I wish we could find at least six people with stable XP machines to play OP again. CE still needs too much work IMO.
I wish we could find at least six people with stable XP machines to play OP again. CE still needs too much work IMO.
*Looks over at ancient Dell Laptop* Define stable...
The Czar
I wish we could find at least six people with stable XP machines to play OP again. CE still needs too much work IMO.
I wish we could find at least six people with stable XP machines to play OP again. CE still needs too much work IMO.
<----- Has a stable XP Rig. That's One.
I wish we could find at least six people with stable XP machines to play OP again. CE still needs too much work IMO.
Still have an old dell XP machine, but was never able to get into D2 . Miss the game actually, used to have a lot of fun flying and dying.
The hype, storylines, organisation, recruiting, the lead up to the majestic final battle that unfortunatly wasn't met to be. It would have been glorious. I will cherish these memories until I die. Best gaming experience ever.
Trust me it does.At best there were some "interesting" features about SFC-3... However, the mission drafting alone (never could draft team mates on most missions) left a bad taste in my mouth right up front! Over all I agree.... squash a few of the old bugs in OP ... use the original ship list ... update it with a few more from the TNG and possibly post TNG .. some new mission scripts, mix thoroughly, bake until done !
I rather play OP with mods then ever touch SFC3. It's horrible. They should have just added to OP instead.
I'm trying to make a mod myself but I don't have the time I once had. It's a shame bc with the right mod I can see a lot of us returning and having fun.
Adam
Trust me it does.
I rather play OP with mods then ever touch SFC3. It's horrible. They should have just added to OP instead.
I'm trying to make a mod myself but I don't have the time I once had. It's a shame bc with the right mod I can see a lot of us returning and having fun.
Adam
DH, it's funny how you deride Trek games but still play that abomination they made of D&D. Have you been banned from the forums again? I went on awhile ago to see if things were different (they weren't) and saw no postings from you in a search.
I first played SFB when it was sold in a "baggie" and no one would have ever thought it would be a full on computer game one day. Utilities for things like rolling damage sure but not an SFC. But it was. It has happened and can happen again.
There is a way to make it more likely. Just use the SFB rules (no deal for Trek itself) leave out the explicitly Trek stuff which is names, background and images. Calling things "The Federation" predates Trek so that is Okay, Lyrans, Hydrans, ISC are fine too. Done right allowing modding and fan mods make it into Trek (many fan mods for Trek in other games Galciv II for example).
I wouldn't say they are all bad if you are a Trek Fan then you will like all of them errr STO has few things to be desired but it is not bad.It certianly feels when you play Klingon that you are actually playing it and I hate to say unlike SFC.There would be NO SFB without Star Trek and none of those ships in Star Trek had drones or fighters.
Sorry, the game is dead because it doesn't work with modern operating systems (cannot draft with Windows 7 or Vista). And nothing can fix this, I was one of the last people hosting servers and saw this game die kicking and screaming.
We'd only need 50-100 active players for a great D2 campaign, but with the game not running on new OSes and XP being retired in 2014 it's just plain old done.
What we either need is a "real" game based on the SFB IP or something modern that can be modded into an SFCish game.
let's face it . . . Trek games suck. I've played them all, they are all horrible. SFC was awesome because it was based on SFB and not retricted to the Trek stuff which was never meant to be a game. Trek games are all full of fanboi bullsh*t and "ubber-ships" and crap that should never be playable like the Borg. SFC/SFB weren't perfect but man, it was a hell of a lot better than anything else.
I'm dreaming, I know it'll never happen, but it would fill the void as there is no game out there that is as good as this was.
Well, as a profitable venture I'd say it is out of the realm of possibility, but if some rich fanboi wants to spend it, there is no problem here that money cannot solve. Has anyone considered Kickstarter?
I wouldn't say they are all bad if you are a Trek Fan then you will like all of them errr STO has few things to be desired but it is not bad.It certianly feels when you play Klingon that you are actually playing it and I hate to say unlike SFC.There would be NO SFB without Star Trek and none of those ships in Star Trek had drones or fighters.
There is a way to make it more likely. Just use the SFB rules (no deal for Trek itself) leave out the explicitly Trek stuff which is names, background and images. Calling things "The Federation" predates Trek so that is Okay, Lyrans, Hydrans, ISC are fine too. Done right allowing modding and fan mods make it into Trek (many fan mods for Trek in other games Galciv II for example).CBS wouldn't allow for them to use the Licensing of the Ships no K D7s or BoP as well as those for the romulans and Federation Models.
Well, as a profitable venture I'd say it is out of the realm of possibility, but if some rich fanboi wants to spend it, there is no problem here that money cannot solve. Has anyone considered Kickstarter?
I remember getting threatened by SVC over the use of his IP profitable or not. I'm not lawyer so I don't know what can or cannot be done legally but doing this without ADB and Paramounts permission is just asking for litigation.
Yes they shot from an astroid not a ship and yes they had small fighters which the maquie used but that was in TNG not in TOS time period.I wouldn't say they are all bad if you are a Trek Fan then you will like all of them errr STO has few things to be desired but it is not bad.It certianly feels when you play Klingon that you are actually playing it and I hate to say unlike SFC.There would be NO SFB without Star Trek and none of those ships in Star Trek had drones or fighters.
They had fighters in DS9 during the Dominion War and misslies were shot at the Enterprise in TOS on at least two occasions IIRC: Patters of Force and one other episode I can't remember right off hand.
There is a way to make it more likely. Just use the SFB rules (no deal for Trek itself) leave out the explicitly Trek stuff which is names, background and images. Calling things "The Federation" predates Trek so that is Okay, Lyrans, Hydrans, ISC are fine too. Done right allowing modding and fan mods make it into Trek (many fan mods for Trek in other games Galciv II for example).
CBS wouldn't allow for thme to use the Licensing of the Ship no K D7s or BoP as well as those for the romulans and Federation Models.
It would still have to be abroved by CBS or looked at.There is a way to make it more likely. Just use the SFB rules (no deal for Trek itself) leave out the explicitly Trek stuff which is names, background and images. Calling things "The Federation" predates Trek so that is Okay, Lyrans, Hydrans, ISC are fine too. Done right allowing modding and fan mods make it into Trek (many fan mods for Trek in other games Galciv II for example).
CBS wouldn't allow for thme to use the Licensing of the Ship no K D7s or BoP as well as those for the romulans and Federation Models.
Which does not contradict what I said. No explicit Trek in the game. Explicit Trek as after market fan mods.
They had fighters in DS9 during the Dominion War and misslies were shot at the Enterprise in TOS on at least two occasions IIRC: Patters of Force and one other episode I can't remember right off hand.Yes they shot from an astroid not a ship and yes they had small fighters which the maquie used but that was in TNG not in TOS time period.
It would still have to be abroved by CBS or looked at.
Of course it wasn't strictly true to SFB. Given that one was a turn based board game and the other a real time computer game it couldn't be. But it was based as closely on SFB as practical. It was where they broke that connection (non SFB ships and non Eschelon ISC) that the game had playability issues.agreed... however, there were some folks who made endless argumentation and even spent a lot of time developing some of the SFB ship lists. Again: nothing wrong with that sort of thing if that is the style you prefer.
For me the SFB rule set was its greatest strength it had more years of play testing than any complex computer game ever has had or will have. There was more balance outside of the ISC and X-Ships than any other game that begins to rival its complexity.
Are there places where SFB went wrong? Absolutely. Creating weapons whose features were designed to give an over whelming advantage against their enemy (Hydran Hellbore vs Early Klingons). Designing ships to avoid the DAC issue with forward hull by using central hull is another (there was no real reason Hydrans shouldn't have had fore and aft hull). Some are perfectly legitimate like developing ADD, dogfight drones and strengthening those rear shields to defend better vs Hellbore for example.
I've actually stopped ... tried to think of a delicate way to say this without starting something. After all these years ... I'd love to be able to NOT cause trouble.
Actually when OP was released it was based on SFB ideas: not a strict interpretation of SFB. This one particular idea was probably one of the most consistently contested discussions (aside from the magic photon). I know since my son was a close friends with a member of the development team.
That said I mean no disrespect to those who enjoy SFB. However, if this sort of game were ever revisited it would probably be closer to OP than SFB. There is always room for speculation and dreaming. I would love to see another OP based game come to life. It was FUN !! And now that I actually could make more of a genuine contribution (something besides flipping hexes) ... it really gets the old adrenalin going !
EDIT... and yes .. anything that would be done on a large enough scale to warrant public use would probably have to be approved by CBS (as I understand it). STO license / development group (whom ever that is) .. might have a few words to say as well (just a guess).
For me the SFB rule set was its greatest strength it had more years of play testing than any complex computer game ever has had or will have. There was more balance outside of the ISC and X-Ships than any other game that begins to rival its complexity.
Are there places where SFB went wrong? Absolutely. Creating weapons whose features were designed to give an over whelming advantage against their enemy (Hydran Hellbore vs Early Klingons). Designing ships to avoid the DAC issue with forward hull by using central hull is another (there was no real reason Hydrans shouldn't have had fore and aft hull). Some are perfectly legitimate like developing ADD, dogfight drones and strengthening those rear shields to defend better vs Hellbore for example.
IMHO there were some balance issues ... (as you have pointed out) .. BUT nothing that could not be fixed. Unfortunately some folks were never satisfied unless some of those items were basically nerfed. Let me hasten to say that I really would prefer to not go there out of respect to everyone here and out of respect to where this thread started. Let's just say that I agree with you in some areas!
However, I still love the "X" ships ! ;) One of my favorite designs was a modified CLC that was done for a MOD. I loved the extra Gatling phasers on it... it was a great ship to fly wing in.
For me the SFB rule set was its greatest strength it had more years of play testing than any complex computer game ever has had or will have. There was more balance outside of the ISC and X-Ships than any other game that begins to rival its complexity.
Are there places where SFB went wrong? Absolutely. Creating weapons whose features were designed to give an over whelming advantage against their enemy (Hydran Hellbore vs Early Klingons). Designing ships to avoid the DAC issue with forward hull by using central hull is another (there was no real reason Hydrans shouldn't have had fore and aft hull). Some are perfectly legitimate like developing ADD, dogfight drones and strengthening those rear shields to defend better vs Hellbore for example.
IMHO there were some balance issues ... (as you have pointed out) .. BUT nothing that could not be fixed. Unfortunately some folks were never satisfied unless some of those items were basically nerfed. Let me hasten to say that I really would prefer to not go there out of respect to everyone here and out of respect to where this thread started. Let's just say that I agree with you in some areas!
However, I still love the "X" ships ! ;) One of my favorite designs was a modified CLC that was done for a MOD. I loved the extra Gatling phasers on it... it was a great ship to fly wing in.
I have to say . . . one of the best moment in SFC was when you and your son left.
Ahhh ... your way or the highway ... eh Diehard !
shhhh ... don't let that out .. you'll ruin my reputation !Ahhh ... your way or the highway ... eh Diehard !
Oh, come on now Buzzy, you have to admit that Nannerslug was just as stubborn in his own way. IIRC you ended up smoothing out more than one skirmish that he sort of let escalate out of hand.
I have to say . . . one of the best moment in SFC was when you and your son left.
Holy moly. Nannerslug's your son. Had no idea. Yup I remember his mods. It was him and Chris Jones that made me so passionate about SFC. I wish we could do more.
Adam
There was one other game that did use SFB rules but they were not authorized to do so and were forced off the market. Warp Factor, written in interpreted basic for the original PC. I had it then and have the source code still. I'd be tempted to try and upgrade it to the more modern FreeBasic if I had the skills.
There was one other game that did use SFB rules but they were not authorized to do so and were forced off the market. Warp Factor, written in interpreted basic for the original PC. I had it then and have the source code still. I'd be tempted to try and upgrade it to the more modern FreeBasic if I had the skills.
Only to be sued and shut down again? :)
The Trek games without the SFB rules all suck, it's a shame but it's true.
I wouldn't go so far as to say that all non SFB based Trek computer games suck mainly because I've played relatively few of them (and those were disappointing) but there may well be some that do have fans who like them. Sucking is at least partly opinion and I dare say that there are those for whom SFC "sucks" because it is too complex for them.
For me the SFB rule set was its greatest strength it had more years of play testing than any complex computer game ever has had or will have. There was more balance outside of the ISC and X-Ships than any other game that begins to rival its complexity.
Are there places where SFB went wrong? Absolutely. Creating weapons whose features were designed to give an over whelming advantage against their enemy (Hydran Hellbore vs Early Klingons). Designing ships to avoid the DAC issue with forward hull by using central hull is another (there was no real reason Hydrans shouldn't have had fore and aft hull). Some are perfectly legitimate like developing ADD, dogfight drones and strengthening those rear shields to defend better vs Hellbore for example.
And that is so true! The SFB rules, is the greatest strength of the game. Whether or not people want to believe it or not. It's definitely what separates SFC from all the other crap. Someone mentioned BC. I play BC. It's not balanced at all. After 10 min it gets ridiculously boring. Just like STO.
There's no rules in place. People add as many weapons, all this technology that hasn't been tested for balancing, in the end its overkill. SFC remains the best game IMHO. OP on the top, SFC3 on the bottom of the SFC series. Between OP and 3. 3 is like watching Star Trek the Animated Series. Cartoonish, kind of cheesy, trying to hold on to Star Trek but in the end poorly executed. SFC has most of SFB, and even though I never played SFB I have to agree you can definitely see the difference btwn SFC and every other Star Trek Game. I have them all and they all turn out the same. But if it weren't for the SFB veterans around here; I don't think I would of fell in love with the game.
Adam
Name: Star Fleet Battles
Any Star Trek fan worth their salt would have at least heard of this game.
Any Star Trek fan who loves board/card games would have played this game at one point in their life or seen someone playing it.
Star Fleet Battles is the most recognised board game for Star Trek on the planet and is the game which gave Interplay the idea to make Star Trek: Starfleet Command back in the 90's (heck the original interplay manual even credits Amarillo Design).
Even though Star Fleet Battles is a VAST game with LOADS of expansion sets and a massive rule set book the game itself is easy to get into.
With tournaments, official discussion groups and online support and play it's the corner stone of Amarillo Design and was the corner stone for Interplays most successful series of Star Trek games before they held the franchise over to Activision in 2000.
That was on the Old Taldren boards when I was playing SP here I started playing on the Dyna then GSA.Tracey figured out my GSA name which I used to log on the dyna with and it became widely known.Then I was everyone target on the coalition.
I am not dramatic just pointong out the facts and OP is balanced only to those who like the way it is only for those who know STB so well.It is best to those who play /ed the board game for the pure Star Trek fan it is not as balanced as it could be.Thee are lots of useless ships in the shiplist and the fighters are no where to be balanced
This is not fan-boy crap.
Sorry Diehard .. I'm not trying to flame ya bud! You just don't have room in your heart or mind for different ideas! (or at least you come across that way !) That's all. No anger here! None at all!
Stupid question mooks . . .
Do you guys think if OP Dyna works on modern OS's this game would still be active?
I'm gonna go with a "yes" on this. I mean you really only need 50-100 people for a decent D2 server . . . but the bugs of this game are worse than a Jersey Girl's crotch.
Flamewars, magic-photons . .. all that bullsh*t wouldn't have mattered if this was a better working game under the hood. I mean modern games just work . . . just click on an instance, it opens you play. The bullsh*t we had with the poorly designed drafting system in SFC . . . nobody would tolerate in these days.
Not eveyone's able to make a dual-boot system either.
I'm gonna go on record with saying the Vista thing is what killed SFC worse than any Magic Photon even could have.
And if some of us had OUR dream .. we would take the BEST ideas of game we have played ... shake 'um up and have a grand time like you would not believe!
My only regret is that I do not have the tech savy or $$$$ (and LOTS of $$$$$$$$$$$$ ) to make it happen.
not just admit no one wants to play, why worry about wether or not it plays on 7 or 8 get and old computer whch are available at every second hand shop in a america you can get xp for a song and a dance and run returnel if your worried about viruses. You can get some good second hand computers around here for 10 bucks, yeh yeh its not fancy but you can play the game. NBo one wants to.
No, the game is dead because for most of us, the inconvenience of making the damn thing work outweighs even a strong desire to play it.
If we can find someone with a dual boot system that is willing to test my theroy, we may find that WinXP isn't an issue afterall.
I don't really understand the problem with XP going "EoL". It's not like it will stop working or something. Besides, if you are only using it for a game computer who cares if it gets infected with something. Just wipe, reinstall and load up the files from a saved directory.
I don't really understand the problem with XP going "EoL". It's not like it will stop working or something. Besides, if you are only using it for a game computer who cares if it gets infected with something. Just wipe, reinstall and load up the files from a saved directory.
I don't really understand the problem with XP going "EoL". It's not like it will stop working or something. Besides, if you are only using it for a game computer who cares if it gets infected with something. Just wipe, reinstall and load up the files from a saved directory.
How many people will really do this?
I don't really understand the problem with XP going "EoL". It's not like it will stop working or something. Besides, if you are only using it for a game computer who cares if it gets infected with something. Just wipe, reinstall and load up the files from a saved directory.
How many people will really do this?
Yeah, see, that's just it. I get paid good money to wrestle with ridiculous headaches like that. I'll be damned if I'm gonna do it in my free time. That there are a dozen or so people here who will countenance the effort doesn't render the problem moot -- it is still obstacle enough to dissuade many (most?) people who might actually pick up and play this game.
So, I shall wait patiently, and watch to see if SFC4 reaches a point where my skills might be of use. But I do hope I've done at least something to disabuse you of the notion that "everyone should just get a spare computer and get a copy of XP and install OP and install a custom shiplist and clone it all and reimage it weekly (while preserving palettes, saves, etc.)" is a reasonable solution for all but a few.
Games aren't balanced for the great players but for everyone and you should know that by now playing DDO online.Phasers and photons should use sec instead of turns as it related more to PvP in PC games.Photons Torps like Submarine Torps don't recharge they reload.I am not dramatic just pointong out the facts and OP is balanced only to those who like the way it is only for those who know STB so well.It is best to those who play /ed the board game for the pure Star Trek fan it is not as balanced as it could be.Thee are lots of useless ships in the shiplist and the fighters are no where to be balanced
So it was balanced from people who were good at playing games . . . but not for fanbois who thought Photons should never miss?
Pretty much the truth.
But games, especially PvP games, need to be balanced on what great players can do in the ships. If you balance from the un-skilled you see massive imbalances when you add skill the the equation. Sure, Photons hitting through a 2 Shift of EW didn't matter when it was two newbies or AI was involved . . . but give that advantages to Ghish or Fox and it's ridiculous.
Photons Torps like Submarine Torps don't recharge they reload.
Notice how I said submarine torpedo you don't charge those up much the same as in Star Trek TOS.
Photons Torps like Submarine Torps don't recharge they reload.
SFC IS NOT BASED ON CANON STAR TREK!! The first reference to photon torpedoes as physical objects was in a schematic in TMP. By then, SFB had already been built around photons as an energy weapon. As for gameplay balance, we got magic photons. The do alleviate some of the problems of flying feds in single ship cruiser duels which are the bread and butter of SFC, although I will concede that they make multiple feds, or fed DNs too powerful. Perhaps some sort of system where the proxy bonus shuts off if one side has more than four photons would have worked better.
It was never specified in TOS. The mechanism of preparing photon torpedoes to fire wasn't seen until TWOK.It is just assumbed they would load them in the same way after all they torpedos same as Sub.
It was never specified in TOS. The mechanism of preparing photon torpedoes to fire wasn't seen until TWOK.
It is just assumbed they would load them in the same way after all they torpedos same as Sub.
It was never specified in TOS. The mechanism of preparing photon torpedoes to fire wasn't seen until TWOK.It is just assumbed they would load them in the same way after all they torpedos same as Sub.
They didn't use missles though.It was never specified in TOS. The mechanism of preparing photon torpedoes to fire wasn't seen until TWOK.
It is just assumbed they would load them in the same way after all they torpedos same as Sub.
Slow missiles fired on a straight line course? Ballistic drones in other words.
@kightstrom
I took them to be just like torpedos aboard a submarine when I first heard about them way back in 1971 in syndication.
They didn't use missles though.
Whatever it is still a torpedo that reqiures no energy to arm
Missles aren't torps buy why.
Whatever it is still a torpedo that reqiures no energy to arm
And like I stated, before TWOK, licensed publications described photon torpedoes as energy weapons, which do require ships energy to manufacture and maintain. SFB adopted that concept, which is how it ended up in SFC. Why can't you get that?Missles aren't torps buy why.
Can you rephrase that? I don't understand what you're trying to say here.
There can't be photons because.
Missles are chemicaly fueled warhead that travel well under impluse speeds.That any phaser or even laser could shoot down.
Even the Klingon/federation emissary traveled in a photon torpedo tube at warp in one of the episodes.It was a high speed probe in emmisary. For the record, while its never been stated on screen, and thus is not canon, an issue of Star Trek magazine in the late 90s stated that photon torpedoes are sub-light weapons. While they have a theoretical top speed of warp one, they have a limited quantity of anti-matter which is used for both propulsion, and detonation. The faster they go, the lower their yield.
I think we all just wish a "game" can do what we "see" in the media.
LOL, I'm sure you're right Captain Adam...
Since you've got no reference/link, and if we were reading the same ST mags in the 90s Knightstorm, I willing to bet you're mis-remebering. The TNG manual makes it a point that photorps can't make the jump to warp on their own, but they are indeed the weapon to use while at warp, as opposed to phasers, which are "sublight" (technically, the beam moves at c, so neither "sub" or "FTL").
True, gameplay should trump media viewing for playing a game; I think we all just wish a "game" can do what we "see" in the media.
Thanks for the tip Captain Adam; I had forgotten about the Daystrom Institute site. I'm lovin' it!
It is true that they show both photons and phasers firing a warp speeds (right from the very first production episode of TOS where they destroy the cube in The Corbomite Maneuver at warp three) and that they have been inconsistant about it as they made it up and as plots required clever fixes to problems to move along. I'll just use their own technobabble approach and say that the phasing part in "phaser" that blends plasma into a laser also phases the beam partly into a sub-space domain that allows it to seem to go FTL when at warp due to the relativistic speed differential. As for photons; since they have a hard candy coating encasing all that sweet goodness, it isn't hard to assume that they fit them with small warp boosters that allow them to maintain a high warp speed (approaching the assigned limit of warp ten set in TNG before achieving trans-warp).
Those technical manuals aren't canon either, but they're more authoritative than other sources, because of who's writing them, but the same could be said about that magazine article. I'm going to have to look, but I might still have it packed away somewhere. These magazines were high quality, and I didn't get many of them since they were over $7 per issue which was a bit over budget for a high school student to spend on a magazine in the late 90s.
Like I said, I believe you've misremebered those mags, since they say the same thing as those manuals.
Star Trek -The Magazine. Volume 1, issue 3, p.60:
"The photon torpedo was developed as a tactical weapon that could be used while a starship travelled at warp - a situation in which phasers are useless."
It's a retcon to the early TOS, but it's beome the accepted norm in ST.
Technically, (And I'm throwing out anything pre-TMP as the concept of Warp changes with the advent of The Motion Picture. TOS and TAS had starships maneuvering and fighting while at warp, almost all the time, anytime they had to fight at sublight, it was stated that they were clearly at a disadvantage because of it) The only way to have combat at Warp is if the ships involved in the fighting share a Warp Field. At which point, since they are in the same area of subspace, they can exchange fire with each other as if they were at sub-light. With all the maneuvering restrictions of being at warp. I can't think of a single instance (Outside of SFC3) where a ship at warp, exchanged fire with a ship at sub-light after the Warp Concept change. Mostly because of the logic of trying to hit something at FTL speeds leaves a firing window of only a few milliseconds.
Even the Klingon/federation emissary traveled in a photon torpedo tube at warp in one of the episodes. I'm still fuzzy about what you are trying to say. Can you explain it again.
Yes but aren't the casing identical.
Don't they even state several times that you can remove the internal mechanisms and alter it to be uses as weapons or sensor eq. Or in that case a make shift environmental unit for her to travel.
Those technical manuals aren't canon either, but they're more authoritative than other sources, because of who's writing them, but the same could be said about that magazine article. I'm going to have to look, but I might still have it packed away somewhere. These magazines were high quality, and I didn't get many of them since they were over $7 per issue which was a bit over budget for a high school student to spend on a magazine in the late 90s.
Like I said, I believe you've misremebered those mags, since they say the same thing as those manuals.
Star Trek -The Magazine. Volume 1, issue 3, p.60:
"The photon torpedo was developed as a tactical weapon that could be used while a starship travelled at warp - a situation in which phasers are useless."
It's a retcon to the early TOS, but it's beome the accepted norm in ST.
Lol Nem! I sighted that example about ten posts ago.
Yeah, and they also did an episode where they made a big to do about the Enterprise not being able to fire with its shields up,
and lets not forget the Romulan Bird of Prey's "power is simple impulse."
Yeah, and they also did an episode where they made a big to do about the Enterprise not being able to fire with its shields up,
When did they do that?
I always assumed that it meant that they were running on simple impulse at that time due to the cost of the cloak and the plasma torpedo. Realistically, there is no way they could have made it into deep space on impulse alone. The Romulans probably had a limited warp ability that they only used to get from place to place and when confronted by a ship with a superior ability on that regard, the Romulan commander tried to use the advantages that the situation presented since he knew he couldn't out run the Enterprise as he was low on fuel.
Technically, (And I'm throwing out anything pre-TMP as the concept of Warp changes with the advent of The Motion Picture. TOS and TAS had starships maneuvering and fighting while at warp, almost all the time, anytime they had to fight at sublight, it was stated that they were clearly at a disadvantage because of it) The only way to have combat at Warp is if the ships involved in the fighting share a Warp Field. At which point, since they are in the same area of subspace, they can exchange fire with each other as if they were at sub-light. With all the maneuvering restrictions of being at warp. I can't think of a single instance (Outside of SFC3) where a ship at warp, exchanged fire with a ship at sub-light after the Warp Concept change. Mostly because of the logic of trying to hit something at FTL speeds leaves a firing window of only a few milliseconds.
Ermmm, :huh: While it wasn't a ship, in TMP they fired a photon at an asteroid while in the wormhole caused by the engine imbalance near the start of the movie. They were definitely at warp (even though it was a warped warp) and I'm pretty sure asteroids don't move at FTL speeds.
It was the episode where the planet was fighting a computerized war, and the Enterprise had been marked as a casualty. When they refused to self destruct, the race fired on the Enterprise, and the ship couldn't fire back because its shields were up.
Or, this was an early episode before it had been decided that impulse would solely be a method of sublight propulsion.
The Asteroid was pulled into the wormhole with them, it was in their warp field, therefore they could fire at it.
That's federation writing on the probe.
schematics/starfleet_probes.htm[/url]
This site usually is very good with canon sources. Don't quote it or me but the class 8 probe is suppose to be a modified photon. Don't tell at me if I'm wrong. Lol
Adam
if you hadn't noticed, I was quoting directly from that magazine, pulled right off my shelf, so don't bother. ;)
BTW. I still haven't found my copy of that magazine...
Missiles are chemically fueled warheads that travel well under impluse speeds.That any phaser or even laser could shoot them down.Because they are like sidwinder on a F18 Hornet.What I am trying to say is that photons travel at warp speeds missles don't as phaser can't fired at warp.The missles you saw were fired from an asteroid.
Age, where did you come up with this conclusion?
I just want to understand where you are coming from. What possess you to think you can redefine someone else's artistic vision, clearly someone from the Trek World made it this way bc that's what they believed a photon torpedo was to be. They even stated that it could travel warp speeds. Even the Klingon/federation emissary traveled in a photon torpedo tube at warp in one of the episodes. I'm still fuzzy about what you are trying to say. Can you explain it again.
A missile is a projectile that moves through air or space. There is no speed limit on what can be considered a missile. Photon torpedoes are guided missiles.There is a speed limit on missles as they no more that a small version of a rocket.
Of course TOS is more inconsistant than TMP-TNG stuff. They had ten years of fans asking questions and retconning everything before the movies started. By then they knew to pay better attention, but never let it get in the way of plot, which turned out to be a double edged sword as it created its own problems when they would stray from the "path".
Missiles are chemically fueled warheads that travel well under impluse speeds.That any phaser or even laser could shoot them down.Because they are like sidwinder on a F18 Hornet.What I am trying to say is that photons travel at warp speeds missles don't as phaser can't fired at warp.The missles you saw were fired from an asteroid.
Age, where did you come up with this conclusion?
I just want to understand where you are coming from. What possess you to think you can redefine someone else's artistic vision, clearly someone from the Trek World made it this way bc that's what they believed a photon torpedo was to be. They even stated that it could travel warp speeds. Even the Klingon/federation emissary traveled in a photon torpedo tube at warp in one of the episodes. I'm still fuzzy about what you are trying to say. Can you explain it again.
I don't kmnd me asking but where did you and knightstrom come from as I never seen you post a few years ago and I know everyone in Trek gaming.
@knightstromQuoteA missile is a projectile that moves through air or space. There is no speed limit on what can be considered a missile. Photon torpedoes are guided missiles.There is a speed limit on missles as they no more that a small version of a rocket.
Different eras. in the TOS era what TV show had a consistent on going story line? Soap operas. By TNG others had been added (BSG for example). By Enterprise even more like Stargate and Babylon 5, Firefly.
Missiles are chemically fueled warheads that travel well under impluse speeds.That any phaser or even laser could shoot them down.
Age, where did you come up with this conclusion?
I just want to understand where you are coming from. What possess you to think you can redefine someone else's artistic vision, clearly someone from the Trek World made it this way bc that's what they believed a photon torpedo was to be. They even stated that it could travel warp speeds. Even the Klingon/federation emissary traveled in a photon torpedo tube at warp in one of the episodes. I'm still fuzzy about what you are trying to say. Can you explain it again.
Because they are like sidwinder on a F18 Hornet.What I am trying to say is that photons travel at warp speeds missles don't as phaser can't fired at warp.The missles you saw were fired from an asteroid.
I don't kmnd me asking but where did you and knightstrom come from as I never seen you post a few years ago and I know everyone in Trek gaming.
@knightstromQuoteA missile is a projectile that moves through air or space. There is no speed limit on what can be considered a missile. Photon torpedoes are guided missiles.
There is a speed limit on missles as they no more that a small version of a rocket.
First off, there is no speed limit on missiles, yes a sidewinder is a missile,
The Asteroid was pulled into the wormhole with them, it was in their warp field, therefore they could fire at it.
Missiles are chemically fueled warheads that travel well under impluse speeds.That any phaser or even laser could shoot them down.
Age, where did you come up with this conclusion?
I just want to understand where you are coming from. What possess you to think you can redefine someone else's artistic vision, clearly someone from the Trek World made it this way bc that's what they believed a photon torpedo was to be. They even stated that it could travel warp speeds. Even the Klingon/federation emissary traveled in a photon torpedo tube at warp in one of the episodes. I'm still fuzzy about what you are trying to say. Can you explain it again.
Because they are like sidwinder on a F18 Hornet.What I am trying to say is that photons travel at warp speeds missles don't as phaser can't fired at warp.The missles you saw were fired from an asteroid.
I don't kmnd me asking but where did you and knightstrom come from as I never seen you post a few years ago and I know everyone in Trek gaming.
@knightstromQuoteA missile is a projectile that moves through air or space. There is no speed limit on what can be considered a missile. Photon torpedoes are guided missiles.
There is a speed limit on missles as they no more that a small version of a rocket.
First off, there is no speed limit on missiles, yes a sidewinder is a missile,
There are top speed limits on a missle.
[url]http://www.bga-aeroweb.com/Defense/Sidewinder.html[/url] ([url]http://www.bga-aeroweb.com/Defense/Sidewinder.html[/url])
Sidewinder supersonic is its top speed much like that of a car.
Also, speed 31 in SFC is supposed to be around warp 3 Corbo, or Tanimal can probably give you the speciics.
As I quoted from the SFB manual, the workaround to use a map scale that included planets while keeping turns to a minute were just gobbledeegook to me.
Missiles are chemically fueled warheads that travel well under impluse speeds.That any phaser or even laser could shoot them down.
Age, where did you come up with this conclusion?
I just want to understand where you are coming from. What possess you to think you can redefine someone else's artistic vision, clearly someone from the Trek World made it this way bc that's what they believed a photon torpedo was to be. They even stated that it could travel warp speeds. Even the Klingon/federation emissary traveled in a photon torpedo tube at warp in one of the episodes. I'm still fuzzy about what you are trying to say. Can you explain it again.
Because they are like sidwinder on a F18 Hornet.What I am trying to say is that photons travel at warp speeds missles don't as phaser can't fired at warp.The missles you saw were fired from an asteroid.
I don't kmnd me asking but where did you and knightstrom come from as I never seen you post a few years ago and I know everyone in Trek gaming.
@knightstromQuoteA missile is a projectile that moves through air or space. There is no speed limit on what can be considered a missile. Photon torpedoes are guided missiles.
There is a speed limit on missles as they no more that a small version of a rocket.
First off, there is no speed limit on missiles, yes a sidewinder is a missile,
There are top speed limits on a missle.
[url]http://www.bga-aeroweb.com/Defense/Sidewinder.html[/url] ([url]http://www.bga-aeroweb.com/Defense/Sidewinder.html[/url])
Sidewinder supersonic is its top speed much like that of a car.
I meant there are no speed limits to what can be considered a missile. You're putting down arbitrary rules because you don't want to call photon torpedoes missiles.
There are speed limits tough and you just refuse to aknowledge it.Appolo 11 is rocket missle with a top speed which is where you are getting confused.
You just want to think you know everything about Trek if this was on any other board you would be laughed at as well as presented with a debate you would not win.
In other words, gameplay trumps reality.
Frankly, I have trouble reading Age's posts. Is English his second language? Maybe it sounds better in the original Klingon...
In other words, gameplay trumps reality.
Hory clap . . . .
I need to know, can Mighty Mouse beat up Superman?
Set your uninversal translator to 'retard' and his posts might make sense.
I need to know, can Mighty Mouse beat up Superman?
I always saw it as a weapon with a casing, basically an anti-matter bomb hurled via a rail-gun.
Did Lurch ever demonstrate superhuman strenght? Herman did.
Before we get into this debate, someone has to explain to me how Herman, a Frankenstein, can marry a Lily vampire and with her produce Eddie, a werewolf.
Did Lurch ever demonstrate superhuman strenght? Herman did.
Well, he did used to pick people up by the scruff of the neck a lot. Besides, Lurch was in a movie with Paul Newman and Robert Redford at the same time! Herman only managed to get into a movie with Joe Pesci and Ralph Macchio, so I think Lurch has him beat.
Did Lurch ever demonstrate superhuman strenght? Herman did.
Well, he did used to pick people up by the scruff of the neck a lot. Besides, Lurch was in a movie with Paul Newman and Robert Redford at the same time! Herman only managed to get into a movie with Joe Pesci and Ralph Macchio, so I think Lurch has him beat.
Who the actor starred with does not make him super strong.
Herman as I recall acted as a car jack with one hand while changing a tire with the other. Significantly stronger.
Didn't they state, or heavily imply, that Grandpa was Dracula?
Didn't they state, or heavily imply, that Grandpa was Dracula?
As I recall no. Just a vampire (and magician).
No Star Trek show had a consistant on going storyline until DS9 began emulating B5. In the '60's, Lost in Space had an on going storyline, sidetracked quite a bit, but always returned to consistantly.
No Star Trek show had a consistant on going storyline until DS9 began emulating B5. In the '60's, Lost in Space had an on going storyline, sidetracked quite a bit, but always returned to consistantly.
Must admit that I haven't watched more than scattered episodes since I was a kid. Even then I don't think that I saw them sequentially so any ongoing storyline was either not noticed by me or forgotten (beyond the get to Alpha Centauri bit).
I am now watching it sequentially. Interestingly Alpha and Proxima Centauri are referred to as a Binary Star when it is in fact a Trinary with Beta Centauri.
I'm watching episode 8 now and Professor Robinson is using a very modern looking headset to operate the chariots loud speaker, very slim and trim in design.
OK, I did some reading and I was mixed up. Alpha and Beta are the close binary system and Proxima (apparently) has yet to be closely defined as to its gravitational association with A&B. They are sure that it is a trinary system, but Proxima seems to be barely involved in it, at least until they can build a better device to measure the system. In the '60's they may not have been able to see A&B as separate, so Proxima became the companion star in a binary.
Probably the key would be: What was referred to as Alpha Centauri back in those days .. early 60's? A ? Was there an Alpha B back then? Or is this just another writer's "liberty" at work?
Probably the key would be: What was referred to as Alpha Centauri back in those days .. early 60's? A ? Was there an Alpha B back then? Or is this just another writer's "liberty" at work?
Alpha and Beta Centauri were among the first stars found to be "binary". Proxima wasn't found until the early 20th century.
I was a junior in high school when those things came out ('69).
Now, that is one for the philosophers and may never be quantifiable....
so if we combine those aspects it should be unbeatable... someone with fake boobs and hair....
(shudder)
So if Donald Trump gets a boob job we've all had it?
Hory clap . . . .
I need to know, can Mighty Mouse beat up Superman?
No Star Trek show had a consistant on going storyline until DS9 began emulating B5. In the '60's, Lost in Space had an on going storyline, sidetracked quite a bit, but always returned to consistantly.
Must admit that I haven't watched more than scattered episodes since I was a kid. Even then I don't think that I saw them sequentially so any ongoing storyline was either not noticed by me or forgotten (beyond the get to Alpha Centauri bit).
I am now watching it sequentially. Interestingly Alpha and Proxima Centauri are referred to as a Binary Star when it is in fact a Trinary with Beta Centauri.
I'm watching episode 8 now and Professor Robinson is using a very modern looking headset to operate the chariots loud speaker, very slim and trim in design.
They drifted away a lot more as the show went on, but the mission to get back home was about as cohesive as the mission to find Earth in the original BSG. It was there, but didn't factor into everything they did. A far as the headset mic, those or similar ones were invented for the space race (by Plantronics I believe?), so I'm not surprised they used what fancy new gadgets they could to make it look futuristic. IIRC the Proxima system was thought only to be a binary until not to long ago. Beta was known, but not as orbiting its brothers. Didn't the Hubble help with determining that?
Other shows would have just written her out or showed her only sitting or standing. They made it part of the continuity.
That's because B5 was conceived as a concept show. JMS had a hard time selling the idea for years because no one at a network would believe that people would watch a show that was not episodic in nature, especially a sci-fi show. It was also planned as a finite story that had a definite conclusion, so the networks also couldn't wrap their heads around the idea that JMS only needed five years to finish the whole series. Who starts a TV show and knows its life span? If it doesn't catch on it is gone before anyone knew it was there and if it gets popular you try to keep it on the air as long as you can. Only that surge of new networks popping up in the early '90's got that show its chance to see the light of day, and even then JMS couldn't get the measly five years he needed until TNT stepped in to save the last season.
By the time O'Hare passed away in September 2012, he hadn't had a role in over a decade, nor had he been seen out in public for years, fueling speculation he was gravely ill for the last several years of his life. Only upon O'Hare's death (and at his request) did close friend and Babylon 5 creator J. Michael Straczynski confirm that he had, in fact, been battling an increasing debilitating case of schizophrenia. Straczynski also confirmed that O'Hare's difficulty with the illness was the primary reason he was forced to leave Babylon 5 at the end of the first season, a decision which was mutual and very amicable. JMS even went so far as to delay the filming of the series several months to try and accommodate his condition, but O'Hare declined, citing that the delay would adversely affect the rest of the cast & crew, and insisted that they should continue without him. O'Hare would eventually return for a brief cameo in the second season, as well as a guest role in the third season that concluded his character's story in the series.
That's because B5 was conceived as a concept show. JMS had a hard time selling the idea for years because no one at a network would believe that people would watch a show that was not episodic in nature, especially a sci-fi show. It was also planned as a finite story that had a definite conclusion, so the networks also couldn't wrap their heads around the idea that JMS only needed five years to finish the whole series. Who starts a TV show and knows its life span? If it doesn't catch on it is gone before anyone knew it was there and if it gets popular you try to keep it on the air as long as you can. Only that surge of new networks popping up in the early '90's got that show its chance to see the light of day, and even then JMS couldn't get the measly five years he needed until TNT stepped in to save the last season.
Yes it does. The only big anomaly is Sinclair leaving because the netork wanted a bigger name in the lead, hence Bruce Boxleitner and the command change, which they handled rather deftly I think. The minute details were not all set in stone, it is a TV show after all and JMS was writing the scripts as they went, but the main story and all the broad strokes were already in place. Garibaldi's decent back into alchoholism was made more pronounced because Jerry Doyle told JMS that if they were going to do it then they should do it properly. Alchoholism is a real problem and Doyle didn't want it to become a throw away reason for his character's problems.
You do realize that was just one example. B5 is full of continuity where things in earlier episodes link to later ones. Earlier shows lacked that to a great degree.
You do realize that was just one example. B5 is full of continuity where things in earlier episodes link to later ones. Earlier shows lacked that to a great degree.Soap operas did it all the time.
Different eras. in the TOS era what TV show had a consistent on going story line? Soap operas. By TNG others had been added (BSG for example). By Enterprise even more like Stargate and Babylon 5, Firefly.
Link ([url]http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0641365/bio?ref_=nm_ov_bio_sm[/url])QuoteBy the time O'Hare passed away in September 2012, he hadn't had a role in over a decade, nor had he been seen out in public for years, fueling speculation he was gravely ill for the last several years of his life. Only upon O'Hare's death (and at his request) did close friend and Babylon 5 creator J. Michael Straczynski confirm that he had, in fact, been battling an increasing debilitating case of schizophrenia. Straczynski also confirmed that O'Hare's difficulty with the illness was the primary reason he was forced to leave Babylon 5 at the end of the first season, a decision which was mutual and very amicable. JMS even went so far as to delay the filming of the series several months to try and accommodate his condition, but O'Hare declined, citing that the delay would adversely affect the rest of the cast & crew, and insisted that they should continue without him. O'Hare would eventually return for a brief cameo in the second season, as well as a guest role in the third season that concluded his character's story in the series.
That's because B5 was conceived as a concept show. JMS had a hard time selling the idea for years because no one at a network would believe that people would watch a show that was not episodic in nature, especially a sci-fi show. It was also planned as a finite story that had a definite conclusion, so the networks also couldn't wrap their heads around the idea that JMS only needed five years to finish the whole series. Who starts a TV show and knows its life span? If it doesn't catch on it is gone before anyone knew it was there and if it gets popular you try to keep it on the air as long as you can. Only that surge of new networks popping up in the early '90's got that show its chance to see the light of day, and even then JMS couldn't get the measly five years he needed until TNT stepped in to save the last season.
Which doesn't conflict with what I said.
JMS had a hard time selling it because it was not "the way things are done". Until it is of course.
Just because the studio knows the planned life doesn't mean the audience needs to be told. Things can also be stretched or compressed or sequels/spinoffs planned in if the show is sufficiently (or insufficiently) successful. Consider Stargate SG1 from the beginning it was the threat of Apophis that the fought, until it wasn't but a new threat was created to continue the series. Then another etc. I myself thought of two different spin off concepts they could have used when SG1 ended. No reason Babylon 5 couldn't have done the same (in fact they tried but poorly).
Yes it does. The only big anomaly is Sinclair leaving because the netork wanted a bigger name in the lead, hence Bruce Boxleitner and the command change, which they handled rather deftly I think. The minute details were not all set in stone, it is a TV show after all and JMS was writing the scripts as they went, but the main story and all the broad strokes were already in place. Garibaldi's decent back into alchoholism was made more pronounced because Jerry Doyle told JMS that if they were going to do it then they should do it properly. Alchoholism is a real problem and Doyle didn't want it to become a throw away reason for his character's problems.
No. The first season was definitely more episodic in nature. There were a few episodes which indicated he intended to have a few smaller storylines, but nothing like the sweeping four year arc which characterized the series.
I liked Excaliber and wish it had had more time to grow. The Ranger movie pilot was pretty weak though. Both suffered from a lack of budget and the strange place the future of TV was in at that point.
I liked Excaliber and wish it had had more time to grow. The Ranger movie pilot was pretty weak though. Both suffered from a lack of budget and the strange place the future of TV was in at that point.
Both were pretty much DOA. TNT made the decision to cancel Excaliber before the first episode aired, and looking at the series on DVD, some of the special effects shots actually appear to be unfinished. As for Legend of the Rangers, Sci-fi had no intention of picking it up. They aired the movie at the same time as the AFC championship to make sure that it wouldn't get the ratings to justify developing the series.
JMS set up the whole thing with the Vorlons (why they couldn't show themselves) in the pilot movie and didn't pay that one off until season 3(?).
Yeah, Excaliber got the rug pulled out from under it. You'd think TNT would have realized the budget necessary to make a show like that after doing it for a year and making several movies about the show.