Sheffield's Shipyard


Master of Orion
Argentus seems to be a nice guy, stop picking on him guys, be polite. I'm doing a lot of typos myself, just because I type very fast and my keyboard is old and i'm not a native english speaker ;)


Dont worry about it guys ... i'm used to it.

In case anybody's wondering:

1. I'm from Europe ( Belgium ), so English is my third language ( after Dutch, French, a bit of german & japanese ... to be honest, i suck at french worse then english ;) ).

2. I have a condition called dislexia, google for it, i'm fed up writing what it is, did that a few 1000 times already. That's the main reason why i'm writing error's. Proofreading doesent help much becouse of the nature of dislexia, the errors seem normal to me ( atleased my mind thinks it's the right word ).

3. I'm a fast typer, that also doesent help. But those error's i find most of the time after proofreading it.


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.

The same can be said about the Star Trek fans, Star Wars fans, etc ... they all take there history seriously. It's not becouse people want to expand & want unknown blanks filled in, that they are less seriously about a game & it's universe.

What will you say if Cyberion designs a new ship, one that doesent exist in the universe, some cool looking design. Are you gone say we can't use it, becouse it doesent exist in the game's universe?

What if, heaven forbids, write a novel in the wc universe, and i make a lot of ship designs & other stuff up ( what in a sence, is writing all about ). And if it's a official novel, then all of a sudden it's ok?? What if it's a non offical novel...

There is a differance between using the universe data to the maximum possability & filling in the blanks to give a more complete picture. Or using the purist approche, and not accepting anything new out of fear of polution.

Most people wont be confused with new ships, designs etc if they are introduced logically, & fit into the universe. And lets be honest, we can even call several craft from the WC-V game, just as corupt becouse they dont fit into the other fours design pathern.

Hell, i bet a lot of people never even played WC I & II, let alone know the ships in the universe. How many people are of my generation, and still even remember WCI & II. Yet, we are using ships & material from those era's as well, while for the recent gamers, they dont even know of those.

There is nothing wrong with being creative, and if ( lets hope so ), a new WC game come's out in the future, and we learn some more data, we can always alter the things we got wrong or used a creative approch on. Like spiritplumber said, a 20 sec job at best.


Rear Admiral
If Cyberion made up his own WC ship and gave it his own background story and all, there would be nothing wrong with that. I would welcome it, Cyberion is a very talented modeller and I look forward to his future work. But there is a difference between adding to the universe and changing what is already there. You call the destroyer the Sheffield class out of what you call convenience, but its not as if calling it WC3 destroyer or THE Sheffield is inconvenient. When someone creates their own class of ship the community tries to make sure they stay in the continuity of the series, so that same continuity should definitely apply to something that is ALREADY in the series.


I've seen a good many arguments about this now and I have to agree with Loaf and can't just call this a Sheffield Class destroyer because we don't know what class it is. You can, however, say this is actually the Sheffield or that this model is Sheffield type (implying that it is similar to the Sheffield). My advice...give this model a name (an individual ship name) and then you shouldn't need to refer to it by class name.
I'm just going to call it "destroyer" in code for now. Easier on everyone. A (n|r)ose by any other name smells just as good, and I think this is a GREAT model. So whenever you know what to call this ship class uhm, drop me a line ^^; or just drop units.csv a line, better yet.


Vice Admiral
with regards to new content.....until the series creators okayed it, and said 'yes, this book is WC' it's not WC. sure, you can add stuff.....but it's not official WC until the creators say it is.

like for my scenes of mcauliffe project, yes....i'm putting a 'face' so to say on the ships of the book, but they are in no way 100% set in stone designs, nor will i pretend they are. now if chris roberts or someone else who had a hand in the series came to me and said 'hey, we like this....we like it so much to make it an official source for this time frame' then it becomes true...but thats not likely to happen.


Nice, the ship looks like it has some mass to it. I think its the small windows, the WC3 texture had such large ones.

My one knock is that the hanger entrance is a little small. The original is almost as large as the aft section it occupies.

Very cool, though.



  • Confed_Destroyer_side.png
    22.5 KB · Views: 205
  • Confed_Destroyer_aft.png
    25.3 KB · Views: 200


Vice Admiral
hmmm...upon further examination i'd also suggest doing up the windows and towers more like on the WC3 variant. I can get you the model ripped from the game, it has textures as well. The best way to go about it would be to use the textures to get exact details and then rebuild the textures by hand. Lemme know and i'll get the model to you.


Master of Orion
hmmm well i see the windows size from here pretty good ;) well i could make them 10 times bigger so they fit into the size of the original ones. not a big deal.


no, i'm talking about accurate placement and stuff based on the textures


okay we need names for cap ship classes from WC III/IV can the CIC have a series of polls so we can just assign a name to the things and move on?

I mean the odds that future WC games are going to answer these questions post creation of the Plunkett and Murphy is fairly small.

So lets just figure out the WC community is going to have to supplant cannoical material in this regard and resign our selves that not everything has been spelled out in the written works of our religion , that being WC.

It will be like Talmudic law or something.


What we can just put in a caviat that "untill the prophets tell us otherwise were gona say its X" then we can adjust if we learn things later on.


You can't do that...

If you call it X and I call it Y and Loaf calls it Z and someone else calls it A then all you've done is unleashed chaos. Something we definitely don't need... Also, don't think that because you've decided to call it X that everyone else should do the same...