posted
I believe it's hidden in one of the maps. I never got to play Armada myself, though I would of liked to. I even bought it, but apparently I don't have a compatible graphics card.
And the name Venture isn't cannon Wes. I wish they would give the scout ship a name, but a game doesn't count.
------------------ "Tigers are mean! Tigers are fierce! Tigers have teeth and claws that pierce!" Federation Starship Datalink - On that annoying Tripod server, sucks don't it?
posted
LOL Hobbes I knew you would have to comment on that. As for the Galaxy, its not buildable, yet. You can use it in the single player maps and its also in the multiplayer map '4junky' you can salvage it and use it. Its the same strength as the Akira.
As for the Venture. I know it isnt canon, but all canon means is from the TV shows or Movies, and since it doesnt have a name yet, i'll just call it the Venture untill then. and BTW, the plotlines and ship class names/designs are making thier way into Trek's writers bibles according to the Armada team. This is closest to canon as any game has been and i would NOT be surprized if you hear a refrence to it in upcomming series/movies. HA!
posted
There's the contradicition in terms right in your post *L* A Heavy Cruiser is not a battleship. From memory, the classification goes something like (this is in order of size):
posted
Well, actually there is no such thing as a scout in traditional seagoing navies. And the others are a bit fuzzy as well - corvette and frigate have sometimes referred to basically the same thing, and some frigates today are just as big and capable as destroyers, so that many navies ignore the destroyer designation altogehter. Even the huge Virginia/California nuclear anti-aircraft escorts were originally designated "frigates" even though they eventually became cruisers.
"Heavy" or "Light" as prefixes to ship designations are currently out of favor. They were used for a while in the world wars era, to replace an older system where cruisers were "Armored" or unarmored - in the WW era, calling any cruiser armored would have been pretentious, since only battleships carried any armor worth the name.
So the Starfleet system would seem to be a hodgepodge of historical systems, combined with sci-fi elements. We can't be 100% sure that a Heavy Cruiser isn't the same thing as a Battleship in Starfleet parlance...
BTW, your site is really nifty! It's nice that you use the established designations for the ships, instead of imposing invented ones. But because you are so careful with that, I'd like to remark on five details:
a) USS Horatio was called an Ambassador class Heavy Cruiser in TNG "Conspiracy" by Data. b) The Cardassian Galors were considered destroyers instead of cruisers by Sisko in "Sacrifice of Angels", even though the Cardassians themselves have called them cruisers. Perhaps the ships are so weak from Starfleet's POV that they do not warrant a cruiser designation outside the parlance of their native users? c) The K't'inga ships are explicitly called "battlecruisers" whenever they appear, even in the DS9 timeframe ("Rules of Engagement"). Apparently, Klingons don't change the designations even when the rest of the fleet outgrows the earlier designation hierarchy. d) The Negh'Var isn't really officially proven to be a battleship. It seems a bit small for that designation, which IMHO should be reserved to truly huge designs like the big Romulan warbirds and the Dominion true battleships. Perhaps the noncommittal "starship" designation would be in order here. e) And the Galaxy class supposedly is one of Explorers, although this isn't made clear in the episodes. It *is* part of the Tech Manual, though, and in this teeny weeny case a concession to noncanon material could IMHO be made...
Also, I'd move the Nebula to the upper box since it's just as voluminous as a Galaxy, even if it is a bit shorter. Vor'Cha in turn could move to the lower box alongside the other humbler cruiser types.
Timo Saloniemi
[This message has been edited by Timo (edited May 02, 2000).]
posted
Hang on, Daryus, where are you pulling the three different types of BoP's out off?
Kick-ass pic, BTW.
------------------ Remember December '59 The howling wind and the driving rain, Remember the gallant men who drowned On the lifeboat, Mona was her name.
posted
Timo, I'm aware of the points you're making. However the idea of the chart was to account for most possibilities. In regard to what various characters said in episodes, those terms are relative. In their day a K'tinga may have been a battleship, however when compared to 'modern' ships it would be a destroyer at best. In relation to the Negh'var, the term battleship would be accurate as it is the largest and most powerful ship in the Klingon fleet and as I am sure you have observed it has more firepower than a galaxy Class vessel, which is considered to be only fractionally less powerful than a warbird. Therefore you can conclude that even though a Negh'var lacks the overall volume of the Warbird it can still be calssified as a battleship. Anyway its mostly a matter of opinion
Gaseous Anomaly, thanks for the compliment . I pulled the three different classes from a number of sources, including canon VFX and names. There have been references made to K'vort class vessels, B'rel and there have been tiny scouts seen in episodes such as WOTW. Now I'd agree with anyone who said that its only physically possible to have one size for any given configuration of ship. However as there have been so many references to these classes and varied onscreen sizes for the BOP I put in 3 calculated sizes that fit the facts best. I used both written information, screen caps and a good mix of pixel to pixel measurements to calculate the sizes.
------------------ "Blind faith is the crutch of fools"