Topic: wanted: fed battle pod (Read 12669 times)

Lord Schtupp · « **Reply #40 on:** November 12, 2004, 04:57:05 pm »

Quote from: Rhaz on November 12, 2004, 09:39:12 am

LS - I really like the pod! The power nodes are well integrated.

Thank you - BTW, These are the kind of comments I really like to see about any model. When I comment about somebodys model, I try to identify what it is about it that stands out and is original. Agree?

Anyway this should be a formidable ship in its own right, great for Starbase defense in case theres no tug around. Really make sense if the Feds are gonna build something that would be as expensive as a ship, they might as well give it at least nominal warp capability. Im thinking about 3/4 movement cost for the pod itself with 16 total warp power. Combined with 3/4 move for the tug, will give 1 1/2 cost total for the unit as a wholeand allow full speed.

Quote from: FireSoul on November 12, 2004, 10:03:50 am

Question:
Have you kept the previous pod somewhere? It would do a nice light pod (which also does exist)..

Well unfortunatly I have only a file one step behind what I posted, I inadvertantly saved over the latest ver1 pod with an early ver2 pod. Doesnt normally happen as I usually keep everything in seperate folders but this one didnt start as a regular project.

I knew that there should be a light or mini pod, would be a worthy little project. Ideal for keeping at base stations. just as the full sized ones would be kept at starbases.

I greatly refined and reduced the poly count today, added sensor dish and phasers, should be textureing it tonight.

zerosnark · « **Reply #41 on:** November 14, 2004, 02:44:54 pm »

Just a small comment on this REALLY COOL pod.

Most starships (fed, klink, rom) have warp nacelles physically removed from the main hull. There must be a reason for that. . .yet this ship has the engines integral to the hull.

Note: Yeah, the SFB fed Frigate has close coupled engines, but my take is that is a really bad mistake.

FireSoul · « **Reply #42 on:** November 15, 2004, 11:29:03 am »

I wouldn't worry too much about the engines on the pod, especially since they're supposed to be just impulse engines..

Lord Schtupp · « **Reply #43 on:** November 15, 2004, 12:39:31 pm »

Quote from: zerosnark on November 14, 2004, 02:44:54 pm

Just a small comment on this REALLY COOL pod.

Most starships (fed, klink, rom) have warp nacelles physically removed from the main hull. There must be a reason for that. . .yet this ship has the engines integral to the hull.

Note: Yeah, the SFB fed Frigate has close coupled engines, but my take is that is a really bad mistake.

Good observation, but remember that this pod is not a regular service cruiser but an auxilery ship (when operating independantly from a tug). Not meant for long voyages or standing patrols but as an "Ace in the Hole" for a Starbase commander. Three reasons of the importance of keeping the warp nacelles apart are 1. safety (Matt Jeffries reason) 2. Manuverabilty, and 3. stability of the warp field at speed. The ratio of nacelle length to centerline distance between nacelles on the connie (the standard by which all others are judged) is 4:3, the pods ratio is 2:1. SO if the distance between nacelles is because of manuverability or warp field stability then the pod is clearly inferior to the connie. If safety is the governing factor then it must be kept moored at a starbase awaiting the emergency it was designed for (kept at the ready, manned by starbase personnel). In all three cases the pods design and mission profile conforms to any or all of the three warp rules above.

The internal warp design has canon precedent in DS9's Defiant. What makes this possible is the the use of the warp core design of matter-antimatter mixing, as opposed to the older intermix shaft configuration of more typical TOS era starships. FORTUNATELY (for me) this battlepod comes equipped with one of the first designs of warp core tech, which allows the warp core to be jettisoned in an emergency instead of the entire warp nacelle(s).

For a more detailed explanation see Jane's Warships of the Galaxy 2268. I'd lend you my copy, but you know how expensive the Jane's books can be - Im sure you understand ZSnark

Lord Schtupp · « **Reply #44 on:** November 15, 2004, 12:46:30 pm »

Quote from: FireSoul on November 15, 2004, 11:29:03 am

I wouldn't worry too much about the engines on the pod, especially since they're supposed to be just impulse engines..

No theyre warps, but you could consider them warp APRs like in the SSD. I'll post pics tonight of the textured model, almost done. Im at work right now, obviously being very productive. (Very bored is more like it)

Rod ONeal · « **Reply #45 on:** November 16, 2004, 09:43:04 pm »

:bump: This was getting a little too far down the page for my comfort zone.

Rhaz · « **Reply #46 on:** November 30, 2004, 09:36:00 pm »

Bump again

FPF-Wanderer · « **Reply #47 on:** December 13, 2004, 10:38:19 am »

Bump the III...

Rod ONeal · « **Reply #48 on:** December 20, 2004, 01:06:12 am »

:bump:
I hope this project doesn't get shelved. It's looking so good.

FireSoul · « **Reply #49 on:** December 20, 2004, 06:40:12 am »

Even a WIP would be welcome..

Lord Schtupp · « **Reply #50 on:** December 22, 2004, 01:38:23 pm »

Quote from: FireSoul on December 20, 2004, 06:40:12 am

Even a WIP would be welcome..

I wanted a suitable fleet tug that is much more battleworthy and beefier than the standard ptolemy. I think that a well armed tug would become necessary with all this war goin on. The pod mesh is finished, the tug nearly so, soon Ill be working on textures. As you can see Ive already done some to the pod, but Im not sure if Im happy with this yet...

Anyway the tug/pod combo looks tuff enuf I think!

USS Mariner · « **Reply #51 on:** December 22, 2004, 03:04:59 pm »

Quote from: Lord Schtupp on December 22, 2004, 01:38:23 pm

Quote from: FireSoul on December 20, 2004, 06:40:12 am
Even a WIP would be welcome..

I wanted a suitable fleet tug that is much more battleworthy and beefier than the standard ptolemy. I think that a well armed tug would become necessary with all this war goin on. The pod mesh is finished, the tug nearly so, soon Ill be working on textures. As you can see Ive already done some to the pod, but Im not sure if Im happy with this yet...

Anyway the tug/pod combo looks tuff enuf I think!

http://www.dallypress.com/schtupp/forums/montrose1.jpg

Wow...

Rod ONeal · « **Reply #52 on:** December 22, 2004, 04:39:43 pm »

Thanks for the WIP update. It looks great!!! I'm looking forward to using the finished product in game, man.

Lord Schtupp · « **Reply #53 on:** December 22, 2004, 04:51:21 pm »

Quote from: Fallen_Warrior on December 22, 2004, 03:43:22 pm

i agree can outalance use it for an upcoming mod

Sure

One of the problems is deciding which UI to use, but I think Ill use the FCX one. I moved two torps to RA arc on the pod, and the tug will have two FA torps. The SSD has more weapons than I can put into this SFC model, so that has its own problems.

Pod: 4 Phot FA(2HP), 2 Phot RA, 4 Phas1 ALL, 2 Phas1 RX, 2 PhasG RX, 1 DrnG 3, 12 HVY fighters or 24 std ones.

Tug: 2 Phot FA, 2 Phas1 FH, 2Phas1 LS, 2 Phas1 RS, 2 Phas1 RH

Yea that should do it huh lol...

FireSoul · « **Reply #54 on:** December 23, 2004, 10:05:49 am »

That's so overkill.. I mean, there never was something like that in SFB.. and certainly no photons on the CVA pod itself. You sure that's not a bit much?

Lord Schtupp · « **Reply #55 on:** December 23, 2004, 01:28:52 pm »

Uh well just 12 ftrs then. You can make the HPs however you want of course but I have to hardpoint the model with something in mind.

This isnt the CVA pod that I would also like to build, but a purpose built and engineered Schtupp-type BP that stands in contrast to the hastily contrived converted cargopod SFB BP. The Lord Schtupp Brand® Tug is a natural evolution of the Ptolemy with all those Orion Pirates flying Heavy cruisers now in the SFB General War of 185. Put the two together and yea: you're gonna have some firepower.

With the standard tug then firepower will fall in line to what a die-rollin', rule-book-browsin', impulse-chart-movin', grease-pencil-breakin' SFBer would expect from a Fed BT.

FireSoul · « **Reply #56 on:** December 23, 2004, 01:37:25 pm »

well, you know I'm just waiting for you to release the pod so that I can kitbash some pods I want out of it, right?

Lord Schtupp · « **Reply #57 on:** December 23, 2004, 01:56:27 pm »

Well sure, what did you have in mind?

Rat Boy · « **Reply #58 on:** December 23, 2004, 02:37:39 pm »

Quote from: Mariner Class on November 11, 2004, 02:12:40 pm

Masao once made a Pyotr Velikiy Marine Tug with the "Eagle's-head star" your describing LS.

http://www.starfleet-museum.org/pv-tug.jpg

I hope that helps some.

Speaking of which, Schtupp, I seem to recall you having a WIP of a Pyotr Veliky a long time ago. You wouldn't by chance be interested in doing more SFM ships? I'd love to see your take on a Lancaster.

FireSoul · « **Reply #59 on:** December 23, 2004, 02:59:31 pm »

Quote from: Lord Schtupp on December 23, 2004, 01:56:27 pm

Well sure, what did you have in mind?

Well, appropriate models for OP+ of course..
I do have CVA and CVL pods, but yours are fantastic. The CVA pod is for 24 fighters while the CVL sports 12.

But what I lack are battlepods, both the original heavy and light variants. The heavy pod has 6 photons and is for a standard tug like the Ptelomy. It makes the Ptelomy move like a slug (1.5 move cost, 1 for the pod alone) but it's worth it. The light version shouldn't affect the tug's move cost.

I liked the original design that looked like a torpedo. I could probably reproduce that shape, myself, but I kinda suck for textures.

News:

Topic: wanted: fed battle pod (Read 12669 times) var addthis_config = {"data_track_clickback":true};

Topic: wanted: fed battle pod (Read 12669 times)