+- Discovery Gaming Community (https://discoverygc.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Discovery Development (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=7)
+--- Forum: Discovery Developers Forum (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=183)
+---- Forum: Discovery Unofficial Development (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=389)
+----- Forum: Discovery Mod Content Submissions (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=33)
+----- Thread: proposed revised fearless (/showthread.php?tid=30418)
proposed revised fearless - Jinx - 11-30-2009
most new ship designs won t appear before 4.86 ( just so we have enough eye candy for 4.86 left )
proposed revised fearless - Tenacity - 11-30-2009
Looks great, though I admit it'll be sad seeing the old model go... I had a lot of fond memories with that ship.
Some questions, however... what's the size comparison between this one and the current model? I always thought the Fearless was a tad too large and not quite manuverable enough for the power available to it, so if the model is being replaced those should be remedied at the same time. Certainly the model should be no bigger than the current, and if it's close to the same size I'd just suggest a slight increase to turning/strafe speed.
proposed revised fearless - Jinx - 11-30-2009
sizewise - its not really much different. - the fearless looks more dumpy than it really is.
this one is maybe 5% longer - and 5% flatter ( nothing you d really even notice though )
proposed revised fearless - BlueSpawn - 12-01-2009
Jinx, I would like to see a close up of how the back "claws" attach into the rest of the chasis.
proposed revised fearless - Luis - 12-01-2009
:ylove:
proposed revised fearless - schlurbi - 12-01-2009
The back part is a tad too massive for me :/
But its still a nice model Jinx:P
proposed revised fearless - Tenacity - 12-01-2009
After that being mentioned and taking a second look at the model, I agree - the rear portion should not be wider than the front.
Make the armored section on the back thinner to match up with the front, as shown here:
![[Image: 8zi3d0.jpg]](http://i48.tinypic.com/8zi3d0.jpg)
Basically, "cut" out everything above and below the red lines to create a more uniform width along the ship's sides.
proposed revised fearless - Jinx - 12-01-2009
i appreciate the suggestion about the shape - but no, i won t change it to be thinner in the rear.
the ship doesn t need to be physicly lighter in the rear - it just needs to feel lighter. - and it is. the front section is a massive module. - the forked tail is a rather graceful arrangement of hull that might be the fuel depot or something else.
while it is true that other capital ships like the juggernaut feature a much more massive front section and a thinner rear - this ship is supposed to be a "next generation" medium warship. - for the first time, the rear plates do serve a purpose and are not just very thick armour plating.
but i ll conduct other changes.. like adding modelled hardpoint locations.
proposed revised fearless - Camtheman Of Freelancer4Ever - 12-01-2009
A new juggernaut?
4.82 model plox? Please, Jinx, make the turret ranges (i mean how it can rotate, 360, 180, ect) be able to fire UP more. Forward firing ships are a bit lame and overused (like BHG caps, they all fire forward.)
And about the Zoner Destroyer, its a LITTLE big for its firepower. It should be like a dang kusari destroyer if its going to stay as weak as it currently is.
proposed revised fearless - Leo - 12-08-2009
Appoligies for the slight grave dig. Only one week, still enough to merit some people screaming to put the shovel down.
The ship looks good. A mighty nice upgrade from the old Fearless.
Is there anyway we can get a front shot of the ship more angled from the underside so we can see what the underside looks from the front angle of the ship, I'm curious to see what it looks like from that side.
~Leo