Your Star Trek Online Screenshots!

[Hartzilla2007]

Well Here are some of mine

The TOS Connie USS Intrepid



It's Captain James Hunter and part of one of the Miranda bridges you can buy at the C-store that work wil the TOS Connie.



and some more of said bridge

[Angelsilhouette]

Heh, the Alpha/Beta/Gamma bridges look a bit like an astrometrics lab. :3

[Excelsior]

Must admit, when I bought the Prometheus bridge pack, I switched to the 'Blaze' bridge for my Miranda, Constitution (TOS) and Excalibur class ships - simply because it's currently the only way to have a classic bridge configuration in the game (thanks to the Prometheus bridge being a re-dress of the 'Undiscovered Country' Enterprise/Excelsior bridge set!).

Some more screenshots, here - showing off my new costume slot I purchased (leaving me one spare, for future use). I've now got room to have all 3 TNG-era uniforms on the go at once, plus an off-duty set of civvies.


First up: my 'Duty' uniform - the 'First Contact' version, with my character's trademark gloves (seen here in the Observation Lounge, with Cardassian warships in the background):






My new 'Duty Variant', which I'm really fond of - the DS9/Voyager look:






The classic TNG uniform, serving as my 'Fleet' uniform:






And my regular clothes - because nothing beats that ol' time-honoured 'jeans and a sweatshirt' look!






And on a totally unrelated note, because it's hitting the game sometime next week (not a moment too soon, if you ask me!), the new Excelsior-class (variant)!

[Hartzilla2007]

so what rank do you need to be able to command this thing and where would you get it from?

[judge alba]

ooh an excelsior! hopefully a rear admiral can use one,

[Excelsior]

There are going to be two versions:

- A Commander-level (Tier 3) one available for energy credits or ship tokens.
It's the regular Excelsior-class, as seen in ST VI and TNG/DS9 (although, strangely, it's being advertised as the 'ST III' version - clearly the bods at Cryptic aren't aware that the 'Search for Spock' Excelsior and the 'Undiscovered Country' Excelsior aren't exactly the same...).


- A Vice Admiral-level (Tier 5) one available for retrofit tokens, emblems (?) or through the C-Store.
This is the Excelsior variant (Enterprise-B/Lakota) shown above, although it'll be possible to choose the regular Excelsior hull components as well, with the option to 'mix and match' (i.e. 'kitbash'...). It's being marketed as the 'Lakota' version - why they can't just call it the 'Excelsior Variant' is beyond me, but then again, the original Constitution class is referred to as the 'TOS USS Enterprise' in the C-Store, which is equally facepalm-worthy.

[Noname Given]

Excelsior wrote:

---

There are going to be two versions:

- A Commander-level (Tier 3) one available for energy credits or ship tokens.
It's the regular Excelsior-class, as seen in ST VI and TNG/DS9 (although, strangely, it's being advertised as the 'ST III' version - clearly the bods at Cryptic aren't aware that the 'Search for Spock' Excelsior and the 'Undiscovered Country' Excelsior aren't exactly the same...).


- A Vice Admiral-level (Tier 5) one available for retrofit tokens, emblems (?) or through the C-Store.
This is the Excelsior variant (Enterprise-B/Lakota) shown above, although it'll be possible to choose the regular Excelsior hull components as well, with the option to 'mix and match' (i.e. 'kitbash'...). It's being marketed as the 'Lakota' version - why they can't just call it the 'Excelsior Variant' is beyond me, but then again, the original Constitution class is referred to as the 'TOS USS Enterprise' in the C-Store, which is equally facepalm-worthy.

The Commander level Excelsior is the STIII: TSFS variant. the VA1 version refit (coining later) will be the U.S.S. Lakota (from DS9 - 'Paradise Lost'/Star Trek: Generations version.

As for the original 1701 being advertised as the 'TOS Enterprise' instead of 'Constitution Class' - realize that DURING TOS the 1701 was refered to as a 'Starship Class' vessel. The 'Constitution Class' designation was n't introduced until the Franz Joseph 'Star Trek Technical Manual' circa. 1975 - and wasn't stated on screen UNTIL ST:TMP. So, if anything, Cryptic's description is probably more acurate - considering the ST:TMP Constitution Class Enterprise is also in the game as a 'free' Lt. Cmdr. level ship.

[Excelsior]

Noname Given wrote:

---

The Commander level Excelsior is the STIII: TSFS variant. the VA1 version refit (coining later) will be the U.S.S. Lakota (from DS9 - 'Paradise Lost'/Star Trek: Generations version.

As for the original 1701 being advertised as the 'TOS Enterprise' instead of 'Constitution Class' - realize that DURING TOS the 1701 was refered to as a 'Starship Class' vessel. The 'Constitution Class' designation was n't introduced until the Franz Joseph 'Star Trek Technical Manual' circa. 1975 - and wasn't stated on screen UNTIL ST:TMP. So, if anything, Cryptic's description is probably more acurate - considering the ST:TMP Constitution Class Enterprise is also in the game as a 'free' Lt. Cmdr. level ship.

My problem is that calling them the 'Enterprise' and the 'Lakota' is wrong - you're buying a ship of the same class, not THE USS Enterprise or THE USS Lakota. And they're not called the 'Enterprise-class' or 'Lakota-class', so it's just an inaccuracy, probably due to someone at Cryptic not having done their homework (wouldn't have been the first time...).

As for the whole 'Constitution class' vs. 'Starship class' thing, every other game EVER has been happy to go with the almost universally accepted names of 'Constitution class' for the TOS ship, and 'Constitution class refit' for the TMP version. And if we're going to argue the canonicity of names, then why is the 'Miranda' class in-game with no argument? That's never been quoted as a class name in any episode or film, and in many publications, it was referred to as the 'Avenger class' before 'Miranda' became the popular and thus accepted version.

And if there's a problem with people being confused by the fact that the 'Constitution Refit' is in-game for free as the 'Constitution-class', then the easy solution would have been to call the C-Store ship the 'TOS Constitution' - not the 'TOS USS Enterprise'. Again, you're not buying THE Enterprise that Kirk commanded - you're buying a ship of the same class. Truth in advertising, an' all that...

Ultimately, it seems to come down to the old truism of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it". Or more precisely, if everyone's agreed on what these blasted things should be called in games, books, merchandise, etc. for well over 30 years, it's more than a bit grating when STO can't be bothered to follow suit. Heck, even the much-maligned 'Star Trek Legacy' got that much right...


And regarding the Excelsior, while I'm very much aware that the Tier 3 version is being advertised as the 'Search for Spock' version, it's anyone's guess whether the actual in-game model will resemble the actual 'Search for Spock' version, or the later, more famous version seen in 'The Undiscovered Country'. The two are different in several areas, yet considering the lack of source material the art team at STO have to work on (judging by the amount of inaccuracies found on several canon ships), I doubt this has been taken into account.

Just for the record, I'm putting my money on it actually being the 'TUC' version, just because it's more easily interchangeable with the 'Enterprise-B' variant.

[Captain_Amasov]

Excelsior wrote:

---

My problem is that calling them the 'Enterprise' and the 'Lakota' is wrong - you're buying a ship of the same class, not THE USS Enterprise or THE USS Lakota. And they're not called the 'Enterprise-class' or 'Lakota-class', so it's just an inaccuracy, probably due to someone at Cryptic not having done their homework (wouldn't have been the first time...).

As for the whole 'Constitution class' vs. 'Starship class' thing, every other game EVER has been happy to go with the almost universally accepted names of 'Constitution class' for the TOS ship, and 'Constitution class refit' for the TMP version. And if we're going to argue the canonicity of names, then why is the 'Miranda' class in-game with no argument? That's never been quoted as a class name in any episode or film, and in many publications, it was referred to as the 'Avenger class' before 'Miranda' became the popular and thus accepted version.

And if there's a problem with people being confused by the fact that the 'Constitution Refit' is in-game for free as the 'Constitution-class', then the easy solution would have been to call the C-Store ship the 'TOS Constitution' - not the 'TOS USS Enterprise'. Again, you're not buying THE Enterprise that Kirk commanded - you're buying a ship of the same class. Truth in advertising, an' all that...

Ultimately, it seems to come down to the old truism of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it". Or more precisely, if everyone's agreed on what these blasted things should be called in games, books, merchandise, etc. for well over 30 years, it's more than a bit grating when STO can't be bothered to follow suit. Heck, even the much-maligned 'Star Trek Legacy' got that much right...


And regarding the Excelsior, while I'm very much aware that the Tier 3 version is being advertised as the 'Search for Spock' version, it's anyone's guess whether the actual in-game model will resemble the actual 'Search for Spock' version, or the later, more famous version seen in 'The Undiscovered Country'. The two are different in several areas, yet considering the lack of source material the art team at STO have to work on (judging by the amount of inaccuracies found on several canon ships), I doubt this has been taken into account.

Just for the record, I'm putting my money on it actually being the 'TUC' version, just because it's more easily interchangeable with the 'Enterprise-B' variant.

This seems decidedly nitpicky over how something is listed in the C-Store compared to its actual name in-game. The TOS Constitution is listed as "Constitution Cruiser" in the chat box when purchased in-game:

[Excelsior]

Captain_Amasov wrote:

---

This seems decidedly nitpicky over how something is listed in the C-Store compared to its actual name in-game. The TOS Constitution is listed as "Constitution Cruiser" in the chat box when purchased in-game:

That's new - when I unlocked mine (got it with a pre-order, many moons ago), it came up as 'USS Enterprise' in the chat box as well.

To be fair, it's not that one thing that bothers me - it's just one of many accumulating misappropriations of Trek canon that IMO stop the game from really doing the license justice. For example:

- Everyone's going to end up as an Admiral, whether they like it or not. And yet, at the same time, being a Flag Officer is no different to being a Lieutenant Commander, so rank is meaningless.

- There's talk of a Tier 5 TOS Constitution 'retrofit'. Which means you can fly one at Rear Admiral rank, and deliver a pasting to the 'lowly' Tier 3 Akira-class.

- To conduct diplomacy, you have to do so as a member of the Federation Diplomatic Corps, with your own seperate 'diplomatic rank'. I can't remember Picard being both a Starfleet Captain and a FDC 'Envoy' in 'Darmok' or 'Star Trek Insurrection', but there you go.

- Similarly, I'm stumped as to why ALL non-combat gameplay counts as 'diplomacy', and thus grants 'diplomatic XP'. The mission 'Quarantine' involves developing an antidote, yet it's apparently under the auspices of the FDC, not Starfleet Medical.

- And let's not start on the 'First Contact' missions, which conveniently ignore the fact that many of the races not only know more than you do about Federation life (seriously - how many of them seem to be big fans of 'Parises Squares'?), but have also been encountered before in Star Cluster missions (it's not exactly 'First Contact' with the Scoodians when I've lost count of the number of fights I've had with them beforehand).


I could go on, but you get the picture, I'm sure. Basically, it feels like TPTB at Cryptic have a passing knowledge of Trek, and couldn't be bothered to go that extra mile (is memory-alpha.org so difficult to find?) to make sure there facts were correct. Sometimes it's just erroneous mission dialogue (like the 'hilarious' instance where a Borg drone says "I'm trying to find artefacts from the 3rd Dynasty of my people" - yeah, because that sounds like the Borg to me...), but sometimes it's the lynchpin of an entire element of gameplay, and it's hard to ignore.

I'm still baffled by why Cryptic didn't get someone like Doug Drexler on hand for even just some casual advice - even Perpetual comissioned Andrew Probert and John Eaves to do concept art when they had the project. This lack of authoritative input is glaringly obvious in STO, and will be even more so when Gameforge releases their free-to-play Trek games - they've just enlisted the help of Mike and Denise Okuda. STO needs that 'official' touch to really help inject the 'Trek' back into the game - it's a no-brainer, yet I don't see them doing it any time soon.

[Excelsior]

Ok - doom and gloom over with for now, as it's time for new screenshots!


Here's one of the intrepid crew of the Discovery - Lt. Commander Shepherd (sporting his new uniform variant!), Ensigns Sisek and Jezor (Engineer and Flight Controller, respectively), and Lieutenant Darin (ship's Doctor). Not sure what planet it was, but the view sure was pretty!

[ares93]

NOOOOOO! Deanna is driving!

USS Leran Manev NCC-101562. Sovereign class, Flagship of Battlegroup Core Defence

[Destructor]

ares93 wrote:

---

NOOOOOO! Deanna is driving!

[Excelsior]

"Sir, there was nothing in the ship's Black Box to suggest the cause of the crash, although the forensics team has found what appear to be traces of... ...chocolate pudding amongst the debris..."

[ares93]

My enemy's enemy is my friend.