ACTA SF

AdrianH said:
Out of interest, does anyone know what parts need to be glued together? If, for example, the warp nacelles on the Federation Frigate and Battle Frigate are separate parts, that gives me all sorts of possibilities to make something more interesting looking. (Actually, if Mongoose sold a box of assorted Federation warp nacelles, saucers and secondary hulls, dedicated SFU fans could assemble their choice of regular ships while folks like me could get creative. Sort of like a SFU Lego set. :))
Click to expand...

A bits bag could be a cool idea - nice thinking - not sure if it works for all the races as some of them are a bit, shall we say, odd looking.........
 
Thanks Jean, I already have a pretty good collection of Fed Com stuff so I'm set there. I just remember ACTA B5 had some pretty nice looking counters that were nice and big. Either way me and my group have already decided that we are going to buy the crap out of this game. I know on the other message board people are talking about it retaining it's SFU "feel" we are hoping it will retain it's ACTA "feel". I feel this way you find a whole new group of people that will buy your game, but I am not an expert on game design or marketing. I just know that this game is generating a lot more excitement in my group then Fed Com did and we have played SFB Fed Com and ACTA B5. Sorry for the ramble I'll be leaving now.
 
davyj0427, don't be sorry for the ramble! That is exactly the sort of feedback we need to hear. We want the same results in a fight as SFB would have; we want it to feel like ACTA.

Jean
 
Jean said:
Folks, the pictures of the Federation New Heavy Cruiser are up on the BBS: http://www.starfleetgames.com/discus/messages/27411/28060.html?1315866779
They will be going up on ADB's page on Facebook (album link upstream).

Jean
Click to expand...

Not too impressed with that secondary hull - I'd expect the NCA to be one ship where Mongoose *could* have a bit more fun, tbh... I'd like to have seen the secondary hull merge with the back of the saucer to make it look a bit more "streamlined". Also, isn't the NCA supposed to have a shuttlebay? Might be nice to have a clamshell doors between the two nacelles instead of the void maybe or on the back of the secondary hull...

Maybe put the clamshell on the secondary hull and upside down from the normal CA version and fill the void at the back of the nacelles with a curved section with the impulse engines in there?
 
Da Boss said:
AdrianH said:
Out of interest, does anyone know what parts need to be glued together? If, for example, the warp nacelles on the Federation Frigate and Battle Frigate are separate parts, that gives me all sorts of possibilities to make something more interesting looking. (Actually, if Mongoose sold a box of assorted Federation warp nacelles, saucers and secondary hulls, dedicated SFU fans could assemble their choice of regular ships while folks like me could get creative. Sort of like a SFU Lego set. :))
Click to expand...

A bits bag could be a cool idea - nice thinking - not sure if it works for all the races as some of them are a bit, shall we say, odd looking.........
Click to expand...
It might not work for all races. But the Federation ships look as though they're assembled from such a bag, so let's have the bag. :) For example, that Frigate is basically a saucer with a couple of nacelles stuck to it. If they're separate then I get to build my own pylons and maybe end up with something like FASA's USS Chandley. ;)
 
There seems to be a lot of ships that consist of a suacer and 3 warp nacelles.

The new heavy cruiser doesn't appear to have a secondary hull, making it seem much smaller than the heavy cruiser (the Connie).

I find it quite amusing that the SFB hardcore guys started off complaining that the changes were too radical. Now they are complaining the changes aren't enough. :)
 
Being one of those old SFU guys,(c1979), the concern with changes were with the TV/FJ ships. Now the designs are moving into the ships that have a lot more freedom to play with, as they are ADB hulls, the WOW factor is desired for a successfull product.

I don't speak for anyone but myself, YMMV.
 
ctchapel said:
Being one of those old SFU guys,(c1979), the concern with changes were with the TV/FJ ships. Now the designs are moving into the ships that have a lot more freedom to play with, as they are ADB hulls, the WOW factor is desired for a successfull product.

I don't speak for anyone but myself, YMMV.
Click to expand...


chapel: I dunno - you speak pretty much for me too... it was really only the basic FJ ships I cared about getting the same with the possible additions of the NCL and the Old CL... (the former because I liked the design (and Mongoose did it proud) and the latter because it was a really nice design (again, Mongoose did a good job)).
 
Greg Smith said:
There seems to be a lot of ships that consist of a suacer and 3 warp nacelles.

The new heavy cruiser doesn't appear to have a secondary hull, making it seem much smaller than the heavy cruiser (the Connie).

I find it quite amusing that the SFB hardcore guys started off complaining that the changes were too radical. Now they are complaining the changes aren't enough. :)
Click to expand...

Yes, I'd be happier with a few variations on the number of nacelles, but that's for others to decide...

The NCA does have a secondary hull, but it's a very small one that's right behind the lower side of the saucer and is the base for the lowe nacelle (but it's very small in comparison with the normal CA).

What you have to remember is that the older SFU fans were pretty much into Trek in general long before the films and grew up with the basic few designs, so feel pretty strongly about them... meaning that getting them right is important. You'll always get the few in any crowd where they don't want anything to change and you'll always get some who don't care about keeping the old designs and want the new and shiny ones...

Most of the complaints I've seen were either design criticisms from the function/aesthetic perspectives or were complaints about designs looking too "Next Generation" and so worries about license violations. If they ever bring out the X-Ships, I *really* want to see what Mongoose can come up with... it'll be a fun project... :)

I think, basically, Mongoose's designers need to just look at the timeline that the ship was brought in and use that to decide how "blocky" or "old-fashioned" to make each design - making the later designs more streamlined and flash (while retaining the feel of the race they're designing the ship for).
 
Ryu: FJ = Franz Joseph - He did the Star Trek Technical Manual for the original series and full deck plans of the Federation CA (ie the one in the series which we should not name). TV simply refers to the TV series. The Tech Manual featured the ships that are the Fed CA, DN, DD, SC and Tug (Heavy Cruiser, Dreadnaught, Destroyer, Scout and Tug) from the boxed set as a series of side, front and plan views. Worth picking up if you see a copy on ebay, especially if you roleplay too...
 
In another thread it was asked:
Thank you Jean and Scoutdad for the info. I should have been clearer, though. I meant to ask whether or not the Romulan Hawk-type ships will look the same as in Starfleet Battles or not. It's nothing against the game itself; I just find the look of them so jarringly different from the classic-style Romulan ships that I cannot imagine the Hawks being a natural evolution from previous Romulan designs, even considering Klingon influence.

So I guess I'm wondering if we'll see newer, more contemporary-looking ship designs. Of course, I'm not asking about D'Deridex ships from TNG, just updates of the SB ships.
Click to expand...
I can't speak for Mongoose, but I can tell you about the conversation I had with them at Origins.
We were discussing the various empires and their ships at the Mongoose booth...
(I'm looking forward to the Lyrans - please put detail on the bottoms of hte ships!!!! :wink: )
Ron is looking forward to the Hydrans (but we won;t get into that in this forum!!! :roll: )
But we did discuss the Romulans. He says he has some interestig tweaks in mind for the hawk ships, as he's been rather un-impressed with the current models. No images are yet available and nothng firm was discussed, but he did say he envisioned a more "bird-like", streamlined version.

Hopefully, this means a wider body with more prominent "wings" extending out to the engines; a more beak-like forward end; and more organic looking curves rather than boxy shaped stuck together. But only time will tell.
 
BFalcon said:
Ryu: FJ = Franz Joseph - He did the Star Trek Technical Manual for the original series and full deck plans of the Federation CA (ie the one in the series which we should not name). TV simply refers to the TV series. The Tech Manual featured the ships that are the Fed CA, DN, DD, SC and Tug (Heavy Cruiser, Dreadnaught, Destroyer, Scout and Tug) from the boxed set as a series of side, front and plan views. Worth picking up if you see a copy on ebay, especially if you roleplay too...
Click to expand...
Ah ok. Got that techmanual a few years ago^^
 
I'm also one of the "old-time" SFB grognards.
I was very adamant about the look of the "classic" or iconic units.
The FJD ships (Federaiton CA and DN, as well as the SC/DD and TUG if they ever are produced) and the iconic TV ships (Romulan War Eagle and Klingon D7). These have been show manytimes and are recognizable at a glance and should be true to the earlier images. Over all, I like the "tweaks" made by Mongoose that are present in the final versions of each of these units.

Now, moving into the purely speculative realm of SFU only ships... I'm all for giving Sandrine a bit of freedom and seeing where things end up.

Now, that being said - there are limits. I was very much against the initial CC design. Not because I didn't like it - but because there was no logical way to go from the Federation CA ship card (and Federation CA miniature) to the proposed Federation CC ship card (and proposed CC miniature). Too radical a design change for what amounted to two extra boxes on the SSD.
Now, if hte proposed CC design is used for hte basis of another miniature [a Federation CB, maybe] - then I'm all over it.
Same with the proposed Federaiton DN design. It was a great lookign ship and would make a great starting point for a Federation Battleship or Heavy Carrier, but it was waaaay too much of a change from the iconic FJD design.

And as previously mentioned - bring on the "X-Ships". Those are where Sandrine and mongoose should really be able to shine.

OK. That was a really long post to explain why this particular SFB player was against all the design changes madeto the early ships, but now wants to know "why no more changes than that?"
 
BFalcon said:
Greg Smith said:
There seems to be a lot of ships that consist of a suacer and 3 warp nacelles.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Hence my suggestion for a set of parts. ;)

What you have to remember is that the older SFU fans were pretty much into Trek in general long before the films and grew up with the basic few designs, so feel pretty strongly about them... meaning that getting them right is important. You'll always get the few in any crowd where they don't want anything to change and you'll always get some who don't care about keeping the old designs and want the new and shiny ones...
Click to expand...
I'm not a SFU fan but was into Trek long before the films and in fact, that's why I'm more interested in ACTA:SF than ACTA:NA. So I'd like models of ships which actually appeared in TOS to be accurate, while others can be shiny and creative.

What that means is that the ridge which someone decided to stick on the back of the Federation Heavy Cruiser is getting removed by Dremel, and I'm not even touching the Romulan War Eagle while it has the three hatches and sculpted bird. If someone can confirm that the Starline 2400 War Eagle has a clean underside then I might get one or two direct from ADB, otherwise no Romulans for me. :(

On the other hand, for the ships designed for SFU, I'm with scoutdad - get creative and make them interesting. If Sandrine and Mongoose don't, I'll have to do it myself - for example, that E4 looks just like an F5 only smaller, which means if I get my hands on them, one or other is getting some major surgery. Likewise, most of the rest of the Klingon fleet I've seen in the Starline 2400 range looks like minor variants of the D7, squashed or stretched and with perhaps an extra warp nacelle or two. If the Mongoose B10 looks like the Starline 2400 one, i.e. a D7 which ate too many cakes, it won't when I've finished with it. :twisted:
 
AdrianH said:
[
What that means is that the ridge which someone decided to stick on the back of the Federation Heavy Cruiser is getting removed by Dremel, and I'm not even touching the Romulan War Eagle while it has the three hatches and sculpted bird. If someone can confirm that the Starline 2400 War Eagle has a clean underside then I might get one or two direct from ADB, otherwise no Romulans for me. :(
Click to expand...

The overall plan is to offer two versions of the Romulan ships (well, three, if you include the cloaked ones), one with eagle, one without. However, the initial line up will be a mix of the two and it may be a little while before we get round to the others. They may also be mail order only.

But, they are on the cards.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

MongooseMatt
The Deep and the Dark - on PDF and Pre-Order
2 3
Replies
59
Views
3K
Seffix
Seffix
M
Referee Tools
Replies
6
Views
694
MJMcMahon
M
U
2300AD - Scout Services?
Replies
12
Views
620
Sigtrygg
Sigtrygg
S
The Premises of Traveller: 3. Most Worlds are Unimportant
2 3 4
Replies
65
Views
3K
MasterGwydion
M
V
Legal Torpedo Mounts
Replies
9
Views
394
Annatar Giftbringer
A
Back
Top