Psst, don't destroy my illusions!
Also, Fleet Admiral Jorel Quinn and Captain Benjamin Walker make a point of how the Player is specifically invited to the event. Pulling some random frigates along seems a bit out of the ordinary.
Spoilers 31st/32nd Century Ships Revealed
- Thread starter NCC-73515
- Start date
Also, Fleet Admiral Jorel Quinn and Captain Benjamin Walker make a point of how the Player is specifically invited to the event. Pulling some random frigates along seems a bit out of the ordinary.
https://twitter.com/_Pundus_/status/1330943317568229376
I really want to see her in action
I really want to see her in action
Um, it does have the detachable nacelles.
Oh shit, you're right. The art is a bit dark, I didn't notice that the right hand side shows the detached nacelle. That's my mistake
So, to revise what I said, it literally couldn't be worse. They ruined a really good ship design with this random bulshit, ruining stuff that works being STDs Mo at this point
Have you seen the episode yet? They show it working and mention the detachable nacelles.
I'm keeping up with images and descriptions, I'm noo going to watch another episode of the show. even if I didn't have problems with the horrendous writing, as a huge fan of Star Trek ships just that element alone would make the show intolerable
I want to see the Voyager J in action. I hope the J shows up at some point and helps Discovery.
I would DEFINITELY love to see how the detachable nacelles make these ships "more maneuverable", that Saru mentions in his log following the refit. I'd love to see any of these ships in action.
Yeah - I’m so looking forward to seeing how Eaglemoss approach these starships, specifically the 1031-A!
No it isn't. It's had a complete external overhaul. It's the equivalent of the Connie Refit.
Last edited:
you'll notice I was corrected earlier because I didn't notice the moronic detached nacelles when I first saw the image. So yeah, it's definitely not the exact same ship, because the original design actually looked good.
also, comparing the also, comparing the excellent Enterprise refit to the Discovery one is really insulting to the original Enterprise refit.
Can't insult ships, especially fictional ones.
Far as I'm concerned, the detached nacelles are in the same league as the Turbolift Funhouse(tm):
It doesn't fucking MATTER how they work, or what kind of logical sense they may or may not make. They just look cool, and that's enough.
It doesn't fucking MATTER how they work, or what kind of logical sense they may or may not make. They just look cool, and that's enough.
I honestly have more issues with the Roller Coaster Turbo Lift than the detached Warp Nacelles.Far as I'm concerned, the detached nacelles are in the same league as the Turbolift Funhouse(tm):
It doesn't fucking MATTER how they work, or what kind of logical sense they may or may not make. They just look cool, and that's enough.
I can come up with numerous ways for detached Warp Nacelles to work on a technological level without having to exit 24th century TNG era tech if used correctly.
You can't insult inanimate or fictional objects.
But please, tell me, what other Star Trek ship can I compare it to that's had a similar complete exterior makeover other than the Connie refit? Oh right, you can't because there isn't one.
So the comparison stays.
Right because it's human nature never to speculate at all unless you have all the facts...
Oh.. wait...
I can't believe someone is complaining it's unrealistic that the crew would dare speculate about anything after traveling 930 into the future and seeing what they're seeing.
I'm not sure what the issue here is. These ship enthusiasts speculate in a number of plausible ways - and then there's this one specifically implausible way, the "this must be a scout" thing that entirely lacks both justification and motivation, and as such is a case of the writers screwing up.
"That guy might be from Iraq" is plausible speculation, even if ultimately rather weakly based in the general case: we can observe signals that need not be statistically significant even when belief in them is not misplaced as such. "That guy might be gay", likewise: we can believe in what we consider rational evidence even when the belief is erroneous. "That guy might be a secret agent working for Brutopia" is a fun concept, but not speculation - it's just a fancy game to play in the total absence of pertinent facts, and indeed in a situation where facts would automatically be absent.
But "That guy might really be what an arctic giraffe would be like" is more plausible than "that ship must be a scout from the future", and probably more fun, too.
Timo Saloniemi
"That guy might be from Iraq" is plausible speculation, even if ultimately rather weakly based in the general case: we can observe signals that need not be statistically significant even when belief in them is not misplaced as such. "That guy might be gay", likewise: we can believe in what we consider rational evidence even when the belief is erroneous. "That guy might be a secret agent working for Brutopia" is a fun concept, but not speculation - it's just a fancy game to play in the total absence of pertinent facts, and indeed in a situation where facts would automatically be absent.
But "That guy might really be what an arctic giraffe would be like" is more plausible than "that ship must be a scout from the future", and probably more fun, too.
Timo Saloniemi
Technology had already become magic in Voyager, where an injection would change your head shape. Add 830 years to that and of course the tech is not going to make a lot of sense to us primatives.
Discovery: Tokyo Drift
Similar threads
