www.ditl.org

Monroe wrote:I was thinking hey that's not bad.. until I saw the last picture and the giant ballsack hanging from the bottom of the ship.

Yeah, I thought the same. It looked kinda alright until I saw the fucking underside.

What makes them think that ship parts + huge rectangle makes a good ship?

What the fuck is that second one meant to be?

Here's some Klingon ships.

This one made me literally lol.







Boxy ship syndrome.



I'm not sure, but something about this looks wrong.



Did they forget the other half?



Look, its a baby battlecruiser!



Why?




If I posted all the nightmares, I'd be here for a week.

Those are hilariously bad.

When me and Nick saw the "baby" battlecruiser, we burst out laughing.

Now that I think of it, Mark may get soda on his monitor after seeing it.

This is 10 times worse than Voyager's variable geometry nacelles.



What did they do to the Connie?!

Good god, that's awful.

Why, why did they make all these horrendous ships? SFC and Klingon Academy provided us with plenty of decent looking movie-era ships.

stitch626 wrote:

This one is not that bad, actually the detachable conecting neck is a good concept, the ship looks kind a small for that but wathever. IMO the problem would be the bridge module, seems like made with playblocks, the cheap ones.

Wow, there are some truly awful kitbashes here. Interesting thing, most from scratch ships are far more tolerable than kitbashes. Something about most kitbashes is just ridiculously bad.

A kitbash on paper just doesn't make any sense to me.

K'Ehleyko Class Troop Cruiser

Oh god, that's just WRONG.