The Venture-class saucer is missing half the windows underneath, on the starboard side, and it never has the same type of windows as the rest of the ship.
This is another one that has been reported more than once, when that ship was first released. I reported this months ago, got tired of the game, and just came back to give it another try...and it still isn't fixed. Seeing all the ads all over the site doesn't give me any hope that it will ever be fixed, though; they'd probably rather sell more broken ships than fix the stuff we've already paid for.
Its just that they are all busy with season 6 atm but your right they should have fixed all ships problems when they had the free time and when we have been telling they for ages. This one of the reason why im a silver player.
An update of the Venture class, after some experimentation:
1. The Venture saucer is ALWAYS missing half the windows on its ventral surface.
(See this link for a clear image of the missing windows: http://www.stowiki.org/images/thumb/0/00/Exploration_Cruiser_Refit_bottom.png/800px-Exploration_Cruiser_Refit_bottom.png)
2. If you use ONLY Venture parts, you can use whatever windows you like.
3. If you use Venture parts, but with a Galaxy neck, the windows become different for each section; they show up normally when you hover the mouse pointer over the drop-down list, but when you click on them, the hull section always reverts to Type 1 windows.
4. The nacelles and pylons do not change any of this, and seem to be unrelated to the problem.
Please, the sooner this can be fixed, the better; I paid real money for this thing, and it's been broken ever since I bought it last September. I wouldn't have bought it if the C-store showed the underside with the missing windows (I'm a bit OCD about things matching, and it drives me crazy to look at it).
What's funny is, windows select works fine when using Venture parts on the Dreadnought. However, even on the Dreadnought the Venture saucer is missing those windows.
I agree with you completely on this, it's been almost a year since I've bought this ship with dozens of bug reports issued, and never heard a single word on it being fixed.
Edit: sorry finally i found in the 2nd post that my report was an old known issue, so i removed all the text with my
useless report and i leave here only the pic (there is not one for the center pilon, so feel free to use for the 2nd post)
bye!
I noticed, while in cloak, the Tor Kaht has bars running down the body of the ship at the focal point of the wings. I do believe the wings are supposed to drop. I think people would enjoy a large version of the BOP, myself included.
1. The same issue as the t5 excelsior use to have, the Impulse engines only partially swap to special engine trails for items such as the omega / maco engine. The one that seems to misbehave is the outside trail on the saucer section.
This seems to be an issue only with the vesta saucer as the others seemed to display ok. Also the flight deck portion of the vesta displays the name correctly.
The Tier 3 Heavy Cruisers are totally uncustomizeable, I've tried everything I can think of, the changes I've purchased just wont apply! :mad: :mad: :mad:
The Vigilant nacells fit on the Sao Palo's hull is really awarkard & Ugly. The nacells are way to low and look stupid. This needs to be fixed. Also part of the hull cuts out of the top of the nacell's top. Devs can this be fixed ?
Problem # 2
The Quad phasers controll my forward Phaser Cannons. But i'm running 3 phaser turrets on the rear that is not controlled by the Quad cannons. they fire out of sync.
Problem # 3
The material type 6 skin cannot be applied it you use any of the other defiant parts.
Please leave some good feedback I wish a DEV would respond or it would get someone's attention. i love the Defiant and would love to see these little problems fixed.
When I first started playing season 7, I was happy to see the Acamarians were in it. I enjoy seeing the various characters from the different series in the show. When I played the Acamarian system, I thought the Acamarian ships looked a little weird. Then this weekend, I realized what it was that was wrong, the Acamarians were using TALARIAN ships!
[Fixed by disabling visuals on shild]
I do also have a window problem with the constiution class. All my windows have a strenge white T on them. It may be a graphic problem on my computer, but I think it is releated to the model.
Superspeed500
- I am one of the owners of SN Fleet. Join us in our next adventure!
They should be on the back of the saucer. The "cut-outs" for them are already there, there's just nothing there..
2) There seems to be a bug with the "camera" being too far back. It makes it turn kind of weird (As if it's front-heavy) and when looking at it in the shipyard, it becomes obvious that the camera pivot point is too far aft.
3) The 1st option under Windows (when you're customizing the ship) removes all of the lifeboats and the windows look stretched and really really bad.
Other then that, beautiful ship. Enjoying it very, very much.
Couple more problems with the Steamrunner, in addition to those in my previous post.
1) It seems badly scaled. It's bigger then an Akira and wider then a Sovereign. David Stipes, DS9 visual effects supervisor, said the Steamrunner was 244 meters long. It should be roughly half the size of an Akira.
2) It doesn't have any floodlights covering the name and registry on either the dorsal or ventral surfaces.
Hello again.
I have seen that a few models in game get TRIBBLE because of textures applied by components you put on the ship. Shilds, engines, deflectors and consoles that edit the ship visuals may tard up the model textures.
This is a problem with the T1 constition class. That error is caused by the shield. You can disable the visuals by right clicking the component and select disable visuals.
Superspeed500
- I am one of the owners of SN Fleet. Join us in our next adventure!
When they designed the Defiant for the game, they broke her nose and pushed it back. I just wish they would... fix it.
Dreadnought class. Two times the size, three times the speed. Advanced weaponry. Modified for a minimal crew. Unlike most Federation vessels, it's built solely for combat.
The default bridge is an ugly one, I'm thinking that the displacement of the bridge follows the TOS bridge model that is not aligned with the long access of the ship but actually turned so that the main screen is at the 10 o'clock position. I always buy a new bridge when I get a ship, for those that don't come with a dedicated one, because of this.
Windows on the Galaxy/Dreadnaught/refit lower saucer are still misaligned, which isn't too noticeable, but the Dreadnaught dorsal cannons and spinal cannon are still displaced slightly to port, which is very noticeable.
If something is not broken, don't fix it, if it is broken, don't leave it broken.
I was hoping it would be possible for the lines added by the veteran skin to change color based on what set was being used (green for the assimilated Borg set, purple for the Dominion set...etc.).
whats about the Sovereign Class rework? still have many issues and since Months/Years no fixes!!! Such an iconic ship will fall down to the forgotten space...
amen bro!
Already a refit version of the sovereign class but no fixes
Just bought a Wells Temporal Science Vessel from the exchange and found that the ship does not have floodlights lighting the 'Starfleet Insignia' on the hull. In this picture of the Wells Class from the VOY: "Relativity", it shows that there are floodlights (though dim) on both sides of the hull lighting the insignia. Also, the in-game Wells has its nav lights on both sides blinking red while in this picture again from VOY: "Relativity", shows a green nav light on the starboard side.
Note: Image of the Wells Class (from Star Trek: Voyager) taken from Memory Alpha Wiki.
Pretty much my opinion on what needs to be fixed. I omitted a lot of things I could say about all three ships, and others, but those are the most obvious.
stardestroyer001, Admiral, Explorers Fury PvE/PvP Fleet | Retired PvP Player
Missing the good ol' days of PvP: Legacy of Romulus to Season 9 My List of Useful Links, Recently Updated November 25 2017!
I'm in the camp that a MMO starship will never look perfect, however, I believe that each model should have the look and feel of ship it's representing. For the most part everything is correct. The Intrepid looks and feels like an Intrepid, the Defiant looks and feels like a Defiant, and the Sovereign looks and feels like a Sovereign.
But then we get to the Galaxy. It doesn't look or feel like the Six-Foot Model and it doesn't look or feel like the Four-Foot Model either.
It's in this middle-ground where it just doesn't feel right. The neck is probably the biggest culprit, it feels way too straight, removing the small forward-swept feeling of the saucer over the deflector dish, instead it feels like it's just on top of it. I could nit-pick the saucer and secondary hull, but if there's not going to be a new model created I would just really like a new neck.
And lastly there's an issue for the artist to consider. What version of the D do I use as reference? If you're in this thread you probably know that there were three different models of the Enterprise-D used throughout the run of NextGen and the first half of DS9. Of these three, the graceful and curvaceous six-footer, the stocky bulldog that is the four-footer, and the small practical two-footer I think I'd go for the four-footer.
While not quite as graceful as the original sixer, it emanates for me the feel of the TV show. And that's what you want from ships in this game. You want to feel like you're flying that ship you've seen on TV for the last 20 years.
Two very different attempts at the same ship. While I'll see the six-foot model and know it's the D, it is the four-foot that instantly brings back memories of TNG. The four-foot looks more aggressive, which also makes sense in the war-torn universe that STO takes place in. The four-foot would also be a great candidate for this new texturing technique Cryptic has used with the Ambassador.
Thanks for reading!
Number one on my wishlist: New FED transporter effect
Number two: 22nd Century Excursion Jackets
Number three: Handheld communicator animation for non-combadge uniforms
I'm in the camp that a MMO starship will never look perfect, however, I believe that each model should have the look and feel of ship it's representing. For the most part everything is correct. The Intrepid looks and feels like an Intrepid, the Defiant looks and feels like a Defiant, and the Sovereign looks and feels like a Sovereign.
The Intrepid doesn't look like an Intrepid. Just look at the weird window/light things on the bottom of the saucer, and the size of the registry number. I could make a comparison if it's not obvious.
But yes, the Defiant has come a long way, and it looks good.
But then we get to the Galaxy. It doesn't look or feel like the Six-Foot Model and it doesn't look or feel like the Four-Foot Model either.
It's in this middle-ground where it just doesn't feel right. The neck is probably the biggest culprit, it feels way too straight, removing the small forward-swept feeling of the saucer over the deflector dish, instead it feels like it's just on top of it. I could nit-pick the saucer and secondary hull, but if there's not going to be a new model created I would just really like a new neck.
And lastly there's an issue for the artist to consider. What version of the D do I use as reference? If you're in this thread you probably know that there were three different models of the Enterprise-D used throughout the run of NextGen and the first half of DS9. Of these three, the graceful and curvaceous six-footer, the stocky bulldog that is the four-footer, and the small practical two-footer I think I'd go for the four-footer.
While not quite as graceful as the original sixer, it emanates for me the feel of the TV show. And that's what you want from ships in this game. You want to feel like you're flying that ship you've seen on TV for the last 20 years.
Two very different attempts at the same ship. While I'll see the six-foot model and know it's the D, it is the four-foot that instantly brings back memories of TNG. The four-foot looks more aggressive, which also makes sense in the war-torn universe that STO takes place in. The four-foot would also be a great candidate for this new texturing technique Cryptic has used with the Ambassador.
Thanks for reading!
I totally agree. The ingame Galaxy-class looks like they tried to make both the original six-footer (note that the starboard warp nacelle was always tilted, they didn't do this thankfully), the four-footer, and the CGI Galaxy from Generations/DS9. It looks terrible...
stardestroyer001, Admiral, Explorers Fury PvE/PvP Fleet | Retired PvP Player
Missing the good ol' days of PvP: Legacy of Romulus to Season 9 My List of Useful Links, Recently Updated November 25 2017!
I totally agree. The ingame Galaxy-class looks like they tried to make both the original six-footer (note that the starboard warp nacelle was always tilted, they didn't do this thankfully), the four-footer, and the CGI Galaxy from Generations/DS9. It looks terrible...
Agreed, though if they wanted a hybrid they could always ask Gabriel Koerner for a look at his Enterprise-D CGI model, which he made for "These Are the Voyages...". He stated that he used the basic geometry off of the 6ft model, but included the more detailed hull from the 4ft version: http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Galaxy_class_model#Gabriel_Koerner.27s_CGI_model
Agreed, though if they wanted a hybrid they could always ask Gabriel Koerner for a look at his Enterprise-D CGI model, which he made for "These Are the Voyages...". He stated that he used the basic geometry off of the 6ft model, but included the more detailed hull from the 4ft version: http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Galaxy_class_model#Gabriel_Koerner.27s_CGI_model
I'm sorry, but IMHO, that model was the worst appearance of the Galaxy-class starship in the whole Trek series. The deflector shape didn't look anything like the 6-footer or the 4-footer, and neither did the rear of the saucer, nacelle pylons, engineering section rear, or the colours of the ship's warp engines.
The hull textures looked nice, but the shape was off.
stardestroyer001, Admiral, Explorers Fury PvE/PvP Fleet | Retired PvP Player
Missing the good ol' days of PvP: Legacy of Romulus to Season 9 My List of Useful Links, Recently Updated November 25 2017!
I'm sorry, but IMHO, that model was the worst appearance of the Galaxy-class starship in the whole Trek series. The deflector shape didn't look anything like the 6-footer or the 4-footer, and neither did the rear of the saucer, nacelle pylons, engineering section rear, or the colours of the ship's warp engines.
The hull textures looked nice, but the shape was off.
Okay fair enough, so which should they use for future/potential model fixes? Chronologically speaking, the six foot Enterprise-D model was the last one used on screen in Generations: http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Galaxy_class_model#Use
Its use in Star Trek Generations, proved to be the last time the six-foot studio model was ever used as a production asset, the shot of the saucer section breaking through the cloud cover of Veridian III, being the very last of the model.
Comments
Its just that they are all busy with season 6 atm but your right they should have fixed all ships problems when they had the free time and when we have been telling they for ages. This one of the reason why im a silver player.
1. The Venture saucer is ALWAYS missing half the windows on its ventral surface.
(See this link for a clear image of the missing windows: http://www.stowiki.org/images/thumb/0/00/Exploration_Cruiser_Refit_bottom.png/800px-Exploration_Cruiser_Refit_bottom.png)
2. If you use ONLY Venture parts, you can use whatever windows you like.
3. If you use Venture parts, but with a Galaxy neck, the windows become different for each section; they show up normally when you hover the mouse pointer over the drop-down list, but when you click on them, the hull section always reverts to Type 1 windows.
4. The nacelles and pylons do not change any of this, and seem to be unrelated to the problem.
Please, the sooner this can be fixed, the better; I paid real money for this thing, and it's been broken ever since I bought it last September. I wouldn't have bought it if the C-store showed the underside with the missing windows (I'm a bit OCD about things matching, and it drives me crazy to look at it).
I agree with you completely on this, it's been almost a year since I've bought this ship with dozens of bug reports issued, and never heard a single word on it being fixed.
useless report and i leave here only the pic (there is not one for the center pilon, so feel free to use for the 2nd post)
bye!
1. The same issue as the t5 excelsior use to have, the Impulse engines only partially swap to special engine trails for items such as the omega / maco engine. The one that seems to misbehave is the outside trail on the saucer section.
2. I did not infact name my vesta 09870987098709870987098
https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/4COTmFltH-30edSJ9l8qPWi2qz6p6gkwnlIOmEHzM9c?feat=directlink
This seems to be an issue only with the vesta saucer as the others seemed to display ok. Also the flight deck portion of the vesta displays the name correctly.
Problem # 1
The Vigilant nacells fit on the Sao Palo's hull is really awarkard & Ugly. The nacells are way to low and look stupid. This needs to be fixed. Also part of the hull cuts out of the top of the nacell's top. Devs can this be fixed ?
Problem # 2
The Quad phasers controll my forward Phaser Cannons. But i'm running 3 phaser turrets on the rear that is not controlled by the Quad cannons. they fire out of sync.
Problem # 3
The material type 6 skin cannot be applied it you use any of the other defiant parts.
Please leave some good feedback I wish a DEV would respond or it would get someone's attention. i love the Defiant and would love to see these little problems fixed.
Thx ~ OOP
When I first started playing season 7, I was happy to see the Acamarians were in it. I enjoy seeing the various characters from the different series in the show. When I played the Acamarian system, I thought the Acamarian ships looked a little weird. Then this weekend, I realized what it was that was wrong, the Acamarians were using TALARIAN ships!
This is an Acamarian Ship:
http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Acamarian_starship
This is a Talarian ship:
http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Talarian_warship
They look similar but there is a difference.
I just thought I'd share that tidbit of info. Have a great day!
~Plumeyer
I do also have a window problem with the constiution class. All my windows have a strenge white T on them. It may be a graphic problem on my computer, but I think it is releated to the model.
- I am one of the owners of SN Fleet. Join us in our next adventure!
An Escort that can't turn is not an Escort.
Steamrunner:
Beautiful, but two small problems.
1) Impulse engines are in the wrong place.
http://shipyard.scifi-art.com/steamrunner_top.jpg
They should be on the back of the saucer. The "cut-outs" for them are already there, there's just nothing there..
2) There seems to be a bug with the "camera" being too far back. It makes it turn kind of weird (As if it's front-heavy) and when looking at it in the shipyard, it becomes obvious that the camera pivot point is too far aft.
3) The 1st option under Windows (when you're customizing the ship) removes all of the lifeboats and the windows look stretched and really really bad.
Other then that, beautiful ship. Enjoying it very, very much.
1) It seems badly scaled. It's bigger then an Akira and wider then a Sovereign. David Stipes, DS9 visual effects supervisor, said the Steamrunner was 244 meters long. It should be roughly half the size of an Akira.
2) It doesn't have any floodlights covering the name and registry on either the dorsal or ventral surfaces.
I have seen that a few models in game get TRIBBLE because of textures applied by components you put on the ship. Shilds, engines, deflectors and consoles that edit the ship visuals may tard up the model textures.
This is a problem with the T1 constition class. That error is caused by the shield. You can disable the visuals by right clicking the component and select disable visuals.
- I am one of the owners of SN Fleet. Join us in our next adventure!
An Escort that can't turn is not an Escort.
Here is your model.
STO Defiant-class model
Here is the correct model:
Defiant-class model side view
The Valiant, so you can see what really bugs me.
When they designed the Defiant for the game, they broke her nose and pushed it back. I just wish they would... fix it.
Dreadnought class. Two times the size, three times the speed. Advanced weaponry. Modified for a minimal crew. Unlike most Federation vessels, it's built solely for combat.
*working as intended* by artwork
-> https://picasaweb.google.com/107690288451082557730/StarTrekOnlineArtwork#5621394901640544050
but yes, ugliest Bridge EVER
Windows on the Galaxy/Dreadnaught/refit lower saucer are still misaligned, which isn't too noticeable, but the Dreadnaught dorsal cannons and spinal cannon are still displaced slightly to port, which is very noticeable.
amen bro!
Already a refit version of the sovereign class but no fixes
Just bought a Wells Temporal Science Vessel from the exchange and found that the ship does not have floodlights lighting the 'Starfleet Insignia' on the hull. In this picture of the Wells Class from the VOY: "Relativity", it shows that there are floodlights (though dim) on both sides of the hull lighting the insignia. Also, the in-game Wells has its nav lights on both sides blinking red while in this picture again from VOY: "Relativity", shows a green nav light on the starboard side.
Note: Image of the Wells Class (from Star Trek: Voyager) taken from Memory Alpha Wiki.
Pretty much my opinion on what needs to be fixed. I omitted a lot of things I could say about all three ships, and others, but those are the most obvious.
Missing the good ol' days of PvP: Legacy of Romulus to Season 9
My List of Useful Links, Recently Updated November 25 2017!
But then we get to the Galaxy. It doesn't look or feel like the Six-Foot Model and it doesn't look or feel like the Four-Foot Model either.
It's in this middle-ground where it just doesn't feel right. The neck is probably the biggest culprit, it feels way too straight, removing the small forward-swept feeling of the saucer over the deflector dish, instead it feels like it's just on top of it. I could nit-pick the saucer and secondary hull, but if there's not going to be a new model created I would just really like a new neck.
And lastly there's an issue for the artist to consider. What version of the D do I use as reference? If you're in this thread you probably know that there were three different models of the Enterprise-D used throughout the run of NextGen and the first half of DS9. Of these three, the graceful and curvaceous six-footer, the stocky bulldog that is the four-footer, and the small practical two-footer I think I'd go for the four-footer.
While not quite as graceful as the original sixer, it emanates for me the feel of the TV show. And that's what you want from ships in this game. You want to feel like you're flying that ship you've seen on TV for the last 20 years.
A quick example being (yes I know it's a different game, but the idea is the same) Bridge Commander. Two very very good models for the Galaxy are Wiley Coyote's Six-Foot Based Generations Model and C2X's more four-foot based Galaxy.
Two very different attempts at the same ship. While I'll see the six-foot model and know it's the D, it is the four-foot that instantly brings back memories of TNG. The four-foot looks more aggressive, which also makes sense in the war-torn universe that STO takes place in. The four-foot would also be a great candidate for this new texturing technique Cryptic has used with the Ambassador.
Thanks for reading!
Number two: 22nd Century Excursion Jackets
Number three: Handheld communicator animation for non-combadge uniforms
The Intrepid doesn't look like an Intrepid. Just look at the weird window/light things on the bottom of the saucer, and the size of the registry number. I could make a comparison if it's not obvious.
But yes, the Defiant has come a long way, and it looks good.
I totally agree. The ingame Galaxy-class looks like they tried to make both the original six-footer (note that the starboard warp nacelle was always tilted, they didn't do this thankfully), the four-footer, and the CGI Galaxy from Generations/DS9. It looks terrible...
Missing the good ol' days of PvP: Legacy of Romulus to Season 9
My List of Useful Links, Recently Updated November 25 2017!
Agreed, though if they wanted a hybrid they could always ask Gabriel Koerner for a look at his Enterprise-D CGI model, which he made for "These Are the Voyages...". He stated that he used the basic geometry off of the 6ft model, but included the more detailed hull from the 4ft version: http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Galaxy_class_model#Gabriel_Koerner.27s_CGI_model
I mean, it didn't turn out too bad in the end: New Enterprise-D CGI.
Commanding Officer: Captain Pyotr Ramonovich Amosov
Dedication Plaque: "Nil Intentatum Reliquit"
I'm sorry, but IMHO, that model was the worst appearance of the Galaxy-class starship in the whole Trek series. The deflector shape didn't look anything like the 6-footer or the 4-footer, and neither did the rear of the saucer, nacelle pylons, engineering section rear, or the colours of the ship's warp engines.
The hull textures looked nice, but the shape was off.
Missing the good ol' days of PvP: Legacy of Romulus to Season 9
My List of Useful Links, Recently Updated November 25 2017!
Okay fair enough, so which should they use for future/potential model fixes? Chronologically speaking, the six foot Enterprise-D model was the last one used on screen in Generations: http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Galaxy_class_model#Use
Commanding Officer: Captain Pyotr Ramonovich Amosov
Dedication Plaque: "Nil Intentatum Reliquit"