Hard Light Productions Forums
Modding, Mission Design, and Coding => The Modding Workshop => Topic started by: Taristin on August 15, 2004, 09:05:44 pm
-
Remember this ship?
(http://3dap.com/hlp/hosted/14_year_war/Raa/myrmfighteroriginal.jpg)
Well...
(http://3dap.com/hlp/hosted/14_year_war/Raa/myrmfighter.jpg)
I did it! W00t. And all that.
-
Excellent... now texture it and sell it to the highest bidding project
-
Please tell me it has two nacelles and you're not going to name it the Swarmer Mk.2. ;)
Nice BTW!
-
I'd refine the nose to be more like your pick and less stubby/bulbous. :)
-
Nice ridges
-
Originally posted by Liberator
Please tell me it has two nacelles and you're not going to name it the Swarmer Mk.2. ;)
Nice BTW!
Sadly, I don't know what that's in reference to, but it is a single nacelle. Not that it'd be hard to run it through the symetry tool and make two, but I don't want to do that.
-
I guess he's referring to the swarmer from Homeworld Clicky (http://well-of-souls.com/homeworld/hws/kadesh/swarmer.htm)
But don't make it symmetrical....asymmetrical = gooood
-
Wheeee!
Me loves.
-
Cool :)
-
Very good! Very nice! Yeahh... I love it :).
-
Very nice, now texture it :)
you could add some details there maybe
-
Originally posted by Col. Fishguts
I guess he's referring to the swarmer from Homeworld Clicky (http://well-of-souls.com/homeworld/hws/kadesh/swarmer.htm)
But don't make it symmetrical....asymmetrical = gooood
Asymetrical is more Terran, Vasudans generaly don't dablle in it
-
Horus? Ma'at? Satis?
-
Originally posted by Knight Templar
Horus? Ma'at? Satis?
Horus: Has the cockpit ooff-center, otherwise symmetrical.
Ma'at: OK, I'll give you that, but the asymmetric looks of it resemble those of naval ships. Or something. I got nothin'.
Satis: Huh?
-
Terrans love symmetry. It's big on almost everything they do. Only one Terran ship is assymetrical, and it's the ugliest behemoth in te fleet (Orion). SO I think your argument has no standing.
Besides, I'm keeping it as is. I like it. It's my mesh!:p
-
Awesome. I like it a lot - though it looks a bit off from your sketch at that angle. It needs to be flatter on the front, i.e. the tip of the nose needs to be lower down on the model (at th moment, the very front looks to be halfway up the cockpit, rather than below it). What's it going to be (assault fighter, bomber, etc)?
-
Assault fighter. With the latest beam technologies, Bombers are becoming lesser and lesser valuable. :doubt:
I realize that the front is off a bit, but textures will take care of it. And I'm happy enough witht he geometry. I just need to finish the UV mapping on it. Then start making the textures for it. I think I'll actually start on that tonight.
-
*bump*
Slight update. It's UV mapped, but now I have to texture it...
joy.
I've never mapped Vasudan ships before. I fear I'll screw it up verily...
Oh well...
-
If I can help you in any way, just call :)
-
:yes:
-
Originally posted by Raa
Assault fighter. With the latest beam technologies, Bombers are becoming lesser and lesser valuable. :doubt:
It'd be the other way around wouldn't it? Bomber's would be more valuable, because they are the only things that can carry large enough ordinance to rapidly disarm the larger vessels(I'm thinking Sathanas here) before they rip the guts out of their opponents. They would just become more fighter-like in their performance. HMMM, that's got me thinking, wouldn't it be likely that bombers would be so focused on secondary loadouts and engine power that they wouldn't mount hoss guns like the Kayser or the Maxim due to the energy requirements?
-
Originally posted by Raa
*bump*
Slight update. It's UV mapped, but now I have to texture it...
joy.
I've never mapped Vasudan ships before. I fear I'll screw it up verily...
It's easier than terran ships... you don;t have to worry about things making sense, for one.
-
Originally posted by Liberator
It'd be the other way around wouldn't it? Bomber's would be more valuable, because they are the only things that can carry large enough ordinance to rapidly disarm the larger vessels(I'm thinking Sathanas here) before they rip the guts out of their opponents. They would just become more fighter-like in their performance.
I meant in a traditional sense... Bombers wouldn't be used for destroying capital ships anymore, when ships are being armed with beam cannons. Bombers have a completely different role now, and will be less like bombers, and more like tactical heavy assault vehicles.
-
Originally posted by Raa
I meant in a traditional sense... Bombers wouldn't be used for destroying capital ships anymore, when ships are being armed with beam cannons. Bombers have a completely different role now, and will be less like bombers, and more like tactical heavy assault vehicles.
And we've come full circle with bombers returning to the role they had before FS1 :D
That's actually pretty realistic in terms of military history in many ways. :)
That said I don't buy it. Start producing more Helios's and the cap ship killing bomber isn't anywhere near obsolete.
-
Just up the ante with better AAAf & Flak....
Then you can have the 2 distinct classes of bomber - the strike bomber, which takes out the defensive turrets & the weapons subsystems to clear the way for the assault bomber, which is slow but carries the big guns.
And the fighters, which either cover or attack bombers.
-
*Still texturing*
I should probably be following the same texturing method as I did with Terran ships. Look for an image update in the next day or so...
-
Next day or so, eh? ;)
-
Yeah, eh? :p
-
...Err. I haven't really been able to work on it in a while... Or anything else for that matter. It'll get done some time.