Hard Light Productions Forums
Hosted Projects - FS2 Required => Blue Planet => Topic started by: Darius on October 18, 2013, 07:55:45 am
-
Aesaar's been hard at work getting the Erebus ingame the past few months.
(http://i1210.photobucket.com/albums/cc415/dariusbei/screen0005_zpsedfb6630.jpg) (http://i1210.photobucket.com/albums/cc415/dariusbei/screen0005_zpsedfb6630.jpg~original)
(http://i1210.photobucket.com/albums/cc415/dariusbei/underside_zps7045faed.jpg) (http://i1210.photobucket.com/albums/cc415/dariusbei/underside_zps7045faed.jpg~original)
-
Oh my GAWD! That is beautiful. It 'feels' like a battlestar in the sense that it looks like a gritty, harrowed warship.
-
It's gorgeous! Congratulations!
-
Sweet mother. Outstanding work.
Do I spot new turrets?
-
:eek:
:yes2: :jaw: :yes:
-
Sweetness. That is one glorious beast.
-
I thought we wouldn't see this sweet thing before the release of the final part of bp? :)
-
I put forward a good argument about the world needing to witness this.
-
man, it looks even better with the textures than i expected
-
Also interesting what else is there in that picture galery:
(http://i1210.photobucket.com/albums/cc415/dariusbei/screen0008_zpsfd340e5d.jpg~original)
(http://i1210.photobucket.com/albums/cc415/dariusbei/screen0007_zps3eb65a49.jpg~original)
-
Wut.
Did you mean to post that in Celeb FS ? This has nothing to do with TEI warships.
-
Also, we've seen those before.
-
Also, we've seen those before.
Oh, and I thought I had discovered something cool and secret there. :(
And sorry for being off-topic. Stopping as of now.
-
i'm trying to remember, wasnt it darius that cooked that one up?
-
either it's from his experiments with that silk thing someone linked a while back or it involves dubstep beams
-
I looked on the FS wiki and couldn't find something called an "Erebus". Is this a new destroyer or something?
-
I looked on the FS wiki and couldn't find something called an "Erebus". Is this a new destroyer or something?
It's what they're considering changing the Raynor's name to.
-
It's an HD Raynor given a Greek name. Because master culture.
And they aren't considering it, they did it. :P
-
Which is great given the historical significance of the name Erebus. If I Google "Raynor" most of the hits are for a company that manufactures garage doors... :)
-
I always thought the naming convention of FreeSpace (as in Greek mythological figures) is unsustainable and thought Raynor was a good change that could be linked to BP's expanded universe's history. Is Erebus just a codename or is it gonna be a retcon?
-
What about the voice acting? Do they not say "Raynor" once in all of BP:AoA?
-
Thanks guys. Believe it or not, it's been nearly a year since I started this model.
I always thought the naming convention of FreeSpace (as in Greek mythological figures) is unsustainable and thought Raynor was a good change that could be linked to BP's expanded universe's history. Is Erebus just a codename or is it gonna be a retcon?
No less sustainable than any other naming convention. Like most modern navies, I don't think the GTVA only uses a name once. Names are almost certainly reused as ships are decommissioned. Moreover, the GTVA doesn't restrict itself to Greek mythology. Apart from other mythologies, there's pretty much any ship name you can think of: places, people, adjectives, etc.
While we're on the topic, I wouldn't have much of a problem with names from fiction if that fiction was undeniably classic literature. Something like, say, the Lord of the Rings. Starcraft doesn't even come close to qualifying.
And yes, the name change is happening. And believe it or not, it's mentioned precisely once in AoA, in a line that can be cut out fairly easily.
Do I spot new turrets?
There are a lot of new turrets. Total count is 60, up from 41.
Loadout is:
HBlue: 1
BBlue: 1
MBlue: 4
TerSlashBlue: 2
PBlue: 2
TerPulse: 8
STerPulse: 4
Eos: 6 (x4)
AAA: 8
Terran Turret 2: 22
Misc (CM): 2
-
While we're on the topic, I wouldn't have much of a problem with names from fiction if that fiction was undeniably classic literature. Something like, say, the Lord of the Rings. Starcraft doesn't even come close to qualifying.
Why is that?
There are a lot of new turrets. Total count is 60, up from 41.
Which is totally justified in my eyes. Having kilometers long warships with only a handfull of turrets is total bogus. I recently upgunned the Orion to have some 60 turrets, too.
-
Following that line of though, why is Batman cited as classic literature? Answering: "Because he is the goddamn Batman!" does not count. :P
There are tons of names that can replace Raynor (Ex: Nelson, Carthage) that sound better than Erebus.
Disclaimer: I don't expect to change anything stating my opinion, just putting it out there.
-
But none that sound cooler than Raynor. As far as I'm concerned, starcraft doesn't even exist, so it should be a non-issue.
-
Yeah, you've been pretty much overruled on that.
-
What is PBlue?
-
PBlue = Pulse Blue? Some sort of AAA like beam cannon, maybe for longf range sniping?
And I meant new turret designs Aessar, but still an impressive loadout.
-
While we're on the topic, I wouldn't have much of a problem with names from fiction if that fiction was undeniably classic literature. Something like, say, the Lord of the Rings. Starcraft doesn't even come close to qualifying.
I didn't mean to think that Raynor came from Star Craft, and that's not why I'm like it so much. It was just that a long time ago on the board here, there was mention that the name Raynor could have come from a famous person from BP's history, and I was happy with that explanation. The hat trick made the person cease to exist.
But that's still not the biggest issue. We've been calling it the Raynor for so long, changing it now is like pulling a George Lucas!
Suffice to say, I'll get used to the name switch once the next release happens.
-
I don't really think there needs to be much of a controversy here. The fact is, Aesaar has made a great model here - that's undeniable. But it's also a terrible HTL - if the Raynor were a [V] ship, I'd fight tooth and nail to keep this version out of the MediaVPs. It loses a lot of critical Raynor features like the tubes, like that huge spine of multiparts. It also has much less of a vertical component in the engine section than the Raynor does. It's clearly been inspired by the Raynor, but it's a different ship.
Personally, given the long history of the Raynor model before BP, I think I would have been more disappointed if they'd tried to keep the name for this model instead of changing it.
-
I sincerely disagree, what makes a great HTL great is taking the original design, throwing out as much of the bad as you can (which I feel was done in Aesaar's model), and infusing it with
sexual energy the modeler's creativity, making it something of their own. So, in my opinion, this Erebus makes for an amazing HTL Raynor as well.
-
if the Raynor were a [V] ship, I'd fight tooth and nail to keep this version out of the MediaVPs.
Turns out it's not. Who knew ?
-
if the Raynor were a [V] ship, I'd fight tooth and nail to keep this version out of the MediaVPs.
Turns out it's not. Who knew ?
Shock horror, you're right! Do you need a lesson in the word "If"? :doubt:
Hades: I think we've had more than enough discussions on this issue to know where we both stand, although I do think this is an interesting situation. Think about it this way - this is a model with a new name, a distinctly different design in several key areas, a new turret layout and a higher total number of turrets. Is it really really just a high poly makeover of the old model any more? The way I see it, it's basically a Ship of Theseus now - beyond a general resemblance, there's really nothing left of the original model. So why pretend? Let it break out and be its own thing I say.
Of course, that wont stop people using it in place of a HTL Raynor, and nor should it if they choose to. But I'd also not be surprised to see the existing Raynor continue to be used alongside it.
-
What about the voice acting? Do they not say "Raynor" once in all of BP:AoA?
They say it exactly once, all that needs to be changed is the one line.
As for the Erebus not being faithful to the Raynor, I don't really see the problem — it's a redesign of an old community model for its BP usage, the same as Aesaar's Diomedes or Draco.
I still miss the tubes though.
-
Except neither the Diomedes nor the Draco got a name change.
But Black Wolf has grudgingly convinced me that it may be the better this way, even though I have more affection for the name than the model.
-
After making that awesome of a model, I think Aesaar has the right to call it whatever he wants :D
-
After making that awesome of a model, I think Aesaar has the right to call it whatever he wants :D
Agreed on that. My only point of contention is that the bridge is no longer tall and pointy, but I can ignore that.
-
Wait that was a Raynor?
Now I want to see it from the upper side. I absolutely disagree with Black Wolf, I think (so far) that it is an awesome Raynor!
-
Wait that was a Raynor?
Now I want to see it from the upper side. I absolutely disagree with Black Wolf, I think (so far) that it is an awesome Erebus!
Fix'd :p
-
I think it is a bloody awesome model and if people dont want to use it as a HD raynor then simply dont use it easy. The name change dosent bother me and the new one i think fits better with BP. I just can't wait to see what Aesaar is doing with the Titan carrier, that has been one of my favourite user ship designs of all.
Also what is the PBlue?? is it a pulse beam like you get in Homeworld 2 of Nexus?
-
After someone leaked a p3d link to the Erebus, I gotto say that the pointy bridge is indeed missing.
And those two PBlue...there are two rather large single barelled turrets at the prow. I'm still think they are some sort of sniping turret.
-
Wait that was a Raynor?
Now I want to see it from the upper side. I absolutely disagree with Black Wolf, I think (so far) that it is an awesome Erebus!
Fix'd :p
I just hate it when ppl do that to other ppl's words. Hate it.
-
That raynor/erebus is such a huuuuuge upgrade from what we have now.
(Also, Chimera DL link sends you to a file that you can't download)
-
Dude, Chimera is in latest BP2 release.
-
...it totally is, isn't it? I'm looking at it right now in the ship lab. My bad.
Edit: There doesn't happen to be a shield HUD icon that someone's made for the new Draco, is there?
Edit2: Holy crap the new Draco is OP as ****. Do loops and you'll never get hit, ever. I just finished Aristea with 18 kills and 92% hull integrity. If only it had real damage output... Kayser/tempest feels so weak after 6x rapier gunpoints.
-
After someone leaked a p3d link to the Erebus, I gotto say that the pointy bridge is indeed missing.
And those two PBlue...there are two rather large single barelled turrets at the prow. I'm still think they are some sort of sniping turret.
This link calls to me like the sirens of the Odyssey. I must have it.
-
Disclaimer:
/me is totally oblivious to any drama that may have occurred, and I also see no reason why this should be kept hidden - it's a wonderful model, and it's complete an in-game already anyway.
-
DROOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL
-
Good model, I love the frontal section and forward beam cannons (it was a good idea to change the orientation of that dorsal cannon, now we will see it shooting more often)
But still I have a different vision of a new Raynor. I'm not going to argue with anyone about the "proper HTL'ing" We've had enough of this ;) It's a fan made ship so... Freedom of choice.
-
*snip*
That is GORGEOUS. Everything about it just screams "warship". I only have two questions to ask.
First is about the turrets along the ship's broadsides, why restrict their firing arcs by putting them in recessed bays?
Second is the missile launchers, why make them turrets that - from what I can see - have extremely limited turning radius? Why not make them VLS tubes, or just fuse the launchers to the hull, extending outward from the spaces behind them?
-
Seeing it with all the details fully fleshed out, I don't mind the restructuring so much.
-
After a while I don't think I mind the whole thing so much. There is such a difference between the Raynor and the Erebus, the former could easily be an early prototype of the latter mass production model.
EDIT: Omg, I just noticed this thing is overloaded with ribs! Even the ribs have ribs!
-
After a while I don't think I mind the whole thing so much. There is such a difference between the Raynor and the Erebus, the former could easily be an early prototype of the latter mass production model.
Or vice versa. ;)
Erebus is a massive, solid looking warship. It's basic shape is less complicated than Raynor's (middle section with hangarbay and the rear). I don't compare the front because it's almost identical (the basic shape of course).
Also Raynor is not that massive looking. If you put these two next each other you will see an agile, slender and aggressive- looking destroyer and a tough, compact piece of a god damn battleship :D. And that is the most (I think) important thing here. As I remember there was a briefing where somebody compared the mobility of the Orestes and the Titan class. BP-ish raynor/erebus is far heavier than Titan and this new model shows it.
-
Note that the p3d model is out of date, but I just can't be bothered to update it.
Edit: There doesn't happen to be a shield HUD icon that someone's made for the new Draco, is there?
Edit2: Holy crap the new Draco is OP as ****. Do loops and you'll never get hit, ever. I just finished Aristea with 18 kills and 92% hull integrity. If only it had real damage output... Kayser/tempest feels so weak after 6x rapier gunpoints.
I'll ask Esarai about the shield icon. I think he may have made one.
And yeah, the Draco is a bit much ATM, even if it hasn't changed much from the original, stat-wise. Could use a nerf to maneuverability. It's a boom & zoom fighter and should fly like one.
*snip*
First is about the turrets along the ship's broadsides, why restrict their firing arcs by putting them in recessed bays?
Second is the missile launchers, why make them turrets that - from what I can see - have extremely limited turning radius? Why not make them VLS tubes, or just fuse the launchers to the hull, extending outward from the spaces behind them?
For the side battery turrets, the main one is simple rule of cool. As a bonus, it makes them focus their firepower on the sides, perfect for hitting torpedoes heading for the beam cannons.
For the torpedo launchers: In game terms, they are VLS. FSO doesn't support moving turrets with no arm. We just wanted them to look different from UEF VLS.
-
Note that the p3d model is out of date, but I just can't be bothered to update it.
So noted. Is uploading to P3D really a hassle? I have no experience with it, or with modeling, and I always assumed it was basically the Photobucket for 3D models.
For the side battery turrets, the main one is simple rule of cool. As a bonus, it makes them focus their firepower on the sides, perfect for hitting torpedoes heading for the beam cannons.
Hmm, I guess that makes sense, given the programming shenanigans likely involved. :ick: I just imagined the turrets would be more effective as something like this:
(http://fc03.deviantart.net/fs70/i/2013/024/2/f/rotary_cannon_firing_arcs_by_scifiwarships-d5sjt89.jpg)
Much better firing arcs, wouldn't you agree? :p
For the torpedo launchers: In game terms, they are VLS. FSO doesn't support moving turrets with no arm. We just wanted them to look different from UEF VLS.
It sounds like I wasn't descriptive enough. :ick: When I said "fused to the hull", I meant sort of like this:
(http://picturehoster.info/images/14167565862547072494.png)
As it is now, the turret looks like it has unnecessary moving parts involved.
Still, neither of these pints are complaints as much as they are nitpicking. :p Your work is too awesome for there to be any genuine flaws. :D On a related note, I look forward to seeing what the Temeraire class in your P3D account will look like when it's finished. :D ;7 :nod:
-
After a while I don't think I mind the whole thing so much. There is such a difference between the Raynor and the Erebus, the former could easily be an early prototype of the latter mass production model.
Or vice versa. ;)
Erebus is a massive, solid looking warship. It's basic shape is less complicated than Raynor's (middle section with hangarbay and the rear). I don't compare the front because it's almost identical (the basic shape of course).
Also Raynor is not that massive looking. If you put these two next each other you will see an agile, slender and aggressive- looking destroyer and a tough, compact piece of a god damn battleship :D. And that is the most (I think) important thing here. As I remember there was a briefing where somebody compared the mobility of the Orestes and the Titan class. BP-ish raynor/erebus is far heavier than Titan and this new model shows it.
Totally agree. I'm all for what you've done by replacing the 3 cylinders in the middle with a fighter bay. Btw, nice Atlanta sitting in there.
(PS, the shape really lends itself to lego. If only...)
-
As it is now, the turret looks like it has unnecessary moving parts involved.
Perhaps you complaint was purely aesthetic, but my understanding is that the missile launchers themselves are not designed to move at all. No part of the assembly is supposed to rotate either in-game or in-universe.
-
His complaint is that they look like they move when they don't.
-
Well, I have mixed feelings about the Erebus. It's a good model by itself, but at the same time, greatly departs from the original Raynor. The huge, spine-mounted turrets are gone, which is a shame, because they did give it a bit of a "battleship" flavor. The VLS systems replaced turreted launchers, which I liked, as they introduced a distinction between GTVA and UEF design philosophy. GTVA used turrets, UEF used VLSes, and that was a nice touch. While VLSes are cool, the Raynor didn't need them at all (neither does the Titan). Also, the gap in the middle is gone, which makes the ship lose it's distinctive silhouette somewhat. The forward-facing cannon doesn't sit very well with me either, though given the BP loadout it does make sense, as it's stronger than broadside ones. I'd say, Raynor II, not a replacement. That would justify the VLSes (GTVA could copy them from UEF, for whatever reason), as well as other changes.
-
Well, I have mixed feelings about the Erebus. It's a good model by itself, but at the same time, greatly departs from the original Raynor. The huge, spine-mounted turrets are gone, which is a shame, because they did give it a bit of a "battleship" flavor. The VLS systems replaced turreted launchers, which I liked, as they introduced a distinction between GTVA and UEF design philosophy. GTVA used turrets, UEF used VLSes, and that was a nice touch. While VLSes are cool, the Raynor didn't need them at all (neither does the Titan). Also, the gap in the middle is gone, which makes the ship lose it's distinctive silhouette somewhat. The forward-facing cannon doesn't sit very well with me either, though given the BP loadout it does make sense, as it's stronger than broadside ones. I'd say, Raynor II, not a replacement. That would justify the VLSes (GTVA could copy them from UEF, for whatever reason), as well as other changes.
I see them as being two entirely different classes of ship. You have the Raynor, and you have the Erebus, there's a distinct resemblance, but this is also the case with modern warships. Just look at the Ticonderoga (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ticonderoga-class_cruiser), Arleigh Burke (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arleigh_Burke-class_destroyer), and Oliver Hazard Perry (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oliver_Hazard_Perry-class_frigate) class ships operated by the U.S. Navy. Hell, the Ticonderoga even uses the same hull as the retired Spruance class destroyer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spruance_class_destroyer).
As I considered his work, it became clear to me that Aesaar hasn't made a fully modernized HTL of the Raynor, but instead created an entirely new class of vessel that is quite obviously descended from the Raynor. This makes changing the name to "Erebus" all the more appropriate. It remains to be seen if another skilled modeler will give us a "true" modern HTL-ed Raynor, but I find myself quite satisfied with this fine piece of work that Aesaar has seen fit to give us. ;)
-
Trying to imagine how it would look with some Slava tubes would look on the Erebus. I think less high tech, but certainly would get the point across.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b5/SS-N-12_Sandbox_surface-to-surface_missiles.JPEG/757px-SS-N-12_Sandbox_surface-to-surface_missiles.JPEG (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b5/SS-N-12_Sandbox_surface-to-surface_missiles.JPEG/757px-SS-N-12_Sandbox_surface-to-surface_missiles.JPEG)
Regardless, awesome work.
-
As I considered his work, it became clear to me that Aesaar hasn't made a fully modernized HTL of the Raynor, but instead created an entirely new class of vessel that is quite obviously descended from the Raynor. This makes changing the name to "Erebus" all the more appropriate. It remains to be seen if another skilled modeler will give us a "true" modern HTL-ed Raynor, but I find myself quite satisfied with this fine piece of work that Aesaar has seen fit to give us. ;)
Amen for that :D
Talking about the VLS. GTVA is already using this system (for example on Deimos, new Diomedes) so I don't see any problem with more Allied ships using this.
But the most kickass heavy missile launchers are the tubes from Galactica ;)
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-IasmBXf9ZxQ/T4HNCWy5vmI/AAAAAAAAC24/pm9A2mjkdN8/s1600/Galactica_nukes.jpg)
-
As I considered his work, it became clear to me that Aesaar hasn't made a fully modernized HTL of the Raynor, but instead created an entirely new class of vessel that is quite obviously descended from the Raynor. This makes changing the name to "Erebus" all the more appropriate.
That's not how it's working. The Erebus is the new Raynor in BP and all references to the name 'Raynor' are going to be removed, as far as I understand it. Basically, BP is using it as the 'htl raynor' and renaming it.
-
I really don't get all the hate in this thread.
So the Erebus is slightly different in some details from the Raynor.
Big. ****ing. Deal.
The level of canon worship is just astounding to me. Especially when one considers that the original Raynor was just a third party asset used for convenience by Darius in the first place.
This is the new Raynor. I really don't see the point of making a new "HTL" version of the former ship known as the Raynor other than just mindboggling senseless aforementioned canonworship. Such great skills could be put to oh so much better use!
Like building the new Titan! :nervous: ;7
-
I really don't get all the hate in this thread.
So the Erebus is slightly different in some details from the Raynor.
Big. ****ing. Deal.
The level of canon worship is just astounding to me. Especially when one considers that the original Raynor was just a third party asset used for convenience by Darius in the first place.
This is the new Raynor. I really don't see the point of making a new "HTL" version of the former ship known as the Raynor other than just mindboggling senseless aforementioned canonworship. Such great skills could be put to oh so much better use!
Like building the new Titan! :nervous: ;7
I agree with this post greatly. Would people shut up about it being so "different" already? :banghead:
-
I agree with you luis. The way i am understanding it these new models are being made for the BP cannon and not as general 3rd party High Poly models. I remember reading post by either Daruis or GB about the Raynor and Titan etc being place holders until new models where made specifically for BP. So i really dont know what the beef is as they have said the new model is Erebus and not the raynor anymore, its a new ship to replace the Raynor, that has taken insperation from the Raynor design by stratcomm, nothing wrong in that.
I feel the new design fits in better with BP than the Raynor, i always thought it looked out of place along with the Titan (despite it being one of my favourite models) after the Aaseers new models were put into the last release.
I am really looking foward to going up against this bad boy and really cant wait to see what you will do with the Titan.
Also does this mean we will get another update to BP 1 and 2?
-
I really don't get all the hate in this thread.
So the Erebus is slightly different in some details from the Raynor.
Big. ****ing. Deal.
The level of canon worship is just astounding to me. Especially when one considers that the original Raynor was just a third party asset used for convenience by Darius in the first place.
This is the new Raynor. I really don't see the point of making a new "HTL" version of the former ship known as the Raynor other than just mindboggling senseless aforementioned canonworship. Such great skills could be put to oh so much better use!
Like building the new Titan! :nervous: ;7
I agree with this post greatly. Would people shut up about it being so "different" already? :banghead:
So we can't discuss about that? Just to compare things? To tell each other what we think? I did not see any complains written("hate" also). Now we all should know why this new model is different. It was built to suit BP's designers needs and every modder here should understand this. But I guess that a lot of people expected to see something more like Chimera or Bel- like remake, so I can understand such point of view.
-
I really don't get all the hate in this thread.
So the Erebus is slightly different in some details from the Raynor.
Big. ****ing. Deal.
The level of canon worship is just astounding to me. Especially when one considers that the original Raynor was just a third party asset used for convenience by Darius in the first place.
This is the new Raynor. I really don't see the point of making a new "HTL" version of the former ship known as the Raynor other than just mindboggling senseless aforementioned canonworship. Such great skills could be put to oh so much better use!
Like building the new Titan! :nervous: ;7
I agree with this post greatly. Would people shut up about it being so "different" already? :banghead:
So we can't discuss about that? Just to compare things? To tell each other what we think? I did not see any complains written("hate" also). Now we all should know why this new model is different. It was built to suit BP's designers needs and every modder here should understand this. But I guess that a lot of people expected to see something more like Chimera or Bel- like remake, so I can understand such point of view.
I'm not asking people do stop discussing or comparing. I'm asking them to stop making posts like Dragon's where the content of the post can be summarized as "they changed it it's ugly nao baaaaaaaaaw". It might turn out that's not the case, but it SEEMS like it, and it's annoying me already.
-
I agree I exagerated in the "hate" part.
-
I figured. I personally keep getting "this sounds like whining and not discussion" vibes or something, but I'm hella tired, so it might be that. I think I'm going to come back to this later when I'm a bit more cognizant.
-
(http://i.imgur.com/l9SFviM.png)
-
For actual criticism/discussion:
I don't really like the single barrel turrets you have in alcoves. First, the alcoves are huuuge (easily fitting bombers in it and such, if the atlanta fighter is an accurate representation of scale), and don't need to be for allowing the turrets a full field of view. They could be shallower, not as wide, and not as tall. They also don't need to be rectangular, and could be crescent or triangular shaped to minimize places something could hide. Second, they would look more integrated and less fragile if they were attached to the hull on the bottom and top of the turret. Maybe as a cylinder spanning the bottom and top of the alcove, similar to what this lego turret looks like:
(http://bartkowalski.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/Gun-turret-detail.jpg)
-
Aesaar keeps all his models private for some reason, even the ones that have long been released.
-
No, I just delete them from p3d after they've been released to clear up space.
Hyperion is next on the list. It's getting a total redesign, much like what the Diomedes got.
Dragon: it still has box launchers. They just can't move because FSO doesn't support moving turrets without an arm. They can probably move in-universe, maybe even pitch up. The reason they don't is because I couldn't manage to make a decent looking mechanism to let them do so.
Funny thing is that the controversy over this being a "proper Raynor" is pretty much exactly the reason that I stay away from FSU. I have no interest in making replicas of old models with a higher polycount. I didn't set out to make a proper HTL Raynor. I set out to redesign the thing, clear away all the bits I didn't like, and make it mine. I can't stand being constrained into keeping design elements I don't like.
Honestly, I'd really like to see someone make an actual HTL of Stratcomm's Raynor, just to see how much their version differs from mine.
-
Couldn't you make them move without an arm by assigning it a "dummy" arm (some tiny thing buried inside the turret, etc)?
if you wanted them to be able to pitch up, then the idea would probably be a dummy turret base with the box as the "arm", and then using initial position and limited traverse to achieve the desired range of motion (IIRC, this is possible in FSO).
-
Who cares about controversy, the model is gorgeous and we're grateful for the time you are investing on it.
If I haven't said before, kudos for the great model :yes:
-
The real question is: how will Steele feel about this 'new' ship? ;)
-
(...) I'd really like to see someone make an actual HTL of Stratcomm's Raynor, just to see how much their version differs from mine.
Time to shine! *Goes digging for own old Raynor redesigns*
But regardless of what comes of the discussion, I've made my peace with this change. All that is now left are ugly old posts.
-
Please dont name that thing Erebus.
Sorry to say that, but someone else was faster than u guys to pick that name.
http://theatreten.s249.xrea.com/eve/wp-content/uploads/ErebusOnNYC1.jpg
And yes, that is a picture with New York City below it to show u its size. And dont think anything in FS2 can or even should rival that monster.
Also, even if u finaly decide to keep the name, think at least about changing it to Erebos instead.
Other than that, pls keep up the good work.
-
Please dont name that thing Erebus.
Sorry to say that, but someone else was faster than u guys to pick that name.
Nope, not gonna change it again. EvE does not have a monopoly on names, especially not ones taken from greek mythology.
-
Neither does Starcraft. Your argument is invalid.
-
Neither does Starcraft. Your argument is invalid.
Actually, Starcraft does have a monopoly (enforced by trademarks and IP laws) on names from its own mythology.
-
As I considered his work, it became clear to me that Aesaar hasn't made a fully modernized HTL of the Raynor, but instead created an entirely new class of vessel that is quite obviously descended from the Raynor. This makes changing the name to "Erebus" all the more appropriate.
That's not how it's working. The Erebus is the new Raynor in BP and all references to the name 'Raynor' are going to be removed, as far as I understand it. Basically, BP is using it as the 'htl raynor' and renaming it.
That's actually what I meant, that Blue Planet has discarded the Raynor in favor of the Erebus. When I said "descended", I was speaking from a meta perspective. The Erebus evolved from the Raynor in the sense that Aesaar used it as a guideline when creating his own ship, which Blue Planet is now using instead of the Raynor.
Just clearing up the misunderstanding. :)
The way i am understanding it these new models are being made for the BP cannon and not as general 3rd party High Poly models. I remember reading post by either Daruis or GB about the Raynor and Titan etc being place holders until new models where made specifically for BP. So i really dont know what the beef is as they have said the new model is Erebus and not the raynor anymore, its a new ship to replace the Raynor, that has taken insperation from the Raynor design by stratcomm, nothing wrong in that.
Exactly what I meant.
BTW starbug, are you perchance a denizen of Spacebattles.com? Your screenname is identical to one of our better writers there.
No, I just delete them from p3d after they've been released to clear up space.
Really? :wtf: Then why is the P3D model Droid803 posted (http://p3d.in/60bLX) not visible on your profile (http://p3d.in/u/Aesaar)? The link works just fine, as of this posting. :confused:
Hyperion is next on the list. It's getting a total redesign, much like what the Diomedes got.
*cackling with glee* Has anyone told you how awesome you are? Because I am possessed with an overwhelming urge to remind you of it. :D
I didn't set out to make a proper HTL Raynor. I set out to redesign the thing, clear away all the bits I didn't like, and make it mine.
And I'd say your efforts were a complete success there. :nod:
Please dont name that thing Erebus.
Sorry to say that, but someone else was faster than u guys to pick that name.
http://theatreten.s249.xrea.com/eve/wp-content/uploads/ErebusOnNYC1.jpg
And yes, that is a picture with New York City below it to show u its size. And dont think anything in FS2 can or even should rival that monster.
Also, even if u finaly decide to keep the name, think at least about changing it to Erebos instead.
Other than that, pls keep up the good work.
(http://stream1.gifsoup.com/view3/1790469/headslap-o.gif)
-
Looking forward to the Hyperion redesign.
The original one is somewhat of an odd design...looked kind of misproportioned.
"Derpy" if you will...
-
The Hyperion was always a hideous little thing. It had a decent front that was ruined by it's weird and very ugly-looking rear-end. It'll be nice to see what Aesaar does to it! :drevil:
-
Funny thing is that the "controversy" over this being a "proper Raynor" is pretty much exactly the reason that I stay away from FSU. I have no interest in making replicas of old models with a higher polycount. I didn't set out to make a proper HTL Raynor. I set out to redesign the thing, clear away all the bits I didn't like, and make it mine. I can't stand being constrained into keeping design elements I don't like.
Man I love ya.
-
Funny thing is that the "controversy" over this being a "proper Raynor" is pretty much exactly the reason that I stay away from FSU. I have no interest in making replicas of old models with a higher polycount. I didn't set out to make a proper HTL Raynor. I set out to redesign the thing, clear away all the bits I didn't like, and make it mine. I can't stand being constrained into keeping design elements I don't like.
:yes:
-
Funny thing is that the "controversy" over this being a "proper Raynor" is pretty much exactly the reason that I stay away from FSU. I have no interest in making replicas of old models with a higher polycount. I didn't set out to make a proper HTL Raynor. I set out to redesign the thing, clear away all the bits I didn't like, and make it mine. I can't stand being constrained into keeping design elements I don't like.
I also forgot to thumb up Aesaar's post. Allow me rectify that. :yes:
-
decade-old pixels are the most important thing in life and must be protected
-
Ask yourself Hades - is that comment going to do anything positive for this thread? :doubt:
-
About as positive as your post or Dragon's post, which were effectively the polar opposite of my comment in terms of opinion - only difference was I didn't put in a ton of needless fluff into my post to make it seem hugely important :P
-
Great model and I'll look forward for your next one. :yes: :yes:
-
literally the worst model ever, lacks tubes
-
Phantom, whereas Hades's post was just flippant, yours is actually trolling. Knock it off.
-
About as positive as your post or Dragon's post, which were effectively the polar opposite of my comment in terms of opinion - only difference was I didn't put in a ton of needless fluff into my post to make it seem hugely important :P
You know that's not true. Try playing the ball, not the man.
-
Erebus discussion can have its own thread, I'll leave the other thread for release discussions.
-
I'm fine with the Erebus. Since Aesaar is reworking the Tev fleet as a whole, it is his right to change things, as long as Darius goes d'accord with it. One could easily name it Aesaars fleetspack and be done with it.
-
Since Aesaar is reworking the Tev fleet as a whole, it is his right to change things, as long as Darius goes d'accord with it.
My involvement in Aesaar's work doesn't go further than "That looks good, let's use it."
-
I should note that I wasn't saying the Erebus is ugly. It's a very good model and it definitely has a place in BP. I just don't really see it replacing the Raynor outright, but rather complementing it.
-
I should note that I wasn't saying the Erebus is ugly. It's a very good model and it definitely has a place in BP. I just don't really see it replacing the Raynor outright, but rather complementing it.
From a meta perspective, anyway. Removing the Raynor from BP canon with this beauty as its replacement is more than okay with me, I just don't want it to stop anyone from making a fully up-to-date HTL-ed Raynor.
-
That won't be a problem. If someone has a kickass idea and enough skills to make the model, he'll do it no matter what :D
-
I've personally liked the Hyperion's design :blah:
-
Nothing will stop you from using it after Aesaar releases his. :P
Just please give it another name. The amount of hulls named Hyperion in this forum IS TOO DARN HIGH!
-
Nothing will stop you from using it after Aesaar releases his. :P
Just please give it another name. The amount of hulls named Hyperion in this forum IS TOO DARN HIGH!
But it has HYPER in its name.
It must be awesome.
-
Droid is right, Hyperion is too hyper tempting for a name to be avoided.
-
If anything, it's the other mods who should change their ships to other names. This is the TRUE hyperion as far as I am concerned :D
-
I think both the Raynor and this Erebus look cool.
It was said this ship has more turrets though. Strategically/tactically does it perform about the same?
-
I think it's a moot point. The Orestes really only gets to shoot things in the second last mission of AoA IIRC, and doesn't shoot anything in WiH. Balancing around the new model should be fairly straightforward.
-
Uhm... sorry to say that, but i still think Erebus is a bad idea.
Simply, given the meaning of the name and the intention of the ship itself (pwning shivans / the destroyers / the great dark that threatens humanity) i wouldn't name a ship after the ancient god of darkness.
Wikipedia ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erebus )
In Greek mythology, Erebus /ˈɛrəbəs/, also Erebos (Ancient Greek: Ἔρεβος, "deep darkness, shadow"), was often conceived as a primordial deity, representing the personification of darkness; for instance, Hesiod's Theogony places him as one of the first five beings to come into existence, born from Chaos.
I mean, in some way u name it after the darkness and its purpose is to fight the darkness. For me this seems a bit of a conflict (Prometheus would be a better alternative, and yes i know this name is allready occupied. But there are a ****ton of other gods out there, even if u take only Greek mythology (Herakles comes to mind, or Perseus as great heros).
Also, Nyx is *only* a fighter (which is Erebus' sister).
I used the Eve reference before, but there at least they used Erebus for the Titan and Nyx for the accompanying Supercarrier. In BPverse, i would rather see Erebus used for a new type of advanced strike bomber or something rather than a destroyer.
From how i see it, the Raynor/Erebus/whatever in BPverse is thought to be THE weapon to stop the shivans, together with the other TEI ships of course, but this class is the flagship. If u rename it, i think this should be considered and a appropriate name should be chosen.
It is the pinnacle of decades of hard work to find a way to deal with the shivan threat that still is the very definition of why the GTVA exists. And if i where in charge there, i would pick a less sinister name.
Btw.: if i am too late and everything is allready decided, just tell me to STFU and i'll do.
PS: If u find any typos u may keep them, english is not my mother tongue, so excuse me there ;)
-
Btw.: if i am too late and everything is allready decided, just tell me to STFU and i'll do.
On the nose.
-
Well, naming the ship after a god of darkness seems appropriate seeing as one of the themes of BP is the GTVA turning into something dangerously close to the Shivans...
-
Or, you know, the engineers who drew it up thought the name sounded cool and didn't give a second thought to it.
-
Well, naming the ship after a god of darkness seems appropriate seeing as one of the themes of BP is the GTVA turning into something dangerously close to the Shivans...
Eh, they are dangerously close to the shivans in that they are unfriendly to a group of humans that they massively outnumber. I feel like it still ends there.
-
Eh, they are dangerously close to the shivans in that they are unfriendly to a group of humans that they massively outnumber. I feel like it still ends there.
There's also the fact that TEI warship design is based around forward-focused firepower for shock-jump tactics (heavily favoured by the Shivans, as in the Sathanas), and the fact that every time GTVA ships had parity with Shivan ships in AoA, the GTVA ships won handily. I think Steele's tactics are also explicitly compared to (apparent) Shivan strategic doctrine.
-
Except better in every way. Shivans just toss in their ships for a shock jump with no regard to their own survival. The new GTVA ships can do just that and escape before the enemy can strike back.
-
BTW starbug, are you perchance a denizen of Spacebattles.com? Your screenname is identical to one of our better writers there.
Sorry Val, that's not me but I am on spacebattles.com.
As for the Hyperion, while stratcomms model is cool, it no longer really fits in with the new tev fleet.
I really really can't wait to see the new titan, when it gets done. Will he keep the curves/streamlined look? I just can't wait.
I do have a question, when these models are complete will we be getting a patch/update to aoa/wih like before or will they all be released in act 3?
-
I really really can't wait to see the new titan, when it gets done. Will he keep the curves/streamlined look? I just can't wait.
I share this question. And I also hope that will be treated just like Bel and Chimera ;)
These curves make Titan look like a flying space cucumber or..... some kind of a toy :D I would be glad to see them redesigned.
-
Well, the Titan reminds me of a whale, while Raynor a shark.....
-
The Titan is in a really early phase of development. I've barely concepted anything. It'll be curvier than the Erebus, but as you may have come to expect from my ships so far, it'll still be a lot less curvy than it is now. My main focus (appearance-wise) will be on emphasising both its very imposing appearance from the front, and its role as a carrier. The basic shape of the ship will hopefully remain very similar.
It was said this ship has more turrets though. Strategically/tactically does it perform about the same?
Anti-capital firepower is very similar. The BBlue gets used more often, and the SBlues on turrets gave them a much better field of fire, but it's otherwise pretty much the same.
The point-defense screen, on the other hand, got a very significant upgrade. It's got more guns, and they're better positioned. For instance, in AoA Universal Truth, the Orestes doesn't really need any fighter cover. But given that UT is the only mission so far in which an Erebus isn't almost completely scripted, the effect on gameplay is pretty minimal. I have much less freedom with the Titan and Hyperion loadouts.
The Hyperion's name won't change. It fits GTVA naming conventions just fine, and I honestly don't really care if the community overuses it a bit.
James Razor: It's final, but I'll address your points. The GTVA has rarely been consistent in how it applies its naming conventions. Hades was a destroyer, but Zeus was a light bomber, and Poseidon was a freighter. I also really, really don't care what EVE does. As for a less sinister name, GTVA ships have had sinister names before. The aforementioned Hades, for example (well, GTI, in this case). Deimos, Erinyes, Nyx are others. This is hardly without precedent.
-
I do have a question, when these models are complete will we be getting a patch/update to aoa/wih like before or will they all be released in act 3?
Yep, even if Act 4 isn't finished by the time the Erebus is done, the mod/campaign missions will get an update.
-
If anyone is truly offended by "erebus", I implore them to think of it as "Airbus" from now on.
-
Any news on what the Pblue is? :)
-
You'll see eventually. :P
-
If anyone is truly offended by "erebus", I implore them to think of it as "Airbus" from now on.
yeah listen to what the animu robot says
-
Yep, even if Act 4 isn't finished by the time the Erebus is done, the mod/campaign missions will get an update.
That sounds like you'd release act 4 singly. I thought acts 3, 4 and 5 are supposed to be one package? :)
-
damn you. had you pretended not to have read anything significant Darius would have probably unconsciously leaked more stuff :D
-
Love the model, not a fan of the name. I'll get used to it eventually. But Raynor sounds sooo freaking awesome!
-
I do have a question, when these models are complete will we be getting a patch/update to aoa/wih like before or will they all be released in act 3?
Yep, even if Act 4 isn't finished by the time the Erebus is done, the mod/campaign missions will get an update.
And perhaps my forthcoming mod, FreeSpace: Reunited, will make use of the Erebus.
BTW, does the Erebus make use of "height maps"?
-
*poke* any update?
-
when is this sucker getting released?!??! it looks AMAZING!!!!
-
oh my god can you not
-
Disclaimer:
/me is totally oblivious to any drama that may have occurred, and I also see no reason why this should be kept hidden - it's a wonderful model, and it's complete an in-game already anyway.
There is no way this is going into freespace blueplanet at war unless i can find a way to wave its triangles to 40000, which i find impossible. :shaking:
-
Don't worry! You just have to cut like 80% of the detail. :-P
You'd probably be on better footing if you used LoD 2 or such as the starting point.
-
I honestly see no problem with reducing the details. As it goes, if it even had one tenth of the detail it has now, it would look amazing. Just do what it takes to get it working game. Best of luck!
-
Don't worry! You just have to cut like 80% of the detail. :-P
You'd probably be on better footing if you used LoD 2 or such as the starting point.
very true hopefully there is a lod as some of the newer models don't have lod's
-
I honestly see no problem with reducing the details. As it goes, if it even had one tenth of the detail it has now, it would look amazing. Just do what it takes to get it working game. Best of luck!
the problem i have with reducing detail is i use poly reduction which can cause shadow issues and uv issues within sins
-
I honestly see no problem with reducing the details. As it goes, if it even had one tenth of the detail it has now, it would look amazing. Just do what it takes to get it working game. Best of luck!
the problem i have with reducing detail is i use poly reduction which can cause shadow issues and uv issues within sins
That does sound pretty bad. I assume this was made in 3DS Max?
-
Awsome model, but isn't the re-positioning of the hangar entrances going to cause problems when putting it into existing missions?
-
Darius mentioned there would be an updated AoA if the Erebus was done before WiH A4. So my guess is they will remap the missions as needed.
-
very true hopefully there is a lod as some of the newer models don't have lod's
If they don't have LODs they're incomplete. I'm pretty sure this will have LODs.
-
Awsome model, but isn't the re-positioning of the hangar entrances going to cause problems when putting it into existing missions?
i really liked the spinal hangar. i don't want it to go away :(
-
No one said you have to update your copy of BP. :p
-
once the next release is out we'll probably have to.
-
Alright, a lot of stuff happened at the start of November, which delayed pretty much everything (including my schoolwork). A November release is unlikely. And a December one would probably be late December, after my exams. We'll see.
There is no way this is going into freespace blueplanet at war unless i can find a way to wave its triangles to 40000, which i find impossible. :shaking:
It's may not possible. The ribs alone are 32k triangles.
very true hopefully there is a lod as some of the newer models don't have lod's
If they don't have LODs they're incomplete. I'm pretty sure this will have LODs.
I don't really see the point in having more than one lod level for a ship of this size. Making acceptable ones that avoid visible transitions at intermediate distance would require editing textures, and increasing the amount of textures the game needs to load is hardly a performance improvement. More polygons onscreen is less performance intensive than additional textures.
I've already got one lod model made, it looks hideous at ranges less than 10-15km or so, and it's 30k polygons. There might be a second one for extreme ranges, but it would look even worse.
That does sound pretty bad. I assume this was made in 3DS Max?
The vast majority of it was made in Wings3D. Some detailing was done in max, as were the glow maps.
Awsome model, but isn't the re-positioning of the hangar entrances going to cause problems when putting it into existing missions?
Darius is making a sweep of the AoA missions in which it appears, fixing possible issues. Already found one, actually. Hangar middle deck needs to be removed since the Boanerges doesn't fit in it because of its shield mesh, which I hadn't considered.
i really liked the spinal hangar. i don't want it to go away :(
Too late. :p
-
Awsome model, but isn't the re-positioning of the hangar entrances going to cause problems when putting it into existing missions?
Darius is making a sweep of the AoA missions in which it appears, fixing possible issues. Already found one, actually. Hangar middle deck needs to be removed since the Boanerges doesn't fit in it because of its shield mesh.
Couldn't you make the Boanerges spawn outside the hangar? Or shrink the things?
It's sad to learn that it wont have many LoDs...
Guess we know which ship Yy_MasterInfraLife_yY will use to troll us.
-
There is no way this is going into freespace blueplanet at war unless i can find a way to wave its triangles to 40000, which i find impossible. :shaking:
It's may not possible. The ribs alone are 32k triangles.
God Damn it :hopping:
-
here's a thought: remove the ribs since they won't be hugely visible in sins
-
here's a thought: remove the ribs since they won't be hugely visible in sins
yes but will that leave gaps in the model
-
then...fill in the gaps.
-
then...fill in the gaps.
How, i can't model for s**t
-
Awsome model, but isn't the re-positioning of the hangar entrances going to cause problems when putting it into existing missions?
I'd be more worried about major changes in the turret configuration and loadout :P But like An4ximandros said the missions will be rebalanced.
-
The turret "problem" can be lessened to a degree via tables and FRED and they don't require pathing, unlike the hangar entrances.
-
You don't have to model in the gaps. They'll be small and fairly hard to see at the scale of Sins. You can literally remove the ribbing and be fine, seriously.
-
You don't have to model in the gaps. They'll be small and fairly hard to see at the scale of Sins. You can literally remove the ribbing and be fine, seriously.
oh you will see the gaps, definitely when the ship is being built, the gaps will be highy visable
-
I always thought the naming convention of FreeSpace (as in Greek mythological figures) is unsustainable and thought Raynor was a good change that could be linked to BP's expanded universe's history. Is Erebus just a codename or is it gonna be a retcon?
I have to admit, as good as the name sounds (though Raynor sounds awesome already), I feel like there's a bit too much of Greek theme-naming going on for the GT(V)A. It's starting to feel bland, even though the names themselves are fine/good. Raynor is refreshing; it's original (as far as ship-naming goes), highly distinct from other sci-fi verses (even in SC, there aren't any craft, vehicles, or weapons named anything like it), and it sounds great without going into the well-trodden path of Greek/latin (at least as far as how the word sounds). Taking every name for each class of ship in the navy from Greek Mythology seems excessive (and tempting fate, given how much bloodshed and tragedy it contains).
As for the model itself--I'm not quite sure yet. It's obviously great (no doubt there), but my first impressions aren't the kind of instant-drool I had for the new Chimera, Diomedes, and Bellerophon. Still, Aesaar has made several of my favorite ship models already, so I trust it to be excellent work regardless of my personal tastes, should I not come to love it.
EDIT: Seeing that there appear to be performance obstacles to deal with in the model (too much detail of various kinds), it makes me wonder if Aesaar is trying too hard to make the model look as amazing as possible by taking advantage of the recent advances in tech/high-end computer performance--in other words, raising the bar from, say, Bellerophon/Chimera-quality to something significantly higher, rather than avoid raising said bar to account for scaling up the size of the model. Making a much larger ship look just as good/detailed as a smaller one already means an inherent increase in the performance cost of the model, right? So raising the standards along with the scale seems like a recipe for crippling performance problems--or do I have a critically flawed understanding of this whole thing?
-
E'rry body stop panickin'! I got this:
Ribs -> Texture Detail ; Hangar Gap -> Close it (Gate Texture + 6 sided prisms for the "platforms")
The guns will have to go super lo-poly, maybe even as far as making the side-gap single barrel ones a tri or quad prism.
For the big guns... errr... Release the Shivans!
:warp:
-
EDIT: Seeing that there appear to be performance obstacles to deal with in the model (too much detail of various kinds), it makes me wonder if Aesaar is trying too hard to make the model look as amazing as possible by taking advantage of the recent advances in tech/high-end computer performance--in other words, raising the bar from, say, Bellerophon/Chimera-quality to something significantly higher, rather than avoid raising said bar to account for scaling up the size of the model. Making a much larger ship look just as good/detailed as a smaller one already means an inherent increase in the performance cost of the model, right? So raising the standards along with the scale seems like a recipe for crippling performance problems--or do I have a critically flawed understanding of this whole thing?
The problems are with majorvader111's Sins of a Solar Empire mod. My ships are made for FSO, and I'm not about to start making concessions so they'll work in Sins.
They need to work in FSO. If they don't work in other games, it isn't my problem.
-
The problems are with majorvader111's Sins of a Solar Empire mod. My ships are made for FSO, and I'm not about to start making concessions so they'll work in Sins.
They need to work in FSO. If they don't work in other games, it isn't my problem.
[/quote]
No the problem is sins in general, the game has a 40000 triangle limit which is hardcoded in. which i am starting to get s**ted of with.
-
No the problem is sins in general, the game has a 40000 triangle limit which is hardcoded in. which i am starting to get s**ted of with.
Oh, I didn't mean it was your fault. I know it's Sins' polygon limit. Really stupid. Even HW2 doesn't have that, and it's 4 years older.
-
HW2 does have a limit; you can have a 50k poly fighter, but how many of those can you have before it lags the crap out of a computer. I love Blue Planet, but the very first mission has me running 60 fps before anything's onscreen. It can get down to 30-ish I think in a lot of the bigger battles in AoA and WiH. I'd rather not have my laptop melted too much. A little optimizing will be very appreciated.
-
Oh, I didn't mean it was your fault. I know it's Sins' polygon limit. Really stupid. Even HW2 doesn't have that, and it's 4 years older.
To be fair, there's not only a huge difference in scale, but I was pretty sure there was a 20k polygon limit that was bypassable if you separated stuff into subobjects in HW2.
-
No the problem is sins in general, the game has a 40000 triangle limit which is hardcoded in. which i am starting to get s**ted of with.
Oh, I didn't mean it was your fault. I know it's Sins' polygon limit. Really stupid. Even HW2 doesn't have that, and it's 4 years older.
not to talk about ai being unmoddable, single core processing, 5 weapon limit, 2gb memory limit (now 1.7gb with rebellion). pretty stupid for a 2012 game
-
To be fair, there's not only a huge difference in scale, but I was pretty sure there was a 20k polygon limit that was bypassable if you separated stuff into subobjects in HW2.
There's a polygon limit, but it's on the higher end of the spectrum (more like around 80k) and I believe it was a problem with CFHodEd (the fan-made tool we use to import ships), not the engine or file format itself.
I managed to get the Solaris in by cutting it into only two subobjects (not counting turrets).
HW2 does have a limit; you can have a 50k poly fighter, but how many of those can you have before it lags the crap out of a computer.
A lot, as long as it doesn't have tons of hugeass textures and uses a low-poly enough collision mesh.
Honestly, HW2 is remarkably scalable. Perhaps more so than FSO.
-
To be fair, the polygon limit makes more sense in Sins than in did (or would have done?) HW2.
Or how likely is it to see several hundred big ships on screen in HW2?
Just in plain unmodded Sins you can have 20 Capships and depending on which ones of the smaller ships you build you can easily get 200 smaller ones plus all the fighter craft. And now multiply that with the ten players you can have in a game...
Not exactly an enviroment into which I'd want to throw high-poly models.
-
Wow, I must say, that is an amazingly beautiful (although very terrifying) warship. Love the gritty yet elegant feel to it.
-
so when do you think we will have a release aesaar?
-
I'm really happy about the firepower upgrade, the ship felt a little bit underpowered in beam-town compared to the Titan it is allegedly superior to. What about balancing BP missions it is currently in with the additional firepower, though? Will they all still work fine with the upgraded firepower of the primary Tev heavy?
-
I'm really happy about the firepower upgrade, the ship felt a little bit underpowered in beam-town compared to the Titan it is allegedly superior to. What about balancing BP missions it is currently in with the additional firepower, though? Will they all still work fine with the upgraded firepower of the primary Tev heavy?
There are not that many missions in which the combat power of an Erebus is actually relevant, you may be surprised to learn. They will come in Act 4 and later, of course, but for now the changee is largely cosmetic.
-
There are 3 missions which have an Erebus in combat, 2 in AoA and 1 in WiH. In only one of these is its combat ability actually relevant; the other two are scripted so it doesn't really matter.
-
Well, 4, but one of them sort of happens twice!
-
If you mean the dream sequence then it falls squarely into the 'scripted' category for obvious reasons.
-
True, but the scripting may have to be adjusted if the change in the ships firepower is significant
-
What a lovely ship. Love the Galactica aesthetic. Prefer it to the Raynor by far.
-
What a lovely ship. Love the Galactica aesthetic. Prefer it to the Raynor by far.
Same here. It's a lot prettier than the Raynor, and the Raynor is quite nice to begin with.
-
Very gorgeous, indeed. Aesaar, when are you going to release it to the public? Along with BP2 Act 4 or separately?
-
(...) I'd really like to see someone make an actual HTL of Stratcomm's Raynor, just to see how much their version differs from mine.
Time to shine! *Goes digging for own old Raynor redesigns*
But regardless of what comes of the discussion, I've made my peace with this change. All that is now left are ugly old posts.
BTW, An4ximandros, did you find your old designs?