[Gloriano]

[Knight Templar]

Me likes.

[Nico]

Me too, save for the fact they're overtanks. I don't like overtanks, they don't look as mean w/o the tracks.

[Flaser]

Add a plastic skirt and place an armored intake like the one the F-35 has on the top and you can even dub it a 22-23'rd century hovertank.

AWSOME model BTW.

[Shrike]

Originally posted by Flaser
Add a plastic skirt and place an armored intake like the one the F-35 has on the top and you can even dub it a 22-23'rd century hovertank.

But..... why?  If I wanted it to have hoverskirts I'd have designed it with hoverskirts.

AWSOME model BTW. [/B]

Thank you.

[Vilkacis]

I hope you're going to add detail underneath, because as it is it appears to float midair for no apparent reason and looks like it would be flung around by recoil quite easily

[delta_7890]

Originally posted by Vilkacis
I hope you're going to add detail underneath, because as it is it appears to float midair for no apparent reason and looks like it would be flung around by recoil quite easily

It's a hover tank.  >>;

[mikhael]

And hovertanks don't have the benefit of surface friction to keep them in place when they fire the big guns so, um, you know THEY'LL BE FLUNG AROUND BY RECOIL QUITE EASILY.

[Vilkacis]

Originally posted by delta_7890
It's a hover tank.  >>;

I understood that, but right now it looks like it floats by magic because there's no visible engine exhaust or something that could keep it afloat, unless it really does float by means of magic powers.

[Kamikaze]

How about using counter-thrusters?

[Shrike]

Originally posted by Vilkacis
I hope you're going to add detail underneath, because as it is it appears to float midair for no apparent reason and looks like it would be flung around by recoil quite easily

Dunno.  Do you consider antigravity and forcefields to be magic?  And yes, they'll be details down there, but not much.  Tanks don't normally have a great deal of interesting stuff on their bottoms.

Originally posted by mikhael
And hovertanks don't have the benefit of surface friction to keep them in place when they fire the big guns so, um, you know THEY'LL BE FLUNG AROUND BY RECOIL QUITE EASILY.

They only have the benefit of field lifters.  Surface friction is unneeded to deal with recoil, which will be limited with DEWs anyhow.  Would you buy that it has an internal inertial control and dampening system?

Maybe I should clarify.  These vehicles do not fly with surface effect and vectored thrust, they fly via gravity manipulation and forcefield repellers.

[mikhael]

Hey, if you're talking gravitic manipulators and field repellers, anything goes. I was just reiterating the point for Delta, since he seemed to have missed the fact that the recoil problem is why modern hovercraft don't carry large weapons today.

Now. Show us the bottom of these craft. I'm curious how they park, etc. Oh, and let us see the gunnery and driver stations.

[KillMeNow]

just afew comment if its a directed energy wepon why is the barel rifled and wouldn't be better off witha polished lense on the end too if its some sort of plasma confinement system then the  inside of teh barrels should  well the shoudl being going round the barrle not down along its length

that said the model is awesome - there of work in that beast - well thought out general design
 would be interesting tos ee any concept sketch you did and a wireframe

[Shrike]

[Rott3]

That is a quite erotic tank. What happen to other pics, tho? I would like to see the progress.

[Kie99]

Originally posted by Rott3
That is a quite erotic tank.

Erotic?

[Taristin]

Originally posted by kietotheworld


Erotic?

Sexy.

[Rott3]

Raa gets some Headz

[Grug]

Nice.

My only critic would be to maybe show the panels on the front a bit more, either in the texture or the model.

But an awsome tank none-the-less! ^_^

[Carl]

fix the old pics!