Subject:
|
Re: new Mk4 pics are up on brickshelf
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.space
|
Date:
|
Mon, 22 Jan 2001 23:16:55 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
605 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.space, Tim Courtney writes:
>
> Interesting that you follow Star Trek technology quite closely - Brandon and I
> started out doing that when we began building stuff for Zacktron back in '92,
> but over the years have split and used other influences such as modern military
> strucutre/units, NASA/future realistic space flight projections, and other
> Sci-Fi movies. Its kinda a conglomeration of all - we try to become unique and
> not just one technology.
I did before, but I found that some people use fold technology, some use
warp conduits, some use hyper space - but when it comes to fictional FTL
technology, I found that the most documented material comes from Star Trek.
So, in the interest of adding detail to my ship, and because I'm an enigneer
(really!) I wanted something that looked half believable. To me at least.
But that's not to say that I don't like everyone elses method of attack too.
So far I have been very impressed with what I have seen out there. I only
wish people would build MORE capitals, since capitals in my mind are far
more realistic than teeny-tiny 1-man fighters performing intersellar flight.
I also can't see the use of only fighter craft without jump gates - Very
small vessels just don't have the power generation capability in my mind's
eye. A transport or freighter or even a heavy fighter: now *that's* a
different story - they tend to be larger and have room for the power
generation. Thoughts?
>
> But aren't there three decks pictured? I don't think our ship is big enough to
> need a Brig, we have a hatch and an airlock ;-) (just kidding) But think...in
> the middle of a war, a traitor would be executed, not merely contained on a
> battleship.
Well there are 4 true decks in total (I don't think I finished paragraph
relating to this in my last post)
Deck 1) bridge/science (highest deck)
Deck 2) general crew
bunks/washrooms/showers/cargo/weapons/brig/security/subsystems
Deck 3) officer's quarters/medical/mess hall & galley/fighter bay control
Deck 4) docking ring, escape pods, service bays. (lowest deck)
The service and main fighter bays are all two decks high, and engineering is
three decks high. There is an upper and lower level in
engineering/propulsion, but they tend to overlap the second and third decks
since the propulsion machinery is so big compared to the minifigs themselves.
As for the brig, well, I have always liked the use of a brig. The brig is
useful containment area to perform torture and interogations prior to
ejection from an airlock! ;^D Wait, I didn't say that! Nobody better
tattle to Grand Admrial Sandlin on me, now! He's liable to have one of my
captians stripped of rank!
>
> You should LDraw the models you like and disassemble them for capship projects -
> if you use more specialty parts you'll get a lot better asthetic effect. Just
> my suggestion :-)
I REALLY want to get into Ldraw. I tried, but I think I had a down-level
version that was non-user freindly. If someone could set me up with a
windoze-based version that is user friendly and provide some instruction,
now THAT would be a kind gesture! :^) If that were to happen, my capitals
would get really nice in a short period of time becuase I wouldn't be
restricted to the number of pieces available! Suggestions are welcome!
>
> They're permissable, but they're still not as visually pleasing as a well
> rounded, defined ship.
Well put. You know, everyone should bear in mind that while this ship lacks
in some asthetics, (and this is important!) I *REALLY* like the way it
turned out. I actually wanted this thing to look somewhat boxy. That was
the style that I was looking for this time around, and that's why this is
the "Mk4". My previous attempts were trying to achieve the same thing, but
I just wasn't happy with them. And for good reason (they sucked). I finally
feel that I have achieved the look that I want in a ship of this specific
type and style, taking into account the available pieces. Yes, some details
could always be improved, but that's the point. If this ship was perfect,
I'd never want to make another one. You're all right , though - I should
now use the experience I have gained and move into the non-boxy arena. I
would like to keep my size around the size of your destroyer, and eliminate
the use of fighter bays altogether. I wanted a ship that would accomodate
larger fighters, and escort fleet carriers. I have accomplished this. Now
let's look at cruisers, frigates and gun boats to add to my line of craft.
I really liked Dan Jassim's A-wing carrier and felt that I could tackle
other roles for now.
>
> Wow - more decks! [...] For you to do that would
> require an incredibly strong lower deck and very tight removeable deck designs.
> Good idea solving that problem. I've gotta figure out how we'll do that if we
> decide to add a third deck on a future project (likely).
I think I'm about 6000 pieces, maybe more. Mostly classic brick. I placed
the escape pods on the lowest deck to allow for more support (walls in
between pods). My Mk2 was my last solid piece ship of this size, and that
one was HEAVY. This one is twice the size altogether.
One thing of note: My ships modular as you can see in the pics. The idea
here is that I can leave sections off if I want! :^) So, I could remove
the service bays to make a different configuration of the craft. I saw this
in Star Trek where the show modelers took pieces of older models to make new
ships in new episodes. We see this in Star Trek Generations at the end of
the movie. I like this because I can create different role craft with
different pieces. (For such large ships, pieces would not be manufactured
in prefab segments, but think of incorporating existing designs, and
individual segments are designed by different teams - this sort of
standardization is model used by Astro Lift Co.)
> you do have all the parts to make an enormous sculpted non-boxy ship, your
> building techniques to achieve that will be much different than mine - because
> of different building histories. I'd venture to say your walls would still be
> 2-4 studs thick versus my 1-2 studs thick walls, and so on.
I don't think I go over two studs accept where detail is more key.
>
> Still, my advice is to strive to break the boxyness thing and go for something
> more sculpted - function and form working hand in hand, versus mostly function.
Will do! Thanks for the advice!
>
> You mention accomodating your ships - and I saw a hangar bay with a plane in it.
> Is that what you meant?
Yup. I can hold three A-wings comfortably. Which is what I wanted since
Dan Jassim's A-Wing carrier holds 8 I believe.
>
> With our ship classes - we intend to provide more loose guidelines and then
> every ship built for the fleet will have a specific mission. So, some
> Destroyers (this is odd - Destroyer is both a category and a class in Zacktron,
> because we haven't come up with a naming convention for our ships yet - still in
> development, but we believe our Destroyers will be named after famous military
> personnel and space battles) follow the typical 'put a few guns there and a few
> guns there and kick the snot out of em' pattern, and others have special
> functions and therefore different internal/external configs.
I would love to have us all come up with some loose standard guidelines.
People can play around with that and it doesn't have to be fixed, but for
comparison purposes and with the up and coming Space Domain, it would be
nice to be able to classify what is a cruiser, destroyer, frigate, carrier,
fleet carrier, support craft, gun boat, super destroyer, and so on, just
like the talks that have transpired on what is a heavy, medium and light
fighter. None have to look similar of course, but it would be neat-o non
the less.
Y'all come back, now, y'hear?
~Trev
Astro Lift Co.
|
|
Message has 3 Replies:
 | | Re: new Mk4 pics are up on brickshelf
|
| In lugnet.space, Trevor Pruden writes: <snip> (...) I would suggest you goto (URL) and lookup all you can about MLCad. The base LDraw is a DOS based program, but MLCad is a full featured Windows application. It actually requires the LDraw files (...) (24 years ago, 23-Jan-01, to lugnet.space)
| | | Re: new Mk4 pics are up on brickshelf
|
| "Trevor Pruden" <trevor_pruden@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:G7L7C7.F4q@lugnet.com... (...) I (...) military (...) and (...) Aah, I understand. I'm considering several NASA theories to explain Zacktron's FTL 'Translight' drive system, and will (...) (24 years ago, 23-Jan-01, to lugnet.space)
| | | Re: new Mk4 pics are up on brickshelf
|
| (...) That sounds like standard procedure to me. Oh, waiiiiit a minute! You forgot the part about stuffing the captive's face with Spamcake before ejecting him. 2 Demerits, and you're on Fleebnork duty until further notice. ~Mark "Muffin Head" (...) (24 years ago, 23-Jan-01, to lugnet.space)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: new Mk4 pics are up on brickshelf
|
| "Trevor Pruden" <trevor_pruden@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:G7KCsw.3Dt@lugnet.com... (...) Interesting that you follow Star Trek technology quite closely - Brandon and I started out doing that when we began building stuff for Zacktron back in (...) (24 years ago, 22-Jan-01, to lugnet.space)
|
16 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
