Hard Light Productions Forums
Modding, Mission Design, and Coding => The Modding Workshop => Topic started by: Turnsky on May 16, 2004, 08:40:32 am
-
when/if people make some 'upgrades' to the [V] models, (see the HTL fenris for the ultimate example and it's texture set) i would suggest that the GTA line of capital ships get an optional set of military grey textures to keep in line with the color schemes of the fenris class, (so you'd have one set of clear textures to go with the original, the other, is military)
oh, and if somebody /does/ make a high-poly orion, please keep the overall design of it correct, it's not true to [V] if it diverts from it, now is it.. i know people are trying, and i respect that.
if people can point me to some tutorials on textures, i may be able to help out a little. :nods:
although, it'd be cool if somebody made a CG-quality version of a freespace vessel.. with textures to boot..
also, some animated "derelect" textures would be funky, you know, have the ship unlit, with some random lights flickering on and off on various areas on the ship.
-
I think the colors of the ships where not painted, tha would take too long. It's just the color of the material they used :)
-
Originally posted by jdjtcagle
I think the colors of the ships where not painted, tha would take too long. It's just the color of the material they used :)
*imagines a man with a paint-brush, standing before the colossus* :)
He might say "Look at the size of this thing". ;) (For the Star Wars fans here)
-
red dwarf
-
Originally posted by jdjtcagle
I think the colors of the ships where not painted, tha would take too long. It's just the color of the material they used :)
Robots. Hundreds of robotic pods with the sole purpose of painting the hull of nearly a billion cubic meter warship. It's glorious, simply glorious!
-
*wonders what material would make the Orion colour.
-
titanium aloy
-
pure Titanium is white or very light gray so an alloy would be white, or very silver
All the FS2 ship are painted, probably with some kind of tinted monobonded super paint that reinforces some key system.
-
Why don't they scratch when you ram into them then?
-
its very thick paint?!? ;)
-
Paint, shmaint. The Fenris looks the way it does because its made out of all the automobile scrap heaps that became obsolete in the infant days of the GTA ;)
-
*Imagines a grey GTD Orion*
-
No more like mothballed naval fleets recycling the metal as personal vehicles are now almost completely made out of polymers. Damn military contractors cutting corners, hey maybe that's why some ships have that rusted look eh? LOL...
-
Originally posted by Turnsky
oh, and if somebody /does/ make a high-poly orion, please keep the overall design of it correct, it's not true to [V] if it diverts from it, now is it.. i know people are trying, and i respect that.
So very true. Modders, take heed! Any who divert shall be smote, SMOTE I SAY!!!
So...Is anyone making a high poly Orion?
-
Damn Star Dragon, LOL, that's what I was trying to think of, but I couldn't think of it, so I threw in automobiles to replace whatever I couldn't remember...so funny I missed the obvious entirely. Yeah, battleships. That's prolly what they did, too. Prolly dismantled all those obsolete aircraft carriers and made Fenrises by recycling the hull plating. Who knows. Either that, or the fenris was so early that it was designed to fly alongside real naval fleets as aerial support, and as such was given the same color scheme. :)
-
Originally posted by Gregster2k
Damn Star Dragon, LOL, that's what I was trying to think of, but I couldn't think of it, so I threw in automobiles to replace whatever I couldn't remember...so funny I missed the obvious entirely. Yeah, battleships. That's prolly what they did, too. Prolly dismantled all those obsolete aircraft carriers and made Fenrises by recycling the hull plating. Who knows. Either that, or the fenris was so early that it was designed to fly alongside real naval fleets as aerial support, and as such was given the same color scheme. :)
I think you mean orbital support.. I can't see a fenris flying in atmosphere.. at all.
-
well no, Fenrises first started as boats, the where sailing, the someone though, hey, why not making them fly into space!
They just forgot to rename it Yamato.
-
Ever heard of orbital bombardment? - no need to fly in the atmospehere, it's enough if the Harbingers do.
-
there's no need for a carrier fleet, then, if you drop super-nukes into the atmosphere :p
-
...and guess what the Harbringer qualifies as?
:?
-
Harbringers don't have that firing range.
-
Just drop one near a planet and let gravity do the rest... who needs a radar lock when you are sitting over a planet anyway? Its woudn't imagine a planet is that easy to miss from orbit.
-
A Harbinger would most likely do tectonic damage to the planet anyway :)
-
Originally posted by TopAce
Harbringers don't have that firing range.
Read the technical data: it IS an orbital bombardment device.
-
Originally posted by Flipside
A Harbinger would most likely do tectonic damage to the planet anyway :)
Actually, given its size, it probably wouldn't, at least, not major stuff.
*Has been reading some interesting Geology books has he* :D
-
Originally posted by Peter
Just drop one near a planet and let gravity do the rest... who needs a radar lock when you are sitting over a planet anyway? Its woudn't imagine a planet is that easy to miss from orbit.
Ops, I forgot about gravity. :)
-
Simply dropping missiles from orbit wouldn't work too well unless you don't care what you hit. There is a lot of time during the entry for the bomb to be blown quite far off of course.
Of course the original harbinger probably had a guidence system to compensate for that.
-
Would a heat-seeking something work? Let's guess hostile installations have hostile IFF so that the missile could detect it.
-
Originally posted by TopAce
*Imagines a grey GTD Orion*
*envisions a fenris with shark teeth*
-
Originally posted by karajorma
Simply dropping missiles from orbit wouldn't work too well unless you don't care what you hit. There is a lot of time during the entry for the bomb to be blown quite far off of course.
Of course the original harbinger probably had a guidence system to compensate for that.
When you're dropping gigaton+ bombs, you don't particularly care what you hit. If the Harbringer were to miss by a couple of miles, who cares? You're still going to destroy whatever it is that you were targeting and everything else nearby.
-
StratComm: without at least basic targetting and wind compensation, you're going to miss by more than just a mile or two. You could well end up hitting the wrong city entirely.
-
True but hitting the jet steam could easily push a bomb more than a couple of miles out of range. Remember that the harbinger is powered. With no attitude control it could end up anywhere :D
-
NICO, How could you insult that fine legacy. For shame! :mad:
-
a single 25Mt bomb would totally destroy everything within 16.9 miles of ground zero assuming a airburst. (that dosen't include the outer area where the overpressure is under 3psi )
so, according to what I have just read, I can make a 901 square mile area uninhabitable with a single 250mt bomb (thats around twenty times less powerfull than the Harbinger than we are looking at)
I would just drop a few dozen harbingers and take my chances with hitting something.
Hey, I don't even need to hit my target. After a couple of explosions like that there's going to so much of the planet left permantly uninhabitable that whoever I missed wouldn't be able to survive for long anyway. If the explosion wouldn't get them the radiation would (not to mention the EMP's going to fry anything electronic so they can't do a runner with a ship)
-
I agree with you there. If you don't particularly care what you hit then unguided harbingers are fine :)
-
Originally posted by ShadowDrakken
StratComm: without at least basic targetting and wind compensation, you're going to miss by more than just a mile or two. You could well end up hitting the wrong city entirely.
So what? The harbinger, from what I remember, is in the gigaton range, no? You can level a whole region with that, if not a full piece of country :p
We're not talking chirurgical strikes here ;)
Anyway, like the GTVA would not be able to have a gidance system for that :p
-
Originally posted by Nico
Anyway, like the GTVA would not be able to have a gidance system for that :p
That's basically what the whole discussion was about. Why the Harbinger had to be guided. It wouldn't work as an unguided weapon as the only way you could use it was to simply obliterate the planet you dropped it on.
-
lets face it, your not going to do a precsion drop on one target with a multi gigaton weapon.
At the time when you drop one you are pretty much accepting your going to wipe out a noticible portion of the planet, such weapons wouln't be used to blow up one target.
I am sure they did have a guidence system though.
-
"aim away from face"
-
"Not tested on animals"
-
Everyone seems to be assuming that these weapons would be used on cities and the like. But what if the harbinger was designed to take out hardened military bases and the like. Blowing up a city on the next continient wouldn't help you much with that :D
-
These weapons are massivly powerfull nuclear munitions. There is a shelter built under a mountain in the US that can survive anything but a near miss of around 500KT.
5GT = 5000000000KT give or take, unless I am mistaken. I doubt its ever going to be possible to harden something on a planet that much.
I don't think its so much a case of blowing up a city on the next continent, as blowing up the next continent.
You could always carpet bomb the planet with Harbingers? That would certainly do the job.
-
I know nukes are less powerful in space but just look at how easily an orion shakes off a single harbinger.
-
Originally posted by Peter
5GT = 5000000000KT give or take, unless I am mistaken. I doubt its ever going to be possible to harden something on a planet that much.
You ARE mistaken, as 1 GT = 1000 KT, therefore 5 GT = 5000 KT.
-
Not quite TP. 5,000 Kt = 5 MegaTonnes not 5 GigaTonnes.
Giga = Billion
Mega = Million
Kilo = Thousand
-
Originally posted by karajorma
I know nukes are less powerful in space but just look at how easily an orion shakes off a single harbinger.
I laugh at your Harbinger :p An orion can survive an helios, which is an antimatter weapon :p
-
Originally posted by Nico
I laugh at your Harbinger :p An orion can survive an helios, which is an antimatter weapon :p
I know but it laughs at harbingers while Helios bombs are at least concerning :p
-
Btw, that brings a question to mind... how many helioses can an orion take?
Considering that, I assume a planet shouldn't have much more HP than an Orion, ingame :p
-
Originally posted by TopAce
*Imagines a grey GTD Orion*
*made a gray GTD Orion*
Originally posted by DragonClaw
*envisions a fenris with shark teeth*
*hopes DragonClaw never learns how to texture*
-
Originally posted by karajorma
Not quite TP. 5,000 Kt = 5 MegaTonnes not 5 GigaTonnes.
Giga = Billion
Mega = Million
Kilo = Thousand
*smacks self in face with keyboard*
-
:nervous: *checks the figures*
I was right!!! :lol:
-
Nope. You were still wrong cause you said that it was equal to that number of Kt. That makes your value 1000 times to high.
-
*Checks*
Thought so. The Harbringer is a 5 Gigaton weapon.
From the FS1 Techroom
Fusion bomb surrounded by 3 salted fission bombs - propulsion unit is a half-size version of a regulation GTA fighter thruster (Class II) - given the weight of the payloads, the missile is slow despite the power of the thruster - as the Harbinger is exceptionally large, GTA bombers are limited to carrying 6 of these weapons at any given time - the resultant shock wave from this weapon is potentially deadly, due to the size of the payloads (5000 Mt in total) - use near allied installations or allied ship groupings is strongly discouraged by the GTA - most effective when used in preemptive defensive strike against non-military installations.
Note the 5000 Megaton range. So blast force equal to 5 billion tons of TNT, and roughly 10 times as powerful as any nuclear device ever constructed in reality.
-
And your telling me it takes 8 (I think) Harbringer bombs to take out a destroyer. The blast should effect the hull and once it's breached, then bye, bye, destroyer
-
:lol: Yes, It would be since I calculated from base TNT and not from a kiloton. oops.
Well, thats how many tons of TNT it is.
*smacks self in face with keyboard*
-
Easy mistake. I nearly made it myself at one point. :D
This goes to show that the FS2 ships are built of pretty tough materials since a shielded bomber can usually survive a standoff blast from a 5Gt weapon.
-
well, the shields take it as the explosions don't do much damage to energy shields. I remember getting annoyed with my Ursa getting blown away instantly when I dropped a harbinger on the lucifer at point blank range on the last FS mission.
What really shows how hard freespace fighters are is there propulsion. Not a chemical or Ionic drive system but a Fusion drive. They are setting off a Fusion reaction in the back of the ship to move it fowards.
That and the missiles the ships shrug off are in the kiloton range...
-
Well, somthing is slowing them down... just look at there physics.
I know this is probally all stupid and ignorance, but I made a theory:D:
Ships can only move when energy is directed to the thrusters and turns depend on the focus on the artificial gravity created on points of a ship. Artificial gravity is made through the GRAVICORE on the ship which vibrates the string material in subatomic particals to focus on the increase of a gravitational field around the ship, a slight change in one side on the ships gravity points allow it to move. The GRAVICORE is tied in the pilots controls.
We learned that if you create a syncronized vibration through certain energy devices it can have effects on the STRING material in subatomic particles, which make up everything. Using the GRAVICORE we manipulated the sequence to slightly change the gravitational decimals.
Anti-Enertia is not constantly moving at a certain speed this is caused by friction through GRAVICORE components. Every ship must have some similar GRAVICORE components to slow down into planets atmosphere, to turn, or to have artifical gravity, otherwise space travel would be extremely dreadful and unlikely.
-
:wtf: How did this come into the topic ?
Anyway...
How about the artificial gravity generators interact with the distortion field created by the subspace drive to cause a gravitational lensing effect on the particles of space dust within the subspace field that impact the fighter.
This exerts a kind of limited friction on the fighter to slow it down.
This means a fighter can hover inside a planet, however unfortunately this means that any fighter that is equipped with a gravity generator and a subspace drive is unable to exit a planets atmosphere due to not being reach the required velocity of 11.3 km/s to escape the gravitational well of a Sol III class planet.
Or do fighters need to be able to exit the planet as well now we have sky boxes?
Anyway, I think this is better than a gravity manipulation field being used as propulsion. If the GTVA could do that, then they wouln't be using a fusion drive as the primary form of propulsion.
-
Sorry about that, I didn't pull out what I wanted to get across. So I just posted the entire thing. :D