Captain
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 3,546
# 31
12-20-2013, 08:38 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by yreodred View Post
At first i thought that too, but on the other hand the Galaxy and the intrepid also have short nacelles.
The nacelles on the GCS are also much thicker, as is the bottom of the engineering hull, and the Intrepid's nacelles are set further back (I believe). The Intrepid also has even more of an elongated saucer than the Avenger does.

As bad as the visual balance on the Avenger may be, the visual balance on the Perpetual Excalibur-class is much worse. It's all saucer and practically no stardrive.
Vadm. Kanril Eleya, U.S.S. Andraste, Strike Team Alpha

Useful Links for Foundry Writers | "Bait and Switch" -- Fed Foundry project, Part 1 rewards-qualified!
Say no to Arc! STO standalone installer
Captain
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 1,256
# 32
12-20-2013, 09:02 PM
I just wish there was a bit more variety for Federation ships.
I would love to visit this star in-game...or maybe this one!

Quote:
Originally Posted by shurato2099
Won't SOMEONE please think of the CHILDREN?!
Captain
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 2,254
# 33
12-21-2013, 06:58 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by starswordc View Post
As bad as the visual balance on the Avenger may be, the visual balance on the Perpetual Excalibur-class is much worse. It's all saucer and practically no stardrive.
Neck and Enginnering hulla are one single unit there. So the Engineering hull is actually much bigger than on Galaxy or Sovereign Class ships it's just not build horizontal but much more vertical. I think that the biggest missconception most have about that ship.


Don't get me wrong Perpetual Excalibur Class isn't a real beauty, but compared to Cryptics creations it is a masterpiece IMO.

No matter if someone agrees with me or not, i think there's no doubt that Perpetual Excalibur ship model would be excellent and appropirate addition to the Avenger.
Sonme parts, litke the nacelles, pylons or the saucer would be perfect for Cryptics Avenger ship model. At least it would give us the choice between some very different looking designs, instead of Cryptics typical egg shaped (and thus much too light looking) saucers.

I think it is already bad enough that they didn't gave us some additional ship parts for the Flagship (odyssey), mostly because of lazyness or they maybe thought it looks good enough.
But a diverting design like the Avenger class should really have some alternative ship parts availlable, not just a laughably nacelle option to choose from (with or without fin, as if anyone would care).

-> -> -> STO players unite and say NO to ARC <- <- <-

The "TT and/or AtB less builds" - Thread
Captain
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 2,254
# 34
12-23-2013, 03:22 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by starswordc View Post
The nacelles on the GCS are also much thicker, as is the bottom of the engineering hull, and the Intrepid's nacelles are set further back (I believe). The Intrepid also has even more of an elongated saucer than the Avenger does.
But the nacelles of the GCS fit to the rest of the ship, just as the saucer if the intrepid fits to the rest of the intrepid lines.
The saucer of the Avenger class doesn't look bulky, sturdy or powerful at all, it looks fine and totally out of place for such a powerhouse the Avenger is supposed to be.


As i just said in another thread, the Avenger would look much more "complete" with a wide and bulky looking Saucer.

-> -> -> STO players unite and say NO to ARC <- <- <-

The "TT and/or AtB less builds" - Thread
Lieutenant
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 76
# 35
01-02-2014, 06:51 AM
Personally, I dislike ships that have saucers wider than the nacelles. I like the way the Avenger looks. However, I do see what people are saying about the saucer but for me the best way to beef up the saucer would actually be to make it thicker, not wider.

I'd make it thicker, with a greater frontal height. Make it even more squat, purposeful and bulldog-esque. I'd probably square it off more, too. The rest of the ship has a very square, angular appearance. The nacelles are square, the tail is square, the neck is square, and then they have this oval pointed saucer which looks somewhat out of place. I'm not saying I'd want an actual -square- saucer section, but putting what looks like a streamlined saucer on the front of a big boxy purposeful hull looks a little mismatched to me.

I'll agree that it's pretty divisive though.

Last edited by raphaeldisanto; 01-02-2014 at 06:54 AM.
Survivor of Romulus
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 2,147
# 36
01-02-2014, 09:43 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by yreodred View Post
Indeed.

It's a shame that Cryptics Excalibur ship model can't be used actually.


I think Perpetual was planing some different ship system as Cryptic did in the end.
Some while ago i saw screenshots like the first one you posted, but with some Sovereign styled ship parts as well as Galaxy. So i believe that both ships where supposed to be the same just different appearances including the Excalibur.
What a nice idea to just merge both the Sovereign and Galaxy into one ship actually and only give them different ship parts and make them interchange.

I don't know if Cryptics ship tailor allows such extreme different ship shapes, but i think the Excalibur Model would be a good completion for the Avenger.
And let's be honest the Avengers appearance is one of the most dividing ships in STO. So i think Crypticd dves really should make us all a favour and spend the Avenger some additional ship parts.


I know it's not perfect, but i think this ship looks much better than that misshaped ugly thing Cryptic calls Avenger. The best thing would be to add it's ship part to the Avenger ship model so we would at least have some different looking parts to improve the Avenger.
I love that ship!! if the Avenger could get that saucer, it would be a start to making it the bulldog look it should have!

Quote:
Originally Posted by cobaltfleet View Post
And I'm just going to drop into the discussion here. I agree that the Avenger would really benefit from some more hull options, especially the saucer. Right now it simply doesn't have the level of combustibility we've come to expect from Cryptic (the Odyssey and Bortasqu' suffer the same fate, but that's a different topic).

Also, I've fired up my PS and created this beauty/monstrosity:

(please ignore my bad, bad Photoshop skills) (Also sorry i used the fleet version to all the people who like the upswept pylons more, but this was the only picture in a good angle to combine I could find)

While this is far from perfect, it does show how the Excalibur saucer would combine with the secondory hull of the Avenger. Those lines in the center of the saucer could potentionally flow well into the (current) split neck
Nice, that saucer........drool....

Fed Eng (Main). Fed Sci. Fed Tac. Rom Sci (KDF)
Quote:
Originally Posted by kitsune424 View Post
Here is your ticket to the USS Stupidity, Third class, four tacks on the chair, rules state you MUST sit on the chair, no standing, or hovering above the tacks, thank you have a nice day
Rihannsu
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 547
# 37
05-05-2014, 02:11 PM
I think one design liability the STO shipdevs operate under is a fear of making one ship look too much like another, so that they force themselves beyond the more obvious 'what works' cues for Federation ships.

When I look at the Avenger...

- I don't see a need for a larger saucer, though I'm not against extra customization. The PE Excalibur has a nice saucer.

- The bigger flaw I find in the ship is its attempt at being yet another doublenecked vessel. I would have liked to see it have no neck in the style of the Aventine-class. It would have pushed it more toward that warship feel. I mean, most dorsal views of the Avenger are actually rather appealing - it's when you start to see the proportions that it suffers.

I mean, let's face it. Just seen from this angle, the ship looks rather sexy.

Not to mention the attention to detail on it is nothing short of amazing: bridge that's a decent fit with the Origin bridge, the phaser strips, the armored shutter engaging once it enters combat - oh my! It's such a shame a ship this well detailed looks so ungainly!

- I'd want to see the edges tappered. The blunt frontends of the warp nacelle and pylons, for instance. The saucer could've lost those huge proemminent cannons in favor of sporting built-in ports like the Chimera-class and Regent-classes offer.

I mean, just slimming the width of the pylons to 1/3 and letting the rest of the ship's stardrive follow in term of vertical proportions would already be a huge improvement (the result being closing the gap between stardrive and saucer, losing the doubleneck for a more Regent-like look.

Would that have looked much more like an Intrepid or a Luna? Sure, the cues would've been more obvious, especially with the horizontal pylons. But that would've been okay. Not to mention it might have semi-filled that "warship Voyager" niche some people seem to have.
Mhae ir-Virinat t'Rillas, R.R.W Temer

Last edited by umaeko; 05-05-2014 at 02:15 PM.
Lieutenant
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 59
# 38
05-05-2014, 04:57 PM
I too would like to see increased customization options for the Avenger (which I like as the beastly war machine she is). It might increase sales and if I pay real money for a ship I would like it to come with customization options.
Headlong into mystery
Captain
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 3,546
# 39
05-05-2014, 05:03 PM
Zombie thread is a zombie...

Seriously, what is it with this month and this plague of thread necromancy?
Vadm. Kanril Eleya, U.S.S. Andraste, Strike Team Alpha

Useful Links for Foundry Writers | "Bait and Switch" -- Fed Foundry project, Part 1 rewards-qualified!
Say no to Arc! STO standalone installer
Captain
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,807
# 40
05-05-2014, 05:07 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by starswordc View Post
Zombie thread is a zombie...

Seriously, what is it with this month and this plague of thread necromancy?
New season, new newbies
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:08 PM.