Star trek Era and A call to Arms
- Thread starter Urial
- Start date
Iron Domokun
Mongoose
Urial,
Sorry, but no. ADB's license only covers The Original Series and the Animated Series, and not even all of that - anything not already part of the Star Fleet Universe at the time the licensing deal with Paramount was signed is off-limits. However, the Star Fleet Universe has grown and expanded over the past 30 years, and while there are no Borg or whatever in the SFU, there's a lot of interesting stuff there. On the plus side, the license never expires, so ACTA:SF will be supported as long as people keep playing it.
Sorry, but no. ADB's license only covers The Original Series and the Animated Series, and not even all of that - anything not already part of the Star Fleet Universe at the time the licensing deal with Paramount was signed is off-limits. However, the Star Fleet Universe has grown and expanded over the past 30 years, and while there are no Borg or whatever in the SFU, there's a lot of interesting stuff there. On the plus side, the license never expires, so ACTA:SF will be supported as long as people keep playing it.
From what I have gathered Licensing a Francies like ST, B5, SW, or BSG is usually a very expensive cash layout upfront for a contract that can be quite constrictive in scope. Then somewhere 3 to 5 years in the company that owns the rights comes around and basicly say something like well base on how succesful you have been we are going to raise the franchising fee and if you can't handle it then another company can pick up where you will leave off. Funny how that never seems to work out that way isn't it.
The simple answer is there is probably 5 years easily of Star Fleet material that can be ported into A Call to Arms plus about another 20 years worth of backlog that ADB has. If people want a different Trek setting than the SFU. I think what they would need to do is buy the ever living crap out of ACTA:SF and convince eith Matthew or SVC, or both that there is enough player base to support getting another license from CBS/Paramount to open up more Star Trek content.
Edit: Correct some spelling errors.
The simple answer is there is probably 5 years easily of Star Fleet material that can be ported into A Call to Arms plus about another 20 years worth of backlog that ADB has. If people want a different Trek setting than the SFU. I think what they would need to do is buy the ever living crap out of ACTA:SF and convince eith Matthew or SVC, or both that there is enough player base to support getting another license from CBS/Paramount to open up more Star Trek content.
Edit: Correct some spelling errors.
Paramount are very protective and selective (and very pricey) with the Start Trek franchise and as I understand it ADB / Mongoose have a very limited license based on aspects of the original series, the animated series and the Technical Manual.
ADB have crafted what is another “alternative reality” to the main Star Trek universe – It means we have a potentially rich universe to play in – but we can’t touch STM1-10, TNG, DS9, STVOY and Enterprise.
The only criticism I have of the ADB universe is that some of the ships are very “samey” – There was a lot of nice fan design for TOS era ships (including some nice variations on the primary and secondary hulls) around in the ‘90’s – but I believe their publishers fell foul of the lawyers.
The current holder of the main Star Trek license is Wizkids/NECA, INC and they have two games out at the moment and another coming out early 2012. The upcoming game is a clix system – which can be described as a” war-games lite” but is a good introduction into war gaming for new players.
ADB have crafted what is another “alternative reality” to the main Star Trek universe – It means we have a potentially rich universe to play in – but we can’t touch STM1-10, TNG, DS9, STVOY and Enterprise.
The only criticism I have of the ADB universe is that some of the ships are very “samey” – There was a lot of nice fan design for TOS era ships (including some nice variations on the primary and secondary hulls) around in the ‘90’s – but I believe their publishers fell foul of the lawyers.
The current holder of the main Star Trek license is Wizkids/NECA, INC and they have two games out at the moment and another coming out early 2012. The upcoming game is a clix system – which can be described as a” war-games lite” but is a good introduction into war gaming for new players.
Apep said:
Any links or other ways of seeing these images - I have the same issue with the ship designs - I was hoping for some cool early era Klingon designs but basically the same. The only one that seems different is the Federation "old" cruiser (which I don't like).
Still at least with the models now here we can do some kitbashing and adjusting of ships to make new ones..............
I have a few of the books (there was quite a good sci-fi shop when I was at College in Aberdeen) Tried scanning but the image quality is not up to much. I would also be worried about posting due to the issues with the ADB/Paramount license
Some of the books are hard to find as the lawyers got involved.
Try looking though some of the designs on this site http://www.treknology.org/index.htm
Some of the books are hard to find as the lawyers got involved.
Try looking though some of the designs on this site http://www.treknology.org/index.htm
At some point it might be an idea to post a stickied FAQ post on the top of this sub-board, with some info about how things work in the Star Fleet Universe; (parts of) TOS and TAS but no other Franchise material, Early Years but no NX-01, "Star Fleet" not "Starfleet", cat-ear Kzinti(s) instead of bat-ear Kzin(ti), Gorn singular/Gorns plural, no Breen or Cardassians but lots of new empires (such as the Lyrans and Hydrans), and so on and so forth.
archon96 said:
It had so much potential as well. But the minis are completely out of scale and it comes on the heels of the fleet captains game which garnered a lot of complaints regarding how shoddily the ships in it were put together.
The lack of a coherent scale also badly lets down the range, as it makes the whole range look weird and it damages sales as people like me would have bought models in a coherent scale to convert to a TNG/DS9 era version of the SFU rules (which some bright spark will doubtless write).
It's the age of problem with Wizkids minis, they're damn shoddy.
I actually like that. All the klingon/romulan/federation ships have nacelles, seperated from the hull, with a core and a sphere/disc/semicircle bit on the front. There's endless variation on the theme but it makes more sense to me that way than the blizzard of variations on hull designs you see across the rest of the Star-Trek franchise; I like the suggestion that give or take a bit of aesthetics and internal layout, this is the hull design that works with warp physics, just like you can look at every tactical aircraft today and see the same common elements.
I agree locarno24. In most things form follows function and technology. Even though it is just a game and scifi, the SFU has managed to keep a real world progressive feeling to its ship designs. Just like in the real world, when you look at an aircraft or ship, you can see where it came from. Most ships are easily recognizable as a ship because of its hull, even a radical change like hydrofoils maintain some key features.
Many later ships in both the movies/TV shows would have weird designs just to be weird. I especially thought the old FASA game had some exceptionally stupid hulls.
But then it is all opinion and what you like. But overall I have always preferred the SFU ships. Except the Romulans, that is. While I understand the reasons they don't, in my book all Romulan hulls should follow the original hulls like the King Eagle and Condor.
Many later ships in both the movies/TV shows would have weird designs just to be weird. I especially thought the old FASA game had some exceptionally stupid hulls.
But then it is all opinion and what you like. But overall I have always preferred the SFU ships. Except the Romulans, that is. While I understand the reasons they don't, in my book all Romulan hulls should follow the original hulls like the King Eagle and Condor.
It is not about radically changing the primary hull shape, engineering hull – it is about adding some variation. (a good example is this link http://www.strekschematics.utvinternet.com/fanbprints/periaction/akyazi/akyazi.html) Sorry - I know it is a movie style ship.
By cutting out sections of the saucer it looks different - but similar enough you know its origin.
By cutting out sections of the saucer it looks different - but similar enough you know its origin.
Apep - Dogtoothing and cutting sections out of the saucer were discussed during the modeling phase of the 2500 development and it was rejected.
In the SFU for the most part all Empires Fleet maintained a common easily recognizable design style. Some might call it samey others call it logical. Give me a logical reason why the Federation would move away from the most space efficient circular design to something with sections cut out of it? Fast Warships at least had the argument that they were made spade like for drag reasons.
Edit: Ran it through a spell checker.
In the SFU for the most part all Empires Fleet maintained a common easily recognizable design style. Some might call it samey others call it logical. Give me a logical reason why the Federation would move away from the most space efficient circular design to something with sections cut out of it? Fast Warships at least had the argument that they were made spade like for drag reasons.
Edit: Ran it through a spell checker.
1. Reduction in weight
2. Lower target profile
3. Conservation of materials
4. IDIC
5. Look’s cool
6. Advanced spacecraft dynamics (a concept from a fan produced (and a non-canon) Technical Manual, from the 90’s based on the original Technical Manual)
If you take a modern day parallel in the US by looking at “Littoral Combat Ship’s” – Still looks like a ship – but there is variation in hull forms e.g. USS Independence (LCS-2). The US Navy has also looked at Surface effect ships and leased a Skjold class patrol boat as a test bed – another hull form.
2. Lower target profile
3. Conservation of materials
4. IDIC
5. Look’s cool
6. Advanced spacecraft dynamics (a concept from a fan produced (and a non-canon) Technical Manual, from the 90’s based on the original Technical Manual)
If you take a modern day parallel in the US by looking at “Littoral Combat Ship’s” – Still looks like a ship – but there is variation in hull forms e.g. USS Independence (LCS-2). The US Navy has also looked at Surface effect ships and leased a Skjold class patrol boat as a test bed – another hull form.
I'm really unclear how the concept of dynamics matters at all for a spaceship. It's space, what exactly is out there to cause drag?? I can understand it for something capable of atmospheric flight but if it was never intended to enter an atmosphere, why bother?
That said, I see no reason to aesthetically change how starships within an empire look.
That said, I see no reason to aesthetically change how starships within an empire look.
Apep said:
Mass is Mass. Wiether it is a Circle, Square, or a Boomerrang. There is no change in Weight, Profile Surface, or Materials. So why would we move from the more structuaraly round circle to a wedge which will need extra bracing to support the added stress of the unsupported members?
Apep said:
I will leave yoargur vulcan logic but I do not believe the vulcans would change the design of a ship just because they could. They would need a reason why they would change wouldn't they?
Apep said:
Beauty and Coolness Factor are all in the eye of the beholder. This argument can go around and around forever.
Apep said:
Outside of license, unfortunitly the fact that someone else published it is a good reason to avoid it.
Apep said:
This is a Spcially built craft for a specific reason. The downside is they are nort deepwater units. In SFU they would be Monitors and Gunboats which are not in the game yet.
We could spend ages going round in circles with this and this is not what this forum is about - my view is that the ships look "samey" based on a single “empire/federation ship ” classes seen in the original TV series –
The reason for their only being a single Federation /Klingon/ Romulan starship class shown on screen was budget and time, CGI has made it easier to create SFX – and I believe that if Matt Jefferies had access to CGI technology (or a much larger budget)- we may have had more starship classes to base conjecture on.
The reason for their only being a single Federation /Klingon/ Romulan starship class shown on screen was budget and time, CGI has made it easier to create SFX – and I believe that if Matt Jefferies had access to CGI technology (or a much larger budget)- we may have had more starship classes to base conjecture on.
- but I think it will be up to us to make new models from the basics provided..Similar threads
