Hard Light Productions Forums
Hosted Projects - FS2 Required => Inferno => Topic started by: Lepanto on May 20, 2015, 08:26:38 am
-
Now, this may utterly shock you, but Inferno is NOT dead! We're at work renovating the missions, for up-to-date FREDding and a greatly increased dose of awesome. We MIGHT release in 2015, but making promises on Inferno release dates has turned out to be a futile affair.
Any feedback on these WiP EA ground units?
The Hecatoncheir is a battle hovertank, bristling with guns for anti-ground and anti-air work. Well-tested in the Jovian war, they now spearhead the EA's offensive on the GTVA capital world of Janus.
The Arx is an EA prefabricated planetary base. Deployed across the EA's conquests, it provides EA frontline forces with C3I support and a squadron's worth of strikecraft support.
(Update: Gave it an edge-split modifier so the smoothing doesn't suck.)
-
I like the gun design on the tank, but it doesn't feel like a tank. It feels like an artillery placement.
The base also has good design points, but also feels like its elevated side is flimsy. Is it part of a hillside?
-
Somebody else on the internal already told me to make the tank flatter and more tank-y. Rest assured, that shall be done.
Good point on the side of the base. It's freestanding, so I'll fiddle with that part some more.
-
Ground forces? Will Inferno have atmospheric missions?
-
Ground forces? Will Inferno have atmospheric missions?
Now it does. And we've got some plans . . . :)
BTW, would anyone be interested in a series of background fiction teasers setting the stage for the campaign itself?
-
I'm interested.
-
The current Hoplite should be made into a static gun emplacement. As a tank, it just looks bizzare.
-
I'd suggest looking into battletech for nice design inspirations...
-
I'm interested in the fiction teasers as well!
-
I'm certainly interested in Inferno story material.
-
First piece is coming on Monday. (I have to set myself deadlines, or I'd hardly get anything done.)
And the Hoplite still isn't tank-y enough, I get it. :p Will fiddle with it some more.
-
Updated the Hoplite. Hope it looks sufficiently tank-y, and that I can start adding detail now without having to heavily alter the structure again because I later learn that it sucks. I like it better as a hovertank, but does anyone think it would be better as a conventional treaded tank?
-
That thing on the side should be on the back, IMO.
Also, hover is better than treaded because to make the tank not look like a mere prop you'll need to move the tracks. No tracks, no problem.
Also, it's the spaceship and interstellar travel era. Tracks are so last century.
-
I think the main problem is with the asymmetric hull and unproportionally big turret which makes it look more like a fixed emplacement than a tank.
It's not matter of tracks or not, it's a tank so it must look rugged and practical, with a design that should minimize its profile against enemy weapons.
-
I suck at designing tanks, I get the point. I've turned this project over to The Dagger, who will hopefully produce a tank more to your liking.
-
Wait! Maybe it's the Jagdtiger of EA tanks. Its heavy shielding, armor, and firepower tell "minimize-your-target-profile" to go fvck itself.
A: should we even be designing tanks? They are hopelessly vulnerable from land, air, and space.
B: we were told to design tanks! I don't give a ****! Give it a huge turret that can blast enemy cities into dust from 200km away!
A: well-
B: And it must have a massive repulsor-lift chassis! This god damn tank is going to hover over the grand canyon!
A: I guess we could do that. Screw it, we have the budget. This is EARTH.
edit: wait, I have more
it's a tank so it must look rugged and practical,
Well, the Hoplite is the product of the same people who built the Lindos. There was probably a similar discussion when the Lindos was being designed: "they want a ship with an emphasis on alpha shock attacks...I want literally every weapon facing forward! If we run out of space, glue more guns onto sticks and have them protrude violently from the hull! I don't give it a **** if it's structurally unwise, we'll just build more!"
-
You do know that even the mighty Jagdtiger used camouflage and hull down tactics?
Although your argument might have ground if taken on a different perspective.
What if instead of a tank you classify it as a mobile hover fortress?
A cross of Dark Reign Sky Fortress and the mighty interwar landship designs:
http://static.giantbomb.com/uploads/scale_small/11/118253/2268670-sky_fortress.png
http://www.bronetehnika.narod.ru/heavy_proekt/t39_5.gif
Lepanto, if you're interested I can provide you inspirational concepts at will.
-
Thanks, Zarax. The new design should perhaps be more to your liking. (It can't be TOO big, though, as I have a very specific mission role in mind that requires it to fit through a hangarbay...)
Still happy to receive inspirational concepts though, as I have the feeling it'll need another redesign or two before it's satisfactory.
-
MUCH better!
Reminds me of this (fictional) design: http://fc06.deviantart.net/fs71/f/2010/255/f/3/russian_land_battleship_kv_vi_by_vonbrrr-d2yk6b3.jpg
I'd say you could take design cues from the works of Ing. Grotte, creator of some of the craziest tank designs ever made.
Here are the standard size tanks:
http://slackratchet.com/T35/T-35%20reference/t35_12a.jpg
http://media.moddb.com/images/groups/1/3/2074/TG1f.jpg
http://fc07.deviantart.net/fs71/f/2011/213/f/1/t_22_tank_grotte_tg_by_nicksikh-d42f7t3.jpg
http://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/attachment.php?attachmentid=186350&stc=1&d=1348840524
http://www.bronetehnika.narod.ru/heavy_proekt/t39_5.gif
And here are the landcruisers, insane designs of 1000+ tonnes:
http://i.imgur.com/NOFoFYV.jpg
http://www.mmowg.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/P__1000_Ratte_Tank_Cutaway_by_VonBrrr.jpg
That should fit with EA's tendency for overkill firepower...
-
Ahaha yes that looks much better!
-
That tank looks awesome!
However,I think that middle-front turret might in a bad place.
-
That huge main gun is going to look very very wonky if it's a multipart and can rotate fully to the sides or behind. As a singlepart or maybe only being able to rotate/elevate 5 degrees or so, it should be fine, though.
-
That tank looks awesome!
However,I think that middle-front turret might in a bad place.
Juuust thought of that. Will ditch that turret.
That huge main gun is going to look very very wonky if it's a multipart and can rotate fully to the sides or behind. As a singlepart or maybe only being able to rotate/elevate 5 degrees or so, it should be fine, though.
It's supposed to rotate and elevate fully, the better to gatling you with. Any ideas for a more rotation-friendly design?
-
Might work better if it was not as long, then that middle-front turret might not have to go either.
-
Maybe you could use an oscillating turret design: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oscillating_turret
-
Will the upcoming story piece be from the EA or GTVA perspective?
-
GTVA first, though we'll be covering the story of the EA and the Vasudans too.
-
I like the new "flying fortress" design, looks like a more serious threat. That oscillating turret thing looks awesome too and I think it could really work for the central gun.
-
But I want to play as the EA and throw my weight around, behave questionably towards civilian space convoys in Beta Aquilea, etc.
-
But I want to play as the EA and throw my weight around, behave questionably towards civilian space convoys in Beta Aquilea, etc.
Well, you'll have to make a fan-campaign once INF comes out. :)
-
Updated the turret. What do you think?
-
Looking good, although now the central turret reminds me of a sturmtiger
-
You should probably make the turret ring/turret base cylinder thingy a bit thicker since it doesn't quite look like it could support such a massive weapon on it at the moment, with it being off to one side and being "unbalanced". A counterweight would work, but making the base cylinder bigger would go a long way to making it look more stable.
-
Backside exhausts could also be considered, so that the weapon would be recoilless.
-
Updated the cannon, started fleshing out the details.
-
Looking good!
-
UV-ready Y/N? Will add some more plating detail, etc. in the normalmap.
-
I'd say it's good to go!
If you're in the mood for some greebling you might want to put some detail in the engine area, otherwise I'd say it's mighty fine!
-
That main turret gun is going to look wonky if it's able to elevate fully and shoot straight up, because the way it's set up now I think the back portion of it might clip into the hull a bunch.
-
I like the look of the tank.
-
The problem with atmospheric missions in Freespace universe is that fighters carry multi-kiloton missiles on regular basis and bombers carry multi-megaton bombs. Something puny as Roceye in Earth-like atmosphere should have a blast radius similat to a meson-bomb in space.
This means you would have to have special atmspheric-set of missiles or moon-like surface missions where atmosphere is not an amplyfying factor.
BTW EA storming GTA capital? It's like every Blue Planet wet dream (at least the UEF fans).
-
You can just fluff the explosives as shaped charges. The yield is powerful but the blast isn't necessarily massive.
-
The new-and-somewhat-improved Arx, reimagined as a hover base.
Just basic structural feedback, please; I know the model looks a little kludgey.
--
Hecatoncheir is UVed and AO-baked. I suck at textures, so I'm switching to modeling the Arx for now.
-
I wanted to say how stupid and unreal is an idea of shaped-charge megaton-nuke, but then I realized that beam emitters basically do the same with equivalent of multi-gigaton power.
So I guess it's totally possible in FS universe.
Another interesting question is how does shields react with Earth-grade atmospere.
-
Yeah, with FS tech you've just got to be willing to roll with a few silly basic assumptions.
-
You can just fluff the explosives as shaped charges. The yield is powerful but the blast isn't necessarily massive.
Or just blissfully ignore those FS1 tech room numbers, lest we get into a StarDestroyer.net "those turbolasers fire at eleventy billion jiggawatts!" mentality.
-
Or just blissfully ignore those FS1 tech room numbers, lest we get into a StarDestroyer.net "those turbolasers fire at eleventy billion jiggawatts!" mentality.
Yes. This is just another example of story and gameplay getting bogged down by background static.
"Why is there sound in space? How can the missiles be so overpowered? Why do fighters move so slowly"
I don't care! I want to shoot space tanks in an atmosphere of political intrigue and cosmic horror.
-
To get back on topic before we get into another flamewar over death-of-the-author criticism: Any commentary on the Arx? It's supposed to be a mobile C3I/logistics/carrier base, so it's a bit undergunned for its weight class.
-
To get back on topic before we get into another flamewar over death-of-the-author criticism: Any commentary on the Arx? It's supposed to be a mobile C3I/logistics/carrier base, so it's a bit undergunned for its weight class.
And appears to have no weapons covering the right side (assuming the guns are facing forward).
-
This is just a general structural WiP. Turret layout is incomplete. I'll switch to a more all-round gun loadout.
-
That thing could even be used as a enormous tank in its current state.