HRH The KING

Ships Crew
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    4,468

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by HRH The KING

  3. Posted

    want me to spoil it for you tomarrow

     

    No. I'll call Triple H. He'll tell me everything I want to know. He's my favourite ''wrestler''.

     

    :wow:

     

     

    ARRR goddamn post man didnt bring my package no rumble

    no raw no smackdown..wait till he comes i am gonna lay the smackdown

    on his candy ***and the a good old stunner for old times sake and to top it off

    a spike pilldriver

     

    Hey!!!

     

    Piledrivers are banned in the WWE.

     

    :wow::wow::vbg:

  5. Posted

    My dad is starting to hate Enterprise because of all the sexual, sensuality stuff. That is being introduced into Enterprise.

     

    THAT has been one of my main problems with the show since the first episode 'Broken Bow'.

     

    Along with the boring characters.

     

    ;):bow:

     

    ;)

  6. Posted

    The franchise would be crippled if Enterprise was 'cancelled', hence any ideas for a future show would not be worth much as there would not be another series. If Star Trek (in whatever form) does not do well then why would a network want to commission another series?

     

    Hold on, don't jump to conclusions.

     

    But I never said Enterprise should be cancelled. I said that I just happened to have posted some ideas on that particular thread. I personally don't like ENT, but I don't think it should be cancelled at all. ENT should go to seven seasons.

  7. Posted

    STAR TREK: The 29th Century!

     

    I suggested two possible ideas on the ''Should Enterprise Be Cancelled'' thread a while back for new Trek projects. One of them was for a new show for Trek, but I suggested that a time period about 40 years after TNG would be preferable.

     

    The 29th Century idea can be saved for later.

     

    :bow:

  8. Posted · Edited by William Stryker

    People will tear apart the first enterprise from way back in 1966. But if not for her would we have the one's you like?

     

    Probably not. My only problems with the first one were the nacelle pylons. They were on the right track of design with the Galaxy Class, then went back with the Sovereign Class, to the 'V' shaped pylons which I hate.

     

    :bow:

  9. Posted · Edited by William Stryker

    Enterprise 1701: Looked very fragile for a deep space vehicle. The lack of small details of the hull made it look plastic, although 1960's effects taken into account.

     

    Enterprise 1701-A: Generally a good looking ship. The only thing I don't like about it is the nacelle pylons. They look very thin and narrow and could be severed by a lucky photon shot.

     

    Enterprise 1701-B: The modifications to the Excelsior class did improve things but the turquoise hull markings looked horrible. I've never really liked Excelsior class ships. Too long IMO.

     

    Enterprise 1701-C: I think that Ambassador Class ships are the ugliest Starfleet (canon) ships in Trek.

     

    Enterprise 1701-D: I love Galaxy Class starships. The only problems I have with them are that I wish the saucer section was little bit smaller and the neck section should have few decks for a sleeker looking ship. The nacelle plyons are a little thin for my liking. Still the best version of the Enterprise IMO.

     

    Enterprise E- Far too long. A more compact version of this ship would be preferable. The white colouring looks lovely and NASA-esque. The interiors are superb and dark. I hate the pylons as they look like the 'V' shaped pylons of the ENT-A. Deflector looks awful. Warp nacelles look pretty cool though.

     

    ;):bow:;);) :P