Sheffield's Shipyard

Bandit LOAF

Long Live the Confederation!
There are certainly 'in-fiction' weapons which don't appear simulated in the games... but an AMG on the frigate isn't one of them. (People familiar with frigates in the modern setting won't quite appreciate how they work in Wing Commander -- they're not really light line warships in WC as much as they are larger, modular ships dedicated to carrying expendable weaponry or acting as transports/command centers for higher value payloads).
 

ChrisReid

Super Soaker Collector / Administrator
Cyberion said:
There is no sheffield class, cause we do not know what class it is. We call it sheffield, due to the name of the ship in WC3 of this class. So i think i can call it a sheffield. And not to call it unknown-class-ship.

I'd suggest referring to it as *the* TCS Sheffield perhaps then, rather than giving it a class at all. That'd have a better chance of being accurate.
 

Cyberion

Master of Orion
alright, i've finished the texturing. pMing you the model, Spirit. Could you test it asap, cause i didn't use for some maps the "power of two" feature (512x512 - 512x256, etc), so i do not know how the textures will be shown in the game. Converted *.OBJ file shows them perfectly, so i hope everything works, otherwise i'll have to retexture this baby ;)

here is the links to the final renders. I've corrected the windows, added engine textures and fixed some displacements ;)

http://img210.exs.cx/img210/544/sheffield099yt.jpg

http://img210.exs.cx/img210/3107/sheffield09026je.jpg

http://img210.exs.cx/img210/8523/sheffield09034gt.jpg

http://img210.exs.cx/img210/4246/sheffield09043qb.jpg


So i'm waiting for your answer about how the model works in the game.
 

SabreAce

Rear Admiral
That last render (the sorta close-up of the side) looks like a movie scene...damn incredible work, Cyb.
 

Cyberion

Master of Orion
SabreAce said:
That last render (the sorta close-up of the side) looks like a movie scene...damn incredible work, Cyb.

thx ;)

actually i'm planing on drawing better textures and make sheffield increadibly sweet ;) but that will take plenty of time. But still stay tuned ;)
 

Penta2

Spaceman
Question: Why are the innards of the ship on it's bottom exposed to space? Seems to scream for microasteroids breaking things all the time.
 

Cyberion

Master of Orion
Penta2 said:
Question: Why are the innards of the ship on it's bottom exposed to space? Seems to scream for microasteroids breaking things all the time.

well, i guess someone at Origin/EA may tell you that ;) But I think answer will be "because" hehehe
 

Lynx

Spaceman
The windows are very small, judging from their size the ship would be a few miles long. Check out some WC3 screenshots, it has much fewer and larger windows, and also an area with windows at it's "nose".
 

Forlarren

Spaceman
I was wondering about that, heh I just assumed they were more like portholes than windows.

Also as an artistic touch I would add dark windows. And maybe a couple with mood lighting if you get my meening. :p
 

thehawk

Spaceman
ChrisReid said:
I'd suggest referring to it as *the* TCS Sheffield perhaps then, rather than giving it a class at all. That'd have a better chance of being accurate.

This is probably a silly question, but if the Sheffield is a destroyer, and this ship is a 'Sheffield type' and not just one particular ship, then why not just call it a destroyer, instead of the potentially endless debate as to what to call it?

Cyberion- absolutely beautiful, no matter what name you give it.

-thehawk, newguy
 

Arqentus

Spaceman
thehawk said:
This is probably a silly question, but if the Sheffield is a destroyer, and this ship is a 'Sheffield type' and not just one particular ship, then why not just call it a destroyer, instead of the potentially endless debate as to what to call it?

Well, it's easy to solve this one. In general with battleships, the first vessel created is also the class name. Sinds we know of only one vessel with this design, it's safe to say, that it's the first one, and thus, we can call it the Sheffield Class Destroyer.

Problem solved. We dont need to be 100% accurate, sinds a lot of stuff is just made up by the game creaters themselfs.
 

Sarty

Rear Admiral
Arqentus said:
Well, it's easy to solve this one. In general with battleships, the first vessel created is also the class name. Sinds we know of only one vessel with this design, it's safe to say, that it's the first one, and thus, we can call it the Sheffield Class Destroyer.

Problem solved. We dont need to be 100% accurate, sinds a lot of stuff is just made up by the game creaters themselfs.

Its ignorant to think that the ship we see is the first of its class simply because its the one WE see. As LOAF says, thats small universe syndrome.

If you think about it, it doesnt make sense that the Sheffield would be the first of its class anyways. Why would a brand new, first of its class destroyer be assigned to guard an obsolete light carrier? Just doesnt make sense.
 

BradMick

Vice Admiral
since, not sinds.


also, we know that this ISN'T the first of her class, i do believe it's stated somewhere in the mass information vaults on the site somewhere. so, no...problem is not solved, and just because the creators didn't fill in the blank, means we should. WE didn't create it. THEY did. Until THEY say what class it is, we'll just have to accept that it's the Sheffeild, destroyer of unkown class.
 

Arqentus

Spaceman
So, we will call it the Sheffield type. And for the class, well, make a freaking name up, and IF there ever come's any real information ( and the chance for that is little at best ), you just replace the name ingame. Is that so daim hard, instait of this pointless, discussions that seems to have been all over this forum ...

If we dont know stuff sinds the original WC writers/developers dident write it down, then we can use whatever we want. There is no rule that every detail needs to be know, and being fanatic about that data up to the point of insanity.

And if you want to know how to find a ship's class name when it's unknown, you use the navy's way. You make it up based on a set parameter. In case of subs, they used the Military Alphabet. Dont remember the one used for ships, do a google for it.
 

Sarty

Rear Admiral
No, it isnt so damn hard, but neither is spelling.

Our point is that, as easy as it is to call it the Sheffield class, or "make up a name", it isnt right to do that. It also is not so damn hard to call it the WC3 Destroyer, which is what it is.
 

BradMick

Vice Admiral
yeah, ignoring a correction in spelling only proves ignorance, and arguing a point when it's already been deemed as 'this is the way it is' by rest of the folks in the community, also proves ignorance. argue it again and it'll jump to stupidity, same as with ignoring a spelling correction.


since....not sinds.

it is the WC3 destroyer. period, end of story. and keeping on track with details and accuracy is what sets the WC community apart from every other community out there. we take the history and everything else seriously because we take the game seriously. we do expect another WC game, and if they don't give class names to old ships, they'll remain as they are. why pollute something with useless crap which only serves to confuse people, or detract from what is established? kind of foolish to me.
 
I vote we just call it Sheffield since there is no reference... right now Confed only has the Gilgamesh as a destroyer sized ship, and they look different enough to be able to tell :) As soon as someone finds out a better name, we change it. takes what, 20 seconds ^-^ no worries.
 

Forlarren

Spaceman
So spelling is a measure of ones intelligence? As are typos? And just how important is it that your grammer be correct in an argument on some forum on the internet? Did you really have that much trouble understanding what was trying to be said by Argentus, or is this a picking nits thing? I wouldn't know, apparently I am both ignorant and stupid, considering I have so much trouble with spelling and grammer.
 
Top