And Spock's great-grandfather too. Guess the Ambassador Business is a family trade over on Vulcan.
Discovery Size Argument™ thread
- Thread starter F. King Daniel
- Start date
and Spock's Great-Grandfather
Debunked. Cryptic gets their sizes from CBS, but then mostly ignores them. The shuttles shown in Star Trek Online are so huge that they would be totally unable to fit inside the ingame Constitution, Galaxy, Crossfield, or Sovereign shuttlebays. DS9 is portrayed in the game as being so huge that an Excelsior can comfortably fit its saucer in between the arms on the Defiant's berth.I meant to do this weeks ago but forgot about it, here is the Sarcophagus in STO next to a Sovereign. Cryptic gets their sizes from CBS.
Sovereign and Crossfield
In fact, here's what's supposed to be an even bigger, mega-huge Kelvin Connie pulling that stunt off ingame...
Last edited:
Only space stations and shuttles are off scale compared to other Starships.
The shuttles are scaled up for camera and gameplay reasons, if they were to scale they'd be too hard to see in some cases. The shuttles are scaled properly to each other though.
Space stations are up-scaled because of a really dumb reasoning "We don't want them to feel small"
But all the starships are to scale to each other. This can be confirmed with your own eyeballs, and the devs themselves have confirmed this.
So no, this hasn't been debunked at all.
Last edited:
Why can't they make everything "Accurate & To Scale"?
:
:
As far as STO, they can use 2D icons if a Shuttle gets too small, that's what many other games do.
I just want a accurate Game World where everything is 100% accurate, too scale, relative of each other.
With more realistic long distances for fighting in space.
Maybe I'm asking for too much!
:
:As far as STO, they can use 2D icons if a Shuttle gets too small, that's what many other games do.
I just want a accurate Game World where everything is 100% accurate, too scale, relative of each other.
With more realistic long distances for fighting in space.
Maybe I'm asking for too much!
This is star trek, it will never be that realistic.
But imagine a world where it was!
People would be bored out of their minds.
Last edited:
There is a entire market for difficult and simulation style games. So don't just discount it so easily.
That won't happen. Even the insides are scaled up to aid player movement.Why can't they make everything "Accurate & To Scale"?
:
As far as STO, they can use 2D icons if a Shuttle gets too small, that's what many other games do.
I just want a accurate Game World where everything is 100% accurate, too scale, relative of each other.
With more realistic long distances for fighting in space.
Maybe I'm asking for too much!
Gameplay first, ship sizes... fifth or sixth, probably.
Back to the scaled-up stations, DS9 on TV was hugely inconsistent, with differently-sized ships docking in the same ports without issue. Tiny scout ships were made bigger, massive cruisers smaller, so it all looked good.
I haven't played so can't say for sure, but isn't the Defiant "higher" than the Enterprise here and this bigger to the camera?Wow, if that's true, I had no idea that the Defiant was so huge.
Wow, if that's true, I had no idea that the Defiant was so huge.
The Defiant in the DS9 tech manual is said to be 170 Meters long, which would mean it would take roughly 4.2 of them to match the length of the Kelvin Connie at 725 meters.
But the Defiant’s size was never very consistent on screen. It can possibly range from 50 meters to like 200 depending on the scene and other factors.
http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/articles/defiant-problems.htm
You're correct, the Defiant is above the Konnie making it seem bigger, here it is level to the saucer instead of above it. It looks smaller than it does in PicardSpeedo's picture.
Last edited:
That's still awfully big, considering that in canon, the Kelvin Connie is so gobsmackingly huge that it dwarfs a Galaxy class starship...
At any rate, a slightly more authoritative source seems to be of two schools of thought regarding the matter:
Why in the actual hell they need nacelles that long is beyond me.
At any rate, a slightly more authoritative source seems to be of two schools of thought regarding the matter:
Why in the actual hell they need nacelles that long is beyond me.
Last edited:
It's shorter then an NX-Class, length wise..
The Defiant is 170 Meters long
170 Meters fits into 725 Meters (the Konnie's length) almost 4.5 times
And well, would you look at that about 4.5 STO Defiants long.
So STO's Defiant is or is very close to the correct length used by the production team.
You have an odd definition of dwarf. The Konnie is only around 80 meters longer than the Galaxy, and is almost the same height.
Dwarfing it would be like twice the size or more.
Last edited:
Did you just say that the Trekyards guys know the sizes of the ships better than the people who make the show and establish those sizes?
This guy just seems to want to hate on Discovery 100% of the time
No. I was referring to Star Trek Online and its inconsistencies.
I fail to see how hating on Star Trek Online's warped sense of scale equates to hating on Discovery. That's an awfully questionable leap of logic on your part, my friend.
Last edited:
You posted an image of the Discovery. So it wasn't a leap of logic, it was a misunderstanding. I assumed you changed the topic back to the TV show.
And STO uses the sizes from the shows, BTS material or given to them by CBS for their starships.
So any inconsistencies would be from the people working on the shows, not the developers.
Last edited:
Similar threads
