[Col.Hornet]

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

[NeonShivan]

I've personally liked the Hyperion's design 

[An4ximandros]

Nothing will stop you from using it after Aesaar releases his.

Just please give it another name. The amount of hulls named Hyperion in this forum IS TOO DARN HIGH!

[Droid803]

Nothing will stop you from using it after Aesaar releases his.

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.

[Rodo]

Droid is right, Hyperion is too hyper tempting for a name to be avoided.

[Luis Dias]

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

[CT27]

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?

[Kolgena]

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.

[James Razor]

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 

[AdmiralRalwood]

Btw.: if i am too late and everything is allready decided, just tell me to STFU and i'll do.

On the nose.

[Hobbie]

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...

[Kolgena]

Or, you know, the engineers who drew it up thought the name sounded cool and didn't give a second thought to it.

[QuakeIV]

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.

[AdmiralRalwood]

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.

[Flak]

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.

[starbug]

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?

[Col.Hornet]

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 I would be glad to see them redesigned.

[EuclidianGeometry]

Well, the Titan reminds me of a whale, while Raynor a shark.....

[Aesaar]

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.

[Darius]

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.