Hosted Projects - Standalone > Fate of the Galaxy

Imperial Raider

<< < (3/3)

Very good. Hope somebody have the time to make the Raider for a Imperial Mod or a Mission in your Standards. It fit perfect in the role of defending imperial convoys from rebel raiders. After see some ships from Episode VII, even in the new movie the ship is perfect.

That Raiders a terrible model, dagger hull makes no sense on a ship that size and tie solar panels? Lazy designing. Lancers designed specifically for convoy escort, there doesnt need to be exact imperial equivalent of Corvette, fs2 isnt a board game.


--- Quote ---
Or both a lost against my Star Citizen 890 Jump :D

5 turrets + 2 missileturrets+ 2 Fighters :D 20m shorter but the rest are in the size of the 2 Star Wars Corvettes.

--- End quote ---

I'm a little confused by this layout. 

Also - in talking about detail and how accurate a model is (reference to the comments about the cargo transport), I find it not very helpful to allow ourselves to be constrained by the details that may have been canon in the movies. 

Why?  Because those model makers, back in the 70s, were under pressure to come up with ideas no one had really thought of before, and drawing from pure creative spark and a little (but not too much) background knowledge and research of real ships, came up with something in time for a deadline to the film, where that particular detail would only see 3 seconds of screen time, and never be thought twice about for the reason as to why it was there. 

In creating an immersive, expansive universe, we have to give consideration to doing real, hard, extensive research into the things we are trying to create.  This layout of a "Luxury Liner" in Star Citizen is exactly why I don't think enough research is done.   For one, this is a luxury liner, yet the amount of open space in the crew dining area and quarters takes up a good chunk of the middle of the vessel, which is prime territory for a nice guest dining room (perhaps that was the intent...but the crew living quarters is in the wrong place then.) 

The guests you have aboard are your upmost priority in laying out a cruising vessel.   You want to place them as far away from the pumps and machine noises of the engineering spaces as possible.  As well, you want to give the guests maximum open space to roam in a confined area.  There seems to be a cramp on the communal guest accommodation in that regard.  The staterooms are nice, but where is the forward lounge and observatory?  Where is the dining room and bar next to that forward lounge for evening cocktails? 

Furthermore, where are the engineering spaces?  The should be berthed aft...not the guests,  because that would be closer to the uncomfortable heat and noise generated by those spaces.  As well, the bridge does not need to be as large and expansive as it is.  On a luxury liner, there is need for space on the bridge, to be sure.  Officer comfort is important to companies hoping to retain good personnel, and guests (if the bridge is "open" to them) need a place to observe from, usually some sort of couch or seating arrangement can be provided, however in that model, the bridge is huge, and has a lot of empty, useless space, that on a vessel with limited space, you'd never build it that way, because you need space to run cables, pipes, and other machinery, you need to have things open enough to convey welcome, but tetris enough to be utilitarian.  It's a delicate balance.

I've worked on ships for a long time.  I've got a master's license and several credentials.  I have worked engineering, on cruise vessels of all sizes, on old, traditional tallships, on tankers and tugs and been to all sorts of ports and haul outs. 

I can tell you, a lot of these game companies, if they really wanted to create something that FELT real, would consult with someone who's actually been aboard these things extensively, and could tell you that slapping a massive window, 10 stories tall, just doesn't make sense on the front.   They could tell you that a MASSIVE ENGINE meant to propel you across space needs a fuel tank somewhere, and having a master state-room RIGHT BEHIND IT just wouldn't work for all the supporting structure that would need to be in place for that engine to operate.   The Engineering spaces would take up a majority of the aft half of the vessel and be placed center to it.   That's because every room...every conduit, every single wire lead and pipe on that ship from every compartment, at some point needs to get routed back to the engineering space where the generators for power, pumps and other system's management devices reside.    If you have it all off to the side, or in some awkward place, it makes everything from electricity to human waste that much more likely to have problems getting where it needs to go. 

While yes, it is a fictional world with fictional ships, showing even just a little bit of basic sense of modern ship layout will go a looong way for immersion.  And there are people who notice this stuff.   

Just a thought. 

Now the Raider is again Canon :D
Battlefront 2 Imperial Campaign. And see at the second Death Star ;)


--- Quote from: Deathsnake on April 15, 2017, 05:12:46 pm ---Now the Raider is again Canon :D
Battlefront 2 Imperial Campaign. And see at the second Death Star ;)

--- End quote ---

--- Quote from: CountBuggula on January 07, 2015, 02:20:58 pm ---...our policy always is that if someone wants to make an EU ship, they're welcome to try.  If it meets our quality standards and fits the look and feel of OT ships (which is usually a judgement call by Chief1983) then there's a high chance we'll include it.  That doesn't mean it would show up in the campaign missions we're creating, but it'd be available for custom missions.

--- End quote ---

Also, a reminder that Disney Canon does not equal FotG Canon.  For our purposes, the OT is the only reference that matters.  Anything outside of that is EU and may or may not be included at our discretion.


[0] Message Index

[*] Previous page

Go to full version