I like yours. It's got some really cool parts to it like the nacelles.
Here's mine which I'm going to start spamming around the forums. I have'nt entered it in yet because i'm unsure about it. Intervention -class
This one looks like a melding of the NX/Galaxy and the sovereign, my only advice would be to smooth the outlines over, it looks a bit wobbly in places, but its a good design.
Looking back at previous designs is a good idea, but you should look at the direction of the canon ships were heading.
all the pictures look ok, but the problem people are having is that all there ship designs look very simular to other star trek ship, then new Enterprise F contest (which the UK cannot join). needs to be unique and different for all other enterprises in the past.
If the contest was "Design a starship" it would be so much easier to be "original." The problem is that the Enterprise is an iconic vessel, a well known character of Star Trek. The Enterprise has 2 nacelles, a stardrive section, and a saucer. There's only so many variations on that you can do. At best you try to create different shapes for those parts in an attempt to be original.
all the pictures look ok, but the problem people are having is that all there ship designs look very simular to other star trek ship, then new Enterprise F contest (which the UK cannot join). needs to be unique and different for all other enterprises in the past.
Please try to make unigue designs
That's OK as a concept, problem is that the devs have already said they want something evolutionary; that is, something that could rationally be part of a design lineage from the Enterprise-E to the Enterprise-J. In some ways, our current Fleet Excorts are already there, with their embedded saucer design - we need something int he cruiser role though, to fit the lineage.
That requirement kinda limits the "uniqueness" of the designs, as we know the J has a saucer, a attached engineering hull, and twin nacelles. While a design lineage isn't necessarily a limiting factor (the apparent "retro" look of the Excelsior-class is testament to that, in fine anyway), the gross is still a twin-nacelle, saucer with engineering hull design that has been maintained.
Anyone else who wants to post their entry here, please feel free!
Youer design has possibilities; it fits all of Roddenberry's guidelines and can be conceived of as a stepping-stone to the J. Can I ask a few things, though? Not trying to be critical, just trying to wrap my head around a couple of your concepts...
1) As of the end of TNG, Starfleet had shown a trend toward flatter, sleeker designs - culminating in the J, which is almost flat as a pancake from what we could see of it. Why did you choose to have a sword-hilt shaped engineering hull and a conventional dorsal connecting the saucer and the engineering hull? Being again that the trend has been toward "neckless" designs... Now, I agree with shortening and de-empathizing the engineering hull, as that's clearly part of the design lineage - I'm just asking in your case because it makes the ship look a little chunky compared to the flatter Sovereign, which this is supposed to be the next step up from.
2) A minor quibble - your nacelles appear to be above the saucer rim in the side view, but your front view puts them below the saucer rim. Which are we supposed to go with?
I see your ship as a blending of a Excelsior and a Galaxy, with a couple of other concepts thrown in. Not a bad design at all - and I could see that one winning. When it lets me, I'll give ya a star. Using a SR-71 jet intake as a model for the Bussard collector shows some originality, and some understanding of the Bussard concepts - which is a bonus
That's actually not a bad design at all, melding a Sovereign and a Excelsior that way - I'm just not sure if it's evolutionary enough.
Remember, the contest was to design something in the design lineage between the Sovereign and the Enterprise-J - and I'm not sure your ship would fit as the next step after a Sovereign. (Yes, the Excelsior always had a "retro" feel to me, and IIRC the people over at ILM who designed it did that deliberately).
Youer design has possibilities; it fits all of Roddenberry's guidelines and can be conceived of as a stepping-stone to the J. Can I ask a few things, though? Not trying to be critical, just trying to wrap my head around a couple of your concepts...
1) As of the end of TNG, Starfleet had shown a trend toward flatter, sleeker designs - culminating in the J, which is almost flat as a pancake from what we could see of it. Why did you choose to have a sword-hilt shaped engineering hull and a conventional dorsal connecting the saucer and the engineering hull? Being again that the trend has been toward "neckless" designs... Now, I agree with shortening and de-empathizing the engineering hull, as that's clearly part of the design lineage - I'm just asking in your case because it makes the ship look a little chunky compared to the flatter Sovereign, which this is supposed to be the next step up from.
2) A minor quibble - your nacelles appear to be above the saucer rim in the side view, but your front view puts them below the saucer rim. Which are we supposed to go with?
I see your ship as a blending of a Excelsior and a Galaxy, with a couple of other concepts thrown in. Not a bad design at all - and I could see that one winning. When it lets me, I'll give ya a star. Using a SR-71 jet intake as a model for the Bussard collector shows some originality, and some understanding of the Bussard concepts - which is a bonus
1) To be honest, it's my own personal preference that I went away from the newer bullet-shaped designs. One of the reasons they did away with the neck between the saucer and stardrive section for the Sovereign is because when they tried to elongate the saucer, it ended up looking bird-like. Removing the neck fixed that. In my design I tried to keep more traditional layout because I like how it looked.
2) You're right. I caught that right after I submitted my image. The nacelles need to be lower on the profile view, and further apart on the front view.
That's actually not a bad design at all, melding a Sovereign and a Excelsior that way - I'm just not sure if it's evolutionary enough.
Remember, the contest was to design something in the design lineage between the Sovereign and the Enterprise-J - and I'm not sure your ship would fit as the next step after a Sovereign. (Yes, the Excelsior always had a "retro" feel to me, and IIRC the people over at ILM who designed it did that deliberately).
Other than that quibble, good job!
I have to disagree with you here, I think its a great design. Its obviously a step up from the Sovereign and at the same time has a tip of the hat to past iconic ships. Not everything has to be "forget the past its all about the future" here. The great thing about Star Trek is how they continue to go back to proven designs that work. Not only do I see that ship as the next Enterprise, I see it as something anyone with a love for ST Cruisers would water at the mouth to fly in-game.
I dont even fly cruisers and Id definitely get rid of one of my other ships for a Cosmos Class if I could.
Okay so I edited mine and I tried to streamline it and clean it up. Intervention -class
History: Due to Starfleet's ever growing needs of advanced capable ships out on the battlefield, the Starfleet corps of engineers have come together to design the Intervention -class. Primarily a tactical ship designed to counter the larger and more powerful ships of the Klingons, Romulans, and Borg. The ship boasts two smaller shuttle bays and a large one along with a docking pad on it's aft. This pad is large enough of carrying two runabouts or two attack fighters or even smaller alien craft/freighters. The Intervention class carries 340 torpedoes, has six torpedo bays, along with 18 phaser banks. The Intervention class is as powerful as two galaxy class starships and 1 and 2/3 larger then a Galaxy class.
Although primarily a combat ship, it boasts a large science department and carries a lot of the same medical equipment a small star base has. It is well designed as an exploration craft for after war missions.
Attributes: The saucer can separate from the rest of the ship and the impulse engines extend out slightly to form smaller pylons.
im getting irritated with this thing. i keep trying to upload my design and when its done "uploading" my picture, it shows my name under someone else's design ... not cool... its done it 3 or 4 times now.
I took design influences from the later ships (Intrepid/Sovereign/Nova/Prometheus) and blended them together while adding a few unique features. To me it follows the direction that the Producers/Starfleet Design Bureau were going with their ships, the triangular primary hull/saucer, sleek stream-lined secondary hull/ engineering hull with "neckless" design.
I also tried to give hints at the Enterprise J, with long sweeping pylons and a more streamlined nacelle, but with four classes between the F and J, I felt that I couldn't use it too much (look at the variance between A and D).
The rough size would be slightly larger than the star cruisers too, both for adding awe inspiring presence of the ship and to start its way onto the size of the Ent J (3000km :S ).
I haven't come up with any system or tactical statistics, as being in the game I think it would be restricted to what is available and should the class ever come a Fleet Admiral ship for players to use it would be limited for balance reasons. But visually there are eight forward beam arrays and two rear, with room for torpedo launchers, though itd depend on balance for that tier level.
I spent a lot of hours working on it, and I am no artist but I think it came out quite well for something done in Paint, and look forward to any comments you guys have (good or bad).
im getting irritated with this thing. i keep trying to upload my design and when its done "uploading" my picture, it shows my name under someone else's design ... not cool... its done it 3 or 4 times now.
You need to make sure you are giving your file a unique name. Try adding yout initials or something to the name of the file or something similar. There have been others complaining about this very problem and it seems to be related to the fact that the host cannot differentiate between 2 files from 2 different people with the same file name.
I took design influences from the later ships (Intrepid/Sovereign/Nova/Prometheus) and blended them together while adding a few unique features. To me it follows the direction that the Producers/Starfleet Design Bureau were going with their ships, the triangular primary hull/saucer, sleek stream-lined secondary hull/ engineering hull with "neckless" design.
I also tried to give hints at the Enterprise J, with long sweeping pylons and a more streamlined nacelle, but with four classes between the F and J, I felt that I couldn't use it too much (look at the variance between A and D).
The rough size would be slightly larger than the star cruisers too, both for adding awe inspiring presence of the ship and to start its way onto the size of the Ent J (3000km :S ).
It's not a bad design, the only issues I have with it are that you've basically done a Intrepid with a triangular saucer and fixed warp pylons. From what I understand (and stated by Rick Sternbach as a technobabble explanation for the sleeker designs), the original concept for the warp field was a nearly spherical one, and newer developments in warp field theory mandate a elliptical field these days, with the saucer being elongated to better fill the volume of the new field shape. Supposedly, that's why the warp scale was reformulated - the elliptical field allowed closer approaches to the theoretical Warp 10 (the math of which is based on real relativitiy, by the way). Now, how this relates tot he Enterprise-J and it's very circular saucer is left to whoever can reconcile the two
Your saucer is a bit sharp-edged for that bit of technobabble to really be applicable - perhaps if you smoothed it a bit?
If you wanted to fit Sternbach's concept, you'd start with a ellipsis drawn on the paper, then fit your top view into that - then do the same with your side view. I like certain features of your design - it's the angularity (and the high amount of similarity to the Intrepid) that I personally have issues with. That's my opinion, anyway.
I haven't come up with any system or tactical statistics, as being in the game I think it would be restricted to what is available and should the class ever come a Fleet Admiral ship for players to use it would be limited for balance reasons. But visually there are eight forward beam arrays and two rear, with room for torpedo launchers, though itd depend on balance for that tier level.
I spent a lot of hours working on it, and I am no artist but I think it came out quite well for something done in Paint, and look forward to any comments you guys have (good or bad).
IMHO the decisions as to what weapons/stats/etc. should be left to the devs. After all, all designs in the contest are property of Cryptic, witht he "winner" getting paid with recognition in-game. Why use banks, anyway - banks (as in classic phaser "turrets", in pairs, located around the ship) stopped being implemented when the Federation figured out they could get the same effects from lots of smaller beam emitters arrayed into "strips" that wouldn't have the same coverage gaps that large turrets do...and in doing so made sure that no Federation ship could realistically be called a "dreadnought" (look it up to see why - it's not the reason most people think).
Either way, nice attempt - and TBH, I really don't think that length should be a consideration in the design of the ship. Size does not equal power, as anyone who watched DS9 knows (the Defiant is one of the smallest gunships of any of the Federation races - and look what both it and it's successor did during the Dominion War for your proof) - also remember the scale of such things. The Enterprise-J, at 3000m length (9842 feet, or 1.8 miles) is more of a ark than a usable starship in the conventional sense. Such ships would be built to evacuate planets...
Either way, IMHO any length below 1000M would be fine, as long as it's consistent with the ship's role. General-purpose cruisers would be bigger to handle multiple tasks efficiently, with a correspondingly bigger crew. Tactical ships would be smaller, with just the minimum necessary (the cramped nature of the Defiant exemplifies that) - ans Sci ships would sit int he middle. Being we're designing a Enterprise, you'd be bigger and more in the general-purpose slot, as no Enterprise in Starfleet has been a dedicated warship. In RL history, oh ya - ships named Enterprise have a long and proud history in both US and British navies - but not in Starfleet.
Just some thoguths for you - again, this is my opinion, take it for what it's worth
It's not a bad design, the only issues I have with it are that you've basically done a Intrepid with a triangular saucer and fixed warp pylons. From what I understand (and stated by Rick Sternbach as a technobabble explanation for the sleeker designs), the original concept for the warp field was a nearly spherical one, and newer developments in warp field theory mandate a elliptical field these days, with the saucer being elongated to better fill the volume of the new field shape. Supposedly, that's why the warp scale was reformulated - the elliptical field allowed closer approaches to the theoretical Warp 10 (the math of which is based on real relativitiy, by the way). Now, how this relates tot he Enterprise-J and it's very circular saucer is left to whoever can reconcile the two
Your saucer is a bit sharp-edged for that bit of technobabble to really be applicable - perhaps if you smoothed it a bit?
It is funny you say that, I didn't have the Intrepid in mind when I designed her, I wanted to mix the look of my two favourite ships, the Nova and Prometheus, with the previous Enterprise shape. Some how the Intrepid design worked it's way in there too (especially from a side on view). Which does say something, that the design does follow pre-existing styles.
I see you're point with the warp field, I was unaware of the limitations when I designed it. However it mentions in this site here: http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/articles/design.htm that triangular is the way of future development. I used that article after finishing off my design to see if it was up to standards.
That and I thought that Quantum Slipstreams would be standard at this time, and ships that are built to use them (and not retrofitted like those ingame) would use them as a primary means of transport. Which is why I put a larger deflector dish on it than most of the newer starships.
If you wanted to fit Sternbach's concept, you'd start with a ellipsis drawn on the paper, then fit your top view into that - then do the same with your side view. I like certain features of your design - it's the angularity (and the high amount of similarity to the Intrepid) that I personally have issues with. That's my opinion, anyway.
I understand your position, however I feel that the angular design is what sets it apart compared to pre-existing ships.
IMHO the decisions as to what weapons/stats/etc. should be left to the devs. After all, all designs in the contest are property of Cryptic, witht he "winner" getting paid with recognition in-game. Why use banks, anyway - banks (as in classic phaser "turrets", in pairs, located around the ship) stopped being implemented when the Federation figured out they could get the same effects from lots of smaller beam emitters arrayed into "strips" that wouldn't have the same coverage gaps that large turrets do...and in doing so made sure that no Federation ship could realistically be called a "dreadnought" (look it up to see why - it's not the reason most people think).
This is far from a dreadnought, and was designed as an Exploration Cruiser, with a long term missions in mind, reverting back to the Galaxy concept rather than being more of a "militaristic" concept like the sovereign was made out to be. I think if I had control over BoFF slots, it would be more scientific than Tactical.
Either way, nice attempt - and TBH, I really don't think that length should be a consideration in the design of the ship. Size does not equal power, as anyone who watched DS9 knows (the Defiant is one of the smallest gunships of any of the Federation races - and look what both it and it's successor did during the Dominion War for your proof) - also remember the scale of such things. The Enterprise-J, at 3000m length (9842 feet, or 1.8 miles) is more of a ark than a usable starship in the conventional sense. Such ships would be built to evacuate planets...
I did the top view first way before I bothered with measurements, I later looked at the sizes for deck and window placement (which I didn't end up adding in anyway due to the size of the image). Fortunately the numbers were rounded enough in scale that I didn't have to modify the image at all to make the measurements sound correct.
You need to make sure you are giving your file a unique name. Try adding yout initials or something to the name of the file or something similar. There have been others complaining about this very problem and it seems to be related to the fact that the host cannot differentiate between 2 files from 2 different people with the same file name.
Comments
Here's mine which I'm going to start spamming around the forums. I have'nt entered it in yet because i'm unsure about it.
Intervention -class
I would have voted for it, but sadly, it doesn't like me and always tells me I have already voted.
I have the same problem! I would have voted a ton already, but god forbid, i cant!
Looks like a homage to the Galaxy and Ambassador classes, which may be a step in the wrong direction but it is a neat design.
This one looks like a melding of the NX/Galaxy and the sovereign, my only advice would be to smooth the outlines over, it looks a bit wobbly in places, but its a good design.
Looking back at previous designs is a good idea, but you should look at the direction of the canon ships were heading.
It's crude but I like it. There are obvious signs of the move towards the eventual Ent-J in it which I love.
Looks like a Star Cruiser mixed with an Excelsior Class, looks nice
Please try to make unigue designs
That's OK as a concept, problem is that the devs have already said they want something evolutionary; that is, something that could rationally be part of a design lineage from the Enterprise-E to the Enterprise-J. In some ways, our current Fleet Excorts are already there, with their embedded saucer design - we need something int he cruiser role though, to fit the lineage.
That requirement kinda limits the "uniqueness" of the designs, as we know the J has a saucer, a attached engineering hull, and twin nacelles. While a design lineage isn't necessarily a limiting factor (the apparent "retro" look of the Excelsior-class is testament to that, in fine anyway), the gross is still a twin-nacelle, saucer with engineering hull design that has been maintained.
Youer design has possibilities; it fits all of Roddenberry's guidelines and can be conceived of as a stepping-stone to the J. Can I ask a few things, though? Not trying to be critical, just trying to wrap my head around a couple of your concepts...
1) As of the end of TNG, Starfleet had shown a trend toward flatter, sleeker designs - culminating in the J, which is almost flat as a pancake from what we could see of it. Why did you choose to have a sword-hilt shaped engineering hull and a conventional dorsal connecting the saucer and the engineering hull? Being again that the trend has been toward "neckless" designs... Now, I agree with shortening and de-empathizing the engineering hull, as that's clearly part of the design lineage - I'm just asking in your case because it makes the ship look a little chunky compared to the flatter Sovereign, which this is supposed to be the next step up from.
2) A minor quibble - your nacelles appear to be above the saucer rim in the side view, but your front view puts them below the saucer rim. Which are we supposed to go with?
I see your ship as a blending of a Excelsior and a Galaxy, with a couple of other concepts thrown in. Not a bad design at all - and I could see that one winning. When it lets me, I'll give ya a star. Using a SR-71 jet intake as a model for the Bussard collector shows some originality, and some understanding of the Bussard concepts - which is a bonus
That's actually not a bad design at all, melding a Sovereign and a Excelsior that way - I'm just not sure if it's evolutionary enough.
Remember, the contest was to design something in the design lineage between the Sovereign and the Enterprise-J - and I'm not sure your ship would fit as the next step after a Sovereign. (Yes, the Excelsior always had a "retro" feel to me, and IIRC the people over at ILM who designed it did that deliberately).
Other than that quibble, good job!
1) To be honest, it's my own personal preference that I went away from the newer bullet-shaped designs. One of the reasons they did away with the neck between the saucer and stardrive section for the Sovereign is because when they tried to elongate the saucer, it ended up looking bird-like. Removing the neck fixed that. In my design I tried to keep more traditional layout because I like how it looked.
2) You're right. I caught that right after I submitted my image.
Thanks for the input!
I have to disagree with you here, I think its a great design. Its obviously a step up from the Sovereign and at the same time has a tip of the hat to past iconic ships. Not everything has to be "forget the past its all about the future" here. The great thing about Star Trek is how they continue to go back to proven designs that work. Not only do I see that ship as the next Enterprise, I see it as something anyone with a love for ST Cruisers would water at the mouth to fly in-game.
I dont even fly cruisers and Id definitely get rid of one of my other ships for a Cosmos Class if I could.
Intervention -class
History:
Due to Starfleet's ever growing needs of advanced capable ships out on the battlefield, the Starfleet corps of engineers have come together to design the Intervention -class. Primarily a tactical ship designed to counter the larger and more powerful ships of the Klingons, Romulans, and Borg. The ship boasts two smaller shuttle bays and a large one along with a docking pad on it's aft. This pad is large enough of carrying two runabouts or two attack fighters or even smaller alien craft/freighters. The Intervention class carries 340 torpedoes, has six torpedo bays, along with 18 phaser banks. The Intervention class is as powerful as two galaxy class starships and 1 and 2/3 larger then a Galaxy class.
Although primarily a combat ship, it boasts a large science department and carries a lot of the same medical equipment a small star base has. It is well designed as an exploration craft for after war missions.
Attributes:
The saucer can separate from the rest of the ship and the impulse engines extend out slightly to form smaller pylons.
http://www.startrekonline.com/enterprise/gallery?filter=search&keyword=David%20M.
I took design influences from the later ships (Intrepid/Sovereign/Nova/Prometheus) and blended them together while adding a few unique features. To me it follows the direction that the Producers/Starfleet Design Bureau were going with their ships, the triangular primary hull/saucer, sleek stream-lined secondary hull/ engineering hull with "neckless" design.
I also tried to give hints at the Enterprise J, with long sweeping pylons and a more streamlined nacelle, but with four classes between the F and J, I felt that I couldn't use it too much (look at the variance between A and D).
The rough size would be slightly larger than the star cruisers too, both for adding awe inspiring presence of the ship and to start its way onto the size of the Ent J (3000km :S ).
I haven't come up with any system or tactical statistics, as being in the game I think it would be restricted to what is available and should the class ever come a Fleet Admiral ship for players to use it would be limited for balance reasons. But visually there are eight forward beam arrays and two rear, with room for torpedo launchers, though itd depend on balance for that tier level.
I spent a lot of hours working on it, and I am no artist but I think it came out quite well for something done in Paint, and look forward to any comments you guys have (good or bad).
You need to make sure you are giving your file a unique name. Try adding yout initials or something to the name of the file or something similar. There have been others complaining about this very problem and it seems to be related to the fact that the host cannot differentiate between 2 files from 2 different people with the same file name.
It's not a bad design, the only issues I have with it are that you've basically done a Intrepid with a triangular saucer and fixed warp pylons. From what I understand (and stated by Rick Sternbach as a technobabble explanation for the sleeker designs), the original concept for the warp field was a nearly spherical one, and newer developments in warp field theory mandate a elliptical field these days, with the saucer being elongated to better fill the volume of the new field shape. Supposedly, that's why the warp scale was reformulated - the elliptical field allowed closer approaches to the theoretical Warp 10 (the math of which is based on real relativitiy, by the way). Now, how this relates tot he Enterprise-J and it's very circular saucer is left to whoever can reconcile the two
Your saucer is a bit sharp-edged for that bit of technobabble to really be applicable - perhaps if you smoothed it a bit?
If you wanted to fit Sternbach's concept, you'd start with a ellipsis drawn on the paper, then fit your top view into that - then do the same with your side view. I like certain features of your design - it's the angularity (and the high amount of similarity to the Intrepid) that I personally have issues with. That's my opinion, anyway.
IMHO the decisions as to what weapons/stats/etc. should be left to the devs. After all, all designs in the contest are property of Cryptic, witht he "winner" getting paid with recognition in-game. Why use banks, anyway - banks (as in classic phaser "turrets", in pairs, located around the ship) stopped being implemented when the Federation figured out they could get the same effects from lots of smaller beam emitters arrayed into "strips" that wouldn't have the same coverage gaps that large turrets do...and in doing so made sure that no Federation ship could realistically be called a "dreadnought" (look it up to see why - it's not the reason most people think).
Either way, nice attempt - and TBH, I really don't think that length should be a consideration in the design of the ship. Size does not equal power, as anyone who watched DS9 knows (the Defiant is one of the smallest gunships of any of the Federation races - and look what both it and it's successor did during the Dominion War for your proof) - also remember the scale of such things. The Enterprise-J, at 3000m length (9842 feet, or 1.8 miles) is more of a ark than a usable starship in the conventional sense. Such ships would be built to evacuate planets...
Either way, IMHO any length below 1000M would be fine, as long as it's consistent with the ship's role. General-purpose cruisers would be bigger to handle multiple tasks efficiently, with a correspondingly bigger crew. Tactical ships would be smaller, with just the minimum necessary (the cramped nature of the Defiant exemplifies that) - ans Sci ships would sit int he middle. Being we're designing a Enterprise, you'd be bigger and more in the general-purpose slot, as no Enterprise in Starfleet has been a dedicated warship. In RL history, oh ya - ships named Enterprise have a long and proud history in both US and British navies - but not in Starfleet.
Just some thoguths for you - again, this is my opinion, take it for what it's worth
It is funny you say that, I didn't have the Intrepid in mind when I designed her, I wanted to mix the look of my two favourite ships, the Nova and Prometheus, with the previous Enterprise shape. Some how the Intrepid design worked it's way in there too (especially from a side on view). Which does say something, that the design does follow pre-existing styles.
I see you're point with the warp field, I was unaware of the limitations when I designed it. However it mentions in this site here: http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/articles/design.htm that triangular is the way of future development. I used that article after finishing off my design to see if it was up to standards.
That and I thought that Quantum Slipstreams would be standard at this time, and ships that are built to use them (and not retrofitted like those ingame) would use them as a primary means of transport. Which is why I put a larger deflector dish on it than most of the newer starships.
I understand your position, however I feel that the angular design is what sets it apart compared to pre-existing ships.
This is far from a dreadnought, and was designed as an Exploration Cruiser, with a long term missions in mind, reverting back to the Galaxy concept rather than being more of a "militaristic" concept like the sovereign was made out to be. I think if I had control over BoFF slots, it would be more scientific than Tactical.
I did the top view first way before I bothered with measurements, I later looked at the sizes for deck and window placement (which I didn't end up adding in anyway due to the size of the image). Fortunately the numbers were rounded enough in scale that I didn't have to modify the image at all to make the measurements sound correct.
awesome! thank you!!!