I know this sounds kind of silly but I would like the Nobel Class which is a varient on the Soverign to have a shuttle bay some where. I mean if the Soverign has one shouldn't all varients of it as well?
For that matter, what about the variants of other ships that have shuttlebays? Please tell me Cryptic doesn't hate shuttlebays... :C
Also, realistically speaking, why would Starfleet NOT put in a shuttlebay on a ship? I think even the Defiant class had one, albeit small. Then again, I think almost all of the ships that appeared in canon that you can use in-game have shuttlebays.
It just... doesn't make sense why a ship wouldn't have a shuttlebay, and I don't want to break my brain trying to figure it out. >_<
unbelievable that capnlogan can spend days tweaking a 0.0000001 percent imperfectness of a ship but cannot fix the glaring issue with the defiant, that the engine pylons are entirely wrong as seen by the super imposed image over a studio model.
and that the nose piece still is not angled correctly. capn logan you sir are my hero.
such a talented artist, judging by the enterprise nx class, beauty of a ship and you cant fix the easy stuff on the defiant, dont leave your work!
For that matter, what about the variants of other ships that have shuttlebays? Please tell me Cryptic doesn't hate shuttlebays... :C
Also, realistically speaking, why would Starfleet NOT put in a shuttlebay on a ship? I think even the Defiant class had one, albeit small. Then again, I think almost all of the ships that appeared in canon that you can use in-game have shuttlebays.
It just... doesn't make sense why a ship wouldn't have a shuttlebay, and I don't want to break my brain trying to figure it out. >_<
The Defiant class actually had 3 shuttlebays, one primary bay and 2 shuttlepod bays, but they were all hidden from view so when looking at the Defiant you wouldn't know it actually had any.
Admitedly this is the entire point of the Defiant - everything about the design is made to visualy hide the ship's capabilities - but it shows that not all Starfleet designs have shuttlebays visibily obvious on the hull.
So while I fully support the notion of Shuttlebays being made obvious on as many ships as possible (including Klingon vessles - yes Klingon ships have shuttlebays too) it isn't a necessity of canon or realism for them to be seen.
Something I'd like to add about the Excelsior-class:
The secondary hull did not have windows on its bow: [Image]
Aside from being canon, I do believe it would look better / more elegant, too.
Note that the "Enterprise-B" Refit-variant did indeed have windows there, so that part is correct: [Image]
Bottom line: no windows on the normal Excelsior's secondary hull bow plx.
Misc: I also noticed that the windows on the aft section of the secondary hull are not in a proper line with the windows on the main section of the secondary hull. It looks like the deck "jumps" a meter or two in height. No big deal, but if the windows get touched again due to the bow thingie this may as well get fixed, too.
The deflector dish also has a different look, but personally I could let that one slide because it might be an "upgrade" to the old type. It would still be cool if this gets touched again as well, however.
Something I'd like to add about the Excelsior-class:
The secondary hull did not have windows on its bow: [Image]
Aside from being canon, I do believe it would look better / more elegant, too.
Note that the "Enterprise-B" Refit-variant did indeed have windows there, so that part is correct: [Image]
Bottom line: no windows on the normal Excelsior's secondary hull bow plx.
Misc: I also noticed that the windows on the aft section of the secondary hull are not in a proper line with the windows on the main section of the secondary hull. It looks like the deck "jumps" a meter or two in height. No big deal, but if the windows get touched again due to the bow thingie this may as well get fixed, too.
I didn't realize there was a thread specifically for ship errors. I'll try here...
Intrepid:
Please view this side-by-side of the ingame texture compared to the official studio model.
Side-by-side
STO model
Studio model
It's just as thick and overly bright even on 1, 2 and 3 hull.
Hull 1
Hull 2
Hull 3
Hull 4
The ingame version seems overpoweringly thick and bright...
On the official model, the stripes are subtle and are about the last thing you notice when you look at the ship, but nice to notice the extra detail when you do see it. But this in contrary you'd be hard-pressed to notice anything but the stripes first, and always glaring over other player set hull color options and design overlay.
Could they possibly be thinned down and their brightness dulled a bit..?
This ship is very important to me, but the way these stripe markings are right now is really upsetting me.. I know it's just a game and most probably don't care.. but it's important to me..
I didn't realize there was a thread specifically for ship errors. I'll try here...
Intrepid:
Please view this side-by-side of the ingame texture compared to the official studio model.
Side-by-side
STO model
Studio model
It's just as thick and overly bright even on 1, 2 and 3 hull.
Hull 1
Hull 2
Hull 3
Hull 4
The ingame version seems overpoweringly thick and bright...
On the official model, the stripes are subtle and are about the last thing you notice when you look at the ship, but nice to notice the extra detail when you do see it. But this in contrary you'd be hard-pressed to notice anything but the stripes first, and always glaring over other player set hull color options and design overlay.
Could they possibly be thinned down and their brightness dulled a bit..?
This ship is very important to me, but the way these stripe markings are right now is really upsetting me.. I know it's just a game and most probably don't care.. but it's important to me..
Added the side by side shot to the OP under LRSV. (Not really enough room for all the pics.)
Oops. I did indeed. I posted a thread about it awhile back with pictures, and it never got any acknowledgment from the Devs / Thanks for pointing that out
They added the Arrow heads, just go back into the ship costume editor and hit purchase.
Plus the defiant looks a lot better then what it did on release, if you want to see the release model look at the Golden model you can put in your readyroom/Mess hall.
I see, the shape of the nose from the side is wrong and the tip needs to be bend downwards a bit. I wouldnt mind seeing the Defiant and Intrepid get some touch ups.
The Garumba aegis effect (glowing Tron lines) still does NOT show up on the Port middle 'prong'. For 25 dollars, you'd think this would have gotten fixed from Tribble (where it also existed).
I do not even have to spell out what is wrong. But clearly you can see the underside of the sto defiant is very wrong.
also it would appear as those both of the naceles on the STO defiant were just slapped on or inserted into the 'centre' of the ship model. or attached even, unlike how it is on the 'correct' defiant model.
so the side view, the nacele position and the under side positions needs fixing.
Should it be mentioned that the Galaxy class is STILL firing phasers from the tips of the saucer section and not the phaser arrays? Particularly noticable on side-on battles or using dual beam arrays.
EDIT: Here's some more. The galaxy Refit is mising it's battle bridge and docking clamp indents on the stardrive AND the battlebridge indentation and docking clamp holes on the underside of the saucer.
Here's pics of the top of the cobra head for the stardrive, I wont bother posting for the saucer underside cause... welll, duh, it's meant to be clamped down on top of this stuff so you guess how it's meant to look.
Should it be mentioned that the Galaxy class is STILL firing phasers from the tips of the saucer section and not the phaser arrays? Particularly noticable on side-on battles or using dual beam arrays.
EDIT: Here's some more. The galaxy Refit is mising it's battle bridge and docking clamp indents on the stardrive AND the battlebridge indentation and docking clamp holes on the underside of the saucer.
Here's pics of the top of the cobra head for the stardrive, I wont bother posting for the saucer underside cause... welll, duh, it's meant to be clamped down on top of this stuff so you guess how it's meant to look.
DBB never fire from the phaser arrays, despite the fact that it seems obvious that they should.
Of course, in my opinion, every energy weapon should be firing from the beam arrays on the federation ships (with the exception of the Defiant). We've seen Voyager firing dual beams and we've seen Enterprise firing anti-matter (spread) bolts, both come from the beam arrays. It baffles me why cryptic decided to smack a bunch of ugly black pimples all over our ships to represent canon and DBB hardpoints.
Insofar as your standard phaser arrays go, do you have a screen of them firing only from the edge of the saucer?
DBB never fire from the phaser arrays, despite the fact that it seems obvious that they should.
Of course, in my opinion, every energy weapon should be firing from the beam arrays on the federation ships (with the exception of the Defiant). We've seen Voyager firing dual beams and we've seen Enterprise firing anti-matter (spread) bolts, both come from the beam arrays. It baffles me why cryptic decided to smack a bunch of ugly black pimples all over our ships to represent canon and DBB hardpoints.
Insofar as your standard phaser arrays go, do you have a screen of them firing only from the edge of the saucer?
It just occured to me - we have the technology now!
The set items can change the looks of our ships. Maybe now weapons should also affect the looks. If you have cannons equipped, the cannon weapon marks will be displayed, otherwise not. If you got beams equipped, you see the beam array markings, if not, you don't.
It just occured to me - we have the technology now!
The set items can change the looks of our ships. Maybe now weapons should also affect the looks. If you have cannons equipped, the cannon weapon marks will be displayed, otherwise not. If you got beams equipped, you see the beam array markings, if not, you don't.
That would be cool.
Something for which I'd asked on several occasions.
That way we could get rid of those ugly weapon pimples if they have no weapons to utilise them.
Though I still would like to see them put some effort towards beautifying the phaser arrays and finding a way to not have to use pimples to represent cannon / beam hardpoints.
I hate feeling like my ship looks like a spotty teenager.
Comments
For that matter, what about the variants of other ships that have shuttlebays? Please tell me Cryptic doesn't hate shuttlebays... :C
Also, realistically speaking, why would Starfleet NOT put in a shuttlebay on a ship? I think even the Defiant class had one, albeit small. Then again, I think almost all of the ships that appeared in canon that you can use in-game have shuttlebays.
It just... doesn't make sense why a ship wouldn't have a shuttlebay, and I don't want to break my brain trying to figure it out. >_<
and that the nose piece still is not angled correctly. capn logan you sir are my hero.
such a talented artist, judging by the enterprise nx class, beauty of a ship and you cant fix the easy stuff on the defiant, dont leave your work!
pix pl0x
The Defiant class actually had 3 shuttlebays, one primary bay and 2 shuttlepod bays, but they were all hidden from view so when looking at the Defiant you wouldn't know it actually had any.
Admitedly this is the entire point of the Defiant - everything about the design is made to visualy hide the ship's capabilities - but it shows that not all Starfleet designs have shuttlebays visibily obvious on the hull.
So while I fully support the notion of Shuttlebays being made obvious on as many ships as possible (including Klingon vessles - yes Klingon ships have shuttlebays too) it isn't a necessity of canon or realism for them to be seen.
The secondary hull did not have windows on its bow: [Image]
Aside from being canon, I do believe it would look better / more elegant, too.
Note that the "Enterprise-B" Refit-variant did indeed have windows there, so that part is correct: [Image]
Bottom line: no windows on the normal Excelsior's secondary hull bow plx.
Misc: I also noticed that the windows on the aft section of the secondary hull are not in a proper line with the windows on the main section of the secondary hull. It looks like the deck "jumps" a meter or two in height. No big deal, but if the windows get touched again due to the bow thingie this may as well get fixed, too.
The deflector dish also has a different look, but personally I could let that one slide because it might be an "upgrade" to the old type. It would still be cool if this gets touched again as well, however.
Added to the front page.
Thanks for keeping this thread up to date.
Thanks for including pictures.
Intrepid:
Please view this side-by-side of the ingame texture compared to the official studio model.
Side-by-side
STO model
Studio model
It's just as thick and overly bright even on 1, 2 and 3 hull.
Hull 1
Hull 2
Hull 3
Hull 4
The ingame version seems overpoweringly thick and bright...
On the official model, the stripes are subtle and are about the last thing you notice when you look at the ship, but nice to notice the extra detail when you do see it. But this in contrary you'd be hard-pressed to notice anything but the stripes first, and always glaring over other player set hull color options and design overlay.
Could they possibly be thinned down and their brightness dulled a bit..?
This ship is very important to me, but the way these stripe markings are right now is really upsetting me.. I know it's just a game and most probably don't care.. but it's important to me..
Added the side by side shot to the OP under LRSV. (Not really enough room for all the pics.)
Do you mean:
Oops. I did indeed. I posted a thread about it awhile back with pictures, and it never got any acknowledgment from the Devs / Thanks for pointing that out
Starboard nacelle navigation light should be green. It is currently red.
(Circled in image)
Added to the first page
But... but... I already said that. ::sniffle::
Which costume, which beam?
look here
http://imgur.com/yUCy4.jpg
http://imgur.com/WfznG.jpg
just glaringly bad...
They added the Arrow heads, just go back into the ship costume editor and hit purchase.
Plus the defiant looks a lot better then what it did on release, if you want to see the release model look at the Golden model you can put in your readyroom/Mess hall.
The "nose" was ugly as hell.
I see, the shape of the nose from the side is wrong and the tip needs to be bend downwards a bit. I wouldnt mind seeing the Defiant and Intrepid get some touch ups.
It seems, that no issues on the starship models were fixed since the last months!!! Iam scared!
http://i114.photobucket.com/albums/n263/Cruis_In/screenshot_2010-12-26-20-18-08.jpg
I do not even have to spell out what is wrong. But clearly you can see the underside of the sto defiant is very wrong.
also it would appear as those both of the naceles on the STO defiant were just slapped on or inserted into the 'centre' of the ship model. or attached even, unlike how it is on the 'correct' defiant model.
so the side view, the nacele position and the under side positions needs fixing.
EDIT: Here's some more. The galaxy Refit is mising it's battle bridge and docking clamp indents on the stardrive AND the battlebridge indentation and docking clamp holes on the underside of the saucer.
Here's pics of the top of the cobra head for the stardrive, I wont bother posting for the saucer underside cause... welll, duh, it's meant to be clamped down on top of this stuff so you guess how it's meant to look.
http://www.foundation3d.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=17258&d=1226479222
http://www.foundation3d.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=17257&d=1226479222
http://www.foundation3d.com/uploads/studio/2008/11/80-12-508936.jpg
DBB never fire from the phaser arrays, despite the fact that it seems obvious that they should.
Of course, in my opinion, every energy weapon should be firing from the beam arrays on the federation ships (with the exception of the Defiant). We've seen Voyager firing dual beams and we've seen Enterprise firing anti-matter (spread) bolts, both come from the beam arrays. It baffles me why cryptic decided to smack a bunch of ugly black pimples all over our ships to represent canon and DBB hardpoints.
Insofar as your standard phaser arrays go, do you have a screen of them firing only from the edge of the saucer?
The set items can change the looks of our ships. Maybe now weapons should also affect the looks. If you have cannons equipped, the cannon weapon marks will be displayed, otherwise not. If you got beams equipped, you see the beam array markings, if not, you don't.
That would be cool.
Something for which I'd asked on several occasions.
That way we could get rid of those ugly weapon pimples if they have no weapons to utilise them.
Though I still would like to see them put some effort towards beautifying the phaser arrays and finding a way to not have to use pimples to represent cannon / beam hardpoints.
I hate feeling like my ship looks like a spotty teenager.