|
|
Post by USS Mariner on Aug 11, 2008 18:19:24 GMT -5
I have heard your cries for reform, and vow to offer a variant that uses a snazzier B deck.  The prophet has spoken! ;D |
|
|
|
Post by Johanobesus on Aug 12, 2008 22:34:30 GMT -5
I have a little suggestion, if the smaller balls are supposed to be Ph3 turrets. If the phasers are supposed to have 90° arcs, shouldn't there be two turrets to get a 180° arc?
How in the world can anyone look at the NX bridge and not see it as a TMP element? You're PTOS ship looks like a phase two refit.
|
|
|
|
Post by Atrahasis on Aug 13, 2008 5:27:27 GMT -5
I have a little suggestion, if the smaller balls are supposed to be Ph3 turrets. If the phasers are supposed to have 90?arcs, shouldn't there be two turrets to get a 180?arc? All phasers are supposed to have a 360 arc unless blocked by something. Depends on what you consider canon, and for me that is just what we saw on the screen. What we've seen for the Feds in TOS is one ship, the Connie, with a painted hull and sparkly bussards and some angular features. That certainly doesn't mean that all Starfleet vessels followed that design philosophy lineage, especially if you consider the vast array of design differences in TNG...which likey represent different lineages. For example, the rounded Galaxy-class bridge is pretty cool, but that doen;t mean that you'd retrofit it onto every existing Starfleet ship design. In that light, what you're suggesting is some kind of rigid component standardization across the board for all ships. |
|
|
|
Post by Johanobesus on Aug 13, 2008 6:55:34 GMT -5
I thought you were one of the ones agitating for the side 90° arcs in OP? I've found it is more interesting for Constitutions to have only two or four forward phasers instead of six or eight.
It's not rigid. The profile of the saucer doesn't bother me so much, nor the glowing deflector. Having a copper colored dome above the bridge instead of a window isn't a huge deal. It's just the entire look of the thing, with the way the back end sort of molds into the dome and the rectangular gaps underneath the copper part. It is simply too much like the TMP style, and isn't fitting for something that predates the Constitution. It doesn't have to be a simple round module with a cylinder for the elevator and a clear dome on top. But neither should it be something that looks so much like the bridge on the refit Enterprise. Just getting rid of the rectangular spaces and maybe giving the dome a slightly different look would be enough to make it seem like it came from a different era.
|
|
|
|
Post by Atrahasis on Aug 13, 2008 8:15:41 GMT -5
Point taken. I'll endeavor to differentiate it a bit.
As for the 90 degree arcs, I recommended that only for TMP saucer phasers, aka the PhX. They're like "pulse phasers" anyways so they need a limitation.
|
|
|
|
Post by lurker on Aug 13, 2008 14:52:12 GMT -5
I think the phaser turrets are a little big. Other than that I like the standard and GFF variants. I never was a fan of the boxier battle frigate engines.
|
|
|
|
Post by lurker on Aug 18, 2008 20:49:14 GMT -5
|
|
Hey buds, join 4shared now!