Ranger Class

colonelmarik · November 2016

So, I finally gave in and bought the tier 5 TOS ship. I really wanted a Constitution, or at least something that wasn't as fugly as the other TOS ships (except the Daedalus and Pioneer, they're ok), but the Ranger was the only thing available.

However, I'm just not enjoying the LOOK of the ship. I've been agonizing, and I think the problem is that secondary hull, it's just too far forward. Consider the following:

All I did here was move the secondary hull a little further back. I think it makes the ship look MUCH more balanced and elegant (and it frees the designers to put the sensor dome on the bottom of the saucer, as well as move the ventral phasers there, too).

What do you think?

(Oh, btw... landmark 100th thread started)

foxman00 · November 2016

colonelmarik wrote: »

So, I finally gave in and bought the tier 5 TOS ship. I really wanted a Constitution, or at least something that wasn't as fugly as the other TOS ships (except the Daedalus and Pioneer, they're ok), but the Ranger was the only thing available.

However, I'm just not enjoying the LOOK of the ship. I've been agonizing, and I think the problem is that secondary hull, it's just too far forward. Consider the following:

All I did here was move the secondary hull a little further back. I think it makes the ship look MUCH more balanced and elegant (and it frees the designers to put the sensor dome on the bottom of the saucer, as well as move the ventral phasers there, too).

What do you think?

(Oh, btw... landmark 100th thread started)

Personally I am not so sure myself. I personally like the "forward" option. As to bringing it back, it could work, or maybe not. Its hard to tell from one angle.

As many of us know, a ship can look good from one angle, turn it around, ugghhh

bergins · November 2016

Then again, here's the ship from a more common viewpoint:

Star%2BTrek%2BOnline%2BAgents%2Bof%2BYesterday%2BRanger%2Bclass.jpg

... and again, with your changes:

Ok, it's the same picture, but you get my point, yes?

kimony · November 2016

I actually like it both ways but if we're talking strictly balance, I do agree the overall balance of the ship is improved by moving the secondary hull back.

As to the difference moving the secondary hull back would make from the rear angle presented above, I think it would look more like this:

but I agree, the difference as to the rear view* is negligable.

Potato, potahto

*edited for clarity

kodachikuno · November 2016

kinda like it farther back but would also like to see it lowered just a little bit more. All in all tho I rather like design either way.

Less a fan of the gemini

vampeiyre · November 2016

I agree, the secondary hull moved back is definitely a significant improvement.

tyrionjkirk · November 2016

While I am fine with the original design. I do think your concept actually makes the ship look more sleek and I would be happy with this change. Great Idea!!!

ssbn655 · November 2016

I like the forward hull it sets it apart from being just another Fed cruiser. And if it was lowered it would look way to much like a Connie. It's fine the way it is.

meimeitoo · November 2016

colonelmarik wrote: »

So, I finally gave in and bought the tier 5 TOS ship. I really wanted a Constitution, or at least something that wasn't as fugly as the other TOS ships (except the Daedalus and Pioneer, they're ok), but the Ranger was the only thing available.

However, I'm just not enjoying the LOOK of the ship. I've been agonizing, and I think the problem is that secondary hull, it's just too far forward. Consider the following:

All I did here was move the secondary hull a little further back. I think it makes the ship look MUCH more balanced and elegant (and it frees the designers to put the sensor dome on the bottom of the saucer, as well as move the ventral phasers there, too).

What do you think?

(Oh, btw... landmark 100th thread started)

No improvement, IMHO. Now it looks like the saucer is leaning on nothing, and about to break off. Cryptic got it right.

smokebailey · November 2016

Just prior to AoY coming out, and having seen the Ranger (which I agree with Meimei, it's fine as it is) I wanted to try to make something similar, but different, especially since I had no decent tube like structures to use. Here's my own take on it:

My only change for the Ranger would be to make it torpedo pod (if that is what it is, of course) a bit higher, because it, to me, seems like if they fire it, it would clip the top of the bridge. o.o

kodachikuno · November 2016

smokebailey wrote: »

Just prior to AoY coming out, and having seen the Ranger (which I agree with Meimei, it's fine as it is) I wanted to try to make something similar, but different, especially since I had no decent tube like structures to use. Here's my own take on it:

not bad at all, personally prefer the sto one tho.

ssbn655 wrote: »

I like the forward hull it sets it apart from being just another Fed cruiser. And if it was lowered it would look way to much like a Connie. It's fine the way it is.

Im only talkin a hair or two, not a full drop with a "neck" like the connie. for ex in the OPs pic Id say 20-30 pixels(kinda guessing blindly based on the size of the image)

markhawkman · November 2016

yeah, it's not that way because it'd look more like the Constitution.

theraven2378 · November 2016

The Ranger would be perfect with the NX Refit skin

ufpterrell · November 2016

I'll be honest I think I prefer it how it is now. The only thing with the model I dislike is how the engineering hull sort of "clips" into the saucer section. It's like someone activated a noclip command when placing the various sections together. If they could make the joint between the saucer and the hull more convincing (like on the Pioneer class - would actually love to have that at higher tiers btw) it would be much better.

Slight off topic here, but how many of you liked the Pioneer. I thought it was a cute little ship and was saddened I didn't get to pilot her for longer, same with the Miranda class tbh. You race through the levels so fast you never really get to use the starter ships for more than half an hour! For me personally there was that massive XP bonus for AoY launch, so I sped through to level 16 or something before the end of the third or fourth mission in the TOS tutorial arc.

kodachikuno · November 2016

pioneer was a nice lookin ship, would have loved to see a t4 or t5 refit of it for later use in game

shpoks · November 2016

theraven2378 wrote: »

The Ranger would be perfect with the NX Refit skin

zerokillcf2011 · November 2016

Yeah the ranger kinda was weak sauce in my opinion. Still want Crypic to fork over the money to buy the rights to:

Or

smokebailey · November 2016

ufpterrell wrote: »

I'll be honest I think I prefer it how it is now. The only thing with the model I dislike is how the engineering hull sort of "clips" into the saucer section. It's like someone activated a noclip command when placing the various sections together. If they could make the joint between the saucer and the hull more convincing (like on the Pioneer class - would actually love to have that at higher tiers btw) it would be much better.

Slight off topic here, but how many of you liked the Pioneer. I thought it was a cute little ship and was saddened I didn't get to pilot her for longer, same with the Miranda class tbh. You race through the levels so fast you never really get to use the starter ships for more than half an hour! For me personally there was that massive XP bonus for AoY launch, so I sped through to level 16 or something before the end of the third or fourth mission in the TOS tutorial arc.

Yesh, me liked the Ranger. It had asorta "anime trek" feel to it.

smokebailey · November 2016

sorry, Pioneer I was referring to in that last post ^_^;;

sorceror01 · November 2016

OP, I think what's really getting to you is maybe you still sort-of subconsciously want to make the Ranger more Constitution-like? Really, even though the Ranger doesn't have a neck like a Connie does, it does have its secondary hull about that far back under the saucer.

Personally, I rather enjoy the way the Ranger looks as-is. It has a very distinctive profile, and part of that is due to where the secondary hull is placed, too.

Just give it some time to grow on you. Appreciate it for what it is.

sorceror01 · November 2016

Be that as it may, if it gets moved too far back, whenever you use a deflector dish ability, there's a high chance it's going to bisect your saucer even more flagrantly (the Nebula also suffers from this problem, but it's somewhat offset by the fact its saucer is wider than it is long; the Ranger's is a perfect circle).
I still do get where you're coming from, but it is the way it is for, like, very specific technical reasons, too.

Ranger Class

Comments