are taken and directly attached to pieces of another ship, without any real alteration. 100% of the components belong to already established ships. The NX-91001 has some features that are unique to it and no other ship. It looks more like a refit Sovereign with some technologies not seen on any other ship (the primary hull and nacelles are different than those of the Sovereign). So even though the ship looks maybe 90% Sovereign. There are still 10% new technologies (just arbitrary figures). As I've said, the ship looks like it may very well be a Sovereign refit. We'll have to wait and see. I don't consider the ship highly creative on Cryptic's part, but despite the lack of creativity, I don't think it's a bad looking ship, since it looks like a Sovereign, and I don't think the Sovereign is a bad looking ship. And again, I don't find half of the canon ships to be all that creative in design to begin with.

For instance, if you go to

http://stdarkfate.craigcurtis.us/stdfarchivesfc7.html

Yes, I visited that site. It's here people show off their skills using the Starship Creator. :p

And again I know that a ship can have equipment added and warrants it's knew designation. If you go back and see my posts in the NX-91001 thread, I mention this. But after seeing the Oslo almost getting the same treatment it still shows a lack of imagination on Cryptics side.

and look at the fan made designs (pages 5-12) there are a lot of creative designs, but most of them are way too busy in design, in my opinion. Because of this, I do not feel most of them consistent with canon precedents of starship designs.

Again these were made from the Starship Creator and I will admit there are some that are really nice designs, but still STO being 40 years in the future needs some new ships. Cryptic needs to have some originality.

It's not just the front being cut off. The Norway has a much more arrow shaped primary hull, with the posterior end of it being much more broad than the front giving it a semi-triangle shape. The primary hull of the Oslo looks more-or-less the same width throughout and has that little sawed off front (like you said) which is also present on the NX, Akira, Steamrunner, and Nova. The ships look similar because they are in the same configuration but the resemblance really ends there IMO. I can't look to any single component, with the exception of maybe the nacelles, and say "that belongs to the Norway class." In contrast, as I somewhat alluded to in another post, you can look at the module on the rear end and say "that belongs to the Akira," but it's only one small feature on the ship and while it bothers me a little bit (because I don't like how the Akira design is influencing other designs) I still think the ship looks pretty awesome.

It's said to come from the Norway family with Zephyr and Akira components.

And I never said I dislike the design (though I don't like the bent struts).

[babanathie]

(Star Trek Australia) (http://www.startrekmeshes.com/) is a much better site for fan made Star Trek ships. STdarkfate does not show any of the ships rendered properly; that tends to detract from the quality of the work. I know I would not have chose a non rendered site because of the negative slant it tends to give fan work.

[vp21ct]

Lets end this right now.

This is supposed to be taking place 30 years after Star Trek: Nemesis, no.

In that time it is unlikely that there would be signifigant desing changes beyond internal systems. If there were any new classes, they WOULD look like nothing more than kitbashes.

Now, suppose that something, like maybe conflict with the Klingons, demanded a major retrofiting of federation vessels. If these retrofits were major enough, they could constitute naming new class of ship, granted that the previous class was still in service and was still intended to be in service, This is given evidence by such things as the miranda variants, which are designated as separate classes, but are often only slightly cosmetically different, with the rollbar removed and dishes added to the sides.

[Corehaven22]

Lets end this right now.

This is supposed to be taking place 30 years after Star Trek: Nemesis, no.

In that time it is unlikely that there would be signifigant desing changes beyond internal systems. If there were any new classes, they WOULD look like nothing more than kitbashes.

Now, suppose that something, like maybe conflict with the Klingons, demanded a major retrofiting of federation vessels. If these retrofits were major enough, they could constitute naming new class of ship, granted that the previous class was still in service and was still intended to be in service, This is given evidence by such things as the miranda variants, which are designated as separate classes, but are often only slightly cosmetically different, with the rollbar removed and dishes added to the sides.

A lot of what you've said makes good sense.

But at the same time look at the difference between the Enterprise A and the Enterprise D. A lot can change in the Star Trek universe in that amount of time. The ships in the final episode of The Next Generation looked completely different than anything seen before. The Enterprise was a refit in that episode obviously, but we had never seen anything like Beverly's ship the Pasteur. The Klingon vessels in those episodes also looked completely different.

Often, in the Star Trek universe different and new classes of ships looked totally different. I use the various versions of the Enterprise as a prime example. Each model since the Enterprise A looks nothing like the one before it. Each one has the same basic shape, but each one also is larger than the one before it (excluding the Enterpise E), and every piece had a different look.

[vp21ct]

Often, in the Star Trek universe different and new classes of ships looked totally different. I use the various versions of the Enterprise as a prime example. Each model since the Enterprise A looks nothing like the one before it. Each one has the same basic shape, but each one also is larger than the one before it (excluding the Enterpise E), and every piece had a different look.

I beg to differ on this last point. I find that the Enterprises have been on a long and steady evolution.

The First one, we know well. Had long and slender nacells on pylons at a direct angle from the stardrive., a smooth, completely round saucer section, and a slender Stardrive.

The Connie refit made the stardrive fatter, and shortened the nacels somewhat, it also slightly shortened the neck.

The Excellsior one had a very fat stardrive, the Saucer was thicker, and the nacelle pylons were made into square corners, rather than set at a direct angle from the stardrive.

The Ambassador shortened the Stardrive, as well as the nacels, it also made the neck thinner.

The Galaxy included almost all of the (cosmetic) design elements of the Ambassador, with the inclusion of a wider Saucer section.

The Sovreign is the largest single deviation, with a narrower, but longer saucer, narrow and longer stardrive, narrow and longer nacels, and pylons at a direct angle from the stardrive.

Try illustrating that and you'll see the evolution of the enterprise.

Call me Charles Chochran.

[Inquizitor]

What you did not see was the Origional enterprise refit getting the Longer Naucelles of the Excellsior class. Yes you can see the evolution of the same basic class. However you can look at each one and know what era it comes from. When you look at the Starfleet class or the Oslo class you don't see that evolution You see minor modifications.

If Cryptic is wanting to make new ship designs to lead us into the future then I would expect new ship designs to diverge from the previous generations of ships in a significant way.

You can't look at a Cosntitution class ship and mistake it for an Excellsior. and Excelsior cannot be mistaken for an Ambassador class. and Ambassador class cannot be mistaken for a Galaxy. A Galaxy can't be mistaken for a Sov. So now moving into the future why should a Sov be mistaken for a Starfleet class? IT does not bring anything new. It is not unique in anyway.

The Oslo is the same way. At first glance I saw a cyustomized Akira mainly because the Akira is a ship I am familiar with. After doing some research I foung that the Oslo is simply a Norway class ship with a minor modification. How does this break from the old Norway class in any significant way?

Presumably The Miranda class ship has some sort of evolution from where it was to the Nebula class. but the size differences are immense. Sometimes Size does make a big difference in class.

ADD Moment. Does anyone who is familiar with the numbers know how big an Oslo class is as compared to a Norway or Akira? Is it larger or smaller by any significant degree?

[47Wasps]

ADD Moment. Does anyone who is familiar with the numbers know how big an Oslo class is as compared to a Norway or Akira? Is it larger or smaller by any significant degree?

The size of the Akira-class isn't well know,there is a lot of debate over it because different sources say different sizes.
However,the Norway-class is accepted to be about 335 meters long.

[vp21ct]

What you did not see was the Origional enterprise refit getting the Longer Naucelles of the Excellsior class. Yes you can see the evolution of the same basic class. However you can look at each one and know what era it comes from. When you look at the Starfleet class or the Oslo class you don't see that evolution You see minor modifications.

If Cryptic is wanting to make new ship designs to lead us into the future then I would expect new ship designs to diverge from the previous generations of ships in a significant way.

You can't look at a Cosntitution class ship and mistake it for an Excellsior. and Excelsior cannot be mistaken for an Ambassador class. and Ambassador class cannot be mistaken for a Galaxy. A Galaxy can't be mistaken for a Sov. So now moving into the future why should a Sov be mistaken for a Starfleet class? IT does not bring anything new. It is not unique in anyway.

The Oslo is the same way. At first glance I saw a cyustomized Akira mainly because the Akira is a ship I am familiar with. After doing some research I foung that the Oslo is simply a Norway class ship with a minor modification. How does this break from the old Norway class in any significant way?

Presumably The Miranda class ship has some sort of evolution from where it was to the Nebula class. but the size differences are immense. Sometimes Size does make a big difference in class.

ADD Moment. Does anyone who is familiar with the numbers know how big an Oslo class is as compared to a Norway or Akira? Is it larger or smaller by any significant degree?

And the differences were nearly a hundred years for most of your examples. THAT is my point. Even between the enterprise C and the Enterprise D (the least change in the evolution) was nearly 30 years AND at a rather big time of starship developmental change.

also, please read my above earlier post, I think these are VARIANTS.

[Inquizitor]

Interesting. Ill compare it to the Norway then for reasons that will become quickly aparant.

From memory alpha:

Production Base: ASDB Integration Section, Spacedock 1, Earth.
Type: Medium Cruiser.
Accommodation: 190 officers and crew; 500 personal evacuation limit.
Power Plant: One 1500 plus Cochrane warp core feeding two nacelles; one impulse system.
Dimensions: Length, 364.77 meters; beam, 225.61 meters; height, 52.48 meters.
Mass: 622,000 metric tonnes.
Performance: Warp 9.7 for 12 hours.
Armament: Six type-10 phaser emitters; two photon torpedo launchers.


From the OSLO Class specifications:
Dimensions:
Overall Length: 371 meters
Overall Draft: 54 meters
Overall Beam: 228 meters
Displacement: 625,000 metric tons
Defensive Systems:
Advanced Deflector Shield Generators
Rodinium-Alloy Hull Plating
Velocity:
Cruising: Warp Factor 7
Maximum: Warp Factor 9.75
Offensive Systems:
Six Type XII Phaser Arrays
Fore and Aft Torpedo Launchers



The OSlo is SLIGHTLY larger. That's it. It is a Norway refit.

[Inquizitor]

The size of the Akira-class isn't well know,there is a lot of debate over it because different sources say different sizes.
However,the Norway-class is accepted to be about 335 meters long.


The Time span betwen Galaxy and Sov is only around 20 years. and There is a huge difference there. HEck. The Ambasador class is a gerat deal different than the Galaxy class. Looking at the Ambassador class I would say it looks more like a Constiturion class starship than a Galaxy class.

[47Wasps]

Interesting. Ill compare it to the Norway then for reasons that will become quickly aparant.

The OSlo is SLIGHTLY larger. That's it. It is a Norway refit.

The two ships have much in common,and do share a similar basic structure.
But the hull plating and saucer differences are too drastic for it to be just a refit.
I'd say it qualifies as an entirely different class of ship.

On the other hand,the differences between a Constitution-class and the Constitution-class(refit) are just as drastic,so I do see your argument that the Oslo-class is a refit.

Also note...and I think this is somewhat important...the ships namesake.
Oslo is the capital of Norway.

[Inquizitor]

Heh. I was wonddering where they came up with the name.

As I said earlier. It doesn't bug me that they are maknig a new class epr se. Waht bugs me is that we are beign told we are going to have a great deal of custimization control on our startships. The differnce between a Norway adn an Akira are minor enough as it is in teh grand scheme of things and then you add this Oslo class ship which, from teh specifications, seems to be identical to a Norway. Why bother adding in a new class of ship when the existing ones are fine and familiar to fans of the franchise? Refits happen. Heck Starfleet is still using Excellsior class vessels.

It isn't so much that these are even minor modifications. Waht is the difference between a SOyuz class and a Miranda class for instance. What bugs me is that this new class is meaningless based off of what we have been told about the way the game is going to work.

[47Wasps]

You are right,and I'm worried about the same thing.
Take that thing that Cryptic called a "Miranda"
the one that looked nothing like the Miranda-class that had been a cherished part of trek since The Wrath of Khan.
That ship was a Miranda-class in name only.
Too much customization means we will see a lot of vessels looking like the Oslo,but under the name "Norway" or "Akira" and we can't just pass the hundreds of variants we'll see off as refits

[vp21ct]

There is another possibilitie.

And that is that there won't be any such thing as ship 'class'. Each time we customize the look of our ship, we make a new 'class', and the only constant is classification, something that is cannon enough (the Galaxy and the Ambassador barely look different at all).

I would be fine with this.

[BreachAndClear]

You are right,and I'm worried about the same thing.
Take that thing that Cryptic called a "Miranda"
the one that looked nothing like the Miranda-class that had been a cherished part of trek since The Wrath of Khan.
That ship was a Miranda-class in name only.
Too much customization means we will see a lot of vessels looking like the Oslo,but under the name "Norway" or "Akira" and we can't just pass the hundreds of variants we'll see off as refits

Well there was an interview with Allakhazam in which Craig stated that we probably wouldn't be able to fly an exact replica of the Miranda, but that we will be able to create something that looks similar but still uniquely our own. I wonder if when we read things like Miranda, Ambassador, etc. in articles if the devs are using names that are familiar.

I.E. the "Miranda" might not actually be in the game, this new ship with the gray plating and the holes in the primary hull might go by a different name in game. The devs might just be referring to it as a "Miranda" in interviews because it's the closest thing to it that players are familiar with. Similarly, the "Ambassador" class might not actually be in the game, even though it was stated as such. Instead, we might get some updated version that goes by a different name but that the devs choose to call "ambassador" for the moment to give the fans an idea of what they can expect.

For instance, if four months ago an interview was released where it was mentioned that "you'll be able to fly the Oslo class!" nobody would have a clue as to what that meant, but if they said "Norway" it would give fans a clearer picture of what they could expect even if the true Norway isn't actually in the game (it may or may not be). Similarly, whatever class the NX-91001 is might be the successor to the Sovereign, such that in interviews that mention the Sovereign, they might really be referring to the NX-91001, but just use the name Sovereign because the NX-91001 hasn't had its class designation revealed yet, and if it was something like "Demesne class" players would have no idea as to what that class was.

Just a thought.

[THORN74]

there are 2 pics of a modernized/customized miranda in the screen shots of this site, but we have also seen a untouched wrath of khan/reliant miranda shot before. i will have to find it.


:::::: here it is Miranda Class (http://www.startrekonline.com/node/148) ::::::

[CinC-UFPForces-Cardassia]

For instance, if four months ago an interview was released where it was mentioned that "you'll be able to fly the Oslo class!" nobody would have a clue as to what that meant, but if they said "Norway" it would give fans a clearer picture of what they could expect even if the true Norway isn't actually in the game (it may or may not be).

I would actually wager that most fans wouldn't truly be able to pick out a NORWAY Class starship from most other classes, and therein would lie the point.

My guess is that, in certain cases, less famous starships will be reimagined in the style of the OSLO Class, and the "base" canonical class will be scrapped entirely. I actually quite like the look of the OSLO Class, but there's no denying that it's a direct evolution of other classes - least of all because the writeup on the class makes that explicitly clear. There can certainly be a logic behind that, but less so if the base NORWAY Class is also excluded; it seems to me that naming one class in honor of the capital city of a country which already has a class named after it is a pretty clear way of communicating that message.

I don't begrudge those who are a little upset about the similarities between OSLO and NORWAY, but I'd offer the suggestion that this might be exactly the point. This explanation, of course, would not extend over to the NX-91001 type, since the SOVEREIGN Class is practically certain to be included in its base configuration.

[Dext]

You are right,and I'm worried about the same thing.
Take that thing that Cryptic called a "Miranda"
the one that looked nothing like the Miranda-class that had been a cherished part of trek since The Wrath of Khan.
That ship was a Miranda-class in name only.
Too much customization means we will see a lot of vessels looking like the Oslo,but under the name "Norway" or "Akira" and we can't just pass the hundreds of variants we'll see off as refits

For this I would like them to allow us to set the class name but only when the ship is changed to the point that it looks nothing like the original ship.

[LunaticFringer]

Interesting little ship. Think I'd still rather have a Galaxy-class though. :cool:

[marscentral]

I've skimmed some of the comments here and figure I'll add my two credits. I think the Oslo looks more like the Akira then the Norway, although the saucer is closer to the Norway. That said, I think there are some visual differences between the Oslo and it's close relatives, like the curved rear section.

Anyways, I like it. I think people complaining about the originality of it should take a look at how many ships are just rehashes of the Galaxy class and also some of the other STO screens on other sites (like this one (http://pcmedia.ign.com/pc/image/article/952/952351/star-trek-online-20090206053219570.jpg)) and in the trailer, there are a few ships that look very different to anything I recognise. Of course, people moan about that too.

[Varrangian]

there are a few ships that look very different to anything I recognise. Of course, people moan about that too.

And there is the truth of the matter. Cryptic is damned if they do and damned if they don't. Trekkies love to complain, that SNL skit with Shatner is funny to people because it has a strong element of truth to it. If it is not one thing that makes Trekkies unhappy it is another.

Yes there is a group here that likes what they see and there is likely even a silent majority that is happy. But there is also an abundance of histrionic posters who feel they are entitled to nitpick every little thing and have their whims catered to.

[marscentral]

And there is the truth of the matter. Cryptic is damned if they do and damned if they don't. Trekkies love to complain, that SNL skit with Shatner is funny to people because it has a strong element of truth to it. If it is not one thing that makes Trekkies unhappy it is another.

Yes there is a group here that likes what they see and there is likely even a silent majority that is happy. But there is also an abundance of histrionic posters who feel they are entitled to nitpick every little thing and have their whims catered to.

I was watching an interview on www.llewtube.com with David Baddiel that made me think about this. The attention always goes to the negative. You get a room with ten people, nine are happy but the attention goes to the one who isn't. People are always more likely to voice a negative opinion then a positive one. I think the devs know this though (or they will go crazy).

[Varrangian]

I was watching an interview on www.llewtube.com with David Baddiel that made me think about this. The attention always goes to the negative. You get a room with ten people, nine are happy but the attention goes to the one who isn't. People are always more likely to voice a negative opinion then a positive one. I think the devs know this though (or they will go crazy).

What is the old adage? The squeaky wheel gets the grease? I'm hoping in this case the devs realize that the squeaking is not indicative of everyone.

[babanathie]

I've skimmed some of the comments here and figure I'll add my two credits. I think the Oslo looks more like the Akira then the Norway, although the saucer is closer to the Norway. That said, I think there are some visual differences between the Oslo and it's close relatives, like the curved rear section.

Anyways, I like it. I think people complaining about the originality of it should take a look at how many ships are just rehashes of the Galaxy class and also some of the other STO screens on other sites (like this one (http://pcmedia.ign.com/pc/image/article/952/952351/star-trek-online-20090206053219570.jpg)) and in the trailer, there are a few ships that look very different to anything I recognise. Of course, people moan about that too.

It's not a complaint against just rehashing. It's a complaint about the degree of rehashing. They have done nothing, in my opinion, to be creative with ship designs. Taking the Constitution class evolution, you see very distinctive ships bearing the same design philosophy. However, The NX-91001 and Oslo are not distinctive and can easily be mistaken for their "parent" class. That tells me the designers are scared of being creative, are not creative or are too lazy to be creative.

Of course, this view can change if they show something substantial. Thus far, they have not done so. We've been given a Sovereign, Raptor and Oslo with, at least to me, no apparent effort. The thing that really irritates me though is that the designers expect us to gobble this up as innovative or creative by calling these new classes.

[mykpfsu]

Meh, it looks more like an Akira class ship, then the good ol' Norway.

Um, actually they just ripped off the Achilles class from the game DS9 Dominion Wars

[BreachAndClear]

It's not a complaint against just rehashing. It's a complaint about the degree of rehashing. They have done nothing, in my opinion, to be creative with ship designs. Taking the Constitution class evolution, you see very distinctive ships bearing the same design philosophy. However, The NX-91001 and Oslo are not distinctive and can easily be mistaken for their "parent" class. That tells me the designers are scared of being creative, are not creative or are too lazy to be creative.

Of course, this view can change if they show something substantial. Thus far, they have not done so. We've been given a Sovereign, Raptor and Oslo with, at least to me, no apparent effort. The thing that really irritates me though is that the designers expect us to gobble this up as innovative or creative by calling these new classes.

Nobody ever said they were new classes with the exception of the Oslo, which I still cannot for the life of me see how someone can confuse it for the Norway. I'd say it's easier to confuse a Galaxy with an Ambassador. The Raptor... well... it is a Raptor, it has the same class name as before and seems to be a heavily refitted Raptor chassis. The NX-91001 may very well be a prototype for a new Sovereign variant and may be considered a Sovereign refit in the game itself. Nothing has been mentioned in regards to the ship's class. NX simply means it's a prototype, and the NX-91001 might simply be a Sovereign serving as a test bed for a bunch of new technologies. These are only three ships. The rest we've seen via screenshots are mostly canon ships (Akira, Saber, Centaur, Miranda) and in the trailer there are things like the "peace sign ship" which so far is the one of the only "truly" new thing we've seen and I don't see it as an uncreative knock off of a pre-existing ship. Another new ship that isn't obviously inspired from another is

This one (http://media.pc.ign.com/media/142/14270158/img_6434002.html)

[Corehaven22]

Nobody ever said they were new classes with the exception of the Oslo, which I still cannot for the life of me see how someone can confuse it for the Norway. I'd say it's easier to confuse a Galaxy with an Ambassador. The Raptor... well... it is a Raptor, it has the same class name as before and seems to be a heavily refitted Raptor chassis. The NX-91001 may very well be a prototype for a new Sovereign variant and may be considered a Sovereign refit in the game itself. Nothing has been mentioned in regards to the ship's class. NX simply means it's a prototype, and the NX-91001 might simply be a Sovereign serving as a test bed for a bunch of new technologies. These are only three ships. The rest we've seen via screenshots are mostly canon ships (Akira, Saber, Centaur, Miranda) and in the trailer there are things like the "peace sign ship" which so far is the one of the only "truly" new thing we've seen and I don't see it as an uncreative knock off of a pre-existing ship. Another new ship that isn't obviously inspired from another is

This one (http://media.pc.ign.com/media/142/14270158/img_6434002.html)

You cant for the life of you see how the Oslo looks like the Norway? The saucer section I would imagine. Being that its nearly identical and all. And the back of the ship looks identical to the Akira. Take the back of an Akira, and slap it on the saucer section of the Norway....and presto. You have the Oslo.

I liked the link you gave. I dont think that ship looks anything like the Defiant. Not that you said it did. It also looked brand new. Is that a screenshot of a ship in STO? If so, I see something new there. And I like it.

[reco88]

i just still think its funny that the Enterprise NX looks exactly like an upside down Akira

[Corehaven22]

i just still think its funny that the Enterprise NX looks exactly like an upside down Akira

..........Do what? If you say so. :confused:

[marscentral]

..........Do what? If you say so. :confused:

One of the criticisms of the NX-01 was that it looked like the Akira. I believe that's where they started from in their designs in order to move away from more familiar ships.

Bottom line though is that there are only so many ways to stick two nacelles on to a saucer before you're reworking old ideas. Cryptic have at least said the Oslo is related to the Akira and Norway and I think have come up with a cool hybrid that has some new elements too.

[Varrangian]

Bottom line though is that there are only so many ways to stick two nacelles on to a saucer before you're reworking old ideas. Cryptic have at least said the Oslo is related to the Akira and Norway and I think have come up with a cool hybrid that has some new elements too.

Could you imagine the uproar if they stuck 3 or 4 nacelles on something? Though it does exist in Trek lore, those squeaky wheels would go nuts.

[47Wasps]

Could you imagine the uproar if they stuck 3 or 4 nacelles on something? Though it does exist in Trek lore, those squeaky wheels would go nuts.

I think Barclay said it best
"I'd hate to be a third nacelle"

[PicardoManeuver]

Looks like they spliced an Akira and Norway. It's a little iffy for me, but this could be an awesome ship.

And I like this "Rodinium." Is this like the new Gene Rodenberry-grade armor? :D

[Corehaven22]

Looks like they spliced an Akira and Norway. It's a little iffy for me, but this could be an awesome ship.

Yea no kidding. And yea, maybe it could be. Guess we'll have to wait and see.

[Interdictor]

You cant for the life of you see how the Oslo looks like the Norway? The saucer section I would imagine. Being that its nearly identical and all. And the back of the ship looks identical to the Akira. Take the back of an Akira, and slap it on the saucer section of the Norway....and presto. You have the Oslo.

Meh - there are only so many ways you can stick nacelles on a federation ship (engineering section optional). I really don't see anything wrong with slapping an Akira-like plyons on the back of a Norway-like primary hull, who says that hull configuration hasn't become a bit more common in the last few decades?

I mean, It adds a bit of variety to fed ships, which have used the "saucer connected to engineering connected to nacelles" and "nacelles hanging off saucer" configs for centuries, and the seemingly recently-developed "integrated nacelles" via the Defiant, Saber and Steamrunner. A little bit of variety doesn't hurt. ;)

[Sumoben]

Looks like they spliced an Akira and Norway. It's a little iffy for me, but this could be an awesome ship.

And I like this "Rodinium." Is this like the new Gene Rodenberry-grade armor? :D

Oh noes! Ships coming together!... Its liek!....... We need Mega"ship" power! . . . *plays power ranger music, as ships fly in* Akiraway-Oslo Mega"ship" power!


.....We need Runabout Power! .......Hell Yeah! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SB0d0v1JTt4)

[Corehaven22]

Meh - there are only so many ways you can stick nacelles on a federation ship (engineering section optional). I really don't see anything wrong with slapping an Akira-like plyons on the back of a Norway-like primary hull, who says that hull configuration hasn't become a bit more common in the last few decades?

I mean, It adds a bit of variety to fed ships, which have used the "saucer connected to engineering connected to nacelles" and "nacelles hanging off saucer" configs for centuries, and the seemingly recently-developed "integrated nacelles" via the Defiant, Saber and Steamrunner. A little bit of variety doesn't hurt. ;)

YEA!! And they could just take parts of already existing ships and just splice them together to create new ones! Hopefully, we'll see the back of an Excelsior spliced with the front of a Norway! Or a Constitution spliced with the back of an Oberth!

You wouldnt even HAVE to create anything new! Just mix and match and call it new! I mean, it worked with the Oslo!!! WOOO!!!!

And no it doesnt add variety. It does the opposite.

[Interdictor]

YEA!! And they could just take parts of already existing ships and just splice them together to create new ones! Hopefully, we'll see the back of an Excelsior spliced with the front of a Norway! Or a Constitution spliced with the back of an Oberth!
Sounds cool! I mean, it's not at all different from ripping the engineering section off of a Constitution and attaching the nacelles directly to the saucer and calling it a Miranda class. Or doing the same to an Excelsior but adding a Miranda torpedo launcher underneath and calling it a Centaur.

You wouldnt even HAVE to create anything new! Just mix and match and call it new! I mean, it worked with the Oslo!!! WOOO!!!!
Also worked for the Miranda, Nebula, Constellation, Centaur, Soyuz, Saladin, Curry, etc.

[Corehaven22]

Sounds cool! I mean, it's not at all different from ripping the engineering section off of a Constitution and attaching the nacelles directly to the saucer and calling it a Miranda class. Or doing the same to an Excelsior but adding a Miranda torpedo launcher underneath and calling it a Centaur.


Also worked for the Miranda, Nebula, Constellation, Centaur, Soyuz, Saladin, Curry, etc.

You secretly work for Cryptic dont you. I KNEW IT !!! :mad:

[Interdictor]

You secretly work for Cryptic dont you. I KNEW IT !!! :mad:

Geez - I wish - cause either I'd already be playing this game or I'd be getting a second source of income. Preferably both. :D

[Sinclair]

I'm not a huge fan of the 'saucer' portion of this ship. But overall I like these types of designs in general. I think the Akira is a cool design and designs modified from that are great.

[vp21ct]

You secretly work for Cryptic dont you. I KNEW IT !!! :mad:

I'd beleive it more if he once worked for paramount studioes.

Didn't the special effects guys of the show actually admit to doing that.

[Zylthrax]

I like the look of the ship. But it does sort of look like a Dirt Devil with nacelles.