 | | | | | | |
| |
|
Great additions. I like the "info" section. I plan on doing that for my stuff
soon. I am wondering one thing though. Why in the world did you make such a
cool looking ship and give it crappy Star Trek technology.
In lugnet.space, Matthew Moulton writes:
> Well after a few days of work I threw together some webpages for my pics,
> added some extra stuff, and there is more to come! Check it out.
>
> http://www.spicyworld.com/amateurs/moulton/index.html
>
> Suggestions are welcome! I still have to finish my main logo, and the
> description, armament, propulsion information is actually going to be
> redesigned so that when you move the mouse on the ship name it'll show up as
> an image on the same page, gotta play with the image sizes though first, find
> something suitable that works well.
>
> PS in case you're wondering the reason I chose spicyworld as a home for my
> site was that it lets you upload multiple files at one time, it's free, and
> there's no spam, so you can't really complain. :)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
> In lugnet.space, Mike Petrucelli writes:
> Great additions. I like the "info" section. I plan on doing that for my stuff
> soon.
Thanks! I'll have updates for it within the next couple days. I'm gonna scan
some more of my ships and maybe some of the larger weapons arrays (the smaller
ones all attach to a ship while the larger ones can operate on their own).
> I am wondering one thing though. Why in the world did you make such a
> cool looking ship and give it crappy Star Trek technology.
LOL...Not really sure actually, I guess cause Trek technology is so
mainstream, and I like some of the ideas they have, like the weapons arrays
and those self replicating mines. I think that a lot of my ideas come from
Star Trek...hmmm...would that make me a...*gasp*...trekie?! 0_o
-Matthew
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Egad! That means whenever your ship gets shot in the rear, half the
bridge blows up and shields drop to 28%.
I suppose the Star Trek universe never heard of redundancy or fuse
boxes.
~Mark
In lugnet.space, Matthew Moulton writes:
> > In lugnet.space, Mike Petrucelli writes:
> > I am wondering one thing though. Why in the world did you make such • a
> > cool looking ship and give it crappy Star Trek technology.
>
> LOL...Not really sure actually, I guess cause Trek technology is so
> mainstream, and I like some of the ideas they have, like the weapons • arrays
> and those self replicating mines. I think that a lot of my ideas come • from
> Star Trek...hmmm...would that make me a...*gasp*...trekie?! 0_o
>
> -Matthew
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.space, Mark Sandlin writes:
> Egad! That means whenever your ship gets shot in the rear, half the
> bridge blows up and shields drop to 28%.
Don't forget the Photon Torpedos that totally wreck a ship, with all the power
of a hand gernade. (Ever seen Star Trek 5. "Fire a torpedo on my position."
Then JUMPS out of the way.) Seriously though Star Trek weapons are junk.
Those self replicating mines are a good idea but are way too weak to be
effective against a real military vessel. (A Star Destroyer for example.)
> I suppose the Star Trek universe never heard of redundancy or fuse
> boxes.
Obviously not.
-Lord Insanity.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
> In lugnet.space, Mike Petrucelli writes:
>
> Don't forget the Photon Torpedos that totally wreck a ship, with all the power
> of a hand gernade. (Ever seen Star Trek 5. "Fire a torpedo on my position."
> Then JUMPS out of the way.) Seriously though Star Trek weapons are junk.
> Those self replicating mines are a good idea but are way too weak to be
> effective against a real military vessel. (A Star Destroyer for example.)
Uh oh, I don't think we should start that debate in here...LOL My explanation
is that while they share similar names the actual tech specs are completely
different. That would be a cool fight though...The Enterprise vs The Super
Star Destroyer...he he he...
> > I suppose the Star Trek universe never heard of redundancy or fuse
> > boxes.
>
> Obviously not.
>
> -Lord Insanity.
Maybe in the Star Trek universe they never invented fuse boxes...-ZAP- "Dammit
Martha, you were running the clothes dryer and the washing machine at the same
time again, weren't you? Now I'm gonna have to rewire the whole dang house!"
-Matthew
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.space, Matthew Moulton writes:
> > In lugnet.space, Mike Petrucelli writes:
> >
> > Don't forget the Photon Torpedos that totally wreck a ship, with all the • power
> > of a hand gernade. (Ever seen Star Trek 5. "Fire a torpedo on my position."
> > Then JUMPS out of the way.) Seriously though Star Trek weapons are junk.
> > Those self replicating mines are a good idea but are way too weak to be
> > effective against a real military vessel. (A Star Destroyer for example.)
>
> Uh oh, I don't think we should start that debate in here...LOL
Ya that would be for lugnet.off-topic.debate
> My explanation
> is that while they share similar names the actual tech specs are completely
> different.
Ah. Well that is good to know. The tech specs would have a single Star
Destroyer wiping out the entire fleet at Wolf 359, including the Borg Cube.
> That would be a cool fight though...The Enterprise vs The Super
> Star Destroyer...he he he...
An Imperial Star Destroyer would be total overkill let alone an SSD.
http://www.fortunecity.com/tatooine/sputnik/86/sw_vs_st.html
I have some nano-fig scale modles here to illustrate this. These were
originally created for the benifit of the newsgroup alt.startrek.vs.starwars.
>
> > > I suppose the Star Trek universe never heard of redundancy or fuse
> > > boxes.
>
> Maybe in the Star Trek universe they never invented fuse boxes...-ZAP- "Dammit
> Martha, you were running the clothes dryer and the washing machine at the same
> time again, weren't you? Now I'm gonna have to rewire the whole dang house!"
LOL
-Lord Insanity.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
> In lugnet.space, Mark Sandlin writes:
>
> Egad! That means whenever your ship gets shot in the rear, half the
> bridge blows up and shields drop to 28%.
>
> I suppose the Star Trek universe never heard of redundancy or fuse
> boxes.
>
> ~Mark
ROTFL...there ya go, my ships all come equipped with multiple fuse boxes. :)
Doesn't it seem odd though that in Star Trek things blow up and make all sorts
of cool noises...I mean, I though space was a vacuum.
-Matthew
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
I'm willing to forgive the "noises in space" just because it makes the TV
shows/Movies more exciting.
~M
In lugnet.space, Matthew Moulton writes:
> > In lugnet.space, Mark Sandlin writes:
> >
> > Egad! That means whenever your ship gets shot in the rear, half the
> > bridge blows up and shields drop to 28%.
> >
> > I suppose the Star Trek universe never heard of redundancy or fuse
> > boxes.
> >
> > ~Mark
>
> ROTFL...there ya go, my ships all come equipped with multiple fuse • boxes. :)
> Doesn't it seem odd though that in Star Trek things blow up and make • all sorts
> of cool noises...I mean, I though space was a vacuum.
>
> -Matthew
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
Mark Sandlin wrote:
> In lugnet.space, Matthew Moulton writes:
> > Doesn't it seem odd though that in Star Trek things blow up and make
> > all sorts of cool noises...I mean, I though space was a vacuum.
> I'm willing to forgive the "noises in space" just because it makes the TV
> shows/Movies more exciting.
Yah, that and the fact that space *isn't* a vacuum. There is an extremely
small amount of gas and dust per cubic meter in yer average space. This
amount increases near stars and plantery bodies, which are constantly ejecting
gases and dust. And then the amount really increases near an exploding
spaceship, for hopefully obvious reasons. And if enough of these chunks of
debris hits the hull of *your* ship, you'll definitely hear something.
Too bad for Star Trek, though -- the matter from the explosion has to reach
your ship before you hear it. Depending upon your distance from the
explosion, the "sound" could actually be delayed for weeks. :-P
Cheers,
- jsproat
--
Jeremy H. Sproat <jsproat@io.com> ~~~ http://www.io.com/~jsproat/
You need me to use the puppets to explain this, don't you?
- Dr. Schlock
| | | | | | |
