I have been holed up for the last three-four weeks engrossed in this work. You have done (are doing?) a fantastic job. We're experiencing 90+ degree weather here in Tokyo and I'm simply sitting by the pool working on the master timeline!
I still haven't gotten into part 2 yet, but I wanted you to know that this detail is incredible. I feel that the Decipher starship thread mentions just didn't do it enough justice. I recognize a lot of other previous histories thrown in (including FASA's) and I'm hoping to incorporate it (somehow) into Masao's timeline.
Is there a chance you'll be able to notify us when you add/flesh out new classes?
Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
posted
Well, I can always resend zip files of the entire thing... because what I'm currently doing is rethinking the fundamentals, like ship masses or phaser types. I had relatively little FASA material originally to work with, but now I've found a few net sources, and am trying to make the masses jibe etc.
Ships currently under work: the Derf class buoy tenders, which are heavier combatants than some of the FASA cruisers... I'll change whatever I must to make ships like this fit, but I'll make no effort to fit in the ugly majority of FASA ships. The Loknar/Larson/Derf style is at least halfway palatable...
I'd love some feedback, of course. And somebody to do the artwork. And to proofread... I've found plenty of clear errors in the attributions, and several cases where I changed a SFC or FASA design when I didn't have to.
Underlying it all is the gut-gnawing feeling that half of this is gonna be outdated by "Enterprise" anyway. I'm still trying to decide whether I care.
posted
But... It's so close to perfection already! The only thing I'd noticed is the copious use of your pluralizations for the ships:
"The Dominion war saw the Renaissances mainly taking part in counter-raiding operations. "
"It would not be until the Dominion invasion that the Mediterraneans and the Caspians would be pressed to an active combat role."
"Retirement of the Cheyennes was out of the question, however."
While grammatically acceptable, to me it can sound rather awkward - especially when repeated so frequently. Was it a deliberate choice to avoid adding "-class" at the end of a name? For example:
"Retirement of the Cheyenne class was out of the question, however."
More a question of grammatical curiosity more than anything else... The content, of course, is fantastic.
quote:Originally posted by Timo: Well, I can always resend zip files of the entire thing... because what I'm currently doing is rethinking the fundamentals, like ship masses or phaser types. I had relatively little FASA material originally to work with, but now I've found a few net sources, and am trying to make the masses jibe etc.
I'm a big mass guy and would like to see your input on that. I was already trying to determine what might the masses be based upon your quote of Powers massing 2300 mt. Are you going with the FJ Connie mass of ~200K or the Scotty quote of ~900K as a basis?
quote:Ships currently under work: the Derf class buoy tenders, which are heavier combatants than some of the FASA cruisers... I'll change whatever I must to make ships like this fit, but I'll make no effort to fit in the ugly majority of FASA ships. The Loknar/Larson/Derf style is at least halfway palatable...
I've always been a fan of FASA for including the working ships, and the Derf is definitely a Coast Guard-ish model. I don't feel you should be restricted to any one standard, as this is 'your' fan universe (as Masao's has his). You set the standard and grab that inspiration from wherever it pokes its head.
quote:I'd love some feedback, of course. And somebody to do the artwork. And to proofread... I've found plenty of clear errors in the attributions, and several cases where I changed a SFC or FASA design when I didn't have to.
I'd be glad to act as a proofreader, grammatically speaking. I noticed a few errors and loose-ends, but had assummed that they were areas you had intended to go back on and fill in. I have your e-mail address. Let me finish my timeline and initial reading, and then I'll go back and do an entry-by-entry critical look.
quote:Underlying it all is the gut-gnawing feeling that half of this is gonna be outdated by "Enterprise" anyway. I'm still trying to decide whether I care.
Please don't (care). While I enjoy ENT, it has lessened the excitement of exploration, making so many 'firsts' in 2 seasons that it seems like that much smaller (and less mysterious) a universe. Its good entertainment, but I'm still not convinced that ENT will not end up being a divergent timeline from First Contact. It'd be a big pain (for you) to have to go back and change things accordingly, if that were to ebcome (anymore) apparent.
Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
posted
I concur. Timo the work is fantastic! There are just a few grammatical errors and sentence construction errors, but these are easily fixed.
I thought that the content was originally OCR scans of existing FASA and fan fiction material. I am proved wrong.
I also don't see what is so wrong with the idea of an Alternate History of the United Federation of Planets Starfleet. A lot of time and effort has gone into creating the FASA and other fan fiction starships and most of them are pretty cool. A lot better than the stuff we are getting in Enterprise.
Plus, didn't Brannon Braga say that the timeline was changed due to the events of Star Trek: First Contact? What if your history is for the "correct" timeline?
Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
-------------------- Yes, you're despicable, and... and picable... and... and you're definitely, definitely despicable. How a person can get so despicable in one lifetime is beyond me. It isn't as though I haven't met a lot of people. Goodness knows it isn't that. It isn't just that... it isn't... it's... it's despicable.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
I presume that PsyLiam is responding to my comment about the timeline being altered by the events of Star Trek: First Contact when the Enterprise assists Dr. Cochrane with the Phoenix.
I understand that Brannon Braga uses this as an excuse when he is challenged with the continuity problems of Enterprise and why it doesn't seem to match the rest of the Star Trek creation, especially the original series.
Am I correct in my interpretation PsyLiam?
Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
posted
Slightly. And mainly because the Trek timeline has been messed up so many times that there really isn't a "real timeline".
I mean, in the real timeline Earth was destroyed by the whaleprobe thing.
And then in the next real timeline, the Enterprise was destroyed in a time vortex while Picard was in a shuttlecraft.
And in the next real timeline, the Enterprise hadn't heard from the Romulans 60 years, but then suddenly they knew about the Romulan attack on the Enterprise-C and the Klingon outpost.
And then in the next real timeline, the Enterprise was destroyed when it collided with the Bozeman.
And so forth.
Essentially, the "real" timeline is whichever one the most recent episode is in. Braga said that to simply shut up the whinning fanboys.
-------------------- Yes, you're despicable, and... and picable... and... and you're definitely, definitely despicable. How a person can get so despicable in one lifetime is beyond me. It isn't as though I haven't met a lot of people. Goodness knows it isn't that. It isn't just that... it isn't... it's... it's despicable.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Yeah time travel stinks with the paradox problems you need to grapple with. For the most part, I don't think that the script writers and producers have done a very good job addressing these problems. For example, why don't the Borg continue to travel back in time until they are victorious in Star Trek: First Contact?
But I don't think we would be whining if Rick Berman and Brannon Braga actually had storytelling talent. I don't think most of us would care as much about the continuity and timeline if they were producing really entertaining and compelling stories for Enterprise. But because most of the stories are so lame and boring, the continuity problems become very obvious and the show's flaws are much more visible.
But I am going off topic. BUMP.
Timo needs to get a couple of editors and some artists so that he can finish his work. Its a very good contribution to fan fiction.
Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
posted
For the interested, the text is at http://lobotomy.pleh.net/~flareupload/uploads/245/shiptext.zip - a couple of Word files. I did some of those entries way back, when I yet couldn't do English perfect grammar. And I've forgotten more about what I've written than you could believe. But let's try answer a few of the readers' questions:
Mark: I usually open up an article with Starfleet needing a ship class, and until paragraph three I must withhold the class name since Starfleet hasn't decided on it yet. When I do get down to the name, it gets so personal that I go name-happy and avoid the "the class" and "the design" and "the proposed frigate" things of the early paragraphs at any cost. It does get ugly at times, now that you point it out.
Revanche: I generally agonize between volumetrics, canon mentions and noncanon source data, but basically I try to think of the nacelles as superheavy (to justify something like 780,000 tons instead of 180,000 for the Connie), and then derive the unknown masses from that. A PB-31 must mass something like 250,000 tons apiece to be a plausible source of the ship mass... There's a lot of work there, especially if I add mass to the stats of all ships.
Most of the SFC and FASA stuff will have to be re-massed anyway - I haven't been as systematic with them as I should have.
And most of the pics don't exist. I just dreamed up a few catchy captions, things that would be different from yer standard Trek encyclopedia but not out of place in a Bill Gunston style reference work. Thus, a few (2D or holo) photos of varying qualities, "official" and "unofficial", some schematics - one painting, even...
The work has a few "alt-timeline" things built in. Like the lack of a Four-Year War. Basically I still try to aim at what is "real" from the POV of a 2376-77 publication date. And some things I deliberately do with a "24th century bias". A praised battle from the 23rd century may be referred to as shameful slaughter - a pacifist wimp might be a visionary, a powerful warship a poorly thought out waste of resources. Some Kirk adventures are treated as "mythical" or "not made public" or even "remembered differently from how they happened". And I want to insert even more such mischief when I have the time. Please help.
quote:Originally posted by Timo: Revanche: I generally agonize between volumetrics, canon mentions and noncanon source data, but basically I try to think of the nacelles as superheavy (to justify something like 780,000 tons instead of 180,000 for the Connie), and then derive the unknown masses from that. A PB-31 must mass something like 250,000 tons apiece to be a plausible source of the ship mass... There's a lot of work there, especially if I add mass to the stats of all ships.
I wrote to Rick Sternbach back in '98 with a question regarding the mass of DS9, in regards to the known mass of the ENT-D. He addressed it the same way as you did: the coils (and hence the nacelles) are mass-generous.
quote: Thus, a few (2D or holo) photos of varying qualities, "official" and "unofficial", some schematics - one painting, even...
Hey, good luck getting those holo-artists lined up.
quote:The work has a few "alt-timeline" things built in. Like the lack of a Four-Year War.
Yeah...I never felt like the Four Year War was fully addressed in anything I saw from FASA. But you do have a slot for it in the 'Way of the Warrior' section (which I am now up to). It's abruptly cut-off and then the para starts off in mid-sentance. Is that a mistake or a place-holder (as you develop the war). (Again, apologies, as I haven't read further yet.)
quote: Basically I still try to aim at what is "real" from the POV of a 2376-77 publication date. And some things I deliberately do with a "24th century bias". A praised battle from the 23rd century may be referred to as shameful slaughter - a pacifist wimp might be a visionary, a powerful warship a poorly thought out waste of resources. Some Kirk adventures are treated as "mythical" or "not made public" or even "remembered differently from how they happened".
I had seen a few things already that made me think you were re-writing (future) history, especially in areas I felt were certain canon. But, now with that POV in mind, I'll re-consider things when I go back over for a proofread.
quote: And I want to insert even more such mischief when I have the time. Please help.
posted
Yup, the "Way of the Warrior" chapter originally supported a SFC-style story of an encounter between Klingon and human ships and a group of refugees, escalating the Klingon/UFP hostilities. Now ENT has done that one... I intend to revamp everything to support a 2151 first contact yet a 2200s-2210s breakdown in relations, but it would be impossible to accommodate all ENT facts without discarding just about everything from chapters "Romulan War" and "Federation". Even the existence of the phase cannon wreaks havoc on those chapters.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
And to proofread... I've found plenty of clear errors in the attributions, and several cases where I changed a SFC or FASA design when I didn't have to. ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
You had some pretty neat captions provided too. I had assumed you had the artwork already picked out! Those captions have some pretty juicy details.![[Wink]](wink.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
