[Turnsky]

i think even if jms said that it has engines we should not put them on. i mean, could anybody think of a mission where the engines would be of any usage? you also would have to give it some kind of pilot ai, i think it would look kind of strange when seeing babylon 4 moving like a hyperion or any other capitol ship.

just add them with some kinda cover on them, it'd be canon

[Prophet]

i think even if jms said that it has engines we should not put them on. i mean, could anybody think of a mission where the engines would be of any usage? you also would have to give it some kind of pilot ai, i think it would look kind of strange when seeing babylon 4 moving like a hyperion or any other capitol ship.

If JMS said there be engines, then there'll be engines. Having them doesn't mean the station should have the capability to move in the game. I think the engines were more strategic, than tactical resource. Hence they would have little use in-game, exept for storytelling.

It really should have something that can be identified as engines.

[Trivial Psychic]

In "The Gathering", B5 used a series of thrusters to stabalize it when the assassin's self-destruct explosive knocked them out of position.  Who says that B4 has to have actual engines?  Just say that it has a whack of thrusters placed all over the non-moving sections of the hull, which are typically used to keep it oriented properly, but can be used to relocate the station if necessary.  It wouldn't be able to move or accelerate very quickly, but it'd be enough to move the station out in an emergency.  Most specs I've read indicate that it may even be able to survive a hyperspace jump, with a sufficiently wide-mounted jumpgate.  Just make sure that the station has multi-directional maneuvering capabilities, and a very low top speed and acceleration.  Just make sure that in mission, the model has no AI class assigned to it, and perhaps "no dynamic goals" so it won't go wandering off.

[Col. Fishguts]

... on the other hand, it could baseball-bat those pesky shadow ships right out of the galaxy

[0rph3u5]

i think even if jms said that it has engines we should not put them on. i mean, could anybody think of a mission where the engines would be of any usage? you also would have to give it some kind of pilot ai, i think it would look kind of strange when seeing babylon 4 moving like a hyperion or any other capitol ship.

we don't need these engines.. If B4 should move than use your brain(s) and do some fittig FREDing!

[Turnsky]

i think even if jms said that it has engines we should not put them on. i mean, could anybody think of a mission where the engines would be of any usage? you also would have to give it some kind of pilot ai, i think it would look kind of strange when seeing babylon 4 moving like a hyperion or any other capitol ship.

we don't need these engines.. If B4 should move than use your brain(s) and do some fittig FREDing!

either way, the engines on the B4 would be kinda tiny, and thus, slow. designed to break orbit, head through a Hyperspace gate, and relocate elsewhere, not like move about like a bloody omega. they should be below or around the second docking port, behind the solar panels. it doesn't really matter if the guys -use- it or not, the mere fact that they're there, means it could be used for future missions, user or not.
put the damn things in there for just accurracy.

[Slasher]

I don't know if anyone is working on one or plans on doing it, but if there was a campaign centered around the Shadow War with Valen then B4 would be an integral part of the story.  Come to think of it, there's not much other way you could use B4 repeatedly in a campaign.

[Trivial Psychic]

How about during its construction, having to defend if from raids by Pro-Earth groups that participated in the destruction in the previous 3 stations.  And of course, you'd need it for a re-creation of "War Without End" Pt.1, when you must destroy the Shadow fighters and the bomb before it gets too close to B4.

[Slasher]

Well...I was talking about campaigns but I suppose single missions might have a need for a movable B4 too.   

[IPAndrews]

Engines on B4?  Not really worth the effort.

[Slasher]

Yeah, you gotta admit, the usability of B4 itself in a canon-minded sense is kinda limited.  It was there, then basically, it wasn't there. 

[Azrael15]

Yeah, you gotta admit, the usability of B4 itself in a canon-minded sense is kinda limited.  It was there, then basically, it wasn't there. 

Unless... it was in the PAST. 

[I_E_Maverick]

as the thoughts are quite conflictive i now decide that i wont do any engines. apart from some arguments already given i dont want to add anything that has never been seen in the show and destroy a cool design by doing any kind of bad shaped engines at the back.
if anyone can show me a pic of the engines in usual quality i may think of doing them, but until then the station only will get its turrets.

[Whitelight]

In The Gathering, from the movie collection B5 was seen firing thrusters to re-stablise its orbit after an explosion threw it off..
This does in no way say that i`d want thrusters on it though, so I say leave B4 as it is, a station. 
By the way, great job on the model, tis sweet. 

[Slasher]

Either way it does look great.  I_E_Maverick, you're like my TBP hero, man!   

[Prophet]

I really just meant that since JMS said it had engines then that's canon and we should go with that. And having "engines" doesn't prevent it from being a "station". And what I meant the engines being "strategic", I meant that they could just be something resembling engines in the model, without actually having the function of a engine. Thus there really wouldn't be real engines, but just something in the model looking like engines (without the glow). So the station wouldn't be chasing down battlecrabs, but it would leave the option open for story writers to have the B4 as a mobile battlestation.

Just making my views clear since you have already made your mind.

[Trivial Psychic]

I'd prefur to go with the lots-of-thrusters-you-can't-see solution, and just give it a slow table speed, to be used when necessary.

[I_E_Maverick]

I'd prefur to go with the lots-of-thrusters-you-can't-see solution, and just give it a slow table speed, to be used when necessary.

i think this sounds like the best way then. do it!

[tomcat]

Mav... just ignore them ....

[IPAndrews]