Star Trek ship sets

tesco samoa · #1 August 13th, 2002, 05:32 PM

Wow... How a situation changes....

Contacting At's web provider...now that is just wrong.

I do not understand why you would do such a thing as this and I do not want to understand.

Moderators... Lock this forum and let it slide to oblivion. Please.

Growltigga · #2 August 13th, 2002, 05:33 PM

sorry ManofWar, who has spent the Last 15 years developing star trek 'canon'? please do tell me, I would love to know who these powers that be are...

I am a Star Trek fan, you certainly have not spoken to me and frankly, Atrocities' sets are the best Star Trek I have seen and therefore are 'canon' for me until something better comes along.

Finally, comparing B5 to Star Trek is also dangerous ground. I am a B5 fan as well and can see a host of differences any rational person would see.

ManofWar, a piece of free advice, you must stop make these sweeping generalisations, otherwise you will annoy people.

Geo/Mephisto - please seriously consider locking this thread.

[ August 13, 2002, 16:36: Message edited by: Growltigga ]

geoschmo · #3 August 13th, 2002, 05:34 PM

OMG! He critisized B5 now. I might as well lock this thread down now.

MOW, we have had many of these discussions in the past, but you weren't around for them. The fact is 'canon' is very subjective. Trying to base everything on whether it's canon or not is tough, because there are many inconsistancies within trek itself.

Klingons? TOS, Movies, or TNG? And not just the shipsets here. The Klingons themselves have changed radically over the years. Mnay die hard trek fans have tried to come up with ways to justify these changes. So what's the real explaination? Well, the authority would be Rodenberry himself wouldn't it? And he said the reason the Klingons in TOS and the movie Klingons looked different was simple. It was because he didn't have a big makeup budget with TOS.

You see, they aren't really klingons. They are people in makeup pretending to be klingons.

Let's just try to lighten up and not take this stuff so seriously ok MOW?

Geoschmo

kalthalior · #4 August 13th, 2002, 05:35 PM

OK, I hesitate to get into this, but ---- MoW, I'm an OLD Trek fan -- Original Series, the cartoon series, Next Generation, DS9, Voyager, the new Enterprise AND a 20 year vet of Star Fleet Battles. I do not have ANY issue with ANY ship set offered up for play in SE4 -- ST, B5 or whatever. As has been stated by many, if you can do better, DO SO. Not all Trek fans share your opinions -- in fact they have the exact opposite. I really like the shipsets, canon or not. SFB went through a huge court dogfight with Paramount over their intellectual property, I don't want to see that rehashed in SE4. Personally, I don't like you saying B5 is a cheap rip off of ST -- I certainly don't feel that way. If you don't have anything nice to say, maybe you shouldn't say it.

Atrocities · #5 August 13th, 2002, 05:37 PM

MoW you sincerely ow me. You are the first to do it, and I hope the Last.

Check your Messages.

Growltigga · #6 August 13th, 2002, 05:40 PM

what does ow mean?

ManOfWar · #7 August 13th, 2002, 05:48 PM

I think he means Awe. Dude buy a spell checker

Let me take a step back. I know next to nothing about Babylon 5. We did not get it in this area so I could not watch it. From what I read at TrekBBs and other Trek sites, it was a direct rip off of Star Trek. If that judgement is incorrect, then I have only the Network Tv Stations to blame.

So your telling me as dedicated Star Trek fans from your era, and with a history of SFB under your belt, you can sit in your Captains chair and type that you like these star trek sets?

The only set I like of his is the Klingons and Romulan sets. The rest suck horribly. I had to edit them in order to use them, but alas they are useable. Perhaps I should submit them for the TDM Mod. My sets are far better than the onese they are using currently.