Topic: Star Trek Online | Excalibur Class - Is ours better?! (Read 10136 times)

vp21ct · « **Reply #20 on:** June 01, 2009, 10:40:57 AM »

Quote from: Barihawk on June 01, 2009, 06:22:59 AM

Guys, two things to remember:

1) Both STE's Excalibur and the STO version are uncanon designs, so there's no real basis for comparison. If you ask me, both are well designed for different purposes. To those of you trashing the STO team for their work, you are doing nothing but dumping on people who are doing their passion (guess what, the STO guys love Star Trek). To those stating that it's just a rehash of a classic design, what about popular BC models like the Gagarin that are the same concept?

2) All STO designs should be taken with a grain of salt considering the completely massive and near endless options for customization present in their game. I think the STO Excalibur is beautiful and probably the only ship that would get me out of the Excelsior class. Certainly something to work for. And the rule of thumb for STO is that if you don't like how your ship looks, change it.

There is no need for competition here. I think both teams have done great jobs. The STO Ex in particular is a beautiful ship worthy of it's name lineage.

To be completely honest, I'm not a fan of the novel type Excalibur design (just way too massive and flat-formed) but the models done of it do it justice.

Quite rite.

And there is also another thing to consider.

To me, the BC (and thust the STE) Excalibur just seems to scream "Hey look at me, I'm the biggest and best ship ever made, wheee" and with the name Excalibur, it makes it seem even more obnoxious. Sort of like taking something that is already pushing the limit of way too awesome and adding a sign that says "Awesome this way" above it in big neon lights.

The STO ship is a bit more mello. It serves the purpose of support/explorer, and isn't the biggest baddest ship in the fleet. The name is just a name for it, not a big neon sign. And I think thats why I like it more.

farshot · « **Reply #21 on:** June 01, 2009, 12:17:24 PM »

Hmm... I agree with that. I do like the STO one more for using the name less... snobbishly. *cringes in fear of being jumped*

Mark · « **Reply #22 on:** June 01, 2009, 02:20:49 PM »

Well you are entitled to your opinion, but I think you should read the materials that are out there a bit more. Our Excalibur is not going to be "the biggest baddest ship in the fleet", there is a reason for her size, and in terms of weaponry she is definately not the "baddest in the fleet".

The Excalibur class in our story is developed as a fleet flagship, a base of operations for everything going on within a taskforce. It is because of this that she has a large size, although she is still smaller than a Romulan Warbird and only a few hundred metres longer than the Sovereign class.

This role of fleet flagship means that she is defensively built with the expectation that she will have supporting vessels, and while her arsenal is similar to that of a Sovereign class ship she is much larger and far less maneuverable.

Overall if you were looking for a class of ship to send on a "one man mission" you would be better sending a Sovereign Class (or maybe a Prometheus Class depending on the range of the mission) since they are designed with lone combat in mind.

Luke · « **Reply #23 on:** June 02, 2009, 03:23:51 AM »

I think the STO ships look too combat orientated; they look overly dark and menacing (most likley to attempt to appeal to a wider audience- wich actually in their own way dont look that bad) wheras our Excalibur looks more like traditional trek; "light" (for lack of better wording) and not-so menacing

I too agree its impossible to fully compare them, as they have both been designed for different purposes/ in different styles/ different themes.

Allthough aesthetically IMO our Excalibur is better.

newman · « **Reply #24 on:** June 02, 2009, 04:36:20 AM »

Well, ST:O is going for the "every player is a captain of his own ship" thing, which is pretty cool in my book, actually makes a lot more sense to me then their initial concept (every player can be any rank or position on a starship - while it may sound cool at first, when you start thinking about how would they create game mechanics that actually work with that, you get a headache

). That however means that if they stayed 100% true to trek canon, most of the players - ships would look much the same, so they introduced a post nemesis story where Starfleet starts building very modular ships. The result should be that every player can end up with a ship that looks unique. Hopefully though, if someone will want to captain a canon looking Akira, for example, that will be possible too. When you look at their art direction in this context, then it starts to make a lot of sense. MMO is a very special type of game with unique problems of it's own. Excalibur, not being a MMO, can afford to look a lot more canon.
I really don't think there's a basis of comparison for the two games. From what I read on their website, the gameplay of ST:O will be quite different to that of Excalibur. ST:O is a commercial MMO, ST:E is something totally different. And hopefully, both will rock

farshot · « **Reply #25 on:** June 02, 2009, 05:11:53 AM »

Quote from: newman on June 02, 2009, 04:36:20 AM

Well, ST:O is going for the "every player is a captain of his own ship" thing, which is pretty cool in my book, actually makes a lot more sense to me then their initial concept (every player can be any rank or position on a starship - while it may sound cool at first, when you start thinking about how would they create game mechanics that actually work with that, you get a headache ). That however means that if they stayed 100% true to trek canon, most of the players - ships would look much the same, so they introduced a post nemesis story where Starfleet starts building very modular ships. The result should be that every player can end up with a ship that looks unique. Hopefully though, if someone will want to captain a canon looking Akira, for example, that will be possible too. When you look at their art direction in this context, then it starts to make a lot of sense. MMO is a very special type of game with unique problems of it's own. Excalibur, not being a MMO, can afford to look a lot more canon.
I really don't think there's a basis of comparison for the two games. From what I read on their website, the gameplay of ST:O will be quite different to that of Excalibur. ST:O is a commercial MMO, ST:E is something totally different. And hopefully, both will rock

Well said, cookie.

EDIT- Oh wait, not enough posts. Guess it's time to stop lurking.

szekeres2008 · « **Reply #26 on:** June 02, 2009, 05:15:21 AM »

Don't worry I give two cookies, one in your name

Tyre · « **Reply #27 on:** August 17, 2009, 09:54:47 PM »

Quote from: HF Zach on May 30, 2009, 04:29:46 PM

Cryptic Studios have posted an update showing their "Excalibur Class" starship.

I think ours is better.

Here is theirs: (http://www.startrekonline.com/ships/excalibur)

and ours:

It would help if we got another shot of your Excalibur because I can hardly see it, I can only see the top, is your Excalibur an Excelsior class? From what I can see your Excalibur is very impressive.

szekeres2008 · « **Reply #28 on:** August 17, 2009, 11:24:56 PM »

Whel yeah, I think it will be a big suprise so they don't want to spoil it just yet.

Sabre · « **Reply #29 on:** August 18, 2009, 12:04:49 AM »

Yours is much better.

FAR · « **Reply #30 on:** August 18, 2009, 09:45:38 AM »

Isn't there's customizable?

Aresius · « **Reply #31 on:** August 18, 2009, 08:05:31 PM »

Was my first thought, that their Excalibur is a post-Nemesis Constitution class refit.
That said, the Constitution had verious roles. In TOS it was a Command-cruiser/Explorer-type, in TMP it was downgraded to a Strike-Cruiser-type, during the Lost Era (Ent-B/C-era) it was once more downgraded to a Frigate-type and the early TNG, the few remaining Constitutions were called Perimeter-patrol-type.
With all this facy additions, I could imagine the new Constitution-version, a.k.a. Excalibur is now something like a cruiser again. Wooot.

@Tyre: If their ship is somewhat close to the Excalibur that's been commonly associated with that name, it'll be downright awesome to amazing compared to Cryptics version.

Cyllus · « **Reply #32 on:** August 19, 2009, 09:53:12 AM »

i prefer STE's version. mainly because while i really enjoyed how visual the newest ST movie was, in terms of story line it just pissed me off. So while im sure STO's Excalibur is good for what they are doing i just dont like any thing that has to do with that alternate time line.

szekeres2008 · « **Reply #33 on:** August 19, 2009, 01:21:12 PM »

I don't even see the point why the Constitution refit has a new class name in STO, we saw the miranda too it was very disfigured or "modernised" for that reason even that ship coul'd be given a new class name. STO puts back ships into service from the ENT era as well like the klingon raptor or the romulan bird of prey too. At this point I have to say that it is a very unoriginal idea. Instead of making some really cool new designes like this game, they refit old stuff, I'm nit sure I like that, but we must see a the final products to make a compariosn.

Aresius · « **Reply #34 on:** August 20, 2009, 03:31:16 PM »

They can always claim these oldies run luxury-liner tasks...

Unoriginal to say the least.

Zer · « **Reply #35 on:** August 31, 2009, 03:44:27 PM »

Quote from: Aresius on August 20, 2009, 03:31:16 PM

They can always claim these oldies run luxury-liner tasks...

Unoriginal to say the least.

Well it may be unoriginal but it's a rather logical explanation. Older TMP ships tend to have a bit of charm much in the way we consider the Titanic a charming ship. There's a reason why there is a Titanic replica floating around somewhere.

Mark · « **Reply #36 on:** August 31, 2009, 04:14:35 PM »

you sure its still floating?

zzz · « **Reply #37 on:** September 02, 2009, 06:57:05 AM »

Can't really tell with that one grainy shot of yours.

Theirs is clearly meant to be the Constituion class made using TNG materials. Certainly no need for any overzealous fans to get defensive and call either one

Please refrain from swearing in future.

MajorD · « **Reply #38 on:** September 02, 2009, 12:54:22 PM »

Excalibur's Excalibur is obviously of higher quality but I can't tell if the design is better based on the limited picture.

Being larger but no stronger than a Sovereign, and less maneuverable actually makes the Excalibur sound a lot like the Galaxy-class with all its science facilities exchanged for sensor and fleet management facilities, equipment, and personnel. A modified Galaxy would actually fit really well into a fleet command role.

The STO Excalibur over all doesn't impress me. Really, none of their ships impress me, and the only one that interested me was because it was only more interesting relative to the other ships.

EliteCaptianGadget · « **Reply #39 on:** September 02, 2009, 03:49:46 PM »

Obviously the STE's Excalibur!! Is that the same Excalibur design as the one in BC? I love playing with that ship, although the lack of a rear phaser array causes problems...

Author Topic: Star Trek Online | Excalibur Class - Is ours better?! (Read 10136 times)