Posted: Sun Dec 02, 2007 5:49 pm
Not another agreement between you two... 
www.ditl.org
Daystrom Institute Technical Library
https://mail.ditl.org/forum/
Ship of the week: Ambassador
Page 4 of 12
Posted: Sun Dec 02, 2007 5:53 pm
So that's what that loud cracking noise was; I think we just broke the universe.
Posted: Sun Dec 02, 2007 5:55 pm
No problem. Anyone got any duct tape?
Posted: Sun Dec 02, 2007 5:57 pm
Ah, duct tape. What can't it solve? It's kind of like the Force; it's got a light side and a dark side, and it binds the universe together...
Posted: Sun Dec 02, 2007 5:58 pm
I don't know... I've been from one side of this galaxy to the other, and I've never seen any mystical adhesive product...
Posted: Mon Dec 03, 2007 9:22 pm
I'll try fixing that by saying that I find the Galaxy very beautiful. In fact, it's one of my favourite starships. Now you can all disagree with me and fix the universe.
Posted: Mon Dec 03, 2007 9:41 pm
You're completely wrong!
There, and the balance is restored.
There, and the balance is restored.
Posted: Mon Dec 03, 2007 11:59 pm
I think it looks nice, too.Jordanis wrote:I appear to be nearly alone in liking the looks of the Ambassador
I actually think she looks better than the E-D. the E-D always felt bow-heavy to me. The Ambassadors' more compact and solid neck gives it a more solid and balanced look, and helps make it look more stately.
Posted: Sat Dec 08, 2007 6:14 pm
I think the galaxy looks nice! When it comes to a preschooler designing a starship i'd say she's tops! 
Posted: Sat Dec 08, 2007 11:43 pm
It just looks to disproportional to me. The saucer is to wide and round and the nacelles to boring.
The CGI model of it has no life to it either.
The CGI model of it has no life to it either.
Posted: Sun Dec 09, 2007 1:42 pm
At first, I also thought the GCS looked unbalanced, but I was able to forgive that because she is, after all, a SPACEship and balance means very little. However, Teaos hit the nail on the head when he said that the CGI looked dull on tape.Teaos wrote:It just looks to disproportional to me. The saucer is to wide and round and the nacelles to boring.
The CGI model of it has no life to it either.
Posted: Sun Dec 09, 2007 2:07 pm
Thats not the point. Just because it doesnt have to be ballanced doesnt mean it shouldnt be. A fat chick doest weight anything in space but that doesnt mean you'd bang her.At first, I also thought the GCS looked unbalanced, but I was able to forgive that because she is, after all, a SPACEship and balance means very little.
Posted: Sun Dec 09, 2007 2:43 pm
I like big women. And the Galaxy Class. Wonder if there's any correlation.
Posted: Sun Dec 09, 2007 2:48 pm
Just because it doesn't have to be balanced, it doesn't mean you should build an absolutely hideous ship.
*Watches as Kostmayer is dragged off for testing*I like big women. And the Galaxy Class. Wonder if there's any correlation.
Posted: Sun Dec 09, 2007 4:29 pm
I agree that the GCS looks fat (I like my women fit not fat); the Nebula comes out much better with the same "wide" profile. And the Sov is way better than either.