The Constitution class starship.

Post by **Teaos** » Sat Dec 08, 2007 11:36 pm

Oh joy another one on Rocheys side...

colmquinn · Post by **colmquinn** » Sun Dec 09, 2007 2:08 am

I would imagine if the writers of TOS had the special effects and budget to play with we would've seen more examples of the coni having explosions and warp problems just like in TNG.
I know Scotty would've just climbed up a big drain pipe thingy and sorted it out with seconds to spare so maybe they just didn't bother spending the budget on ship models and spent it on the expensive sets

Sionnach Glic · Post by **Sionnach Glic** » Sun Dec 09, 2007 11:53 am

Oh joy another one on Rocheys side...

What's the matter, Teaos? Feeling outnumbered?

Post by **Teaos** » Sun Dec 09, 2007 12:32 pm

A little bit but I'm used to it

I do tend to get the odd ally on some topics but I do seem to be Starfleets number one defender around here... Maybe that should be my new title, the "Anti-Rochey" never really caught on.

Post by **Mikey** » Sun Dec 09, 2007 1:54 pm

colmquinn wrote:I would imagine if the writers of TOS had the special effects and budget to play with we would've seen more examples of the coni having explosions and warp problems just like in TNG.

Very possible, but as I've been reminded several times, we are essaying to find an in-universe explanation for the differences we saw. The SFX tech a/o budget of the show can't be allowed to affect the milieu that was shown. In the final analysis, it just seems that Starfleet was willing to build a ship that more closely resembled a warship "back in the day."

"Anti-Rochey" DOES have a nice ring to it...

Post by **Teaos** » Sun Dec 09, 2007 1:58 pm

I personally like the idea that ships are a product of the times. Back then the Galaxy seemed more dangerous thus they had tuffer ships.

In TNG the Galaxy was more settled.

In Late DS9 things were not so calm and thus we are getting more combat ships once more.

Post by **Mikey** » Sun Dec 09, 2007 1:59 pm

I know you're not used to hearing this from many of us, Teaos, but:

That makes absolutely perfect sense and I agree 100%.

Post by **Teaos** » Sun Dec 09, 2007 2:05 pm

If you don't hear from me again its because I killed my self knowing that this moment can not be topped.

Sionnach Glic · Post by **Sionnach Glic** » Sun Dec 09, 2007 2:46 pm

You might want to sit down for this, Teaos, but I also think that that makes perfect sense.

kostmayer · Post by **kostmayer** » Sun Dec 09, 2007 4:44 pm

To me too. Which begs the question what the next generation of ships will be like.

Will Starfleet construct a more battle orientated fleet incase another major war occurs, or will they go back to having mostly Science and Exploration ships.

Sionnach Glic · Post by **Sionnach Glic** » Sun Dec 09, 2007 5:00 pm

They'll probably go back to the way they were, it's the Starfleet thing to do.

Jordanis · Post by **Jordanis** » Sun Dec 09, 2007 10:29 pm

Yeah, they probably will go back. They're such a big pile of optimists. (And I agree with Teaos' product of their times bit too)

Captain Picard's Hair · Sun Dec 09, 2007 10:33 pm

The TOS era was like a "wild west" period for the Federation compared to TNG - what Picard calls "cowboy diplomacy" in Unification

Post by **Teaos** » Mon Dec 10, 2007 12:22 am

I think we might be starting to see a split finally.

The Akira, promethius, Defiant and to a lesser extent the Sov are all combat ships while the Galaxy and Nova really do seem more science like.

Post by **Mikey** » Mon Dec 10, 2007 12:52 am

Now, if we could just get Starfleet to use vessels the way they're intended...