test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
Remastered Exeter Class
captainrc1
Member Posts: 107 Arc User
Saw pics of a remastered Exeter Class on YouTube recently. Any idea what the ETA might be on that?
Post edited by baddmoonrizin on
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Ie. with the next season update on May 28th or the weeks following (PC).
Notable missions: Apex [AEI], Gemini [SSF], Trident [AEI], Evolution's Smile [SSF], Transcendence
Looking for something new to play? I've started building Foundry missions again in visual novel form!
Although I'm sad it can't be used on the Donnie because it's... a different size, apparently?
It is a different size. The parts were specifically designed for a skeleton of a certain size, that being the TOS Connie. Just simply scaling them up doesn't work as there are details that identify a smaller ship which would look stupid if they were not addressed.
There's also already a bit of a scale mismatch for the current range, the TMP connie's windows are a lot smaller than the other variants, making it appear to be a bigger ship despite relative size. The STO's original connies were built with their scale relative to other TNG ships in mind, and so accentuate them being smaller ships (even as their TV/movie brethren try to make themselves look bigger). To my eye, the new Exeter (especially from the top) looks Oberth sized given some of the large windows and only one deck (seeming) in the saucer section. See also the original Vesta ships, which appear to be smaller than the Caelian and remastered Vesta because their windows are scaled bigger (despite being chonky ships). There's a definite art to selling scale for space ships and when it goes wrong, it can create issue (here: for kitbashing effectively).
But that's in the acceptable window of incongruity for most people not to notice (much). Scaling the Exeter to Donnie scale would absolutely supercharge the incongruity, similar to making a Galaxy-sized Oberth. It's going to look absolutely bonkers (ex. every window being a multi-deck theater-sized porthole). Hence why the Donnie never getting access to original Connie-line parts. A lot of work would be needed to tweak models (including geometry items like phaser strips. Making those bigger/smaller relative to a ship hull also is a method for helping to sell scale).
Notable missions: Apex [AEI], Gemini [SSF], Trident [AEI], Evolution's Smile [SSF], Transcendence
Looking for something new to play? I've started building Foundry missions again in visual novel form!
I'm more bothered by how there isn't a T6 version that can use the new Exeter skin, than the Donnie being able to use it or not. (Also thanks for reminding me of the window scaling issue. That's one that I've noticed over the years.)
All the T6 Connies (Legendary, Temporal etc) can use it, but not the Donnie or Konnie.
Dang, I'm out of the loop. There ARE T6 normal Connies? o_o Thank you, I completely forgot!
There are also issues if ever someone tried to unify those two together. Ex. do the nacelles clip the saucer if you change neck/hull options? Do the pylons and neck even sit flat against the hull? Would the models need to be rebuilt to allow for kitbashing?
Eg. structural compatibility is something that can enter the conversation here even if size is addressed. Cryptic could hypothetically create new rescaled variants of the ships in question to use across kitbashing, adjusting details as needed for the models. But it's going to be a lot of work beyond the simple act to unify assets without major gaps as you try to throw highly curved bits on flat attachment points.
Notable missions: Apex [AEI], Gemini [SSF], Trident [AEI], Evolution's Smile [SSF], Transcendence
Looking for something new to play? I've started building Foundry missions again in visual novel form!
The points more that there's another side to the topic that gets obscured just with size differences. Those are solvable if someone in the team is motivated enough to rescale assets and tweak features of the model/textures that sell scale. But the costs keep compounding the more you try making something that wasn't built to kitbash kitbashable. Solve one problem and you encounter further depths with things like the position and shape of attachment points adding further dev time to solve. Rescaling something isolated like *nacelles* to add some cross compatible parts between ships lines is probably doable (see. original FED intel ships), though evidently not easy (see. ONLY the FED intel ships having this feature of using nacelles from completely separate ship lines). But the moment you drift into the rest of the ship, you hit these compounding structural problems.
Kitbashing is best baked into original development for the ships in question. if you have to ask well after the fact, chances are it's prohibitively expensive. Malachowski being made a part of the Miranda line I think is the sole miracle exception, assuming its eventual T6 version being made a Miranda-line ship wasn't planned during Age of Discovery's development.
Notable missions: Apex [AEI], Gemini [SSF], Trident [AEI], Evolution's Smile [SSF], Transcendence
Looking for something new to play? I've started building Foundry missions again in visual novel form!
Ah, yeah, I get that. Right now the Miranda line shows some of the possible issues with broader kitbashability. It's got stuff with has a lot of different structure forms. (Although sometimes it getting wonky kitbashing can have GOOD visual effects, as well as not so good.) But I do understand that point.
I think my original feeling while forgetting issues like this was wishing a 25th century skin could be used on setups like the MWFDC. But then there's the size issues getting in the way of kitbashing at the *least*. Which leaves me hoping for just a regular T6 option that can use the updated skin, at least. (As far as I know the only options are all lockbox/promo pack ships, with one being made legendary. I think?)
Unfortunately I believe the lack of a NORMAL C-Store Connie still comes from a Decree by CBS. There used to be a rule that CBS imposed to block a T5 Connie. Then we got T6... and it was amended to just be No Endgame Connie. But then we were allowed access to the Kelvin Connie at T6, but the stipulation must have been not C-Store, hence lockbox. Someone probably didn't want everyone and their mom flying Connies, so they limited it to Lockbox, Promo, and eventually Legendary.
I don't know what the current setup is, but I think its still standing Decree of no C-Store Endgame Connie. (Legendary doesn't quite count as its part of a massive bundle.)
IIRC they're based on those on-screen used models not directly used those, at least with the Crossfield they found the on-screen model was too detailed to be used in the game.