+- 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: "Cutlass" Bomber (/showthread.php?tid=21137)
"Cutlass" Bomber - tansytansey - 05-31-2009
' Wrote:Love the model but... this is a bomber right? Torp tubes plz? They wouldn't even have to be obvious... just some sort of representation.I already explained this earlier in the thread. I consider the torpedo gun model to be the torpedo tube. It doesn't make sense to me to put a torpedo tube inside a torpedo tube. The Sabre has two unused hardpoints on the under side of its' wings, that is where the torpedoes will go.
' Wrote:I want to call it the Claymore.The Gaian Gunship is called Claymore.
' Wrote:I vote the "Scythe." It reaps caps.I'm looking more for sword names. Scythes aren't really swords.
' Wrote:I want to call it Falcata. I hope that's self-explanatory.Falcata is a Hispanic sword. This bomber has no ties to the Outcasts, and so it won't be named the Falcata. Eppys' OC bomber will likely become the Falcata replace.
"Cutlass" Bomber - frozen - 05-31-2009
eh. im confused. some say eppy's model is going to be a new one exclusive to outcasts and falcata becomes borderworlds, while some are countering that statement saying its going to replace the falcata.
far as im concerned, if eppy's model gets in, its as a new ship, not a replacement. so i assume your model could be replacing the falcata and thus become borderworlds.
"Cutlass" Bomber - VincentFerrex - 05-31-2009
Don't know why, but this model reminds me of a super-sleek sports car, complete with spoilers and whatnot.
(Yes, another random opinion).
Me <3 sports cars.
"Cutlass" Bomber - tansytansey - 05-31-2009
' Wrote:eh. im confused. some say eppy's model is going to be a new one exclusive to outcasts and falcata becomes borderworlds, while some are countering that statement saying its going to replace the falcata.
far as im concerned, if eppy's model gets in, its as a new ship, not a replacement. so i assume your model could be replacing the falcata and thus become borderworlds.
To me it makes more sense for the Falcata to be replaced with Eppys' model. It won't need a new name (though perhaps a new info card) and will only need to be removed from one selling location (From the bundies)
However if Eppys' ship becomes a new ship and the Falcata is replaced with the Cutlass, then everything needs to be renamed/changed, selling locations moved etc. Seems like a lot less work and hassle to do it the other way around.
"Cutlass" Bomber - sean24 - 05-31-2009
Ive never liked the falcata. Liked eppys model and yourse is nice too. I knew eventually someone would name an outcast ship 'cutlass'. I think it still looks quite VHFish. Maybee beef up the cockpit area or something.
"Cutlass" Bomber - n00bl3t - 05-31-2009
' Wrote:n00bl3t has already made a convincing argument towards naming it the "Rapier"
:DIt works. (Cutlass reminds me of the [OPG] as well.)
"Cutlass" Bomber - khran - 05-31-2009
' Wrote:I already explained this earlier in the thread. I consider the torpedo gun model to be the torpedo tube. It doesn't make sense to me to put a torpedo tube inside a torpedo tube. The Sabre has two unused hardpoints on the under side of its' wings, that is where the torpedoes will go.
Well my point was more that modeling some large torpedo tubes onto what you currently have would make the model look beefier... like most bombers do. They dont even necessarily have to be TUBES per se either. They could be simple extrusions of the model that keep with the current angular aspects but with proper detailing/texturing to appear to house torpedos. I realize you're trying not to modify the main body considering the current ship progression, but you could always, alternatively, beef up the ring or place the tubes in the lower section. Another option would be to model them into the new front support 1/4 ring below the nose.
Like I said, I love the model, but I think it needs just a little more to feel like the "bomber evolution" of the Dagger line.
"Cutlass" Bomber - tansytansey - 05-31-2009
' Wrote:Well my point was more that modeling some large torpedo tubes onto what you currently have would make the model look beefier... like most bombers do. They dont even necessarily have to be TUBES per se either. They could be simple extrusions of the model that keep with the current angular aspects but with proper detailing/texturing to appear to house torpedos. I realize you're trying not to modify the main body considering the current ship progression, but you could always, alternatively, beef up the ring or place the tubes in the lower section. Another option would be to model them into the new front support 1/4 ring below the nose.I won't be putting torpedo tubes on this model. End of discussion.
Like I said, I love the model, but I think it needs just a little more to feel like the "bomber evolution" of the Dagger line.
"Cutlass" Bomber - khran - 05-31-2009
' Wrote:I won't be putting torpedo tubes on this model. End of discussion.
Sorry... I thought the forums were for posting ideas and critiquing submissions. My bad.
I was under the impression that the Devs wanted to move away from light/agile-ish Bombers towards slower, heavier ones... and quite frankly this doesn't look very heavy to me. Adding some kind of representation for torp tubes was simply a suggestion for an easy way to go about making it look more like a BOMBER and less like a VHF with a halo. :rolleyes:
"Cutlass" Bomber - tansytansey - 05-31-2009
' Wrote:Sorry... I thought the forums were for posting ideas and critiquing submissions. My bad.I already said though that I was not going to do this. You expressed an idea, I expressed my disagreement. But in the end, it's up to me to make the decisions on how the model looks. I've taken several good ideas into account so far and made adjustments accordingly. There were also several bad ideas, which I will not implement on this model, such as torpedo tubes.
I was under the impression that the Devs wanted to move away from light/agile-ish Bombers towards slower, heavier ones... and quite frankly this doesn't look very heavy to me. Adding some kind of representation for torp tubes was simply a suggestion for an easy way to go about making it look more like a BOMBER and less like a VHF with a halo. :rolleyes:
This bomber may look light, but it is roughly the same size as the Falcata. And I assure you, there is nothing light about the Falcata.
No argument you present will make me put two ugly torpedo tubes on this ship.
EDIT: Not only that, but when I last made a bomber (The LPI Bomber) which WAS big and heavy, straight away got accused of being a pregnant Liberator. Doing the same to this model won't turn it into a bomber, it will make it a pregnant Sabre.