« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5  All

Topic: Model Request: F-NCA  (Read 8634 times)

0 Members and 4 Guests are viewing this topic.

Klingon Fanatic

  • Guest
Re: Model Request: F-NCA
« Reply #40 on: February 08, 2004, 05:12:36 pm »
Quote:

Not yet he is still modifing adding to it.

Either way he now has about 4-5 ships that need converting, so it will end up back logged.  



Lets hope this and the USS K' Tinga will be done shortly

Qapla!

KF
Logged

Marauth

  • Guest
Re: Model Request: F-NCA
« Reply #41 on: February 08, 2004, 08:35:17 pm »
Quote:

The ventral nacelle on the SFB TOS version is like that...thats why its a that size...I cannot yous a Constellation nacelle because, believe it or not that nacelle is larger than a connie's...but I see you point

As for her rear I just TMPed the SFB miniature...the ship that you guys have posted earlier is not an NCA...but rather is an NDW ...that ship too has a very similar layout to the NCA but is much smaller...also her ventral nacelle is smaller than the 2 dorsal ones

FYI:  the Soyuz is a Frigate as is the miranda...only SFC lists a miranda as a CL...but in reality she is not.  The Soyuz is a science ship...those are not weapons on her those are sensors like the Saratoga variant from the pilot ep. of DS9
 
 
BTW: I totally go for and agree with  the "Trident"-class as an NCA...but maybe a version with Connie nacelles???
And maybe add a shuttle bay by cutting into the mesh  under the impulse assembly deck???



To my knowledge only FASA (and possibly SOTSF/Jackhills - not sure on that one) lists the Miranda as a frigate and in FASA frigates are more powerful than CLs - this is due to FASA using a different set of naval terminology to SFB/C. Also we don't know what those pods are - they may be weapons as it was never really explained in the 30 seconds the ship was onscreen.

Further the Miranda is WAAAAAY to big - in simple mass terms not to mention the amount of clearly visible firepower that it posseses in the 18 phaser banks (including the ones on the rollbar - megaphasers my arse) and the dual forward and aft firing torpedos - it outguns an Enterprise class heavy cruiser. So unless we're following FASA nomenclature then the Miranda in standard form would actually be pretty much equivalent to and NCA.

As it is SFCII has the F-NCM - the sort of accurate to the film version of the Miranda as similar in stats to an NCC The Miranda is a lot more capable than we give credit for. The Soyuz lacks the 4 phaser turrets and 4 torpedos from the rollbar not to mention the phasers under the impulse engine that no one spots anyway so it's no where near as capable in combat simply because of the lack of punch from no torpedos and the lack of phaser coverage.

My ?0.02
Logged

Azel

  • Guest
Re: Model Request: F-NCA
« Reply #42 on: February 08, 2004, 10:35:15 pm »
 
Quote:

 

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The ventral nacelle on the SFB TOS version is like that...thats why its a that size...I cannot yous a Constellation nacelle because, believe it or not that nacelle is larger than a connie's...but I see you point

As for her rear I just TMPed the SFB miniature...the ship that you guys have posted earlier is not an NCA...but rather is an NDW ...that ship too has a very similar layout to the NCA but is much smaller...also her ventral nacelle is smaller than the 2 dorsal ones

FYI: the Soyuz is a Frigate as is the miranda...only SFC lists a miranda as a CL...but in reality she is not. The Soyuz is a science ship...those are not weapons on her those are sensors like the Saratoga variant from the pilot ep. of DS9
 

BTW: I totally go for and agree with the "Trident"-class as an NCA...but maybe a version with Connie nacelles???
And maybe add a shuttle bay by cutting into the mesh under the impulse assembly deck???


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



To my knowledge only FASA (and possibly SOTSF/Jackhills - not sure on that one) lists the Miranda as a frigate and in FASA frigates are more powerful than CLs - this is due to FASA using a different set of naval terminology to SFB/C. Also we don't know what those pods are - they may be weapons as it was never really explained in the 30 seconds the ship was onscreen.

Further the Miranda is WAAAAAY to big - in simple mass terms not to mention the amount of clearly visible firepower that it posseses in the 18 phaser banks (including the ones on the rollbar - megaphasers my arse) and the dual forward and aft firing torpedos - it outguns an Enterprise class heavy cruiser. So unless we're following FASA nomenclature then the Miranda in standard form would actually be pretty much equivalent to and NCA.

As it is SFCII has the F-NCM - the sort of accurate to the film version of the Miranda as similar in stats to an NCC The Miranda is a lot more capable than we give credit for. The Soyuz lacks the 4 phaser turrets and 4 torpedos from the rollbar not to mention the phasers under the impulse engine that no one spots anyway so it's no where near as capable in combat simply because of the lack of punch from no torpedos and the lack of phaser coverage.

My ?0.02  



You are correct in the weapon number of the Reliant and possible firepower(if we assume that the miranda and connie have the exact same phaser types...I agree to this). but in real Naval terms the Connie is an Explorer vessel and is classified by the Klingons(ST3) as a Battlecruiser...the Miranda is a Frigate...Frigates are more "powerful" ships...but are mission specific...(Connie's are multimission)hence all the Types of Frigates in the NAVY.
It is a similar agument to the Galaxy vs. Sovie...Galaxy is a multimission explorer...the Sovie is a warship "heavy deterent cruiser"
Also Frigates are patrollers not deepspace mission ships...Explorers are...Constellation, Early Excelsiors, Connies, and Ambassadors to name a few

As for the Soyuz and Sarratoga...those are sensors not weapons...as it was stated in ST the magazine(not a conon source true, but the closest)

I say the Trident/Medusa Class is the most worthy choice...due to the size and era of tech...not to mention configuration
 
Logged

DH123

  • Guest
Re: Model Request: F-NCA
« Reply #43 on: February 10, 2004, 02:25:57 pm »
Bump    
Logged

Bernard Guignard

  • Guest
Re: Model Request: F-NCA
« Reply #44 on: February 15, 2004, 05:50:02 am »
I'm interested in knowing what is going on with this request    
Logged

Azel

  • Guest
Re: Model Request: F-NCA
« Reply #45 on: February 17, 2004, 11:36:08 am »
 
Quote:

 I'm interested in knowing what is going on with this request  



Aye me too  
Logged

FireSoul

  • Guest
Re: Model Request: F-NCA
« Reply #46 on: February 17, 2004, 11:55:59 am »
same..
Logged

nx_adam_1701

  • Guest
Re: Model Request: F-NCA
« Reply #47 on: February 17, 2004, 01:15:45 pm »
dido
Logged

Dizzy

  • Guest
Re: Model Request: F-NCA
« Reply #48 on: February 17, 2004, 02:38:48 pm »
"..."
Logged

DH123

  • Guest
Re: Model Request: F-NCA
« Reply #49 on: February 17, 2004, 06:17:16 pm »
Quote:

OK here is a TMP version of the SFB TOS NCA
Hope this helps

Enjoy

 
 

   



That is perfect!  PLEASE somebody kitbash this from the P81 Connie!!!!!    
Logged

Dizzy

  • Guest
Re: Model Request: F-NCA
« Reply #50 on: February 17, 2004, 07:40:52 pm »
We need an ass shot. Always get the ass shot. What do they teach in College these days?

DH, the lower warp engine is like mini-me. Its disgustingly small.
Logged

FireSoul

  • Guest
Re: Model Request: F-NCA
« Reply #51 on: February 17, 2004, 09:34:08 pm »
Quote:

We need an ass shot. Always get the ass shot. What do they teach in College these days?

DH, the lower warp engine is like mini-me. Its disgustingly small.  



The side warps offer 12 power each. The one under only offers 6. It *IS* small.
Logged

ModelsPlease

  • Guest
Re: Model Request: F-NCA
« Reply #52 on: February 18, 2004, 04:51:24 am »
Adding my $.02      So what's going on with this ship?
-MP  
Logged

DH123

  • Guest
Re: Model Request: F-NCA
« Reply #53 on: February 18, 2004, 12:54:23 pm »
Quote:

Adding my $.02      So what's going on with this ship?
-MP  



Us pothetic non-moddling Mooks are trying to find somebody who can Kit-bash a TMP Chicago Class from the P81 Connie.   Still looking for a modder to do it.  
Logged

FireSoul

  • Guest
Re: Model Request: F-NCA
« Reply #54 on: February 18, 2004, 01:07:35 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

Adding my $.02      So what's going on with this ship?
-MP  



Us pothetic non-moddling Mooks are trying to find somebody who can Kit-bash a TMP Chicago Class from the P81 Connie.   Still looking for a modder to do it.  



There's a perfectly good reason why I don't do Fed ships: the standards are too high.. sorry, Pass it on to the next person.
Logged

Marauth

  • Guest
Re: Model Request: F-NCA
« Reply #55 on: February 18, 2004, 02:42:44 pm »
Too high? LOL P81's stuff is crap in comparison to some of the stuff that's come out in recent times, Not to mention that hideous exagerated bump-mapping.
Logged

Dizzy

  • Guest
Re: Model Request: F-NCA
« Reply #56 on: February 18, 2004, 05:04:57 pm »
Look, tvl, we will settle for what we can get...
Logged

DH123

  • Guest
Re: Model Request: F-NCA
« Reply #57 on: February 18, 2004, 05:34:15 pm »
Quote:

Too high? LOL P81's stuff is crap in comparison to some of the stuff that's come out in recent times, Not to mention that hideous exagerated bump-mapping.  

 

Please enlighten my feeble mind and show me some TMP Federation ships that look better than P81s.  
Logged

Marauth

  • Guest
Re: Model Request: F-NCA
« Reply #58 on: February 18, 2004, 05:40:52 pm »
Certainly - WickedZombie45's ships have been many times superior for quite some time now - the TMP Enterprise being only one example:



http://www.nightsoftware.com/omega/drs/index2.htm

Here's the link - there's loads more feds of all eras - all far superior to P81's work and some Klinks, Roms and even an Andromedan. Not to mention Skinman's TMP feds were very good, but I don't know where they're hosted, if at all.
Logged

ModelsPlease

  • Guest
Re: Model Request: F-NCA
« Reply #59 on: February 19, 2004, 02:45:24 am »
Count me in as one of the  pathetic shleps who have only Mastered the  Vulcan D/L Technique a.k.a left clicking on the mouse   And personally I dig just about all the ships I've seen from the community here.I want them all.And I want more and more of them.I think it was Azel who recently said "Fresh Ideas from young minds." I agree.Now having said this.Someone  PLEASE  kitbash this so us Shleppies can get to flying it  Thank You
-MP
---------------------------------
" I'm a Model Junkie always in search of my next model fix "
 ModelsPlease@aol.com    
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5  All
« previous next »