Hard Light Productions Forums
Modding, Mission Design, and Coding => The Modding Workshop => Topic started by: Aardwolf on September 05, 2014, 01:57:11 pm
-
(sorry for off-topic but...) Wait what, that thing The E posted is replacing Stratcomm's cruiser? Dislike :(
-
Yeah, I'm afraid so. It's kind of meh, looks like a mini-Raynor as well. The original Hyperion was more unique, I hoped he'd work with the original shape, not ditch it.
-
Yeah, I'm afraid so. It's kind of meh, looks like a mini-Raynor as well. The original Hyperion was more unique, I hoped he'd work with the original shape, not ditch it.
(http://th02.deviantart.net/fs71/PRE/f/2011/088/4/7/homeworld_1_taiidani_skaal_tel_by_callitri-d3csa9q.jpg)
Yeah, unique...
Despite that, Stratcomm's Hyperion has way better shape than Aesaar's one.
-
If someone could split the BP Hyperion talk, I'd appreciate it, and I'm sure Col. Hornet would too. There's no need to hijack this thread.
Quite honestly, I think Stratcomm's Hyperion looks like crap. It takes the Skaal-Tel, then removes the grounded, menacing feel and replaces it with a derpy googly eyed look. I don't know how to fix that without actually making it a Skaal-Tel, which I don't want to do. That's why I started from scratch. I'm not hugely satisfied with what I've got so far, and I'm likely to scrap the back, but the front half is here to stay.
-
That's a shame. I plain simply don't like the new design. Especially the front, actually. It takes away diversity of the pack, just makes it look like Erebus. I liked the original, actually. I wouldn't mind if it resembled Skaal-Tel a lot more than the original does (you tend to favor straight, sharp lines, so it could work), but as it stands, I just plain don't like this reimagining.
-
If someone could split the BP Hyperion talk, I'd appreciate it, and I'm sure Col. Hornet would too. There's no need to hijack this thread.
Quite honestly, I think Stratcomm's Hyperion looks like crap. It takes the Skaal-Tel, then removes the grounded, menacing feel and replaces it with a derpy googly eyed look. I don't know how to fix that without actually making it a Skaal-Tel, which I don't want to do. That's why I started from scratch. I'm not hugely satisfied with what I've got so far, and I'm likely to scrap the back, but the front half is here to stay.
It would be nice :) Both ships, though similar, remain separate projects. Aesaar's construction bureau signed a contract with GTVA Navy for next generation fleet in BP and I'm not going to steal his job :P I make Naxos for my own purposes.
-
That's a shame. I plain simply don't like the new design. Especially the front, actually. It takes away diversity of the pack, just makes it look like Erebus. I liked the original, actually. I wouldn't mind if it resembled Skaal-Tel a lot more than the original does (you tend to favor straight, sharp lines, so it could work), but as it stands, I just plain don't like this reimagining.
In BP, the Hyperion is primarily a fast attack strike cruiser. The Skaal-Tel's appearance doesn't suit this role at all. It looks like a heavy line combatant, basically the exact opposite. If it was a BP ship, it would be a Bellerophon.
-
How are you mounting the beam cannons these days? The fact that they didn't really have a nice, prominent position on the front was the only serious issue I had with the design.
-
How are you mounting the beam cannons these days? The fact that they didn't really have a nice, prominent position on the front was the only serious issue I had with the design.
Seriously considering moving them off to either side of where they are now, under the upper hull. There are point defense guns there ATM, but I can move them elsewhere.
-
But then they look too recessed and lidded, at least IMO. The big, bright frontal beam emitters combined with BP's excessively dark ambient lighting creates a very strong visual motif, it'd be a shame to lose some of it.
-
I've not read the parent topic, and would like a picture of the titular vessel if that's no trouble. :yes:
-
I have an idea. If you have to keep the Raynor nose, mount the cannons over it, in a manner resembling Raynor's main cannon, but somewhat more elevated. Along with, perhaps, an elevated central island between them, this would somewhat restore the distinctive "face" the Hyperion presented. My main problem is that it's too horizontally oriented, Stratcomm's ships are generally tall rather than wide. Raynor is an exception, but it also isn't really a Stratcomm's design. The original, low-poly Raynor was a community-made ship that Stratcomm HTLed. I'd like to see something more in spirit of Chimera and the original Hyperion.
In BP, the Hyperion is primarily a fast attack strike cruiser. The Skaal-Tel's appearance doesn't suit this role at all. It looks like a heavy line combatant, basically the exact opposite. If it was a BP ship, it would be a Bellerophon.
A fair point, but I think that the original Hyperion was also an interesting approach to that. It had a lot of engines at it's back, to me, it looked like an otherwise heavy, stout cruiser pushed to high speeds by strapping it to a lot of engines. Hyperion, despite being an attack cruiser, is much tougher than other cruisers we know, it's speed being a testament to how advanced it is. I've always viewed is as a "lightning bruiser", combining strength of Leviathan and speed of Fenris. Your design seems to veer more towards pure speed approach, with little emphasis on toughness.
Also, I feel that your design deprives Raynor of it's uniqueness somewhat. Stratcomm's style always tended towards more vertically oriented ships, with flat noses and tall broadsides. Raynor is the only exception. I feel that your design somewhat messes this up. It makes it less of a deprature from the other ships. The fact it stood out made Raynor a more impressive, IMO.
-
Maybe a solution is to put it on its side :P
-
Yes! Everyone loves asymmetry after all
-
So that's what they call "assymetric warfare" ? :P
-
I have an idea. If you have to keep the Raynor nose, mount the cannons over it, in a manner resembling Raynor's main cannon, but somewhat more elevated. Along with, perhaps, an elevated central island between them, this would somewhat restore the distinctive "face" the Hyperion presented. My main problem is that it's too horizontally oriented, Stratcomm's ships are generally tall rather than wide. Raynor is an exception, but it also isn't really a Stratcomm's design. The original, low-poly Raynor was a community-made ship that Stratcomm HTLed. I'd like to see something more in spirit of Chimera and the original Hyperion.
In BP, the Hyperion is primarily a fast attack strike cruiser. The Skaal-Tel's appearance doesn't suit this role at all. It looks like a heavy line combatant, basically the exact opposite. If it was a BP ship, it would be a Bellerophon.
A fair point, but I think that the original Hyperion was also an interesting approach to that. It had a lot of engines at it's back, to me, it looked like an otherwise heavy, stout cruiser pushed to high speeds by strapping it to a lot of engines. Hyperion, despite being an attack cruiser, is much tougher than other cruisers we know, it's speed being a testament to how advanced it is. I've always viewed is as a "lightning bruiser", combining strength of Leviathan and speed of Fenris. Your design seems to veer more towards pure speed approach, with little emphasis on toughness.
Also, I feel that your design deprives Raynor of it's uniqueness somewhat. Stratcomm's style always tended towards more vertically oriented ships, with flat noses and tall broadsides. Raynor is the only exception. I feel that your design somewhat messes this up. It makes it less of a deprature from the other ships. The fact it stood out made Raynor a more impressive, IMO.
I'm not Stratcomm. It's true his ships are rather vertically oriented. Mine are not. I tend to prefer something a bit flatter. Even with the Raynor/Erebus, mine is quite a bit flatter than the Stratcomm one. And just look at the Diomedes. You're not the first one to bring it up, but this is just my style.
I focus on the speed part because, while the Hyperion is tough by FS2 standards, it's not especially tough by BP standards. If it's in range, a Sanctus will kick its teeth in in any protracted engagement. The Hyperion's biggest strength is that it has enough subspace maneuverability to run from anything it can't fight, and has the weapons to deal with what an enemy can scramble on short notice (fighters and bombers). It performs quite well on the offensive, but really suffers on the defensive the moment opposing capital ships become involved. The Aeolus offers a much cheaper solution for escort duties, and the Deimos is much better suited to brawling (might be cheaper too). It's a raider, and that's what I'm trying to emphasize. I don't want it to look tough because, for a TEI ship, it's nothing special.
It isn't an HTL of the Stratcomm Hyperion. Don't look at it as one. The only things they have in common is weapons and place in BP.
Anyway, the back is getting a rework, and I'm happier with it already.
Dekker: http://p3d.in/DvmcF
-
:yes: I like the new rear, gives it a sleeker look that is more inline with what I would think of as a fast strike cruiser. Please continue!
-
Copying engines from the Naxos didn't help this design at all. Now it has too simple lines, like a front part of the Raynor cut off from the rest of the ship. Maybe try to add addonital parts, some "wings" like in old variant, but with much more solid construction. Something to ruin basic lines of current ship.
-
If anything the new engines look less like an Erebus than the old.
-
Copying engines from the Naxos didn't help this design at all. Now it has too simple lines, like a front part of the Raynor cut off from the rest of the ship. Maybe try to add additional parts, some "wings" like in old variant, but with much more solid construction. Something to ruin basic lines of current ship.
Try 'Bolitho', not Naxos, or at least I thought it was pretty obviously Bolitho engines.
-
Copying engines from the Naxos didn't help this design at all. Now it has too simple lines, like a front part of the Raynor cut off from the rest of the ship. Maybe try to add additional parts, some "wings" like in old variant, but with much more solid construction. Something to ruin basic lines of current ship.
Try 'Bolitho', not Naxos, or at least I thought it was pretty obviously Bolitho engines.
Yeah, Naxos engines were inspirated by Bolitho. Overall design was. However, Naxos has a pair of addonital engines below the main ones. It was my idea, as far as I remember.
-
revolutionary
-
I like it all. Looking forward to texture preview. Good weapon placement. :yes:
-
I focus on the speed part because, while the Hyperion is tough by FS2 standards, it's not especially tough by BP standards. If it's in range, a Sanctus will kick its teeth in in any protracted engagement. The Hyperion's biggest strength is that it has enough subspace maneuverability to run from anything it can't fight, and has the weapons to deal with what an enemy can scramble on short notice (fighters and bombers). It performs quite well on the offensive, but really suffers on the defensive the moment opposing capital ships become involved. The Aeolus offers a much cheaper solution for escort duties, and the Deimos is much better suited to brawling (might be cheaper too). It's a raider, and that's what I'm trying to emphasize. I don't want it to look tough because, for a TEI ship, it's nothing special.
The thing is, Sanctus is the size of a corvette and should be thought about like one. The only reason they call it a cruiser is that corvettes are a Tev invention. Hyperion is the smallest TEI ship, but that doesn't mean it's weak. Even though it's not exceptionally tough, it's still a very powerful ship. Also, compare it to Skaal-Tel all you like, but it was still a very distinctive design. Yours looks somewhat generic, I get a "generic advanced starship" vibe from it. Smooth, sleek lines, wide, small winglets... It sure looks fast, but it lost all of it's uniqueness.
What you've got here looks like it'd be right at home as the Cretheus, not Hyperion. It looks somewhat wimpy, if fast. This doesn't mesh with how much of a threat this ship actually is. I'd say, keep it, replace Cretheus with it (it's current model isn't exactly the best) or introduce it as another ship altogether. Artistic freedom is fine and dandy, but you're replacing a distinctive, if somewhat ugly ship with a very generic-looking one. I think that the liberties you took with the Raynor and Sparta (Diomedes) are about how far you can go and still keep the "feel" of the original model. While I don't agree with many changes you made to Erebus, it still unambiguously evokes the same "feel" and follows the original outline. This time, you just made a new ship, one that looks closer to Cretheus than to Hyperion. IMO, this sort of complete rebuild is going too far. The new model just doesn't look suitable.
Also, there's a little issue of the ship suddenly getting an all-round STerPulse coverage. In at least one mission, I feel it'd up the difficulty by a fair bit. The thing's guns have no blind spots beside the stern (and even that is awfully small), and STerPulse was rather deadly last time I played. Previously, you could attempt to approach the cruiser from the side, trading STerPulse fire for flak and beams (meaning it was somewhat easier to get a bomb in). With a maneuvering cruiser, this wasn't easy, but possible.
-
The thing is, Sanctus is the size of a corvette and should be thought about like one. The only reason they call it a cruiser is that corvettes are a Tev invention. Hyperion is the smallest TEI ship, but that doesn't mean it's weak. Even though it's not exceptionally tough, it's still a very powerful ship. Also, compare it to Skaal-Tel all you like, but it was still a very distinctive design. Yours looks somewhat generic, I get a "generic advanced starship" vibe from it. Smooth, sleek lines, wide, small winglets... It sure looks fast, but it lost all of it's uniqueness.
Distinctive or unique aren't positives when the ship looks bad, and Stratcomm's Hyperion does (IMO). Most of #bp disagrees with your opinion that my model looks generic, but I'd take generic over ugly-ugly (as opposed to practical-ugly) any day. And while the Skaal-Tel isn't ugly, it does not fit the Hyperion's role at all.
And I never said the Hyperion was weak. It's a very capable ship when used correctly. I said it isn't particularly tough, and in BP's combat environment, it really isn't. Its excellent subspace drive provides far better protection than its armor.
What you've got here looks like it'd be right at home as the Cretheus, not Hyperion. It looks somewhat wimpy, if fast. This doesn't mesh with how much of a threat this ship actually is. I'd say, keep it, replace Cretheus with it (it's current model isn't exactly the best) or introduce it as another ship altogether. Artistic freedom is fine and dandy, but you're replacing a distinctive, if somewhat ugly ship with a very generic-looking one. I think that the liberties you took with the Raynor and Sparta (Diomedes) are about how far you can go and still keep the "feel" of the original model. While I don't agree with many changes you made to Erebus, it still unambiguously evokes the same "feel" and follows the original outline. This time, you just made a new ship, one that looks closer to Cretheus than to Hyperion. IMO, this sort of complete rebuild is going too far. The new model just doesn't look suitable.
The Cretheus model is fine. It's a bit low on detail because of its age, but I like the design. It looks exactly like what it is: a Capella-era gunboat. But yes, you're right, I did make a new ship. It's not a complete rebuild, it's a whole new ship. That was the point. It doesn't evoke the same feel as Stratcomm's model because it isn't meant to. It's meant to fit the role it has in BP, which I think it does much, much better than Stratcomm's.
I don't understand why you're so hung up on Stratcomm's model. If you like it so much, there's nothing stopping you from using it instead. I've no interest in making a new model of it. If I was to make a Freespace version of the Skaal-Tel, it would be a heavy corvette/frigate, not a cruiser.
Also, there's a little issue of the ship suddenly getting an all-round STerPulse coverage. In at least one mission, I feel it'd up the difficulty by a fair bit. The thing's guns have no blind spots beside the stern (and even that is awfully small), and STerPulse was rather deadly last time I played. Previously, you could attempt to approach the cruiser from the side, trading STerPulse fire for flak and beams (meaning it was somewhat easier to get a bomb in). With a maneuvering cruiser, this wasn't easy, but possible.
The team has considered this already. Not especially concerned. BP doesn't have FSU's need to keep ship effectiveness the same. The Erebus/Raynor also got a massive point-defense upgrade (as in it went from 41 turrets to 60, adding 1 TerPulse, 1 AAA, 15 TT2, and 2 light missile). The Diomedes got 1 AAA, 2 TT2, and better coverage. The Hyperion is just getting better coverage, and it's fought less often than the Dio.
Yeah, Naxos engines were inspirated by Bolitho. Overall design was. However, Naxos has a pair of addonital engines below the main ones. It was my idea, as far as I remember.
I wasn't aware you came up with the idea of having a set of smaller thrusters below a set of larger ones. I can think of dozens of popular spaceship designs which owe you thanks.
-
I don't understand why you're so hung up on Stratcomm's model. If you like it so much, there's nothing stopping you from using it instead. I've no interest in making a new model of it. If I was to make a Freespace version of the Skaal-Tel, it would be a heavy corvette/frigate, not a cruiser.
Nothing stopping me? Don't think so. Let's face it, this is as far from a drop-in replacement as it can be. You might even end up changing the name, like with Raynor/Erebus. Once your model is in, there'll be no way of coming back to the old one. If it was a drop-in, you'd be right, but I wouldn't be complaining then.
Stratcomm's Hyperion looks ugly, but I hoped you'll make the effort to make it's design look good, not build another ship to fill the same role. I don't like the idea of this new model being a replacement for the Hyperion. I suppose a passable compromise would be making it either a new class, filling the current role of the Hyperion, and making the actual Hyperion a heavy assault cruiser (more in line with Skaal-Tel-like design). I just don't see that thing as GTC Duke, it's simply too generic, with no distinctive characteristics whatsoever. Duke's unusual shape was quite memorable for me, while your model shares the general lines with a great number of different sci-fi ships.I expect the blue on gray texture to only make it worse (at this point, the only thing you could do to make it even more generic would be swapping gray to white and adding Tron lines along the hull).
BTW, I just realized, shouldn't this thread be better off in the BP board? That way it'd get more exposure to players as well, not only modders.
-
Dragon, you are acting as if there's a debate about this topic. There isn't one. There was one, months ago, in BP internal. It concluded. This is the result.
-
Blast, shouldn't have given the full membership up... Still, shouldn't this debate be conducted in a public forum? This model, as it stands, is not an improvement. It looks impersonal and generic. I'm not sure if I should look forward to Titan, given how both Erebus and this turned out. I certainly won't be surprised if it loses some of it's defining features. If the internal debate concluded (on a silly conclusion, as far as I can see...), that's fine, but this sort of dramatic change seems like it should have a public debate as well. IMO, you're giving up an interesting, but oddly executed design for something pretty, but dull. I'm sure I'm not the only one with this opinion.
-
It was a public debate. I think I remember it. And while I agree with your aesthetic critical take on it Dragon (I agree I totally even prefer the homeworld unoriginal version to this one), I also think it's highly appropriate to recognize that the creators have, after all, full artistic licence to do as they please, and respect this mental space of freedom, which to me is something of absolutely Sacred. As I see it, the only appropriate response if someone doesn't like the ship is to make an alternative and release it as a mod over the bp mod.
-
Alright Dragon, and everyone that wants skaal-tel hyperion.
Let's start a collaborative modelling project for it :)
We'll not have to care about "it's role in BP" as a fast strike cruiser or even take it into consideration.
-
When I mentioned "mental space of freedom" I was also thinking about how to create this vaccum of discussion over any alternative at least until his model is finished. There are not many things more frustrating (and insulting) than having a competing crew making some model because your own "sucks".
Again, it's about respect. Aaesar is making the model, please respect that decisions were made, and the model is being done as decided. I'm not even trying here to censor anyone from making an alternative, but could everyone please be tactful at it? IDK, I'm thinking what would I think if I were the one in charge trying to do this thing and meanwhile this thread was going all out like "bah luis dias version sux, lets get a crew and make it as it should be". Really, come on. That's totally disrespectful.
-
The thing is, he is not making art for art's own sake. It's not that the model sucks, if taken out of context, it's good, if a bit bland. It's just that it's not suited for it's intended role. As I said, I can't imagine this thing replacing the Duke from AoA, which is the most prominent role of the design. I certainly can't agree with the direction this replacement is going. Freedom is fine and dandy, but this model is supposed to take a place in a larger whole, one that has a very distinctive design already. WiH aside (Hyperion isn't very prominent there), such a replacement would mainly hurt AoA, IMO.
Besides, Aesaar isn't making a Hyperion. He's making a Hyperion replacement. What the community project would go for would be actually Hyperion. There's little collision there, aside from the fact it stemmed from realization that we won't get a Hyperion otherwise, and this new cruiser is not a suitable replacement. In fact, I'd gladly use them both, the Hyperion as a heavy cruiser, Aesaar's new ship as a light one (this approach could work for BP as well, with the new ship being a TEI take on the Aeolus). It wouldn't be making "the same thing as Aesaar, but right". It'd be doing what Aesaar didn't want to do. If the results fills the new ship's role better, no harm done, this model is, by itself, good, so it could be used for a new class.
Alright Dragon, and everyone that wants skaal-tel hyperion.
Let's start a collaborative modelling project for it :)
We'll not have to care about "it's role in BP" as a fast strike cruiser or even take it into consideration.
Could be a good idea, though I noticed collaborative modelling often means "one-two people doing all the work on the mesh, another texturing it (after an obligatory wait, if ever), and the rest of the community complaining". :) I'd contribute, if there was something I could do.
Also, knowing BP, if it came out really well, they'd end up incorporating it somehow.
-
Nothing stopping me? Don't think so. Let's face it, this is as far from a drop-in replacement as it can be. You might even end up changing the name, like with Raynor/Erebus. Once your model is in, there'll be no way of coming back to the old one. If it was a drop-in, you'd be right, but I wouldn't be complaining then.
It's absolutely going to be a drop-in replacement. Weapon loadout is the same, subsystems are the same, stats are the same. It's going to be as much a drop-in replacement as the Chimera and Bellerophon were. At most, it might need minor editing of default turret orientation values. No intention to change the name either. Hyperion fits the GTVA naming conventions just fine. Raynor did not.
And if you guys want to make an alternative model, please do. I'd be really interested in seeing what you guys come up with. I genuinely mean this. The community can only benefit from having more ships at its disposal.
EDIT: See, to me, the Duke isn't very important. The defining Hyperions for me are the Novikov and Courageous, a Hyperion pair that shows up a few times in the background over the course of WiH. It's those two which showed us just how capable the class was on the offensive, and it was the Utica and Elissa which showed how poor it is on the defensive. The only thing the Duke contributes to the class is that it establishes how powerful the Hyperion's subspace drive really is. It's no more the definitive Hyperion than the Renjian is the definitive Karuna.
-
The Duke is also, you know, the only Hyperion anyone actually remembers. But I guess that counts for nothing compared to two background cruisers barely anyone outside the mod team noticed.
-
The Duke barely does anything. If we make a model based on what the Duke does (that is to say, jump a lot and then pass out), we could take any cruiser model available and it would fit just fine. Which I guess explains why some think the Skaal-Tel or Stratcomm's model fits the Hyperion's role.
-
It's more of a personality trait, a shape that creates a visual character, more than having "subspace drives". Like it is, it looks like a mini-me version from the Raynor, which can perhaps work fine, like it kinda visually rhymes...
-
I do think that the BP team is focusing too much on the in-fluff defined role of the Hyperion as opposed to the in-campaign established appearance of the Duke. I find it highly strange that people are married to the conceptualized role of the ship, rather than letting its already-defined role which has ingrained itself in much of the audience's mind dictate how it should be directed, but that's purely opinion.
This is my understanding of the situation:
Take, by analogy, the Hyperion as an undeveloped side character in a comic which has only been featured in a prominent way once. The author/artist may have a good idea of the character's intended role or personality, want to feature them more prominently in the future - perhaps 're-using' this side character for continuity reasons, recognize a disjunct between their current appearance and the character's newly-conceptualized role, and thus be tempted to alter their appearance to suit this. They view that their plans for the story - which hasn't been yet presented, as more important that the visual appearance of the character. The readers, however, are not benefit to this knowledge - their only association to the character is their appearance. A change in the appearance would cause readers confusion.
I honestly don't give a rat's anus about what the cruiser's supposed combat abilities are, and why they should be reflected in the design in this instance because it never prominently displays them in any way, and thus is irrelevant. You could come up with any role you want for it, because in established missions, there's very little (read: nothing) that prominently establishes what it's supposed to be doing. More important is the Duke's prominent and visible role of something unique-looking that is the objective of an entire series of missions. This a work of fiction - the Hyperion's role is whatever you say it is as long as it's consistent with its existing appearances and is reasonably believable (suspension of disbelief, etc). There is nothing, as far as I recall, in the Hyperion's existing appearances that clearly define its role on the battlefield, and thus I do not feel that there should be any emphasis on adhering to this supposed role when choosing to redesign the ship or not. As such, yes, any cruiser could work just fine, and the Skaal-Tel or Stratcomm's model indeed fits the Hyperion's "role" just fine, but I'm compelled to argue for something that is recognizable to the current design, which is far more visually distinctive than the current iteration of a mini-raynor and has been clearly established in the "visual canon" of some people already.
People don't remember nor care what some random cruiser that may as well be the GTC Redshirt 11842 exploding in the background, unless it's a direct obstacle to your objectives (ie. that Aeolus that flaks you at the start of that one mission), they probably are even less attached to the statement as to the role of said cruiser in the techroom. They remember and associate far more when said cruiser is the centerpiece and focus of an entire 3-mission pursuit scene, particularly when the most memorable feature of it is it's rather distinct appearance and not anything it does in particular.
The BP team, as the dev team, have a much greater and more intricate understanding of what you want the Hyperion to be, what plans you have for it in later missions, and a far stronger conceptualization of what niche the cruiser fills in the fleet. The general public does not have the benefit of this insight and thus in the lack of prominent presented feats and stunts, tends to focus more on the visible, more "tangible" aspects - that is, for example, a shape which differs substantially from your "Standard Terran Spaceship". Thus, this argument is kind of shaded by perception bias on both sides.
In the end, it's a design choice to be made by the authors - what do they value more? Their plans, or the audience's pre-established perception of something "wrong" as though it may be. There's no reason the author should have to alter their perhaps exceptionally well-reasoned plans for the actor for the audience's perhaps misguided view of said actor. The change would surely disorient the audience, at least at first, but that may be viewed as a necessary step to align the characteristics.
tl;dr: I'm more comfortable with a skaal-tel looking hyperion but the end choice of how to go about it is the BP team's and we should respect that decision. I just don't have to like it :P (just like how i don't like how the Raynor's name was changed and the tri-bar region was removed but hey, design choices)
-
That's well explained. I confess I'm not very attached to the Duke, and every time I play those missions I'm reminded of how much I dislike that model. Like I said, the Novikov and Courageous mean more to me than the Duke does, even though they're very blink-and-you'll-miss-them.
I had concepted a version that had more in common with the Taiidan assault frigate, but I couldn't make it work. I tried, believe me. The current model actually had a hammerhead for a while. Didn't look right, consensus in #bp was to get rid of it, so I did.
-
They way the current model is laid out, I can't see a hammerhead out there. As I said before, the major thing was the ship being vertically oriented instead of horizontally, with the protrusions making the design pretty square from the front and rear. Notice, you mostly see Duke from the rear, then from the top/side. Up close, it's apparent that it's a very large cruiser. The current model doesn't capture any of that. It'll look much smaller, especially from the side. Oh, and there's no hint of anything Vasudan about it, while the old model has some very non-Terran things about it.
Assault frigate style could work, perhaps. Maybe better than the destroyer. The point is, it should keep it's characteristic markings. Vertical "main hull", square-ish stern profile, hammerhead engine mount at the bottom (could stand to be somewhat less pronounced, but only a bit) and "eye beams". It likely should be boxier than the old model, to go with the other remade ships. It's the first TEI ship, and the Vasudans had a lot of say in designing it (also, it being designed partially by Vasudans is mentioned while chasing the Duke), so I'd say, try accenting the sort-of dissonance between boxy, Terran lines and the unusual hull layout more typical of Vasudan ships. There is a certain "rough along the edges" vibe from Stratcomm's model, as fitting for an early design like that (indeed, IIRC, it being an early design was because it was a good reason for it to look so weird). The new design also has none of that, and it is more similar to Erebus, which is, IIRC, a late TEI ship (the table currently on SVN has no tech description for it, so I'm not sure of that, though).
-
Right, let me make this perfectly clear: I'm not starting over. I'm not significantly changing the direction this model is going in. I've finally got this thing to a point where I like it, I'm not going to abandon it now. I'm also not going to relegate it to a place as another TEI ship. I've got enough models on my plate as it is, not going to add another when both the BP team and I are perfectly happy with this one. This is what BP's Hyperion is going to look like. I get that you don't like it. I knew some wouldn't.
Here are your options:
you get used to its new look
you keep using the Stratcomm model, which I'll ensure is compatible as a courtesy
you make your own replacement
If you have suggestions for the model I'm working on, I'd love to hear them. I may not use them, but it was #bp's feedback that led me to change the back here, so I might. However, any more talk of work that would involve me starting over is wasted breath. It isn't happening.
-
The fact that people get so emotionally charged over models for a 15 year old game is laughable, seriously. You've already said your piece several times over Dragon, it's done no good each time, as it goes against what Aesaar set out to do with the ship to begin with. Instead, channel that energy into suggesting things for the new design itself, as that will be leagues more productive (so long as you can be constructive about it!)
-
The fact that people get so emotionally charged over models for a 15 year old game is laughable, seriously. You've already said your piece several times over Dragon, it's done no good each time, as it goes against what Aesaar set out to do with the ship to begin with. Instead, channel that energy into suggesting things for the new design itself, as that will be leagues more productive (so long as you can be constructive about it!)
I partialy disagree. Imagine if You replace some very important, memorable ship like Karuna. People spent years getting used to this model. When You say "Indus", most of BP players have a picture of skeletal, 1km-long vessel with rotating section, spinal gauss cannons and long range VLS torpedoes. Other players like Dragon have taiidan-inspired vessel haunted by ghosts because they paid attention for other ships during they playthrough.
At the other hand, old Hyperion is not so imaginative design and old model is pretty low poly for standards of today. If I were Aesaar, I would design something that incorporate features of old Hyperion, and also have many new features as well, but it's his buisness. His and BP Team... And of course, we should use the most recent stuff we have. I'm on Yes in case od replacing current Hyperion. Aesaar's one is more detailed and it's going to be UVed, not tilemapped. That's important.
-
Replace it with a Borg cube, for maximum fan off-pissage.
obvious troll is obvious
-
Aesaar: :yes: Go for it! I bet that when you get to skin it, you'll turn some heads in favor of you, when you make some new screenshots in-game, you'll win the majority, perhaps even me! Despite any differences, I'm most definitely sure the production quality will be amazing. Again, go for it! :yes:
-
Instead, channel that energy into suggesting things for the new design itself, as that will be leagues more productive (so long as you can be constructive about it!)
Do the words "beyond salvation" ring any bells? I'd gladly offer advice as to how to make this model work better if I could... Only I can't. This model is just unsuitable at it's very basic concept, and nothing can be done to change that. It could never have worked. Raynor was just the same, the things that I didn't agree with were pretty fundamental, though the final result still resembled the original, at the very least. No amount of pretty textures, engine section tweaks or whatever will ever bring this model anywhere close to what it should be to work as a Hyperion's replacement. I hope this trend doesn't stick, or Delanda Est is gonna lose a lot if the Titan undergoes a similar "upgrade".
Our best bet for getting a proper replacement would be gathering up the "nay-sayers" and starting a community project for an actual upgraded Hyperion. I'd do it, but I hate the idea of being "just an idea guy", whose only contribution would be to start a project thread (since I wouldn't be able to do anything until the texturing stage, and even that's doubtful, since many people do it better than me). I can see myself contributing to that, both in feedback and actual work (whether it's POF data or normal maps).
-
Alright, Dragon, I think you've made your point. Aesaar has made his position clear, and while you're free to disagree with it, there are better ways of existing it than calling his model "beyond salvation".
As for everyone else, move on. If you want to talk about the model, fine. But if the thread continues to deteriorate, it'll get closed.
-
Well I like the new design, I think it fits in well with the other next generation of GTVA ships. I'll be honest I was never really a big fan of the original hyperion and the raynor. There was something about the designs that I didnt like. I much preferred the Titan design and looking forward to seeing that redesign.
-
Few words from me.
I never liked current Hyperion model. It's rear and engine section were a quintessence of ugliness in my opinion (Chimera and Bellerophon were almost as ugly) . I also hated the blue candy texture from the Typhoon (in each TEI warship). But when you Aesaar took care of them.... I can say without hesitation that I like them. That's how these ships should look like. So does the new Hyperion. Ok, maybe I don't like 100% of it but still it's better design. Let's face the fact. We have similar taste in aesthetics :) Hera and Naxos are the best examples of it.
So good luck with you work. I am very curious about the final effect. if I can suggest anything it will only be the engines width. I see that you made them to fit into the entire ship's line. how about making them a bit wider? To keep the proportions you can also try to make the wings shorter :) But I'm not pressing, do what you consider the best.
Currently I'm trying to make my Naxos look heavier. Hyperion has a look of a fast attack ship but I want Naxos to look smooth but armoured and powerful.