Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 11
06-19-2010, 03:19 AM
When Cerberus (upper) nacelles are used with Hephaestus or Prometheus (upper) pylons, there is a visible gap at some angles. The pylons simply need to be moved down a little bit so that they connect with the pylons better.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 12
06-19-2010, 04:23 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ultrawave View Post
Not sure if these have been mentioned before, but I'll drop them in as I haven't seen them on the list.

A couple of texturing issues with the Noble

1. Saucer, Starboard side - The 3rd row of windows from the edge of the saucer are broken and incomplete. While the flickering from them isn't as noticeable as it is with other vessels, such as the error with the Dervish saucer, there are numerous instances of window flicker across all tiers.

Noble Saucer Windows

2. Saucer, Starboard side - Staying on this side and moving to the front, there is a visible texture error with the ship name and registry number. The raised section on which it's applied causes it to partly snap off. It looks fine on the port side though.

Noble Registry - Name

Prometheus Pylons

The pylons look more or less spot on if you look at them from above or below, however, side on they look somewhat poor with how they attach to the hull, so a bit of smoothing and tweaking in that area mightn't hurt.

Prometheus, Starboard

Prometheus, Port
Quote:
Originally Posted by hurleybird View Post
When Cerberus (upper) nacelles are used with Hephaestus or Prometheus (upper) pylons, there is a visible gap at some angles. The pylons simply need to be moved down a little bit so that they connect with the pylons better.
Added to the list.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 13
06-19-2010, 07:05 PM
I am not sure if it is a real problem, but when selecting the "Orion" pattern the complete part of the hull gets slightly colored with the first selected color. For example if you select yellow and choose Orion for the saucer, the saucers hull looks slightly yellowish. If you select blue, it would have a blue touch.
Because of that it is somewhat difficult to mix Orion with another pattern, since the hull colors simply don't match.


You can see what I mean on this shot:
http://public.bay.livefilestore.com/...201.jpg?psid=1
The hull section uses Orion pattern and looks clearly blueish compared to the saucer section.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 14 TOS beam and Nimbus
06-19-2010, 07:32 PM
Hi i posted a ist on the old version, i've updated my reply to include screen shot but i will include it here too.

The TOS beam as well as being fat, can fire at certian angles through the hull and due to its oversie the if you look down on the saucer while the beam fires from under it will seem of the beam, and vice versa if u looking up from underneath.

the Nimbus lights up quite nicely using dual plasma beams, if i tried different weapons maybe it would give a multi colour affect / using single beams fom the aft slot has no affect on the ship.

*not tested yet fore single beams or other types of dual beams.

the version of the Niumbus i use is a mix of different parts, i will add them later, but now the screen shots.

first 3 in this folder show the ToS beam, ln one im looking down on the ship while it fires at a target below, giving a red circle on my saucer section. the other 4 show how the Nimbus lights up.

Screen shots
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 15
06-19-2010, 08:00 PM
One thing I've noticed on the Hephaestus model is the the pylons are neither straight or consistently curved.

They look like a wave when viewed from behind.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 16
06-19-2010, 11:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by HMS_Indomitable
Hi i posted a ist on the old version, i've updated my reply to include screen shot but i will include it here too.

The TOS beam as well as being fat, can fire at certian angles through the hull and due to its oversie the if you look down on the saucer while the beam fires from under it will seem of the beam, and vice versa if u looking up from underneath.

the Nimbus lights up quite nicely using dual plasma beams, if i tried different weapons maybe it would give a multi colour affect / using single beams fom the aft slot has no affect on the ship.

*not tested yet fore single beams or other types of dual beams.

the version of the Niumbus i use is a mix of different parts, i will add them later, but now the screen shots.

first 3 in this folder show the ToS beam, ln one im looking down on the ship while it fires at a target below, giving a red circle on my saucer section. the other 4 show how the Nimbus lights up.

Screen shots
Most of those screenshots don't really give any evidence of model or texture errors.

In the case of the TOS Enterprise, why use anything but its phaser banks?

In the case of the Nimbus firing beams that seem to change shape shortly after firing, that is not a starship model error.


Quote:
Originally Posted by DKeith2011
One thing I've noticed on the Hephaestus model is the the pylons are neither straight or consistently curved.

They look like a wave when viewed from behind.
If you can, host a picture of that on tinypic or imgur for us.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 17
06-20-2010, 09:40 AM
Great thread, this and the original. Glad to see so many errors in one place.

I will say, however, that Miranda class ships are generally modular, and it's not inconceivable that they would have minor variations from canon (http://memory-alpha.org/wiki/Miranda...esign_variants). We are 30 years ahead of the latest canon version of the Miranda, so they would probably get upgrades of some sort.

Same basic idea applies to some of the other canon items listed. A lot of them involve windows... ships can have different window types, do these errors apply to all window types, or just the ones used on screen? (I mean: most ships on screen have rectangular thing windows, but we can choose to put round ones on our ships. Are the round window placements also incorrect?)

Speaking of windows, maybe the in game Nova class just has the lights turned off?

Also, the "canon" inconsistencies between steamrunner and zephyr don't really apply, in my opinion. Although the Zephyr is an updated steamrunner, it's still a different class.

Anyways, sorry to nitpick a little, I'm just curious about these things. Great thread, I approve!
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 18
06-20-2010, 01:23 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Felderburg View Post
Great thread, this and the original. Glad to see so many errors in one place.

I will say, however, that Miranda class ships are generally modular, and it's not inconceivable that they would have minor variations from canon (http://memory-alpha.org/wiki/Miranda...esign_variants). We are 30 years ahead of the latest canon version of the Miranda, so they would probably get upgrades of some sort.

Same basic idea applies to some of the other canon items listed. A lot of them involve windows... ships can have different window types, do these errors apply to all window types, or just the ones used on screen? (I mean: most ships on screen have rectangular thing windows, but we can choose to put round ones on our ships. Are the round window placements also incorrect?)

Speaking of windows, maybe the in game Nova class just has the lights turned off?

Also, the "canon" inconsistencies between steamrunner and zephyr don't really apply, in my opinion. Although the Zephyr is an updated steamrunner, it's still a different class.

Anyways, sorry to nitpick a little, I'm just curious about these things. Great thread, I approve!
Appreciated, but I must refer you to the first post:

Quote:
Originally Posted by -Jes-
Ok, I'm hoping to make a catalogue here of known STARSHIP MODEL issues. This means anything from phasers shooting out from nowhere, to clipping textures, visual glitches and Canon inconsistencies.

PLEASE, post ONLY if you have any NEW info on issues or inconsistencies any ship might have, as posting info already found here will only hamper my efforts to update this thread.

If you are only here to flame or whine or otherwise argue semantics, PLEASE GTFO NOW!
If you want to argue that you think the ships look better flawed or that detail can be ignored and sloppiness and lazy modelling accepted and excused for a difference in the time frame then here is not the place for it. Take it to another thread and point out how wrong our list of contributors are in wanting fixes.

Don't forget to read back into the previous version of this thread and see where CapnLogan, the ship dev, agrees with everyone listed in the credits of the Klingon error post and calls the work of his predecessors sloppy and poor (to paraphrase).
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 19
06-20-2010, 01:27 PM
Sorry, I was just curious. I really only skimmed both posts, since they were fairly long. Like I said, I approve of the list!
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 20
06-20-2010, 01:30 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Felderburg View Post
Sorry, I was just curious. I really only skimmed both posts, since they were fairly long. Like I said, I approve of the list!

Appreciated and understood. No hard feelings.
Closed Thread

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 12:16 AM.