Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => Arts & Talents => Topic started by: Grey Wolf on January 29, 2003, 03:15:12 pm
-
(http://www.3dap.com/hlp/hosted/gtdwolf/pics/soyuz2.jpg)
About 1000 polys, I actually built this model for the game Star Trek: Bridge Commander. Never could get anyone to texture it for me :(
-
breaching pod ?
its a nice st ship but as a breaching pod :wtf:
-
Where do you see "breaching pod" in his description? :doubt:
-
Cutter doesnt mean breaching pod...
Most Coast Guard ships are cutters.. theyre just patrol vessels...
Cant say I like those.... cannons... but otherwise it looks good.. for your generic flying frying pan...
-
You misunderstood what I was saying. This ship is designed to patrol borders. Hence the border part. And the cutter part refers to the old type of ship.
-
Originally posted by Thorn
for your generic flying frying pan...
it's spreading!! yeah ;7
-
Originally posted by venom2506
it's spreading!! yeah ;7
I knew you'd say something about that as soon as I posted it... :p
-
but... of course! :D
-
So predictable :D
anyway... Grey, personally I'd lose the cannons on the thing, make the nacelles a bit longer and the nacelle struts a bit sturdier looking, they look kinda flimsy...
couple of phaser strips and a torp launcher on the underside of the saucer might look good too.. but thats just me...
-
BTW, here is a pic of the ship the model is based on:
(http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/scans/other/soyuz-model.jpg)
-
:)
(likes cutters)
(http://www.3dap.com/hlp/hosted/reciprocity/images/pestcontrol_th.jpg) (http://www.3dap.com/hlp/hosted/reciprocity/images/pestcontrol.jpg)
-
Originally posted by Thorn
couple of phaser strips and a torp launcher on the underside of the saucer might look good too.. but thats just me...
Phaser strips are the single most inane ship design idea ever implemented in the history of Trek. The only reason they exist is so TNG could have their cheesy "charging up" effect whenever they fire their phasers. I'm glad, glad, glad that subsequent designs have chosen to minimize or ignore them.
-
Originally posted by ZylonBane
Phaser strips are the single most inane ship design idea ever implemented in the history of Trek. The only reason they exist is so TNG could have their cheesy "charging up" effect whenever they fire their phasers. I'm glad, glad, glad that subsequent designs have chosen to minimize or ignore them.
Why? Seems like a very effective way to give a wide degree of firing angles.
-
Unless I'm mistaken (which I probably am... my Trek knowledge is limited to TNG and the newer movies)... that style of ship used phaser strips. I think I can see one or two in that picture as well.... Which is why I suggested it....
If I am wrong... I dont know... where the hell did they hide them then?
-
Originally posted by IceFire
Why? Seems like a very effective way to give a wide degree of firing angles.
Putting four phasers around the top of the Enterprise would provide exactly as much coverage as one radial strip. It would also get rid of the half-second warning that they're about to fire, and would allow them to fire at more than one target at a time (something the phaser strip has never been shown to be capable of).
-
It is OS era.. IIRC Ships such as the Enterprise had Phaser "holes", possibly the reliant too.
I don't know if newer ships such as the Excelsior did or not..
I always thought the strips were kinda neat but.. wierd. I was thinking about trying to make "Beam Strips" one day, but decided against it. Seems slightly out of place
-
Originally posted by ZylonBane
Putting four phasers around the top of the Enterprise would provide exactly as much coverage as one radial strip. It would also get rid of the half-second warning that they're about to fire, and would allow them to fire at more than one target at a time (something the phaser strip has never been shown to be capable of).
Can't it fire at more than one? I swear it was in TNG movie or Voya... yea.. never mind.
-
Originally posted by Thorn
Unless I'm mistaken (which I probably am... my Trek knowledge is limited to TNG and the newer movies)... that style of ship used phaser strips.
That style of ship is the TOS-movies style (Trek I-VI.5). Phaser strips weren't abominated until TNG.
-
Figures....
I do vagueley remember those ships having a torp launcher on the underside though at least....
now that I think of it.. so does the sovvy...
-
They all have torp launchers on the underside.
Well actually, the torp launcher always seems to be on the opposite side from the warp nacelles.
-
eight what the **** was i thinking at that moment ?
sesh :D
-
Basically, the ships a heavily modified Miranda with the torpedo rollbar removed. In place, it has the heavy phaser turrets.
-
Originally posted by ZylonBane
They all have torp launchers on the underside.
Well actually, the torp launcher always seems to be on the opposite side from the warp nacelles.
No, I meant the underside of the saucer..
The Galaxy and Excelsior had em on the "neck"
-
I have some general layout plans on the Enterprise (ncc 1701 st:os -a thru to d)
i'll post 'em later..
-
Originally posted by ZylonBane
Putting four phasers around the top of the Enterprise would provide exactly as much coverage as one radial strip. It would also get rid of the half-second warning that they're about to fire, and would allow them to fire at more than one target at a time (something the phaser strip has never been shown to be capable of).
Ah, but the advantage of the strips is (brace for technobabble) is that they can be linked together, so your one long strip is far more powerful than your four phaser banks.
Furthermore, most recent shots tend to ignore the phaser charging effect, also, ships can fire multiple phaser shots from one strip - Nemesis had the E-E fire four shots at once.
-
Originally posted by ZylonBane
Putting four phasers around the top of the Enterprise would provide exactly as much coverage as one radial strip.
True. Although the turrets still have to rotate to provide that coverage and can suffer from blind spots - remember that it's 4 emitters vs 400.
It would also get rid of the half-second warning that they're about to fire
Nope. You see, they've got these things called sensors, that pick up things like energy spikes that would occur whether it's a turret or strip powering up. Maybe the visual thing would be of benefit if the electronics were destroyed and the crew were looking out the windows.
Although, you're right about why they were put in the series: extra eye candy.
and would allow them to fire at more than one target at a time (something the phaser strip has never been shown to be capable of).
It's perfectly capable of firing more than once from each array, and has been demonstrated.
As for the Soyuz class ship, keep it how it's supposed to be. That means turrets and bulging sensors. The side turrets may need a bit of change in shape, and the bridge should be a bit higher. Otherwise it's looking nice, texture aside :)
-
Originally posted by Shrike
Furthermore, most recent shots tend to ignore the phaser charging effect, also, ships can fire multiple phaser shots from one strip - Nemesis had the E-E fire four shots at once.
Hmm, haven't seen Nemesis yet. Heard so many bad things about it that I'm considering giving it a miss entirely.
-
It's better than AOTC.... at least I thought so. But I was not particularly impressed by AOTC, so I guess that makes sense.
-
uh.... :shaking: :rolleyes: :wtf:
-
Originally posted by Zeronet
uh.... :shaking: :rolleyes: :wtf:
What?
-
Speaking of AOTC, was I the only one who couldn't tell which military hardware was on which side during the final battle?
"Oh look, big rolly things! Uh, should I cheer or boo?"
-
About phaser strips.
why don't they fire the whole strip in a huge curtain of phaser-ness?
Anyway, nice model, based on a Miranda, is it?
-
Originally posted by ZylonBane
Hmm, haven't seen Nemesis yet. Heard so many bad things about it that I'm considering giving it a miss entirely.
It's actually one of the better Trek movies. However, don't watch it late at night on the second to last day they're showing it :p
Kind of hard to enjoy it then.
-
Originally posted by ZylonBane
Speaking of AOTC, was I the only one who couldn't tell which military hardware was on which side during the final battle?
You probably were.
-
Originally posted by Petrarch of the VBB
About phaser strips.
why don't they fire the whole strip in a huge curtain of phaser-ness?
Anyway, nice model, based on a Miranda, is it?
meh.. I'm sure voyager took out a cube or 4 with that method
*yawn*
-
Originally posted by ZylonBane
Speaking of AOTC, was I the only one who couldn't tell which military hardware was on which side during the final battle?
"Oh look, big rolly things! Uh, should I cheer or boo?"
sorry, by that time, my brains had stopped already.
-
Bah, here's that overview diagram i'd promised 'excuse the quality had to scan the bloody thing and at a 3-page spread it wasn't easy..
i'll post a Link To the Image (http://users.bigpond.com/turnsky/images/ncc1701TOS.png) to keep it from clogging up the forums..
-
(http://www.3dap.com/hlp/hosted/gtdwolf/pics/soyuz3.jpg)
-
I would think the Soyuz would either be a light cruiser or destroyer, not a cutter - that implies something more like an Oberth.
-
I just wrote that because of the designation they gave it in Ship of the Line. In all actuality, since the Miranda is classed as a light cruiser, it's somewhere between a light and a heavy. It has an arnament nearing that of a heavy, but its armor is a bit on the light side.
-
So call it a Medium Cruiser, or even a Strike Cruiser. Or just "Cruiser"