23rd Century Ship Art

pwlaughingtrendy

Our latest blog features the art design and process behind creating our 23rd century ships found in Agents of Yesterday!

Learn more about how the team works to replicate the show’s aesthetic faithfully in all aspects of the game’s art.

~Morrigan "LaughingTrendy"

saurializard

Nicknamed the “Big E” or “The Gray Lady” by some fans, the “original” Enterprise (no bloody A, B, C, or D!)

nebfab

original blog wrote:

In the end, we added a very subtle “aztec” patterning to the hull, which foreshadows the surface detailing seen in the “refit” version of the Enterprise without overpowering the clean, smooth lines of the original ship.

It probably means the references from the 2nd miniature, but for a moment there I just wondered if there would be yet another T1 Enterprise (since, well, it's not called a "retrofit.")

Anyway, it's an excellent work, especially on Daedalus, it really looks like it almost could have been built in the 70s if we only had warp drives

daviesdavies

They are really good. I would put them in museum

I am moved...

they all look like made with the classic idea of Form follows function ( in trek universe )

antonine3258

I really love the art blogs in general, and this one was really interesting - there isn't much in the way of on-screen examples for this era's aesthetic, and from the screenshots so far, I'm really pumped.

kodachikuno

There are still some important questions about the TOS Faction but, the TOS ships are damned beautiful. Major kudos to the artists

ricosakara

Do the concept art for the 26th century ships next! Enterprise-J better be in it! >=3

oslo5

They're all just kitbashes of each other. Exactly the same materials, exactly the same shapes. It looks like they bought a bunch of Enterprise models and glued them together wrong. Does management know about this? Someone should check the dumpster out back for empty model kits and Crazy Glue? What about U.E.S. Vanguard, or the Antares, or Avenger, or Predator, or the Wasp, or the plethora of other original ideas that people came up with without needing to reuse the same shapes for continuity, or the doodle I drew on a napkin yesterday at lunch? I can't upload the napkin for proof, but I called the "Whoosh Class." For reals: I just did it while I was waiting for my beer. I'm just curious; was it really that hard for the staff to come up with their own shapes and ideas?
Daedalus wasn't designed by the art department and the Ranger is exactly just the NX-refit from Ships of the Line with a new skin. Man, when do we get to fight our next big villain, John Luck Pickard, the copyright-safe, time-twin of Patrick Stewart so the art department can use his profile and avoid coming up with their own ideas?
Seriously Cryptic, challenge your employees more. I bet their all a bunch of millenials, too.

jexsamx

oslo5 wrote: »

I bet their all a bunch of millenials, too.

The nursing home staff need to revoke your internet privileges.

yreodred

I'm personally not fond with the look of a engineering hull directly glued under the saucer like the Pioneer and Ranger class has. It just doesn't look very good. Seriously, there are much better looking alternatives to combine those parts together. Sure the promo art shows those ships from (probably their only) favourable angle, but in game i can imagine that they must look pretty bad imo. But each to his own.

I like really like the the integrated hulls of the Perseus and Gemini. They look very sturdy make the ship look very symetric which surely make the Gemini look good from more than just one angle. If any i'd buy the Gemini, but i doubt it will have a BOFF/console layout favouring my playstyle, lol.

Question:
Will there be alternative ship parts, like different shaped pylons, nacelles or deflector dishes for example?

nebfab

Meanwhile in some alternate timeline someone is complaining that "those new designs don't look like TOS at all, it's really a bunch of mediocre fan art not capturing the glorious spirit of Jeffries' original vision... ... millenials... slackers... I doodled better designs on a napkin ..."

Raging about someone else's lack of creativity is the easiest thing in the world, almost as easy as complaining about the people raging about someone else's lack of creativity. So we all do it. It may make us feel smarter, but it's all an illusion. (/em goes all New Age on everyone, it's not very effective. Takes a deep breath, tries to do something brilliantly smart and radiantly creative. Fails. Whines that the world isn't ready. Tries again. Life goes on.)

nebfab

yreodred wrote: »

I'm personally not fond with the look of a engineering hull directly glued under the saucer like the Pioneer and Ranger class has. It just doesn't look very good. Seriously, there are much better looking alternatives to combine those parts together. Sure the promo art shows those ships from (probably their only) favourable angle, but in game i can imagine that they must look pretty bad imo. But each to his own.

I like really like the the integrated hulls of the Perseus and Gemini. They look very sturdy make the ship look very symetric which surely make the Gemini look good from more than just one angle. If any i'd buy the Gemini, but i doubt it will have a BOFF/console layout favouring my playstyle, lol.

Question:
Will there be alternative ship parts, like different shaped pylons, nacelles or deflector dishes for example?

I don't think we see underside of the saucer much in game anyway, and to be perfectly frank, I always found the idea of keeping engineering hull on that long pylon kind of... strange, from purely practical perspective. So, I'd actually expect the earlier designs with separate engineering to be mostly like what Cryptic did, with long pylon gradually evolving for [technobabble] and more balanced look, or for the both hulls to merge back, for the same.

That said, I'd like some alternate engineering hulls (and everything else ) too.

cuchulainn74

@oslo5 you are aware of the long and storied history of kit bashing in Star Trek, right? On that front alone, I don't think there's a real complaint here. Aside from that, from a simple logical perspective, what else would Starfleet do? If they have existing nacelle designs, or hull designs, or saucer designs, they're going to reuse them. To fit different needs, those assembly line parts would certainly be mixed, matched, and rearranged. I think Cryptic have borne that in mind and created some ships that could easily have rolled right out of ST canon. I'm definitely glad we can use these skins on the T6 evolutions.

ssbn655

pwlaughingtrendy wrote: »

Our latest blog features the art design and process behind creating our 23rd century ships found in Agents of Yesterday!

Learn more about how the team works to replicate the show’s aesthetic faithfully in all aspects of the game’s art.

~Morrigan "LaughingTrendy"

Matt Jefferies would be proud.Thank you Devs and artists for the new TOS era ships. They look like they could have been in a TOS episode. Matt Jefferies really knew how to make a clean uncluttered design. No surpirse given his real life work in Aerospace. Now for anexpansion of AOY some missions and ships for The Klingon Empire would be fantastic! It would be so cool doing missions in the days of conflict between the Empire and Accursed Federation.

byllhelotes

I like the new designs as well,

nebfab wrote: »

yreodred wrote: »

I'm personally not fond with the look of a engineering hull directly glued under the saucer like the Pioneer and Ranger class has. It just doesn't look very good. Seriously, there are much better looking alternatives to combine those parts together. Sure the promo art shows those ships from (probably their only) favourable angle, but in game i can imagine that they must look pretty bad imo. But each to his own.

I like really like the the integrated hulls of the Perseus and Gemini. They look very sturdy make the ship look very symetric which surely make the Gemini look good from more than just one angle. If any i'd buy the Gemini, but i doubt it will have a BOFF/console layout favouring my playstyle, lol.

Question:
Will there be alternative ship parts, like different shaped pylons, nacelles or deflector dishes for example?

I don't think we see underside of the saucer much in game anyway, and to be perfectly frank, I always found the idea of keeping engineering hull on that long pylon kind of... strange, from purely practical perspective. So, I'd actually expect the earlier designs with separate engineering to be mostly like what Cryptic did, with long pylon gradually evolving for [technobabble] and more balanced look, or for the both hulls to merge back, for the same.

That said, I'd like some alternate engineering hulls (and everything else ) too.

I also am wondering as if we will be able to change out parts? In addition, could we / will we see a Saladin/Hermes, Ptolemy, TOS-Miranda, or Federation?

daveyny

Unfortunately, TacoFang informed us awhile back that CBS told Cryptic not to use any of the designs from the Original Trek Tech Manual.
Which in my opinion, is a dang shame.

gavinruneblade

Loved this article, in particular all the really detailed information on building and matching the Enterprise. Very cool and thanks for sharing!

gawainviii

daveyny wrote: »

Unfortunately, TacoFang informed us awhile back that CBS told Cryptic not to use any of the designs from the Original Trek Tech Manual.
Which in my opinion, is a dang shame.

Ditto! However, if you look at the profile of the Perseus--it's not too dissimilar to Franz Joseph's Saladin Class Destroyer & Hermes Class Scout, only with dual nacelles instead of one; Similarly, the top-down of the Ranger is reminiscent of FJ's Ptolemy Class Transport, with the nacelle pylons going up instead of down.

So, although they couldn't take the designs (which is what I was hoping for when I first heard the announcement) I'm glad they, at least, provided some inspiration in the design.

psiameese

I also have to compliment the ship art team. The research and resulting methodology is, IMO, impressive. It makes sense to me. I can't wait to get a closer look at these designs inside the game. I have to ask, might there be a comparison chart of these designs next to one another?

daveyny wrote: »

Unfortunately, TacoFang informed us awhile back that CBS told Cryptic not to use any of the designs from the Original Trek Tech Manual.
Which in my opinion, is a dang shame.

From the blog:

The Gemini

The Gemini’s four-nacelle design hints at the Constellation class to come in later years of Starfleet. This ship is meant to feel even larger than the Constitution class, and we accomplished this by adding more windows around a larger saucer section.

I'm going to go out on a speculative limb here. The basic description of the saucer would apply just as easily to Joseph's three-nacelled dreadnaught-class. I suspect Gemini is as close to filling that suggested design advancement from Constitution as we are going to get.

leceter

They look like 23rd century, smell like 23rd century....do they sound like 23rd century?

vorwoda

yreodred wrote: »

I'm personally not fond with the look of a engineering hull directly glued under the saucer like the Pioneer and Ranger class has. It just doesn't look very good. Seriously, there are much better looking alternatives to combine those parts together. Sure the promo art shows those ships from (probably their only) favourable angle, but in game i can imagine that they must look pretty bad imo. But each to his own.

I like really like the the integrated hulls of the Perseus and Gemini. They look very sturdy make the ship look very symetric which surely make the Gemini look good from more than just one angle. If any i'd buy the Gemini, but i doubt it will have a BOFF/console layout favouring my playstyle, lol.

Question:
Will there be alternative ship parts, like different shaped pylons, nacelles or deflector dishes for example?

Interesting. My take is exactly the opposite. While I'd rather see the Constitution's dorsal neck between the primary and secondary hulls, I like "gluing" the hulls together much better than merging them. To me, the Perseus and Gemini look very "wrong", while the Pioneer and Ranger look far more in line with the original aesthetic. To each his own!

In any case, the art department did amazing work with all of these designs, and I am grateful to them! A huge thank you for upgrading the Constitution class's model, too (although I'll reserve judgment on the skin until I see the new aztec pattern work in-game - that line of the blog fills me with a nameless dread. I hope that a pure TOS non-aztec skin option is available).

themetalstickman

vorwoda wrote: »

In any case, the art department did amazing work with all of these designs, and I am grateful to them! A huge thank you for upgrading the Constitution class's model, too (although I'll reserve judgment on the skin until I see the new aztec pattern work in-game - that line of the blog fills me with a nameless dread. I hope that a pure TOS non-aztec skin option is available).

I've seen it, and I don't think you have anything to fear.

jcsww

I sure can't wait for that Tier 6 JJ-Connie with hopefully the retro TOS skin available as an option.

swamarian

daveyny wrote: »

Unfortunately, TacoFang informed us awhile back that CBS told Cryptic not to use any of the designs from the Original Trek Tech Manual.
Which in my opinion, is a dang shame.

I doubt that CBS has the rights. The Tech Manual is its own weird thing. Star Fleet Battles is licensed from the owner of the Tech Manual, not Paramount or CBS.

jonathanlonehawk

daveyny wrote: »

Unfortunately, TacoFang informed us awhile back that CBS told Cryptic not to use any of the designs from the Original Trek Tech Manual.
Which in my opinion, is a dang shame.

Hey @daveyny -- do you have a link to that statement... I'd like to point my fleet to it so some of them will shut up and stop asking me if the Saladin or Federation classes will be in the game.

Thanks!

daveyny

jonathanlonehawk wrote: »

daveyny wrote: »

Unfortunately, TacoFang informed us awhile back that CBS told Cryptic not to use any of the designs from the Original Trek Tech Manual.
Which in my opinion, is a dang shame.

Hey @daveyny -- do you have a link to that statement... I'd like to point my fleet to it so some of them will shut up and stop asking me if the Saladin or Federation classes will be in the game.

Thanks!

I'm repeating it from a Reddit post of his.
I'm not very good at searching on Reddit, but I'll give it a shot.

vorwoda

themetalstickman wrote: »

vorwoda wrote: »

In any case, the art department did amazing work with all of these designs, and I am grateful to them! A huge thank you for upgrading the Constitution class's model, too (although I'll reserve judgment on the skin until I see the new aztec pattern work in-game - that line of the blog fills me with a nameless dread. I hope that a pure TOS non-aztec skin option is available).

I've seen it, and I don't think you have anything to fear.

Thank you! That looks gorgeous - my fears are allayed!

nikeix

jonathanlonehawk wrote: »

Hey @daveyny -- do you have a link to that statement... I'd like to point my fleet to it so some of them will shut up and stop asking me if the Saladin or Federation classes will be in the game.

You could just tell them the underlying truth: that Star Fleet Battles is controlled by a separate company and CBS can't and won't touch ANYTHING produced under that banner.

nikeix

oslo5 wrote: »

What about U.E.S. Vanguard, or the Antares, or Avenger, or Predator, or the Wasp, or the plethora of other original ideas that people came up with...

You answered your own question - because those are OTHER PEOPLE'S IDEAS and many of them are not directly controlled by CBS.

daveyny

It's kind of annoying that CBS and the Franz Joseph Estate are at such odds.

I really was hoping that the Tech Manual ships would be included.
<sadminionface>

markhawkman

Yeah, there's a reason that SFB had so many original races. They had a very specific license as to what they were allowed to use. It's kinda like a reimaging of what TNG would have been like if a completely different set of writers had come up with their own completely different ideas on how to continue where TOS left off. Which is why they have the ISC, the Seltorians, etc.... It's cool... but it's even more of an alternate universe than "JJ-Trek".