I've been meaning to raise this for a while now and since activity on the boards is a little stale at present I hope this will get a discussion going.

The starting ship selections for the Federation need a serious review.

In order to create a consistent universe, ships of the same era need to appear related in terms of design and technology. As time passes and new technologies are discovered, you should see a slow and steady progression as technology evolves and new designs are fielded based on the success of recent innovations

Right now the starting ship selection (ignoring support ships for now) goes something like this;

Cruiser 1- NX/Enterprise class
Frigate 1- Daedalus Class
Scout 1- Hermes Class
Surveyor 1- Icarus Class

Ok....... The NX class and Icarus class are clearly related. They remind me of the Constitution/ Miranda or Galaxy/ Nebula relationships. Just look at them side by side;





So far so good. In fact, the only complaint I have is that since they aren't that much difference in terms of size and layout, the NX should be the cruiser, and the Icarus the Frigate. We've already seen the Icarus in a rescue/ support capacity, not that this completely rules out it's role as science ship, but still... The Icarus would make the perfect 'destroyer' to the Enterprise's 'badass'

Then you have the Daedalus class..... Everything about this design screams Pre TOS/ TOS era to me, doesn't look like a contemporary of the NX, what it looks like is you've started the game a few decades after the ENT series and the Federation has begun building TOS style ships. Then you have the Hermes- this is very blatantly part of the Constitution Class family. Far, far more advanced than the NX class which outguns it in this game.

My proposal is to start the game fully immersed in the Enterprise Era, with not a hint of TOS tech until it's earned. My starting shiplist is as follows;

Cruiser 1 - NX/ Enterprise

Frigate 1- Icarus

Scout 1- This ship







It is an actual canon design, is smaller than the corresponding cruiser and frigate, and would be a nice, agile scout- the Sabre of it's time.

If the Icarus is not the Science ship then what is...? I say the Daedalus, but not right at the beginning. I propose no science ships until tech level 2, your range is pathetically limited anyway in the beginning, and you'll be so busy getting colony ships and construction ships out there I don't think it would be a big deal. Introduce the Daedalus ahead of the TOS ships, giving the first glimpse of what future ships will look like. It makes sense that if certain experimental technologies have become available they would be trialed on a scientific ship initially. If Starfleet really need a Science ship from the start, I guess one would have to be designed as a short term stand in.

A tech level later introduce the Constitution to replace the NX, and the Hermes to replace the Icarus- showing that this technology has reached a point it can be integrated into the designs of much larger and more capable ships. In terms of a scout ship, there needs to be a TOS era scout, maybe the Hermes can do this job and something with a Miranda layout replaces the Icarus?

That way you have smoothly transitioned away from ENT tech, towards TOS tech, without looking at all awkward or confused. The TOS style destroyer most likely outguns the NX class, it is newer and more advanced, just as the TMP/ refit era Miranda will outgun a TOS Connie when it's launched. What this also does is gives the ENT era ships, particularly the NX, the chance to shine. It will be the largest and most capable of 3 combatants. More expensive, but faster, stronger and just basically superior- just as it was in the show.



So in conclusion, I have;

TECH 1

Cruiser 1- NX Class

Frigate 1- Icarus Class

Scout 1- Cool Triangle Thing Class

TECH 2

Surveyor 1- Daedalus Class

TECH 3

Cruiser 2- Constitution Class

Frigate 2- Hermes Class

Scout 2- (TOS scout, Saladin class?)

By this point you are fully immersed in the TOS era. All the ships in your build list are TOS style ships, and they are all better than the dozens and dozens of old ENT style ships you have patrolling your borders and escorting convoys. It will stay that way for a while, until you start seeing TMP/ refit style tech come through and you know the TOS era is coming to an end.

Thoughts?

Very good. I was really iffy with the build list too.

The ship list is not final, but we are planning to have ships from Star Trek Enterprise

That's good to know, thanks for the responses. If the shiplist is still in the process of being refined I'd like to share my thoughts on the rest of the ship classes. Might as well discuss as a community if no final decisions have been made. I'll type it up and post here.

We have a group of people that will select the possible ships and then the community will decide on the final designs.

Vjeko is right; the shiplist will continue to evolve as the community sees fit. It isn't a great immovable object set in stone. But we also have a small team that oversees major decisions like the shiplist, basing its decision on the general consensus and the best suggestions from the community.

The real problem with the shiplist is actually the models. We've been dancing around the shiplist for nigh on six years now - as you know well, SOM - and the modellers have committed to the current list purely because it's the only list we have, and it's been in place for a particularly long time without major challenge. But adding or removing models only extends or negates the work done so far, and we need a hell of a lot of models. The modellers won't be happy if we suddenly drop off a totally new shiplist with new model requirements.

I certainly don't disagree that the ENT to TOS transition is clunky though; in fact, I mentioned it to Dafedz quite a long time ago. But we didn't come up with a solution at the time and the issue got buried. If the game had a working editor, I could implement your ideas and release the game files as a small-scale test just to see if it works as smoothly as planned, but we don't have an editor at the moment, and manually editing files is risky. And we would still have to contend with the models issue above.

...

As for the structures Alex, they're totally out compared to what they *should* be. I was in the middle of a comprehensive review and update of all the structure issues in the game when Mike decided to release the May 2009 update. And that meant an incomplete structure update was released. The same update also destroyed editor compatibility, so Mike removed it from the download, as well as introducing a couple of structure-related bugs. This combination of incomplete files, bugs, and an inability to safely edit the files manually is the ultimate reason for the state of the structures. You can see how they should work in Dafedz's Database.

In spite of the problems, I haven't stopped working on the game. I've been compiling A List with all the updates that need to be implemented so that I can get on fixing them as soon as a new editor is released. And as you can see, there's a lot that needs to be done.

Oh, and have a good read of that list. You might notice some odd things in there that hint at some future planned game updates.

Cool sounds good... What I'd really like is a TNG era scout ship, but I just can't think of one. I've currently got the Centaur down as a scout around Tech 5, and the Sabre around tech 9, just need something to bridge the gap because the Centaur looks a little silly as the most advanced scout alongside Galaxy and Nebula class ships but I don't want the Sabre to come until the back end of the TNG era as a Sovereign contemporary.

Anyone know of anything?

EDIT- cool thanks for the info Matress. I'll certainly be there to lend a hand when the time comes. Most of what I suggested is more of a generaly rearrangement, as you say it's unfair to propose a ton of new model work be done.

Great discussion - proceedeth forwardeth. Captain Bashir

Much of what we have as models is based on what we could find online. Given the large list we could not build them all ourselves in time for the XP version of the combat engine. For now were are focused on 2D images. When we are done with 2D images for the multiplayer version (without 3D combat) we can start in again on the models.

That list has been the biggest point of contention over the years. No one will be happy. I hope that we will have enough models to let us give the player the option to fill the list with models of their choosing at some point. Even if that day comes we still have to decide on a basic set for the download. That will require compromise from everyone. I do not have strong felling about the list myself other than I want one that I do not have to be reworking all the time.

Will you please go through the list and give the model team something that will not be changed? Please do it now while we are working on the backgrounds.

Well I for one think that SOM's suggestions make sense, although including the triangle ship would mean hunting for an extra model, Kenneth. How about an Oberth for the TNG scout, SOM?

I'd like to expand on Kenneth's point about the combat system though, as i'm not sure you know the backstory, SOM.

Basically, we don't currently have a combat system anymore. All of Wolfe's previous work was for naught, as the engine he used is not compatible with Vista or 7, and there are no planned future updates either. He's going to build on a new 3D combat system based on XNA, which is the same format that Strings' Combat Demo was made in. XNA is also something that would work much better in Supremacy as well, and Wolfe now has much more experience in coding than when he first started, so there are actually a number of benefits from starting from scratch.

Before we go 3D though, we're going to have a 2D combat simulator, similar to the one that BOTE currently has. This will give us more time to focus on developing 3D, whilst getting a form of combat out as early as possible.

As always, I have no idea of the release dates for either combat system.

After reading the SOM's post, I have also came to the conclusion that list will need some extra work. Although I have a suggestion about naming the ship types. Since UE to COF and Later UFOP humanity and other members have strived to create peaceful, multi-purpose exploration vessels, science vessels, ... It doesn't seam right that federation will have cruisers, destroyers, ... They should have a more peaceful name like. Explorers should be every thing form the NX to Sovereign. Scouts could be used. Heavy cruisers should be tactical explorers or defenders or anything peaceful or not aggressive (by now you get the point). This will also make it more cannon as federation was reluctant to build "warships" even when it created the Defiant (the first ever federation warship) they named it escort so it would seem less aggressive.

Any thoughts on this.

The cruiser/destroyer/whatever designations are provided simply to help establish the roles of the ships in combat, since this is where players will truly see them in action.

Combat isn't everything about a ship in the game though, and the various classes will have certain unique abilities. For instance, the command-type ships - Cruisers, Explorers, Attack Cruisers, Battlecruisers, Battlehawks, Warbirds, Warhawks, Assault Cruisers, and Battleships - will be capable of towing stranded ships back into refuelling range. Explorers will the premium science vessels in the game. Transports can build stations. Medical ships can cure plagues. And so on.

In terms of naming, I think the Federation ships are relatively peaceful anyways - just look at my list above. The Federation for instance have Explorers whilst the Romulans have Warhawks and Warbirds and the Klingons have Attack Cruisers and Battlecruisers. And whilst it is true the Federation shied away from building warships, you have to remember they are a military organisation. Cruisers and Destroyers would be bread-and-butter to them.

Military ... well sort off. Only Starfleet is military, Federation is a diplomatic organization. (similar to UN troops and UN)

As long as you can tell what the ship is for when you go to build it.

The traditional naval terms for starship types have a precedent in Star Trek. Characters consistently refer to Federation ships as cruisers, there have also been references to frigates and destroyers on occasion. These designations are needed to determine the relevent size and role within the fleet.

Also, the Federation being a peaceful organisation should have no bearing on it's military. Starfleet is a combined military and exploration force, they adhere to traditional naval ranks, (ensign, admiral etc), and adhere to traditional ship classification, (frigate, cruiser etc)

Also Matress, the Oberth is a Surveyor, not a Scout, and is a TMP era ship rather than a TNG era one, it just doesn't get replaced until the Nova. I'm trying to find a Galaxy, Nebula, New Orleans style Scout..... I don't think there is a canon one.

What about Freedom class?

It was one of the ship classes in the battle of wolf 359

Your images didn't work but I google imaged it.... Perfect!!! Please get this in the game, it would replace the Centaur as a Scout ship some time after the launch of the Ambassador/ Niagra, and be replaced by the Sabre very late in the game. Props vjeko.

This is our current Scout I for the Feds.

Freedom class is like a TNG variant of that.

The Saladin and Freedom classes were essentially the same design, but from different eras. Saladin was TOS, while the Freedom was TNG era. Your model however appears to be post-TMP era Kenneth, so it's technically more likely to be a TMP-era Saladin, since the Freedom hasn't been designed yet by that time.

Saladin on the left, Freedom on the right.


Note: the database calls the class the Hermes class. The Hermes class is also the same design as those above; Hermes and Saladin are interchangeable names. All three class names - Hermes, Saladin, and Freedom - are canon.

I know that, that was the point of the discussion, it's 100 years more advanced than the NX class!!

Major races get from two to three designs of ships as a scout to cover the time line of the game. In the case of cruisers the Federation gets five designs. This list already gives us hundreds of ships to build. The Scout I has to last through a long time before the Scout II and the Scout II remains to the end.

It makes the most sense that the first scout be of the oldest era design and then retained in service for a long time. In this case we may then jump right over the
Hermes, Saladin, and Freedom era. That or we use the Hermes, Saladin, and Freedom as Scout II until the end of the game.

One thing is for sure. We can not build six or seven designs of ships for each ship type. It is too much work and too much to download.

I think the 2nd generation frigate should be the USS Kelvin (i.e. from the newest ST 11.) Or it could also be NCC-1864 Reliant. As well, where will the Excelsior-class fit in?

We won't have any elements from the latest film in our game. The movie is set in an alternate reality and not the original trek universe.

Not to mention that the JJPrise is butt ugly.

The Kelvin would also push out the Miranda - and the Miranda has been around a lot longer than the Kelvin. It's also much more widely recognised. Not to mention the fact that the Soyuz (Scout II) is based on the Miranda spaceframe, and it would look odd to have the Soyuz but not the Miranda.

And the Kelvin would look odd at more than double the size of the Constitution.

Personally, I hate the Daedalus and wouldn't mind in the slightest if we completely removed it from the game. It's easily the ugliest and most out of place design we have. I would rather see more Enterprise-era designs, canon or otherwise. Legacy had some nice Enterprise-era designs that weren't necessarily canon, and I wouldn't mind doing something similar.

I have been working on the federation shiplist to include all eras.
I'll soon post it.