Hard Light Productions Forums

Hosted Projects - Standalone => Wing Commander Saga => Topic started by: Tolwyn on July 18, 2007, 07:02:03 am

Title: Paktahn bomber
Post by: Tolwyn on July 18, 2007, 07:02:03 am
For today's update we would like to showcase our final version of the Kilrathi Paktahn bomber. The Kilrathi Paktahn is similar to the Confederation Longbow by virtue of its torpedo attack capabilities. With multiple missile hardpoints and an impressive array of guns, this bomber can engage several fighters at once during a single run. With its six torpedo hardpoints, Paktahns are a Terran capship's worst nightmare. Its heavy armor and auxiliary guns make it dangerous to attacking fighters. Terran intelligence reports that Paktahns most often fly with Dralthi IV or Darket escorts.

(http://wcsaga.com/team/tolwyn/paktahn_02.jpg)

(http://wcsaga.com/team/tolwyn/paktahn_03.jpg)

more... (http://www.wcsaga.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=106&Itemid=26)

Title: Re: Paktahn bomber
Post by: nowd on July 18, 2007, 07:40:56 am
Hey looks awesome. Great work. Its surely a nice ship to destroy  :yes2:
Those Pakthans will be a pain in the main release. Those Gothris were though already.
But I guess that Dumpfires should work against them. They have a bulky silhouette and a maneouverability is only slightly better than the Longbow's one.
Will you update the databank, too?
Title: Re: Paktahn bomber
Post by: Tolwyn on July 18, 2007, 07:44:04 am
Yes, I will. It should be noted, that Wing Commander Arena's manual came out this morning. We'll be updating class names pretty soon. In particular:

Amadeus -> Clarkson
Ranger -> Yorktown
Bhantkara -> Dukara
Bordrav -> Ralarrad
Dorkathra -> Sha’Kar
Title: Re: Paktahn bomber
Post by: nowd on July 18, 2007, 07:54:15 am
Quote
Wing Commander Arena's manual
Yeah the manual. A joy to read for every Wing Commander fan.
So many things to recognize.
So many canonial explainations.

edit: You forgot the Sheffield class destroyer. It was called Southhampton class in the manual.
Title: Re: Paktahn bomber
Post by: Tolwyn on July 18, 2007, 08:09:11 am
I did not. I knew about the destroyer for a couple of weeks now. That's why it is not in my list. ;)
Title: Re: Paktahn bomber
Post by: Drakon on July 18, 2007, 09:42:56 am
Yes, I will. It should be noted, that Wing Commander Arena's manual came out this morning. We'll be updating class names pretty soon. In particular:

Amadeus -> Clarkson
Ranger -> Yorktown
Bhantkara -> Dukara
Bordrav -> Ralarrad
Dorkathra -> Sha’Kar

Will the Ralaxath destroyer appear as well? It had gone by a different (unofficial) class name prior, too. As for the Dukara, I'm a little confused now. Is it really the carrier or that other kilrathi transport class? Hehehe, the icon on the manual is sort of confusing in the sense that it kind of looks like either ship from above. Anyway, just a thought. If someone would take a look that'd be awesome. Here's a link to a screen of the transport: http://ccg.jetlag.us/v/Kilrathi/mod/k-mo-transport.jpg.html If it's not the right ship, does the it have any name? I know that Saga used to or may still be planning to include that transport in the game. Do you guys have a designation for it at least if there's nothing canon about it? :)

With the kilrathi light carrier not named in canon still btw I would imagine the title of Dubav may just stick indefinitely. I'm still quite impressed that you guys worked some of the concepts into reality. Very awesome.  :yes:

On top of that, thanks a lot for posting those screens. The Paktahn was always one of the more intimidating Kilrathi ships in my mind, and I can see that it's just as fightening here as well. I'm sure we'll be lamenting their deadliness against capships before all is said and done. :D
Title: Re: Paktahn bomber
Post by: Bandit LOAF on July 18, 2007, 11:09:09 am
Ahh, it's LOAF post at Hard-Light, hell must have frozen over. :)

The Dukara-class is the WC3 3DO transport (the triangular one linked above). Bhantkara is the correct class for the WC3 carrier - it comes from False Colors.

Edited to add: beautiful screenshots, too! You did a great job of getting the Paktahn right.
Title: Re: Paktahn bomber
Post by: Black Wolf on July 18, 2007, 11:16:19 am
Ahh, it's LOAF post at Hard-Light, hell must have frozen over. :)

Indeed. I can't wait until you start acting like your normal self and someone has the pleasure of banning you.
Title: Re: Paktahn bomber
Post by: Aginor on July 18, 2007, 11:34:27 am
Thanks for the info, LOAF!

EDIT: @Black Wolf: He hasn't behaved wrongly so I think you shouldn't say something like that.
Title: Re: Paktahn bomber
Post by: gevatter Lars on July 18, 2007, 11:59:46 am
@Black Wolf:
I agree with Aginor. Don't act in that kind of rude way. He made a informativ post. So as long as he dosn't do anything wrong he is welcome as any other will be.

Just looked at the image again...its indeed the Transporter and not the carrier. I also first thought is the Kilrathi Carrier but when you zoom in a bit more you can see that it has another shape then the carrier.
Title: Re: Paktahn bomber
Post by: Black Wolf on July 18, 2007, 12:35:06 pm
EDIT: @Black Wolf: He hasn't behaved wrongly so I think you shouldn't say something like that.

Yes he has. For years.
Title: Re: Paktahn bomber
Post by: Drakon on July 18, 2007, 01:35:20 pm
Wolf... it's incendiary spam, the kind that starts bickering that completely defiles a thread. A public forum shouldn't be used for the continuation of a personal conflict, especially when there's a discussion taking place prior. My greatest respect goes out to you both, but... don't. :lol: Plz don't take the bait Loaf, and thanks again for another nugget of wisdom to confirm my observation.

Is it just me though, or is the hull slant backwards? I'm glad I wasn't wrong, but it seems sort of odd that the icon and the screen (plus all the others I've seen) have the bow slanting the opposite way. Hehehe, oh well. So what's the difference here between the two WC3 Kilrathi transporters? Isn't this triangular one more involved with moving troops or something? I heard that somewhere... hmm, I've never seen specs for it either but I'm sure glad it has a name now. The new manual helps people like me enrich fanfic quite remarkably, and as always projects like Saga inspire rich, vivid imagination. :D
Title: Re: Paktahn bomber
Post by: Captain Moran on July 18, 2007, 02:16:49 pm
This just gets better all the time. Nice work to all involved.

Moran out.
Title: Re: Paktahn bomber
Post by: Sphynx on July 18, 2007, 02:31:17 pm

Edited to add: beautiful screenshots, too! You did a great job of getting the Paktahn right.

@ LOAF,

Thank you for the compliment! It isn't easy to get the models right on, and I know that coming from somone who has a keen eye for detail in the WC universe like you, that is quite a compliment indeed.

Thanks for the clarification, as well.
Title: Re: Paktahn bomber
Post by: Woolie Wool on July 18, 2007, 03:20:20 pm
Thanks for the info, LOAF!

EDIT: @Black Wolf: He hasn't behaved wrongly so I think you shouldn't say something like that.
Considering his record of behavior, I do not think it is unfair that we should be unfriendly to him. I wouldn't  ban him right away, as that's petty revenge, but I think the moderators should watch him closely.
Title: Re: Paktahn bomber
Post by: gevatter Lars on July 18, 2007, 03:30:35 pm
And I think that we should stop that now. It dosn't brings us anywhere does it?
Title: Re: Paktahn bomber
Post by: Bandit LOAF on July 18, 2007, 03:37:28 pm
Quote
Is it just me though, or is the hull slant backwards? I'm glad I wasn't wrong, but it seems sort of odd that the icon and the screen (plus all the others I've seen) have the bow slanting the opposite way. Hehehe, oh well. So what's the difference here between the two WC3 Kilrathi transporters? Isn't this triangular one more involved with moving troops or something? I heard that somewhere... hmm, I've never seen specs for it either but I'm sure glad it has a name now. The new manual helps people like me enrich fanfic quite remarkably, and as always projects like Saga inspire rich, vivid imagination.

I think you're right - with the exception of the Armada transport VDUs, these are all taken from the games... the incorrect shape in the image is just a pecularity of WC3:3DO.

As for the difference, it's hard to say since the Dukara-class doesn't really appear in WC3 proper. WC3:3DO uses the Dukara as the ordinary transport and the Sha’Kar as the tanker (in the Behemoth fueling mission). We also see Dukaras moving Melek's refugees to Pasqual in a Wing Commander IV cutscene (I hope I'm getting these names right - it's all so new!).

Quote
Thank you for the compliment! It isn't easy to get the models right on, and I know that coming from somone who has a keen eye for detail in the WC universe like you, that is quite a compliment indeed.

No problem - your artists do have a nack for recreating the 'feel' of Wing Commander III, especially in the Kilrathi ships. If anything, the most they could be accused of doing wrong is sometimes putting in *too much* detail.

(To address the rest of the thread - my initial comment was an attempt at self deprecating humor, I did not mean to start any sort of fight. If I've offended you in the past, I do honestly apologize.  Most of you know me only by reputation, which may or may not be the correct impression.  I'm honest in saying: what better time than to try and get a new start than when there's so much cool new Wing Commander material being released? Hawthorne has a line that I can't find right now about the prejudices of old being washed away by new love - I feel no more past resentment towards any of you (or FreeSpace!) and hope only to be helpful towards Saga and similar projects in the future. Lets drop this here, though, as this thread should be about the Paktahn models. If you'd like to chat privately you can contact me at [email protected] or on irc.wcnews.com, channel #WingNut.)
Title: Re: Paktahn bomber
Post by: Drakon on July 18, 2007, 06:17:56 pm
Back to the Paktahns then. For as much eyecandy as they are, how do they fare in combat? Like was mentioned earlier, the Gothra is a pain to kill when it's dead-set on launching torpedoes. An explanation of how you think this Paktahn bomber fares with it's weapons, manueverability, and anything else really would be pretty cool. Do you see as you play parts of the game that this is a nasty, dangerous nut to crack?

I ask because I take a look at WC3 and realize how incredibly mean those heavier Kilrathi fighters and bombers could be when the difficulty was raised. It'd great to be able to fly against Paktahns and Vaktoths that make the player cringe in fear, and I was wondering if any of you have come to do that as you test elements of the game. :D

EDIT: Oh, and one other thing... I see that in one of the screens that there is a large amount of flame surrounding part of the bomber. Is that in-game battle damage something we can expect to see in Saga missions, or is it a special circumstance set up for just that shot? Either way, the image sure gets a cinematic feel from it. :yes:

(Btw, I forgot to commend you before Sphynx... I've got a lot of screenshots of WC ships and I've never seen an in-game Paktahn look that awesome. I don't know how you did it, but seeing things like that always makes me think of how far it's all come since the older games were released. The originals look like cardboard cutouts compared to these after all.  :lol: Simply incredible.)
Title: Re: Paktahn bomber
Post by: Sphynx on July 18, 2007, 08:48:46 pm
Quote
Is it just me though, or is the hull slant backwards? I'm glad I wasn't wrong, but it seems sort of odd that the icon and the screen (plus all the others I've seen) have the bow slanting the opposite way. Hehehe, oh well. So what's the difference here between the two WC3 Kilrathi transporters? Isn't this triangular one more involved with moving troops or something? I heard that somewhere... hmm, I've never seen specs for it either but I'm sure glad it has a name now. The new manual helps people like me enrich fanfic quite remarkably, and as always projects like Saga inspire rich, vivid imagination.

I think you're right - with the exception of the Armada transport VDUs, these are all taken from the games... the incorrect shape in the image is just a pecularity of WC3:3DO.

As for the difference, it's hard to say since the Dukara-class doesn't really appear in WC3 proper. WC3:3DO uses the Dukara as the ordinary transport and the Sha’Kar as the tanker (in the Behemoth fueling mission). We also see Dukaras moving Melek's refugees to Pasqual in a Wing Commander IV cutscene (I hope I'm getting these names right - it's all so new!).

Quote
Thank you for the compliment! It isn't easy to get the models right on, and I know that coming from somone who has a keen eye for detail in the WC universe like you, that is quite a compliment indeed.

No problem - your artists do have a nack for recreating the 'feel' of Wing Commander III, especially in the Kilrathi ships. If anything, the most they could be accused of doing wrong is sometimes putting in *too much* detail.

(To address the rest of the thread - my initial comment was an attempt at self deprecating humor, I did not mean to start any sort of fight. If I've offended you in the past, I do honestly apologize.  Most of you know me only by reputation, which may or may not be the correct impression.  I'm honest in saying: what better time than to try and get a new start than when there's so much cool new Wing Commander material being released? Hawthorne has a line that I can't find right now about the prejudices of old being washed away by new love - I feel no more past resentment towards any of you (or FreeSpace!) and hope only to be helpful towards Saga and similar projects in the future. Lets drop this here, though, as this thread should be about the Paktahn models. If you'd like to chat privately you can contact me at [email protected] or on irc.wcnews.com, channel #WingNut.)

LOAF,

Well, I can certainly appreciate what you are trying to do. I agree that this is a good time to put old gripes behind us (most of which are probably based on misunderstandings between us). I just wanted to give a public "seconded" to this notion, and to say thank you for offering it.
Title: Re: Paktahn bomber
Post by: Sphynx on July 18, 2007, 08:55:44 pm

(Btw, I forgot to commend you before Sphynx... I've got a lot of screenshots of WC ships and I've never seen an in-game Paktahn look that awesome. I don't know how you did it, but seeing things like that always makes me think of how far it's all come since the older games were released. The originals look like cardboard cutouts compared to these after all.  :lol: Simply incredible.)

To be fair, it was Tolwyn who got the screenshots. I think he really has an eye for them, so I will thank you in his behalf! :)
Title: Re: Paktahn bomber
Post by: Woolie Wool on July 18, 2007, 09:57:57 pm
So, any chance of making Kilrathi ships flyable, at least in the sims? The only thing better than blowing it up is using it to blow something up.
Title: Re: Paktahn bomber
Post by: Starman01 on July 19, 2007, 02:36:12 am
So, any chance of making Kilrathi ships flyable, at least in the sims? The only thing better than blowing it up is using it to blow something up.

Well, I think that's for modders (of the mod) to do so :). There isn't that much nessesary to make kilrathi vessels flyable.

1) add a new flag "player_ship" in the ships.tbl
2) Change the afterburner in the ships.tbl (because AI-Ships are using infinite refuel, but quickly dropping afterburners like original FS-Fighters)
3) Change the weapon-entries (the missiles) in the ships.tbl, because AI ships use customized missiles to give the player a surving change :)
4) maybe some cat-ships need an eye-point added, I'm not sure I give one to all of them

There still remain one thing, which is only optical, but still disturbing IMO. When doing the above stuff, the kilrathi ships still have the same HUD
as the other ships. That might already be changeable (I'm not uptodate according the hud.tbl), but changing will require som more intensive modding I guess.
Title: Re: Paktahn bomber
Post by: Tolwyn on July 19, 2007, 02:41:08 am
I'll try to adress all comments in one single post. Let's see: ;)

The Dukara-class is the WC3 3DO transport (the triangular one linked above). Bhantkara is the correct class for the WC3 carrier - it comes from False Colors.

Aaaahhhh, I must be getting old ;)

beautiful screenshots, too! You did a great job of getting the Paktahn right.

We are doing our best. ;)

Do you see as you play parts of the game that this is a nasty, dangerous nut to crack?

A very dangerous opponent. Not in a dogfight, no, but it's heavy shielding and auxiliary guns make it a tough opponent. Better not stay too long on its tail!

I see that in one of the screens that there is a large amount of flame surrounding part of the bomber. Is that in-game battle damage something we can expect to see in Saga missions, or is it a special circumstance set up for just that shot? Either way, the image sure gets a cinematic feel from it. :yes:

Currently it is an ingame effect applied on both fighters and warships.

So, any chance of making Kilrathi ships flyable, at least in the sims? The only thing better than blowing it up is using it to blow something up.

I'd have thought you could do it yourself. It is a simple matter of tbl editing. :)
Title: Re: Paktahn bomber
Post by: karajorma on July 19, 2007, 02:50:41 am
I'd have thought you could do it yourself. It is a simple matter of tbl editing. :)

Yeah but his changes will be lost when the game goes multiplayer and you really should have the Kilrathi flyable for that so that you can make TvT missions. :)
Title: Re: Paktahn bomber
Post by: Tolwyn on July 19, 2007, 02:54:19 am
Yeah, I see a balancing issue though. We'll most certainly add cockpits to confed fighters. That will give "the other side" an unfair advantage. Unless, of course, you can turn cockpits off. ;)
Title: Re: Paktahn bomber
Post by: karajorma on July 19, 2007, 02:01:56 pm
I've been planning to add a flag like that to the launcher for a while actually (or better yet make it an option from the Options menu but that would require all the major TCs fixing their interface art to use it).

Having show ship in the tables is good but the player needs a way to override it. The problem comes when the interface starts being rendered onto the cockpit. They'll need to be some way of choosing to use the default interface or something similar as a cockpit interface rendered with no cockpit would look decidedly odd.
Title: Re: Paktahn bomber
Post by: Kazan on July 19, 2007, 09:42:35 pm
Ahh, it's LOAF post at Hard-Light, hell must have frozen over. :)

Indeed. I can't wait until you start acting like your normal self and someone has the pleasure of banning you.

knock it off... there is a ton of bad blood between me and LOAF.. but he's not being an ass so don't be an ass to him

------
The paktahn is a PITA in combat... but i have to say i dislike taking on vakoths even even in my own missions i write for testing features (like testing my upgrades to the autopilot system that will make things easier on the saga team so they can spend more time writing content and less time doing things the engine should do for them)
Title: Re: Paktahn bomber
Post by: Tolwyn on July 20, 2007, 06:15:09 am
but i have to say i dislike taking on vakoths even even in my own missions i write for testing features (like testing my upgrades to the autopilot system that will make things easier on the saga team so they can spend more time writing content and less time doing things the engine should do for them)

Vaktoth has a slimmer profile... yeah, I see what you mean. ;)
Title: Re: Paktahn bomber
Post by: gevatter Lars on July 20, 2007, 06:55:43 am
Quote
(like testing my upgrades to the autopilot system that will make things easier on the saga team so they can spend more time writing content and less time doing things the engine should do for them)

Praise the man.....*holy Kazan* ^_^