Some models...

ScoobyDoo said:
A few models based off of wc models or concept pics. There's quite a few more but they are much altered from the canon ships. If you want to see them I can post them.

Sorry about the large pics, apparently the forum doesn't support lvlshot tags.

arbalest-showoff.jpg

Bearcat-In-Space.jpg

Cavlary-showoff.jpg

TCT-Clysdale-showoff.jpg

TCFP-Cobra-showoff.jpg

TCB-Crossbow-Showoff.jpg

TCF-Demon-showoff.jpg

TCB-Devastator3.jpg

TCFP-Epee-showoff.jpg

TCFH-Excalibur3.jpg

TCF-Gladius2.jpg

TCI-Heretic1.jpg

hermes1.jpg
Click to expand...
Having made thousands of ships for games myself, I admire your modelling skills and the detail in your work. Very tidy/even UV layouts! I wish we had the same available texture sizes back in my day. I will keep watching you post. Great to see, all the best.

MPC
 
Like it. I think the Stormfire is what the Mass Driver was always intended to be, it was already called "Gatling Mass Driver" in WC1 yet noone bothered to explain why a kinetic weapon with such a low rate of fire would require multiple barrels (And only one per cannon one was visible in the blueprints, and even that was certainly smaller than the huge balls it was shooting). It would make sense to have a kinetic weapon that doesn't strain the capacitors like the beam weapons do that can be shot in quick succession. This is pure speculation on my part, but i think that was the intention behind the term "Gatling Mass Driver", it just wasn't adopted into the game engine for gameplay reasons or technical limitations.
Of course the term also implies it might be some sort of rail- or coil/gauss gun, which would eplain its in-game behaviour a little better.
But i really see no reason why it would be both, rotating-barrelled AND rail/coilgun. The energy requirements is what's limiting a railgun's rate of fire, multiple barrels wouldn't change that.
Man, i digress again. Beautiful fighter as always!

EDIT: Just re-read that Prophecy indeed described the Mass Driver as a linear accelerator. Doesn't really justify adding a gatling principle either.
 
Michael Paul Cottam said:
Having made thousands of ships for games myself, I admire your modelling skills and the detail in your work. Very tidy/even UV layouts! I wish we had the same available texture sizes back in my day. I will keep watching you post. Great to see, all the best.

MPC
Click to expand...
Thank you. There's so many models in P2 I literally have years of models to work with. Also it's kinda funny, I wouldn't be surprised if just one of my textures is larger than the entire texture work for a wc game. The poly count I know is way beyond anything imaginable back then and Klav's models are several times even more detailed. Gotta love technology.


Red Baron said:
Like it. I think the Stormfire is what the Mass Driver was always intended to be, it was already called "Gatling Mass Driver" in WC1 yet noone bothered to explain why a kinetic weapon with such a low rate of fire would require multiple barrels (And only one per cannon one was visible in the blueprints, and even that was certainly smaller than the huge balls it was shooting). It would make sense to have a kinetic weapon that doesn't strain the capacitors like the beam weapons do that can be shot in quick succession. This is pure speculation on my part, but i think that was the intention behind the term "Gatling Mass Driver", it just wasn't adopted into the game engine for gameplay reasons or technical limitations.
Of course the term also implies it might be some sort of rail- or coil/gauss gun, which would eplain its in-game behaviour a little better.
But i really see no reason why it would be both, rotating-barrelled AND rail/coilgun. The energy requirements is what's limiting a railgun's rate of fire, multiple barrels wouldn't change that.
Man, i digress again. Beautiful fighter as always!

EDIT: Just re-read that Prophecy indeed described the Mass Driver as a linear accelerator. Doesn't really justify adding a gatling principle either.
Click to expand...

Personally I think a mass driver is a slower version of a railgun (when I think of railguns i think of quake 2's railgun) where-as the stormfire is more of a bullet (like a gattling gun), and as for dust cannons :eek:
 
The Reaper. This is another remake of a really old model of mine ('04) based on the Krell. I know the wings aren't rotated nearly enough, but back then I just had one picture to go off of I think. Anyways I like them this way anyways.
2 mass drivers, 2 particles, 1 stormfire (which i can switch out for a dust cannon if needed to). I really liked how well the gun/engine hull smoothly connects to the wings.
TCF-Reaper7.jpg

TCF-Reaper8.jpg

TCF-Reaper9.jpg
TCF-Reaper10.jpg
 
She looks similar to a Crossbow conceptually. After Standoff, I have quite the re-engineered opinion about them. If not for the Crossbow I wouldn't have been able to finish off the Tarvakh. This design looks much more favorable with the sweeping wings, look like you can stuff a few more Reapers vs Crossbows on a cramped carrier deck. Based on those engines she looks like she'll 'sport afterburners, my one major gripe with the Crossbow.

Your Loki looks like a very capable heavy fighter based off of P2's Duress. I'd fly her just the same.
 
capi3101 said:
I like this one. If you've got speed and defense ratings on it we could generate a stat set and add it to my RPG...
Click to expand...
Right now I'm focusing on the models rather than the tables. I'm just copying tables from similar existing models and applying just the absolutely needed info (gun mounts, file info) Things like hitpoints/speed/agility are generic. I'm leaving that up to whoever wants to use them, they can adjust them to suit their own purpose.

I do have a rather large spreadsheet that contains the info from the outdated versions.
 
ScoobyDoo said:
Right now I'm focusing on the models rather than the tables. I'm just copying tables from similar existing models and applying just the absolutely needed info (gun mounts, file info) Things like hitpoints/speed/agility are generic. I'm leaving that up to whoever wants to use them, they can adjust them to suit their own purpose.
Click to expand...

I see. So, I guess the question becomes "who's using these at the moment".

ScoobyDoo said:
I do have a rather large spreadsheet that contains the info from the outdated versions.
Click to expand...

That would work; old data's usually better than none.
 
Generally I aim for a certain group (light fighter, medium, heavy, assault/siege bomber, interceptor, frigate, destroyer, corvette, cruiser, carrier... etc)
This determines how big the ship is, how many weapons it carries, number of turrets and number of pilots (for fighters/bombers). Basically stuff that can't be edited via tables.

Table's include things like speed, acceleration, agility, hitpoints, shield strength, number and type of missiles and type of guns (although there is generally a unique mesh per weapon type [laser, tachyon, mass driver, stormfire, plasma, cloud...etc], actual name of it and description. Those can all be edited in notepad++ and built to whoever wants them specs. Besides right now I hate building table entries :p

Also the Reapers are done (based on the P2 Krell)
TCF-Reaper-showoff.jpg

pics not the best, but ehhhh but its for demonstration purposely :cool:
 
ScoobyDoo said:
Also the Loki (the duress ["duress" is more of a verb than a name]). I had to take some personal liberties with it, mainly the intakes and gun mounts (2 particles, 2 mass drivers, 1 stormfire) I wish I had seen Hudson's version of the duress earlier on. It's about the same length as the hellcat, although the cockpit area is considerably bigger than the hellcats ugh.
Click to expand...

The word duress is a noun, not a verb. But it's somewhat of a downer of a name. :)
 
The Saratoga, a standard carrier (perhaps about the equivalent of the WC4 Concordia class). About as long as Saga's Lexington class. There's a few things that need to be fixed, but since I'm in the middle of a new computer build, it'll have to wait a day or so...

TCCV-Saratoga5.jpg
TCCV-Saratoga6.jpg
TCCV-Saratoga7.jpg
TCCV-Saratoga8.jpg
 
The Bolt (ala Arrow Mk VII)
There's some pieces of the Mk V (wc3/4) arrow along side with a couple from Arena, plus some personal liberties. The intakes were the most frustating on where exactly to put them
TCF-Arrow4.jpg

TCF-Arrow5.jpg
TCF-Arrow6.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top