Hmm. How much work would it take to make STO's Perseus, Gemini, and Ranger visually fit into SNW?
Spoilers The Strange New Worlds Starship Thread™
- Thread starter Tuskin38
- Start date
That's awfully arrogant.
Believe whatever the hell you want, you'll still be wrong.
Yep. It's exactly like that.
I really wish Prodigy had not recycled the Suurok class design from ENT with no changes. I just don't see that class surviving two centuries with no external changes given advancements in Federation technology.
Because it's never stated and famously several sets don't fit inside the assumed sizes. It's all a shell game of assumptions that not everyone buys in to.
Vs. now were there is deliberate effort to fit things together. That it goes against fan assumption doesn't change what is stated on screen.
Tbh I didn't watch Prodigy but that definitely doesn't make sense
We've seen them.
Ooh, when was this?
Discovery. And then SNW showed us the one with the complete warp ring.
That was one of the points I was getting at though once they found footing and started normalizing things there was a behind the scene number they were working off of for decades. There is a large body of work, shots composed, new classes of ship modeled, stories made, etc based off that number, and under normal circumstances that number should be recognized as canon. And if that circumstance has got to change I expect better than "we made discovery 750meters long so enterprise has to be bigger to not make discovery look like a total mary sue ship"
Its normal to fudge a ships size for the sake of composition and the mechanics of cinematography(see shenanigans with the klingon BOP or the DS9 Defiant), so I don't see the problem with rejecting on screen evidence when it contradicts precedent and continuity, do you think its canonical that the 22nd century klingons really had a class of ship that looks just like a 24th century k'tinga?
See above there was still a behind the scenes figure with a large body of work behind it, this is no different than the argument about whether excelsior existed in the 2250's despite the behind the scenes precedent for it being new in the 2280's.
Also stop saying they made an effort to make things fit they clearly did not, we already established the AR wall sets (engineering, cargo, and shuttlebay) do not fit in the secondary hull of a 442meter enterprise. Had it been the case I would have agreed it would have been worth it to accept the change, but that just didn't work out and instead of making the effort they just expected everyone to roll with it by breaking the taboo about stating ship length.
It fits into the hull of the 1450 foot-long ship perfectly, as it was designed to do. Try to keep up
It litterally says "scale cheat required to fit" in red at the bottom left.
We've seen them.
https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/T'Plana_type
Ha, it says a lot about Discovery's lack of dedication to ship porn that there is only 1 good image on the Memory Alpha page.
Except they are.
And if it's a taboo to state a ship's length? Why is this a thing?
Not sure if you've seen this, but one of the regular SNW VFX editors posts to Twitter and he posted the Crossfield-esque graphic: Timothy Peel on Twitter: "#StarTrekStrangeNewWorlds Here is a closer look at VFX Art Director, William Cheng's awesome franken-ship, the (not really) Crossfield class false flag bearer... Beauty that she was, short lived but glorious... https://t.co/irOyTmtBTB" / Twitter
Making things up for the sake of not being wrong.
That's DSC for you. While I like the effects of newer Trek a lot (it beats watching people just mentions battles in TOS & TNG without putting them onscreen), they're often too obscured and dark to actually see
Yep.
Yes, I’ve seen it, but thanks for posting it.
Similar threads
