Topic: Speak softly, but carry a big stick... (Read 6847 times)

Wicked Zombie · « **on:** November 27, 2005, 01:23:23 pm »

Those of you who were following the 3 month long WIP thread on my forums were probably wondering if this would ever get finished. The Missouri was never completed, and the Mars is just plain ugly, so hopefully the third time is the charm as far as TMP Fed Battleships go:

The Carolina class first began construction as a yet unnamed Missouri class battleship. Not long after construction began, Starfleet decided to retool the project into the newly proposed "Battleship NX-4438" design. The Missouri, along with the Yamato and the over-budget Mars refits, had fell short of Starfleet's expectations (either economically, tactically, or technologically) and the Federation council decided to take one last gamble on a warship that could truly counter those of the Klingon and Romulan empires.

In less than three years the new starship, christened the U.S.S. Carolina, was launched from the naval yards at Utopia Planetia for an immediate shakedown cruise and field trials. Not long after the shakedown began, the ship engaged and destroyed a group of Klingon convoy raiders much to the surprise of the Klingon Empire who's intelligence department had been mislead into believing the new battleship being constructed was just another Missouri. After this unplanned, yet successful test of the starship's capabilities, Starfleet ordered three additional Carolina class vessels to be constructed while the Carolina herself continued field trials.

The Carolina is equipped with three shuttle bays capable of launching and servicing over a dozen fighter craft with an additional dozen shuttles, two dozen phaser emitters, eight photon torpedo launchers, a pair of Anti-Drone-Defense auto-turrets, heavy blast-armor, reinforced hull, four warp engines (two per nacelle), four fusion reactors, and battleship-grade shields. In addition, the ship has a dedicated Command-Intelligence-Center above the aft shuttlebays providing a wide field of view of the surrounding area for the command staff. A further distinction is the inclusion of an internal defense mainframe with containment force fields, hidden corridor phaser auto-cannons, and heavy-blast bulkheads to help deter/defend against enemy boarding actions. This mainframe proved instrumental during the Andromedan conflict, where assault droids beamed over from the Andromedan ships were a constant menace to the Alpha-Quadrant crews.

However, despite these advancements and capabilities, the Carolina and other battleships of her time were beginning to lose their value since they were primarily war-oriented ships. Not long after the end of the Andromedan invasion, many of these battlewagons were decommissioned or scrapped in favor of more exploration based vessels. The U.S.S. Arizona, named in honor of a slain American sea-ship, fittingly remains as one of the last of these massive vessels and is moored in low Earth orbit above Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, directly parallel to her ancestor's memorial.

Hi-res and Low-res versions are available along with a set of blank textures for custom registries.

Klingon Fanatic · « **Reply #1 on:** November 27, 2005, 01:40:06 pm »

Awesome! I love the textures and the engines especially. Nice backstory too!

Excellent work and thank you for sharing this.

KF

OlBuzzard · « **Reply #2 on:** November 27, 2005, 02:26:42 pm »

WOW ..

Dude !

I love your work ! (Always have )

Bernard Guignard · « **Reply #3 on:** November 27, 2005, 06:04:07 pm »

Supberb

J. Carney · « **Reply #4 on:** November 27, 2005, 07:51:24 pm »

The detail is AMAZING! Ecxcellent design, and awesome textures.

Brush Wolf · « **Reply #5 on:** November 28, 2005, 02:55:00 am »

By the title of the thread it sounded like you were making the USS Theodore Roosevelt.

Shadowfleet · « **Reply #6 on:** November 28, 2005, 06:27:16 pm »

Woo Hoo!!!! Absolutely awesome. Thanks WZ. I like the design alot, especially the top of the saucer and bridge. As always your texture work is topnotch.

Norsehound · « **Reply #7 on:** November 28, 2005, 07:14:19 pm »

I thought curved nacelle pylons didn't exist in TMP, and were clearly a TNG feature?

Impressive as always, except the pylon curvature, which I never understood anyway.

Greenvalv · « **Reply #8 on:** November 28, 2005, 07:57:18 pm »

I LOVE IT, best looking TMP ship I have ever seen, magnificent!

FoaS_XC · « **Reply #9 on:** November 28, 2005, 10:32:40 pm »

Kick ass, as i said.

GotAFarmYet? · « **Reply #10 on:** November 29, 2005, 12:08:47 am »

Like it allot!

was never fond of the three and four warp engine designes myself. Always thought that was more because of SFB that Trek that those type of designes evolved.

Norsehound · « **Reply #11 on:** November 29, 2005, 01:21:46 pm »

I prefer the three-nacelle dreadnoughts over anything TNG puts up. The only impressive 'dreadnought' post TNG is the Sovergin, but of course that's classed under 'explorer' now, isn't it?

And besides, even though Gene roddenberry said no three or one nacelled designs, TNG breaks that rule by having both in the BoBw graveyard.

Wicked Zombie · « **Reply #12 on:** November 29, 2005, 03:26:14 pm »

It was never decreed that curved pylons can't exist before TNG. The Excelsior and Oberth both had non-straight pylons, and they were certainly TMP era. Regardless, I used them because they worked with the design. Straight pylons didn't work with the Carolina and if something doesn't work, you try something that does. Whether or not they clash with the era/type/race/etc. of the ship can be dealt with afterwards.

Mackie · « **Reply #13 on:** November 29, 2005, 03:38:15 pm »

A nice ship

but as its been said, i dont think curved pylons are really a TMP thing

and as for my opinion about "Speak softly, but carry a big stick"
Be LOUD and be RUDE so you dont need to bring out big sticks

Wicked Zombie · « **Reply #14 on:** November 29, 2005, 04:05:47 pm »

These curved pylons don't really resemble anything seen in TNG (canon wise). In fact, the only major instance of curved pylons, which were really just Excelsior pylons with a rounded bend, were on the Galaxy and Amassador types. Most Federation starships have had straight pylons, regardless of the era, so the ones used on the Carolina and other ships I've made are a fairly unique trait.

Dawntreader · « **Reply #15 on:** November 29, 2005, 05:31:51 pm »

I don't care about that pylon issue, that is just awsome. On a side note, I might need a towel after seeing this ship.

Norsehound · « **Reply #16 on:** November 30, 2005, 12:49:33 am »

The pylon issue is just a pet peeve of mine because somehow I enjoy pure TMP designs far more than anything TNG and beyond.

The way I see it personally, the Federation ship design mentality didn't really go into ornimenting their ships until sometime just before TNG. For in TMP, the only real curved surface we see are things like the secondary hull of starships (circular, like the Constitution, and half-circular on the exclsior, from the front profile). For the most part saucers were round and everything was balanced.

The Ambassador carries many of these traits too and doesn't go overboard. It is also one of the few TNG designs I like...except for the nacelles. Nacelles here get shorter than the primary hull, which I think is another drawback.

The Enterprise-D (also known by some as the loveboat in space) is very front-heavy with most of the emphasis placed on a wide, oval saucer, and curved lines instead of straight ones. IIRC, the only straight lines really on the ship are seen from the side- specificly the 'equators' running along the primary and secondary hulls, as well as the shorter warp engines.

Post TNG - Movies seem to be taking chapters from TMP designs- inroducing the Sovergin with pylons just as long if not longer than the re-arranged primary hull. This gives the Sovergin, IMO, a more balanced look that doesn't seem to put too much emphasis on anything.

Then again, the Sovergin also had curved pylons also, but it wasn't a TMP ship. The summary of all this I guess is that TMP ships use more straight lines than ships of later eras, especially TNG. Just something to notice.

Major A Payne · « **Reply #17 on:** November 30, 2005, 01:09:02 am »

I don't know WZ. To me the ship just looks far to advanced to be a TMP design. Maybe early TNG, or one to bridge the gap between the two eras. Either way its an excellent design and the modelling is top notch as usually expected.

Wicked Zombie · « **Reply #18 on:** November 30, 2005, 07:16:38 pm »

TMP ships can use whatever lines that look good, it doesn't matter what other eras have. As long as the overall appearance of the design fits the time period that it's for, then everything else will work out. While some may focus on the mere lines of a ship, I prefer to focus on the actual elements of what the ship has to help define when it is from.

If I had added escape pods, phaser arrays, and all those other typical TNG traits, it wouldn't really look like a TNG design because it wouldn't have the style of that era. A set of curved pylons isn't enough to distinguish it and muddle the timeframe, just like a big, boat-shaped hull isn't enough to toss the Excelsior out the window. One of those "forrest-for-the-trees" situations.

I'm sure people had the same reaction when the Excelsior appeared, something that was very different from the Constitution and Miranda. Long nacelles, thick neck, boat-hull, handlebar pylons - all things that hadn't been seen prior to ST3. There's also the very unusual Oberth, another design that strays from the norm. That goes to show that the designers were trying new things and not limiting themselves to what was done previously. Now those ships are generally accepted as defining the TMP era, so there's no reason why other designs can't do the same.

MP - The ship is late TMP era, as the Andromedan Invasion supposedly took place in the 2290s, at least as far as the original SFB timeline is concerned. Since the Carolina is the last of the 'old-school' battlewagons it's feasible that it would have some of the old and new technologies/concepts from a period just prior to the 24th century.

Azel · « **Reply #19 on:** November 30, 2005, 07:22:34 pm »

OK...WTF is wrong with you guys!
This model is in no way indicative of a TNG ship...not one TNG ship shares any features with this ship...other than the standard saucer/hull/nacelle combination.
In fact only TMP ships have the curved pylons...not straight as some of you think....do some research, and you'll see what I am talking about .
TNG ships have curved corners not curved pylons....ever heard of a ship called Akyazi?
I mean dammit, I have never seen such a BS complaint in my life...Look, if you don't like it...don't DL it...or build one your damned self.
pet peeve?? pet peeve!!
this is my pet peeve...a lot of hard work goes into building a ship to fit the bill, that doesn't look like a damned TMP Connie Kitbash that makes no sense(no offence to you kitbashers out there you know I support you!)...or some pathetic BS excuse for those fan-boyed "uber cruiser".
a real design that follows the line of thinking to make a transition from TMP towards the future, transcending the Eras ...Like the excelsior...and you guys whine about it???

....(and you wonder why I ducked out of here)

BTW:
Hello Sandman, MP, FW, FotS, Mackie, Ol'Buzz and others!!!

Centurus · « **Reply #20 on:** November 30, 2005, 08:27:19 pm »

*looks at Azel* Can I get you a drink buddy? Coffee, beer, Jack Daniels? Maybe a slave girl?

Anyway, I love the ship. With me, deciding what era a ship fits into doesn't always depend on how the ship looks, what her design is, what features she has. It's also in how you write her story. Every ship has a story to be told. I remember when I started on the Mark 6 project. I said she was to be an early 25th Century refit, but alot had assumed she was a Lost Era refit, and one individual even said that a 25th Century Connie was stupid and that it wouldn't fly, and that I should be smart and release it as a Lost Era ship. I didn't.

I agree with you Azel, if people don't like it, they don't have to download it. Personally, I don't have that problem. I already love it.

Norsehound · « **Reply #21 on:** December 01, 2005, 12:56:40 am »

Azel: Would you or WZ rather I become a bot and spout mindless praise or give you my honest-to-goodness opinions?

I'm not saying WZ has made a terrible model at all, in fact all of his work has been of the best quality I have ever seen (with the possible exception of WillDecker, but his are retextures, and based on WZ's models). I'm only disputing it's TMP roots by pointing out minor, trivial details...because I can't really say anything else other than 'Woah, Cool model!"

I'm also on the lookout for TMP era models that don't carry any design influences from TNG, and look more linear and blocky instead of streamlined and aquatic. My suggestions are just nitpicks should WZ choose to modify his model or release a second version, which I doubt, and is unecissary given the history of this vessel.

And on the note of the Andromedan wars: it's a shame Paramount doesn't take some notes from SFB's history- the latter has much more continuity and consistancy than the storyline presented by Paramount so far.

Core · « **Reply #22 on:** December 01, 2005, 02:37:13 am »

big stick indeed

FoaS_XC · « **Reply #23 on:** December 01, 2005, 08:00:29 am »

Lol, FW, he didnt say 4 Warp Cores, he said 4 Warp Engines. (two in each nacelle) hence the double Grills.

Grim Reaper · « **Reply #24 on:** December 01, 2005, 09:07:20 am »

I like the quality of the model, the sleekness of the design (for such a massive ship!!) and the feel of the vessel.

Norsehound · « **Reply #25 on:** December 01, 2005, 12:50:18 pm »

If I am 'destroying this community' then I'll gladly leave... I don't want to disrupt the delicate balance and work of these modlers.

And besides, better than getting a negative double digit on this karma rating thing, which I'll probably get anyway for opening my big yap.

Wondeful model WZ, but I don't play SFC anymore so I guess it's a no-download for me. Prasie to your Connie modle though, it's even better (IMO) than P-81's (Although his was magnificent also, 'specially with the missing mirror textures).

OlBuzzard · « **Reply #26 on:** December 01, 2005, 01:20:24 pm »

Quote from: Azel on November 30, 2005, 07:22:34 pm

OK...WTF is wrong with you guys!
This model is in no way indicative of a TNG ship...not one TNG ship shares any features with this ship...other than the standard saucer/hull/nacelle combination.
In fact only TMP ships have the curved pylons...not straight as some of you think....do some research, and you'll see what I am talking about .
TNG ships have curved corners not curved pylons....ever heard of a ship called Akyazi?
I mean dammit, I have never seen such a BS complaint in my life...Look, if you don't like it...don't DL it...or build one your damned self.
pet peeve?? pet peeve!!
this is my pet peeve...a lot of hard work goes into building a ship to fit the bill, that doesn't look like a damned TMP Connie Kitbash that makes no sense(no offence to you kitbashers out there you know I support you!)...or some pathetic BS excuse for those fan-boyed "uber cruiser".
a real design that follows the line of thinking to make a transition from TMP towards the future, transcending the Eras ...Like the excelsior...and you guys whine about it???

....(and you wonder why I ducked out of here)

BTW:
Hello Sandman, MP, FW, FotS, Mackie, Ol'Buzz and others!!!

While I might not have expressed it EXACTLY like that ... what I CAN and will say AZEL is:

Narrow minded, half-axxxx, closed boxed ideas that only approve of a select preconceived ideals:

TOS
TMP
certain schools of designs approved by certain Games
PRE-TOS .... as long as it meets a particular criteria

sorry ...

Though I personally might not have designed the ship like this ... I try to see past my own personal pettiness .. and see the design for what it is.

I dont know that I would have named it the Arizona simply out respect to the US Navys position on the matter.

BTW... WZ .. I mean no disrespect to you or your work making that statement. Others who know me know the high regard that I hold sacred for those who serve in the armed forces protecting our freedom. I particularly try to honor those who have given the supreme sacrifice for me to have the life that I enjoy today. (Perhaps that was WZ's intent ... )

please do not take this personal feeling of mine as a matter of dishonored criticism..... (dat cool?)

I said all of that to say this:

We can offer helpful criticism or arguments without trashing someones work. Not everything is posted with the intent of requesting PHILOSOPHICAL design techniques.

BTW... It's not tearing down the community to review something .. or even to disagree...

Perhaps a review on HOW that is presented might be in order.

Core · « **Reply #27 on:** December 01, 2005, 01:37:04 pm »

I now wander what would happen if i ever decide to release any thing

& i am quite aware of the fact tat i ave been saying that i will for years now!!!
but the day is coming

OlBuzzard · « **Reply #28 on:** December 01, 2005, 01:44:17 pm »

That's the whole point ...

release it buddy !

Core · « **Reply #29 on:** December 01, 2005, 01:58:25 pm »

no textures on it .... cant do textures...

Wicked Zombie · « **Reply #30 on:** December 01, 2005, 03:18:02 pm »

I didn't see anything worth getting into such a ruckus over - if I didn't want criticism, I wouldn't have posted it. I just don't share the same viewpoint on certain aspects that others do, which is one of the main reasons I build my own ships. Though, if people want to go on about something, by all means - we modeler types don't get the chance to step up to the public soapboxes much these days.

While I seldom, if ever, agree on criticisms which are basically one's own personal tastes, I don't see any reason to discourage them. It shouldn't matter if one's a contributor or not as the whole point of the forums are to express viewpoints and considerations.

Of course, one has to be careful just how far they go in expressing those viewpoints. Hearing someone give the same old complaint about building a dozen Constitutions, or using piles of texture maps over and over again does get excessively repetitive, for example. As long as they haven't been pointed out before and are valid opinions, there isn't really anything wrong with such comments. That, and being tactful about it which isn't something most people here have ever had a problem with.

Starforce2 · « **Reply #31 on:** December 01, 2005, 06:02:56 pm »

Quote from: Azel on November 30, 2005, 07:22:34 pm

OK...WTF is wrong with you guys!
This model is in no way indicative of a TNG ship...not one TNG ship shares any features with this ship...other than the standard saucer/hull/nacelle combination.
In fact only TMP ships have the curved pylons...not straight as some of you think....do some research, and you'll see what I am talking about .
TNG ships have curved corners not curved pylons....ever heard of a ship called Akyazi?
I mean dammit, I have never seen such a BS complaint in my life...Look, if you don't like it...don't DL it...or build one your damned self.
pet peeve?? pet peeve!!
this is my pet peeve...a lot of hard work goes into building a ship to fit the bill, that doesn't look like a damned TMP Connie Kitbash that makes no sense(no offence to you kitbashers out there you know I support you!)...or some pathetic BS excuse for those fan-boyed "uber cruiser".
a real design that follows the line of thinking to make a transition from TMP towards the future, transcending the Eras ...Like the excelsior...and you guys whine about it???

....(and you wonder why I ducked out of here)

BTW:
Hello Sandman, MP, FW, FotS, Mackie, Ol'Buzz and others!!!

Ok, I don't care if the arizona here has curved pylons or not..but to say tmp ships have curved pylons and tng do not is wrong. Galaxy, Nebula, Sov, Runabouts all have curved pylons leading to the nacelles (akira doesn't, ambassador if u call that tng doesn't either.). Tmp ships, the true ones, do not. Connies, mirandas, excelciors and excleciors 2's, centaur, stagazer (constelation) all havestrait pylons. The only outstanding one is the oberth, and tehcnicly speaking the Nacelles are atatched directly to the ship and the pylons are for the lower sensor boom (and some say the core is down there too but no canon evidence support one way or another the location of the core) so they technicly are not nacelle pylons. Akayazi is not a canon ship. It's a fan ship. Fan made tmp have curved pylons, true tmp do not. Now, as for this ship being cool or not because it has curved pylons is not my point. I think I might prefer them strait, but the ship looks fine the way it is. I don't believe there is anything wrong with a tmp ship having a curved pylon. Certainly not a late era one like this.

Tus-XC · « **Reply #32 on:** December 01, 2005, 10:55:21 pm »

You best check your defnition of straight SF, the excel does not have straight struts, if it did they wouldn't have a bend befoe they attached to the naccel. And technically speaking the oberth has 4 naccel struts, 2 pair per naccel, not your perceptions of 2 pylons and two connecting pylons, one set you could technically call naccel struts and one set for connection purposes. If you made that claim i could equally make the claim that the struts that connect it the saucer section are their to connect the saucer w/ the rest of the ship and are technically speaking not naccel struts (pylons). No this is not the truth for the facts are curved, angled and straight pylons/struts are part of TMP no matter how much people would like to pick and choose thier canon.

ModelsPlease · « **Reply #33 on:** December 01, 2005, 11:23:17 pm »

Hiya Azel (waiving)

.
Great ship WZ......so now are ya ready to take on the Elkins ???? I searched and search and finally found an F-14 for you to use in creating the weirdest Trek ship of all time .

PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE
-MP

Starforce2 · « **Reply #34 on:** December 02, 2005, 01:14:43 am »

Quote from: Tus on December 01, 2005, 10:55:21 pm

You best check your defnition of straight SF, the excel does not have straight struts, if it did they wouldn't have a bend befoe they attached to the naccel. And technically speaking the oberth has 4 naccel struts, 2 pair per naccel, not your perceptions of 2 pylons and two connecting pylons, one set you could technically call naccel struts and one set for connection purposes. If you made that claim i could equally make the claim that the struts that connect it the saucer section are their to connect the saucer w/ the rest of the ship and are technically speaking not naccel struts (pylons). No this is not the truth for the facts are curved, angled and straight pylons/struts are part of TMP no matter how much people would like to pick and choose thier canon.

Excel struts do have an angle in them, however this is a sharp angle, 90 degrees, not a bend or a curve. Thus they are still made from strait sections.

Rod ONeal · « **Reply #35 on:** December 02, 2005, 03:16:28 am »

I can easily picture this as "the answer" to the Andromedan invasion. It would make me park my Intruder and break out the Dominator.

Awesome ship, WZ!

Mackie · « **Reply #36 on:** December 02, 2005, 03:28:37 am »

uh... whatwhat? lots of words... MACKIE BASH SHIP! MACKIE BASH SHIP!

Dawntreader · « **Reply #37 on:** December 02, 2005, 03:38:30 am »

Anyone else notice that this ship looks like a TMP version of the Sovereign class? The arrangement of the features are almost identical. A worthy predecessor, and makes sense too.

Tus-XC · « **Reply #38 on:** December 02, 2005, 06:56:05 am »

Quote from: Starforce2 on December 02, 2005, 01:14:43 am

Quote from: Tus on December 01, 2005, 10:55:21 pm
You best check your defnition of straight SF, the excel does not have straight struts, if it did they wouldn't have a bend befoe they attached to the naccel. And technically speaking the oberth has 4 naccel struts, 2 pair per naccel, not your perceptions of 2 pylons and two connecting pylons, one set you could technically call naccel struts and one set for connection purposes. If you made that claim i could equally make the claim that the struts that connect it the saucer section are their to connect the saucer w/ the rest of the ship and are technically speaking not naccel struts (pylons). No this is not the truth for the facts are curved, angled and straight pylons/struts are part of TMP no matter how much people would like to pick and choose thier canon.

Excel struts do have an angle in them, however this is a sharp angle, 90 degrees, not a bend or a curve. Thus they are still made from strait sections.

Umm no, straight sections and straight naccels/pylons are not the same at all. The definition of straight requires there to be no bends period, not matter how sharp, for an object to be striaght. Further a pylong/strut requirs some base connection point, this is its beginning, for the excel this is at a hub on top of the secondary hull. from here the strut makes a bend to attach to the naccel. the strut itself is the whole thing, not from where the bend is to the naccel

OlBuzzard · « **Reply #39 on:** December 02, 2005, 07:29:11 am »

Quote from: Dawntreader on December 02, 2005, 03:38:30 am

Anyone else notice that this ship looks like a TMP version of the Sovereign class? The arrangement of the features are almost identical. A worthy predecessor, and makes sense too.

This is the most plausible answer here !

I think we've became so argumentative that we've over looked the positive in the design.

At least the discussion has settled down to a more sensable "discussion" in stead of "blasting" the thunder out of the design...

Good call DT.... excellent observation.!

Centurus · « **Reply #40 on:** December 02, 2005, 09:14:42 am »

I made the same comment when I saw images of the initial mesh when she was still in the WIP stage.

Starforce2 · « **Reply #41 on:** December 03, 2005, 02:32:10 am »

Quote from: Dawntreader on December 02, 2005, 03:38:30 am

Anyone else notice that this ship looks like a TMP version of the Sovereign class? The arrangement of the features are almost identical. A worthy predecessor, and makes sense too.

It also has a exclaibur feel to it. It's size is so considerably larger that anything else, it's primary an secondary are built to nearly one peice and it has that heavy, overbuilt look to it like the excaly, esp in the top/fore view pic. (I'm talking about the massive TNG era CGI excalibur).

Wicked Zombie · « **Reply #42 on:** December 04, 2005, 03:42:16 pm »

Quote from: ModelsPlease on December 01, 2005, 11:23:17 pm

Hiya Azel (waiving) .
Great ship WZ......so now are ya ready to take on the Elkins ???? I searched and search and finally found an F-14 for you to use in creating the weirdest Trek ship of all time .

-MP

The Elkins? I don't want to even look at that ship, let alone build it.

News:

Topic: Speak softly, but carry a big stick... (Read 6847 times) var addthis_config = {"data_track_clickback":true};

Topic: Speak softly, but carry a big stick... (Read 6847 times)