Topic: TNG Constitution Project (Read 48872 times)

atheorhaven · « **Reply #40 on:** October 26, 2007, 03:49:42 pm »

So, you're basically thinking of something like this then for the deflector?

atheorhaven · « **Reply #41 on:** October 26, 2007, 04:14:25 pm »

Btw, here's a quick edit to kind of give you an idea of what a rear observation deck would kind of look like once it was all done. Can't believe noone has done one before..

AsYlUm · « **Reply #42 on:** October 26, 2007, 05:21:41 pm »

Yeah... that is a great idea atheorhaven.... 100% credit to u there... very sweet... thanks for the image too... and as for the deflector exactly..... and very similar to the second one shown by Dawg... although i will have a blend between the connie.. many spike and brown bit tng / voy esc

as for redundant polys on a model.. that doesnt make it any less clean, and considering im still builing the model, and giving some insight into its creation, does not mean its final, eveyone who models knows that redundant polygons are exceptable, under the constraints of any particular build. AND we all know that before it is finished these are corrected, (any more comments regarding how to build meshes please pm me... i have been doing this for a long time and i'll chat to you about it ) but redundant polys in the saucer are intentional.. and considering the excessive detail that is being added... they are needed. As for porting, thats not something i can do... i can build the model and fully texture it... im familar with all the variations of texturing, suitable for all platforms.

I'll leave that to those that have expertise in such issues, but the model will be freely available when done, fully textured of course.

guys, crit is always welcome, guidance and tips and suggestions... keep em coming please....

heres a few new wips including phaser placement..

thanks guys

Starforce2 · « **Reply #43 on:** October 26, 2007, 05:47:32 pm »

it's looking great. BTW, did that phaser tut help ya out?

Vipre · « **Reply #44 on:** October 26, 2007, 07:32:28 pm »

As good as anything ever seen on screen, nice work indeed.

Starforce2 · « **Reply #45 on:** October 26, 2007, 07:57:38 pm »

I just noticed a detail in your phaserplacement I missed the first time around and wanted to question it's sensability. I am refering to those placed along the dorsal section of the drive hull. Wouldn't it be more logical to use a small bank from side to side directly over the shuttlebay (these would be like the short stubby ones used on the concorde models I showed you earlier in this thread) and then use an AGT galaxy setup on the nacelles adding phaserbanks there? You'd have a much wider coverage and due to the obvious galaxy influence on your nacelles, the nacelle platforms wouldn't look all that out of place. They could be reduced in side and slightly reshaped and what not, but it would give some pizzaz to the tops of the nacelles, unless you really want to keep the plain smooth lines there...

F9thDawg · « **Reply #46 on:** October 27, 2007, 10:48:46 am »

Quote from: Starforce2 on October 26, 2007, 07:57:38 pm

I just noticed a detail in your phaserplacement I missed the first time around and wanted to question it's sensability. I am refering to those placed along the dorsal section of the drive hull. Wouldn't it be more logical to use a small bank from side to side directly over the shuttlebay (these would be like the short stubby ones used on the concorde models I showed you earlier in this thread) and then use an AGT galaxy setup on the nacelles adding phaserbanks there? You'd have a much wider coverage and due to the obvious galaxy influence on your nacelles, the nacelle platforms wouldn't look all that out of place. They could be reduced in side and slightly reshaped and what not, but it would give some pizzaz to the tops of the nacelles, unless you really want to keep the plain smooth lines there...

May i recommend placing phaser strips on the nacelle pylons both sides thought being that they would disuade enemy ships from targeting those critical areas plus the arc of those phasers would be wide enough to cover the aft sections

Starforce2 · « **Reply #47 on:** October 28, 2007, 12:14:52 am »

that's true, pylon phasers would work, but it would disrupt the clean style of the tmp pylons. Plus, if he decides to add the intercooler vents from the Ent-A or some type of vent system (the TOS had it too) on the pylons, it's going to look cluttered.

AsYlUm · « **Reply #48 on:** October 28, 2007, 03:50:53 am »

both excellent suggestions, i like them... im gonna continue work on this today and show a couple of wip's.

thanks guys.

Fedman NCC-3758 · « **Reply #49 on:** October 28, 2007, 08:45:56 am »

One would think a ship this nice necessitates the addition of Dnet karma.

Not rushing ya asylum. Keeping ya motivated. Nice work.

AsYlUm · « **Reply #50 on:** October 28, 2007, 11:38:36 am »

Ok so i am done with weapon placements, i took all suggestions in mind when i re did them.. thanks for the input guys.

And thanks for all your interest in this project, oh and the karma lol

F9thDawg · « **Reply #51 on:** October 28, 2007, 01:09:37 pm »

ive noticed that theres no weaponry on the ventral side of the secondary hull could use a traditional ventral phaser to discourage enemy ships from targeting the area

Starforce2 · « **Reply #52 on:** October 28, 2007, 02:21:41 pm »

yea, that's a good idea, but he'd hafta move the side phaser strips up and maybe back a bit otherwise it'd look kinda silly having phasers practicly meet at 90 degrees..it'd be ineffiecient/cluttered looking.

AsYlUm · « **Reply #53 on:** October 28, 2007, 02:34:54 pm »

Lol... ok where is that exactly

darkthunder · « **Reply #54 on:** October 28, 2007, 04:13:35 pm »

Quote from: asylum on October 28, 2007, 02:34:54 pm

Lol... ok where is that exactly

Might I suggest this as a phaser placement rather then the 2 phasers you have currently?

Commonly known as a "belly phaser". Ship looks awesome btw. The torpedo tube placements look good as well, with a slight influence of the Intrepid class in the aft torpedo tube placement

F9thDawg · « **Reply #55 on:** October 28, 2007, 04:33:10 pm »

u midas well paint a big red bullseye on the underside saying HIT ME HERE! as for the side phasers move them up and back towards the pylons. I wouldnt put the side phasers under the pylons as they will diminish the arc to which they can fire. Also have u given any thought as to a backstory for this mighty ship?

Starforce2 · « **Reply #56 on:** October 28, 2007, 04:56:45 pm »

Quote from: F9thDawg on October 28, 2007, 04:33:10 pm

u midas well paint a big red bullseye on the underside saying HIT ME HERE! as for the side phasers move them up and back towards the pylons. I wouldnt put the side phasers under the pylons as they will diminish the arc to which they can fire. Also have u given any thought as to a backstory for this mighty ship?

You wouldn't need to worry much about that because you start overlaping arcs with the dorsal and ventral saucer coverage. A deck or 2 under the pylons wouldn't be bad. If you fire exactly parallel to the pylons, that angle will overlap the dorsal saucer except at close range. Since those are defensive arcs anyways...

Red_Sharif · « **Reply #57 on:** October 28, 2007, 05:09:39 pm »

My God, this ship is hot...and I am NOT a fan of TNG aesthetics. Can't wait to see what she looks like with a paint job.

Vipre · « **Reply #58 on:** October 28, 2007, 07:15:32 pm »

Indeed, she's definitely Connie's hot young granddaughter.

Shadowfleet · « **Reply #59 on:** October 29, 2007, 07:19:54 am »

She's looking nice. The bottom middle part of the saucer needs to be flattened some by transforming it up -- otherwise it appears the torpedoes will hit it when launched!Unless they take a turn down immediately after exiting the tubes .

She really does look great.

News:

Topic: TNG Constitution Project (Read 48872 times) var addthis_config = {"data_track_clickback":true};

Topic: TNG Constitution Project (Read 48872 times)