StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Simon_Jester wrote: 2018-01-08 12:48pm Do we have any pictures of the mutant pseudo-Connie? I haven't been following Discovery, but I'm curious.

First picture in this article.

Simon_Jester wrote: 2018-01-08 12:48pm Do we have any pictures of the mutant pseudo-Connie? I haven't been following Discovery, but I'm curious.

I bet they even upscaled it so that the saucer section is the same size as the Discovery's (which apparently is nearly twice as long as a Constitution)


And here is a size comparison of the Crossfield class to an original Constitution:


Rendered by Trekyards, screenshots from Youtube

The last we saw of the defiant was Hiroshi turning up over earth and declaring herself empress iirc. Due to the advanced nature of the ship is it possible they converted it into their mobile hq (being the palace kept mentioned) and it wasn't given over to terran r&d explaining why there was no advancement?

Also I may be blind but I can't see any real difference on that wireframe to my memories of a constitution.

J Ryan wrote: 2018-01-08 02:58pm The last we saw of the defiant was Hiroshi turning up over earth and declaring herself empress iirc. Due to the advanced nature of the ship is it possible they converted it into their mobile hq (being the palace kept mentioned) and it wasn't given over to terran r&d explaining why there was no advancement?

Also I may be blind but I can't see any real difference on that wireframe to my memories of a constitution.

The new Constitution:

• the struts holding the nacelles are not in a 90° angle to each other, looks mor like 120°+
• the same struts are bend and have an additional spine thingy
• the engineering secition is less cylindrical and more oval in form
• the neck seems shorter and bend
• the saucer section has three indentation in the forward part
• it looks overall flatter
• there seems to be a large addition to the back of the saucer, most likely an impulse drive

tezunegari wrote: 2018-01-08 03:09pm

J Ryan wrote: 2018-01-08 02:58pm The last we saw of the defiant was Hiroshi turning up over earth and declaring herself empress iirc. Due to the advanced nature of the ship is it possible they converted it into their mobile hq (being the palace kept mentioned) and it wasn't given over to terran r&d explaining why there was no advancement?

Also I may be blind but I can't see any real difference on that wireframe to my memories of a constitution.

The new Constitution:

• the struts holding the nacelles are not in a 90° angle to each other, looks mor like 120°+
• the same struts are bend and have an additional spine thingy
• the engineering secition is less cylindrical and more oval in form
• the neck seems shorter and bend
• the saucer section has three indentation in the forward part
• it looks overall flatter
• there seems to be a large addition to the back of the saucer, most likely an impulse drive

the part at the back was always there, it's just more obvious now, more akin to the refit or Kelvin timeline versions. As far as updating the connie goes that doesn't seem a bad attempt, I'd have to see it fully rendered and properly lit to give my final judgement.

Lord Revan wrote: 2018-01-08 03:38pm

tezunegari wrote: 2018-01-08 03:09pm

J Ryan wrote: 2018-01-08 02:58pm The last we saw of the defiant was Hiroshi turning up over earth and declaring herself empress iirc. Due to the advanced nature of the ship is it possible they converted it into their mobile hq (being the palace kept mentioned) and it wasn't given over to terran r&d explaining why there was no advancement?

Also I may be blind but I can't see any real difference on that wireframe to my memories of a constitution.

The new Constitution:

• the struts holding the nacelles are not in a 90° angle to each other, looks mor like 120°+
• the same struts are bend and have an additional spine thingy
• the engineering secition is less cylindrical and more oval in form
• the neck seems shorter and bend
• the saucer section has three indentation in the forward part
• it looks overall flatter
• there seems to be a large addition to the back of the saucer, most likely an impulse drive

the part at the back was always there, it's just more obvious now, more akin to the refit or Kelvin timeline versions. As far as updating the connie goes that doesn't seem a bad attempt, I'd have to see it fully rendered and properly lit to give my final judgement.

The new version of the impulse drive takes more than half the back of the saucer. It looks as if it's as wide as the nacelles are apart.

I certainly looks like that but that wireframe might be deceptive (not intentionally so but rather just due to it's nature) and I'll reserve my judgement until we see the thing actually in the series and not just as wireframe on a display.

J Ryan wrote: 2018-01-08 02:58pm The last we saw of the defiant was Hiroshi turning up over earth and declaring herself empress iirc. Due to the advanced nature of the ship is it possible they converted it into their mobile hq (being the palace kept mentioned) and it wasn't given over to terran r&d explaining why there was no advancement?

Also I may be blind but I can't see any real difference on that wireframe to my memories of a constitution.

There are a fair few differences - although the general shape has remained.

Yeah I think she'd rather be likely to make the ship her flag - handing it over to anyone else gives them the power to kill her - the combined defenses of Earth were (presumably) not able to stand up to the Defiant. It makes perfect sense she'd make that her 'Throne'. And after 100 years (or 50 years or 25 years or 15 years - as what happened in the real timeline) it needed refit(s). So they've widened the distance of the naecells - that's fine - from TOS to TMP they swept them back, adding a 50 degree angle or so where before it was 90:



And after that, the next 'generation' ship was the Excelsior which had its naecels like this:



This seems a sort-of in-between. And they've added some extra weapons to it - the pylon bits and I assume the saucer bits are torpedo bays.



Not the first time Trek's come up with some random changes in ships from alternate universes that look different. And remember this one has had decades to have been altered.



and even after all that, yeah, it's not going to look like this, when it's finally shown:

tezunegari wrote: 2018-01-08 03:09pm *the saucer section has three indentation in the forward part

I'm thinking these might be small shuttle bays, similar to the Miranda/Reliant class, and the pre-TNG-era Constellation class (the one with four warp nacelles). IIRC some of the less-canon or just-seen-once ship designs also had saucer shuttle bays.

All in all, though, it just looks weird, almost as if it were put together from a verbal description of a TOS Connie. The fact that it is just a wireframe isn't helping.

More Enterprise continuity. Woo!

Zor

My main problem with the new design of the Constitution is that none of the characters react to it.

If it is a Mirror Universe refit... they should react somehow. "Looks different. You sure it's one of ours?" "Yup. It was modified but the signature matches."

But as they just accept the fact that this is the Constituion class Defiant from TOS and ENT... I have to assume that this is what a Constition is supposed to look like in the Discovery timeline.

And we have seen the Defiant in Enterprise. It did not look like this new design.
So if it is not a refit it would be definite proof that Discovery is not Prime Universe.

Which leads to my personal head canon:
the Prime-verse: TOS, TNG, DS9 and Voy, movies 1-10
Kelvin-verse: created by the actions of the a future Spock from the Prime Universe
ENT-verse: created by the actions during the movie First Contact (TNG crew somehow returned to the Prime-verse)
Discovery-verse: either a continuation of the ENT-verse or a result of stopping the Temporal Cold War

tezunegari wrote: 2018-01-08 12:34pm Why would they need to retrofit the Defiant? The ship and it's technology was already 100 years ahead of what they had.

Maybe something broke that they couldn't repair. So they replaced the broken part with something they could make.

tezunegari wrote: 2018-01-10 04:51am My main problem with the new design of the Constitution is that none of the characters react to it.

If it is a Mirror Universe refit... they should react somehow. "Looks different. You sure it's one of ours?" "Yup. It was modified but the signature matches."

But as they just accept the fact that this is the Constituion class Defiant from TOS and ENT... I have to assume that this is what a Constition is supposed to look like in the Discovery timeline.

And we have seen the Defiant in Enterprise. It did not look like this new design.
So if it is not a refit it would be definite proof that Discovery is not Prime Universe.

Which leads to my personal head canon:
the Prime-verse: TOS, TNG, DS9 and Voy, movies 1-10
Kelvin-verse: created by the actions of the a future Spock from the Prime Universe
ENT-verse: created by the actions during the movie First Contact (TNG crew somehow returned to the Prime-verse)
Discovery-verse: either a continuation of the ENT-verse or a result of stopping the Temporal Cold War

Their computer screens do show generic logos and icons for ships. For example the USS Gargarin was a different class of ship than the Shenzhou but they have the same iconography when we see the Discovery sensor details. They're also reading that info from an 'alien' database and they're just reading what's on there - it does say "Constitution Class" and "USS Defiant" on the screen as well. And we know Burnham likes to "read the console and read it out again" (Battle of the Binary Stars - Saru makes fun of her for doing so).

But even if they have altered it, well, meh. I don't care. Oh, I'm sure it'll be the end of the world for a few people but since they've already decided not to watch the show and/or hate-watch it, it doesn't make any difference.




Also to the person I was arguing with a few pages back - I told you Voq was Ash. You wouldn't believe me.

So if it is not a refit it would be definite proof that Discovery is not Prime Universe.

If that lets viewers sleep at night, whatever.

tezunegari wrote: 2018-01-10 04:51am My main problem with the new design of the Constitution is that none of the characters react to it.

If it is a Mirror Universe refit... they should react somehow. "Looks different. You sure it's one of ours?" "Yup. It was modified but the signature matches."

But as they just accept the fact that this is the Constituion class Defiant from TOS and ENT... I have to assume that this is what a Constition is supposed to look like in the Discovery timeline.

And we have seen the Defiant in Enterprise. It did not look like this new design.
So if it is not a refit it would be definite proof that Discovery is not Prime Universe.

Which leads to my personal head canon:
the Prime-verse: TOS, TNG, DS9 and Voy, movies 1-10
Kelvin-verse: created by the actions of the a future Spock from the Prime Universe
ENT-verse: created by the actions during the movie First Contact (TNG crew somehow returned to the Prime-verse)
Discovery-verse: either a continuation of the ENT-verse or a result of stopping the Temporal Cold War

Why is that a problem? The aesthetic of just about everything in the show is already nothing like what we'd expect it to be given what came before (Enterprise) and what comes after (TOS). Discovery looks much closer (design-wise) to Enterprise than it does TOS, despite being much closer (time-wise) to TOS than Enterprise. What we saw on screen is just what Connies look like under Discovery's design paradigm.

We've already been over the "fact" that the producers couldn't get away with 1960s aesthetics in the 2010s (Have we? I can't remember if I've read it here or elsewhere, but I'm going to assert it as fact anyway), but this is a bridge too far for you? It has a saucer primary hull connected by a neck to a tubular secondary hull, and warp nacelles above the primary hull; that's a departure from other Starfleet vessels we've seen on the show. Yeah, it has some features that TOS Connies don't have, but it looks similar enough that it's hard to say they're slaughtering sacred cows with this design.

houser2112 wrote: 2018-01-11 11:07am

tezunegari wrote: 2018-01-10 04:51am My main problem with the new design of the Constitution is that none of the characters react to it.

If it is a Mirror Universe refit... they should react somehow. "Looks different. You sure it's one of ours?" "Yup. It was modified but the signature matches."

But as they just accept the fact that this is the Constituion class Defiant from TOS and ENT... I have to assume that this is what a Constition is supposed to look like in the Discovery timeline.

And we have seen the Defiant in Enterprise. It did not look like this new design.
So if it is not a refit it would be definite proof that Discovery is not Prime Universe.

Which leads to my personal head canon:
the Prime-verse: TOS, TNG, DS9 and Voy, movies 1-10
Kelvin-verse: created by the actions of the a future Spock from the Prime Universe
ENT-verse: created by the actions during the movie First Contact (TNG crew somehow returned to the Prime-verse)
Discovery-verse: either a continuation of the ENT-verse or a result of stopping the Temporal Cold War

Why is that a problem? The aesthetic of just about everything in the show is already nothing like what we'd expect it to be given what came before (Enterprise) and what comes after (TOS). Discovery looks much closer (design-wise) to Enterprise than it does TOS, despite being much closer (time-wise) to TOS than Enterprise. What we saw on screen is just what Connies look like under Discovery's design paradigm.

We've already been over the "fact" that the producers couldn't get away with 1960s aesthetics in the 2010s (Have we? I can't remember if I've read it here or elsewhere, but I'm going to assert it as fact anyway), but this is a bridge too far for you? It has a saucer primary hull connected by a neck to a tubular secondary hull, and warp nacelles above the primary hull; that's a departure from other Starfleet vessels we've seen on the show. Yeah, it has some features that TOS Connies don't have, but it looks similar enough that it's hard to say they're slaughtering sacred cows with this design.

THE BLOODY PRODUCER COULD GET AWAY WITH THE 1960 AESTHETICS!
DS9 and ENT have proven that.
Troubles and Tribble-ations and In a Mirror, Darkly have used the original Set and Ship design successfully without changing the look of the Enterprise.
Where the 3D models of the Enterprise/Defiant more detailed than the original Studio model used in TOS?
Yes, but they were also recognizable as the same bloody design.

This Constitution class (assuming the lack of reaction from the characters means it is un-modified) is drastically different to the point of possibly being a different class alltogether. To me it'S the same as comparing the Ambassador class to the Galaxy class.
They both have a saucer connected by a neck to a tubular secondary hull, and warp nacelles above the primary hull.

The whole bloody show was and still is advertised as taking place in the Prime Timeline!
They even said it would all be compatible with establish lore at the end of the season.

Why should it be accepted as a soft-reboot when it is always said to be not a reboot.

It's the same problem with the klingon D7 they have shown.

tezunegari wrote: 2018-01-11 11:39amTHE BLOODY PRODUCER COULD GET AWAY WITH THE 1960 AESTHETICS!
DS9 and ENT have proven that.
Troubles and Tribble-ations and In a Mirror, Darkly have used the original Set and Ship design successfully without changing the look of the Enterprise.
Where the 3D models of the Enterprise/Defiant more detailed than the original Studio model used in TOS?
Yes, but they were also recognizable as the same bloody design.

This Constitution class (assuming the lack of reaction from the characters means it is un-modified) is drastically different to the point of possibly being a different class alltogether. To me it'S the same as comparing the Ambassador class to the Galaxy class.
They both have a saucer connected by a neck to a tubular secondary hull, and warp nacelles above the primary hull.

The whole bloody show was and still is advertised as taking place in the Prime Timeline!
They even said it would all be compatible with establish lore at the end of the season.

Why should it be accepted as a soft-reboot when it is always said to be not a reboot.

It's the same problem with the klingon D7 they have shown.

Those episodes you mention were MU one-offs in a series set in our Universe. I don't think you can compare them.

When they said it would be compatible with established lore, I think they were referring to plot, not aesthetics. I don't think they could get away with 1960s aesthetics. I for one think they look like garbage. Acceptable 50 years ago, not acceptable today.

As I said before, Discovery's aesthetics are just different than that of prior series. I think you just have to accept that they've retconned 24th century aesthetics, if not 24th century plot. That is a Connie now. While nothing will ever displace Ent-refit/Ent-A as the best ST starship design, I can accept this one as valid. I think I would've thrown my remote at the TV if a Discovery Connie looked exactly like a TOS Connie.

tezunegari wrote: 2018-01-11 11:39am THE BLOODY PRODUCER COULD GET AWAY WITH THE 1960 AESTHETICS!
DS9 and ENT have proven that.
Troubles and Tribble-ations and In a Mirror, Darkly

Were one offs. Tribbe-ations was an aniversary comedy episode and In a Mirror did very well (highest rated of the Ent episodes, I think?) but it looked like it was portraying a 1960s TV show. It looked more cardboard than The Orville!

DS9 was in what, 1997 (ish?) IAMD was 2004/5 ?

That is not what TV shows look or feel like these days. The thing is, it's a pointless argument. Entirely pointless. The changes are done. The show is on the air, it's doing well and is getting high ratings. It's been renewed. Klingons look different. Ships look different.

If you can stomach the changes, then keep watching. If you cannot - which it appears some people (not necessarily here) can't and they get like physically angry over this shit - then don't watch it. Or make pretend it's in another timeline (as above). Whatever.

But months and months and months of this bitching since the get go is pointless. It just leads to arguments and stuff over something that will not be changed.

I've seen an argument that "The Orville does it!" Well... sorta. TO has the feel of 80s90s TNG but it also looks like it. Cheap. Cheap, Ikea based furniture with "nice, smooth TV lighting". I mean, even the die hard fans of the show admit it looks cheap sometimes.

I don't give a crap about the visuals in Discovery. Well, that's not true - I actually love them. I mean I don't give a crap about the changes. It's just visuals. The models look more up to date, the ship looks nice and sleek etc. OMG HOLOGRAMS! w/e.

I will only get annoyed if the start fucking with continuity - like story wise. Suddenly we've never met the Romulans or something... or Andoria isn't really part of the Federation ... or even Pike not being in command of the Enterprise (he is), something like that. That'd get me annoyed.

But the visuals - uniforms, ships, designs etc? No different than TOS > TMP > TNG > ENT. It's just adding one more on top.

I mean this sincerely - I wish you and those like you could just enjoy the show. It's really very good, if you can switch off that little voice saying "it's different, it's different, it's different".

I think I would've thrown my remote at the TV if a Discovery Connie looked exactly like a TOS Connie.

Very much so. If a Connie appeared as it did in TOS I'd raise an eyebrow not because "yay, connie!" but "urgh... really?".

Discovery's changes rock!

Continuity is literally HISTORICAL. If I say my movie is a historical drama set during the Napoleonic Wars, but the British soldiers are wearing World War I uniforms and wielding World War I weapons, wouldn't you question the aesthetic changes I made?

Sidewinder wrote: 2018-01-13 02:03am Continuity is literally HISTORICAL. If I say my movie is a historical drama set during the Napoleonic Wars, but the British soldiers are wearing World War I uniforms and wielding World War I weapons, wouldn't you question the aesthetic changes I made?

Your analogy is ridiculous. It's not historical, or fact-based. It's science fiction, which has evolved massively in the half-century since TOS was on the air with a budget of sixpence and plenty of bravado. The aesthetics of it simply do not work today, they look cheap and slapdash - which is precisely what they were.
It is also a relatively minor cosmetic change to the design - comparable to using the wrong colour or a slightly different jacket for the uniforms of Napoleonic soldiers.

Star Trek has its own in-universe continuity- its own in-universe HISTORY- which you seem to be ignoring. It's like reading a history book on the Battle of the Bulge, and seeing a PhotoShopped image of an Operation Iraqi Freedom era M1A2 Abrams tank firing upon a Panther. Would you excuse the Abrams' appearance by saying, "American tank technology has evolved massively since World War 2"?

Sidewinder wrote: 2018-01-13 05:51am Star Trek has its own in-universe continuity- its own in-universe HISTORY- which you seem to be ignoring. It's like reading a history book on the Battle of the Bulge, and seeing a PhotoShopped image of an Operation Iraqi Freedom era M1A2 Abrams tank firing upon a Panther. Would you excuse the Abrams' appearance by saying, "American tank technology has evolved massively since World War 2"?

To a lesser degree that happens all the time though. In most films set in WWII most of the technology you/uniforms will be atypical for that exact circumstances, mostly due to the producers of the films using what is available. For example in Fury they use Tiger 131 which was a very early version of a Tiger 1 and has major differences externally to a later production Tiger which would have been operating in Germany at the time. Now most members of the public who saw this film would not care that the wrong tank was used in this scene. The ones who would be able to tell the difference also did not care as it was nice to see an actual working Tiger tank in a film, for the first time in 60 years rather than some CGI monstrosity or a random dressed up British/American tank.

On a Star Trek related note, can anyone remember if when they started to do the films and the next generation, were people this up in arms over changing how the Klingons looked? They after all had a history in-universe of looking one way, and then suddenly looked different for no reason (please don't bring up the Augment virus explanation, that was thought up decades later and was never mentioned at the time, unless you also plan on giving Discovery several decades to come up with an explanation of why their stuff looks different from what you're nostalgia expects).

You forget the impact of the eras in which the respective TV series are filmed. For comparison, it's the 1960s. I'm filming the legendary duel between Miyamoto Musashi and Sasaki Kojiro. I have two actors dress up as Medieval knights (because historically accurate Japanese costumes are hard to find) and hack away with katana, while shouting gibberish at each other. Who'd notice how historically inaccurate this is? Who'd care? And of those who care, who'd dare speak up?

Compared to nowadays. Information on the duel can be found in seconds, thanks to the internet. Historically accurate props and costumes are easier to find and to make accurate- again, thanks to the internet. Japanese people are no longer marginalized minorities afraid to "rock the boat," but politically empowered, likely to take offense and to make their displeasure known.

J Ryan wrote: 2018-01-13 10:06am On a Star Trek related note, can anyone remember if when they started to do the films and the next generation, were people this up in arms over changing how the Klingons looked?

Another reason beyond "no Internet" that I could see against backlash for changing the klingson for TMP is that this was "Star Trek going Big Screen" combined with less tv history. Star Trek didn't have decades worth of materials back then, only a three season shows.

That and a lack of direct interaction of the heroes with the new designed klingons until ST3 (the briefing scene only showed the new ships IIRC).

It's been confirmed, the ship on the schematic is THE U.S.S. Defiant - the same one we saw in 'The Tholian Web' and 'In a Mirror, Darkly'. Apparently she's been upgraded by the Terran Empire.

As per Ted Sullivan (Discovery writer) Twitter comment (screencap below):
Ted Sullivan - Twitter

And they couldn't just add this into the episode?
Lorca: "Another Starfleet vessel. The U.S.S. Defiant. And yes, that's the Defiant. Modified over the hundred years it's been here."
Saru: "How is that possible? At last review, the Defiant was patrolling sector six in hour universe."

There. A singel sentence. No drama about why it looks different.