Re: Athena-class Warships

Mon Jul 01, 2013 9:36 am

Ehhh...they're okay, but I've seen far better...I'm not all that good with LDD...

Mon Jul 01, 2013 3:05 pm

I absolutely love these two ships! Razz

The overall structural design is unique, complex, and really cool, looking, and sets it apart from a lot of other warships. However, I must say that my favorite thing from either ship would have to be the design of the 20mm twin-barreled machine gun turrets. Those things are just so cool! Very Happy

Mon Jul 01, 2013 5:30 pm

Honestly, I kinda stole the idea from RMM and Arik. Well, parts of the idea, and then combined them.

Mon Jul 01, 2013 5:58 pm

Waaait, those things are 20mm guns?
...Uhh, ARC, that small of caliber is pretty much useless except for anti-missile and maybe anti-fighter duty. And at the size of those guns, they wouldn't stand a chance at doing either.

Real-world CIWS guns would be about a ten feet long from the tip of the barrel to the back, and a little over half that measured from side to side. That means the absolute largest "to-scale"-ish placeholder that could be used for the 1 stud = 10 meters "perfect scale" would be a quarter of a stud long.

The 20mm guns you're using are just over four studs long. I can't say exactly what scale you're using, but it's somewhere between 15-20 meters per stud, as opposed to the 10 meters most commonly used. Which, assuming the smaller measurement, makes each gun over 60 meters, or about 200 feet, long.
To put that into perspective, that's two-thirds the length of a football field. Five of those turrets would be as long as even the largest real-world supercarriers.

My point is, something probably should change. You could fit a a few dozen tiny rotary 20mm anti-fighter PD turrets around the smaller ship's hull. And those big multiple-building-sized existing guns? Well, there's a good reason I used those as the markers for my heavy turbolasers. You ought to be measuring those guns' barrel diameters in inches or, assuming they're HE projectiles instead of kinetic, maybe even in feet.

...I suppose if you really want to make them 20mm weapon emplacements, then my final advice is to make them into dual 60-barrel rotary cannons that fire 20mm explosive shells or flak or something, at which point you won't likely need tracking speed in the first place. Razz

Mon Jul 01, 2013 6:21 pm

Arik...it's not my fault that the smallest-sized guns I could get and still have them look cool and menacing screws up my nonexistant scale! So please, just leave me alone about my ships!

Mon Jul 01, 2013 6:41 pm

Don't worry about it, ARC, you can do whatever you want with your ships. Razz

If you want, you could just change the name from 20mm to something more ambiguous like "heavy cannons", so people won't bother you about the size or role. And hey, as you build more and more ships you'll become more "aware" of your scale and style, so don't fret about that sort of thing.

And Arik, I know you probably mean well, but I think that's enough criticism for one ship-- it is HIS ship after all.

And honestly, people (myself included) and nitpick at these ships all we want, but the fact remains that they're just COOL. Well-designed, well-thought-out, I'd snap these up in a HEARTBEAT for my fleet.

Mon Jul 01, 2013 7:51 pm

Thank you, Daragon, for that. I'll probably just call them 'medium cannons' or something, from now on.

Now, if you want these for your fleet, well, if you can safely get to Grelfucan, and you aren't an enemy of the MSI, I'd be happy to trade/sell some.

Mon Jul 01, 2013 8:52 pm

We would be more than happy to take you up on your offer under normal circumstances. However, Daragon Incorporated is a starship company itself, just beginning in fact. Being seen by the public this early with starships from a potential rival could be seen as cheating off other companies, or even an endorsement, both of which are bad PR at this stage.

We hope you understand the dilemma accepting your offer would place us in, and wish you luck in your future endeavors. Perhaps such trades could be considered at a later time.

--Admiral Siriondil Daragon
Daragon Inc.

Mon Jul 01, 2013 9:13 pm

One thing I forgot to add in my criticisms: I criticize what I like. I know that sounds odd, so let me put it another way, I give suggestions to builders that I feel can handle "improvements." That means that I don't suggest too much to those people building "my first ship, or anything for that matter." I can't speak for anyone else on this, but my suggestions means that I consider the builder talented enough to grow even better. There are only two times I don't give (much, I have to be a little annoying Razz

) advice. A, the builder is WAAAAY beyond any of my abilities and any I advice offer would just be an insult, or B, the builder needs to figure out the basics for them-self. Unfortunately, saying something "wrong" with a ship sounds insulting in of itself, so my intention to be helpful ends up being hurtful.

At any rate, yes, there are better ships out there... there always will be for nine-hundred-ninety-nine out of a thousand builders out there, of which I am 763. Razz

But these are quite good! I've never seen a design by ARC before, now I have, and I know that these will not be the last or the best of your lifetime builds... and I am looking forward to seeing every single one of them. I can see you have talent... forget building decent ships, you've gone WAY beyond that! You're already designing your own civilization, armed forces, and plot for Pete's sake! When I first started building.. well... my ships looked like gray pancakes covered in studs! Razz

But these are GOOD, are they "the best on earth?" no, but you're already WORLDS better than I was when I started, and look where I am now... on second thought, don't answer that Razz

Back on topic. If this is any indication of what you can do, you show great potential. You're ships are balanced, functional, well designed, aesthetically pleasing, not blocky or paper-thin, not over powered, or corny. Keep building and they'll go from "really cool" to "jaw dropping, eye-popping, nose-to-screen amazingly, outstandingly, incredibly awesome" And whatever else you do, don't take the critiquing too seriously, we're just elderly and set in our ways. Razz

Tue Jul 02, 2013 9:32 am

Daragon: I understand perfectly. Perhaps at a later date, then.

Dino: Sheesh, you've almost got me blushing for cryin' out loud! Razz

However, if you want to see more of my designs, check out the LEGO Star Wars Creation Lab/Gallery/Thingamajiggy ( Razz

) and just search for my username. Oh, and my greetings thread has some weapons on it, too.

Tue Jul 02, 2013 4:40 pm

Sorry if I was too critical, ARC. Crying or Very sad

One possibility may be to simply not make an in-LDD weapon to represent each individual weapon at all, essentially a trade-off between the "cool factor" and scale accuracy. Obviously you won't offend me if you don't like the idea, but I figure I oughta just mention it. Wink

Tue Jul 02, 2013 4:44 pm

Arik: Well, that's a possibility...but not one I'm excited about, necessarily.

Tue Jul 02, 2013 6:39 pm

ARC I just looked at some of your stuff... wow.... you sir are talented! You're minifig scale and small (unkown scale) vehicles are ESPECIALLY impressive! Very Happy

And I know what you mean about invisible weapons systems.... I'm OCD, and I don't do "excluded details" well. Razz

A suggestion would be to use studs as point defense weapon batteries.

Tue Jul 02, 2013 7:44 pm

Waaait... I offer the most realistic and scale-accurate option possible and it gets labeled as "imperfectionist"? Razz

Tue Jul 02, 2013 8:20 pm

Arik, I'm the kind of person who wants the landing gear, warp core, reaction control thrusters, and a complete mini-fig scale representation of all major rooms on a starship Razz

For me, I would rather SEE the weapons present, then firing arcs are pretty clear, and I can always check my ship if I'm not sure about something... that and I just feel odd listing weapons that physically aren't there in the model Razz

But not having an actual piece/set of pieces represent point defense weapons IS another good way to do it, just not one that I would ever choose. Razz

Tue Jul 02, 2013 10:16 pm

Yeah, Dino, I'm much the same way. I can't stand guns I can't see, but I've learned to live with the limitations of my chosen scale (mostly, anyway). I have thought about using this piece as an anti-starfighter laser battery, but I've never actually done it.

Wed Jul 03, 2013 11:17 am

dino27 wrote:ARC I just looked at some of your stuff... wow.... you sir are talented! You're minifig scale and small (unkown scale) vehicles are ESPECIALLY impressive!

And I know what you mean about invisible weapons systems.... I'm OCD, and I don't do "excluded details" well. A suggestion would be to use studs as point defense weapon batteries.

Well, don't be fooled, a lot of the things I posted were either from Arik, or modified designs of things I got from Arik. Mostly it's just the fighters and ships that I did myself. Ground vehicles (save for the Mandalorian IFV and Raider Grav Tank's turrets) are almost all his.

Wed Jul 03, 2013 11:31 am

Actually, Dino, as of late I've been going into detail on ships' hangar bays, giving my ships actual, expansive to-scale interiors instead of just covering a hangar with trans-blue "energy field" pieces. Razz

Well, I suppose it's just a personal preference, then. One person can't stand not putting key details on, the other can't stand having said details five times as large as they're supposed to be. Wink

Wed Jul 03, 2013 11:50 am

Lord Admiral Ariklego wrote: One person can't stand not putting key details on, the other can't stand having said details five times as large as they're supposed to be.

...Can we stop picking on my ship now? Please?

Wed Jul 03, 2013 12:50 pm

NO! Must.... stop... nitpick... ARC's... starship... RGGHHHH... *manages to restrain myself from making further comments* Razz

Wed Jul 03, 2013 12:55 pm

*Slams Arik with a giant hammer.* There, that'll help.

Wed Jul 03, 2013 9:07 pm

Arc, talking about the point defense weapons wasn't related to your ship being "bad" at all, I personally like the way you did it, I'd rather have a weapon that's "too big for scale" that not have it there at all. Smile

We were just being overly technical about our own ships, we really weren't complaining about the way you did it... it's just that you used an unusual method, which sparked us talking about how we do it ourselves and how we can't agree about anything. Razz

We'll stop using your topic as an outlet for our overly-detail-oriented minds. Razz

Sorry for offending you. Telling you "your work stinks" it not our intention at all, because that is the exact opposite of reality, your work is cool, and we were talking about your methods for doing difficult to accomplish things. Let's end this on a positive note, let's each list several things that we REALLY like about the ships, not discussing "how it could be 'better,' or how we would do it."

I'll start with:

1) I LOVE the chunky armored, aggressive shape of the Odysseus class! Very Happy

2) Your double-barreled turrets look SO devastatingly powerful! They really show the military might of your vessels! Smile

3) I really like the grill pieces (both the tiles and the slopes) on the Odysseus frigate!

4) The engine layout on the Zeus is very aesthetically pleasing!

5) I'm very pleased with the antenna hub on the Zeus. Smile

6) I like how the Zeus heavy cruiser resembles a Dreadnaught! Very Happy

Thu Jul 04, 2013 10:13 am

Aww, Dino, you're too kind. Embarassed

Thu Jul 04, 2013 9:41 pm

Hey, I'm just complimentin' what I like. Wink