Here We Go

[Turkish]

If you can get those textures I'm sure you'll be fine, its just a matter of the learning to properly UVW map/unwrap in 3ds Max that's tricky.

---

I have a fetish for all things Norse.

[Eppy]

So I've discovered... *cue more banjo riffs*

---

Quick comment - we thought that Panzer was the Leader, Swift. -Agmen

Which Dreadnought was that?

One of your nine.

[Exile]

2 things.

1. Get rid of those damned gundamns in your signature.
2. Looking good, better than the current one. Any idea on how the stats are gonna be?

---

[Jinx]

the model itself is straight forward. - its quite clean with little to no real surprises, nither negative ones nor positive ones - but its a rather conservative design - doesn t show .... "the artists stroke" or something.

well thats just subjective anyway - all in all, the model is good - there are a few minor things to critizise ... there always are, on every model:

the engines are not very BW like. they appear exposed and without shielding - not like it matters much - but i think BW ships tend to have a seamless chassis around the whole ship.

the bridge appears to be the only "inhabitable" place. - the size is a bit strange - its too flat to suggests it got more than one layer of windows in its main body - all in all it missed a bit - bulkiness.

from this shape to a flying saucer - its not far - just gotto make the upside view a bit more roundish. maybe you can add something more tubelike in the middleaxis.

the current destroyer does not feel like its a saucer, cause its not box shaped too much - but diamond shaped from the front. ( yours : |===| ..... the current one <===> )

whats the reason to stick to the flatness btw? - you went away from the zeppelin shape of the dreadnought quite well on your dread design. - wouldn t it be appropriate to do the same with the destroyer? - its a new replace model - no need to stick too close to it - cause this flatness contradicts your other outcast ships - i think. it "wants" to look in line - but fails ( by inches ) - if it had not got the bridge and the section behind the bridge - it wouldn t look like your other capships.

there is a tube inside your model - so why is it wide anyway - when all the other ships are tubes. even the gunboat is a tube ( 3 tubes ) - but never looks like its flat and wide. maybe a bold step away from the homeworld design might do the trick - and the ID card needs to change anyway - cause no matter what - it doesn t look remotely like a sleeper ship anymore.

---

Shipdesigns made for DiscoveryGC

[Drake]

1. Get rid of those damned gundamns in your signature.

For the love of God, /signed

I actually like the flatness and general shape... Overall, the ship makes me think 'corvette'. Might stand to have a bit more of a bulge in the middle.

[RHYS_DALLOWS]

I LOVE THE DESIGNS AND TEXTURE:D!!!!! Please try and sqeeze it in 4.85.

---

[indent]

[Seth Karlo]

Hey, if you could send me a .ms3d or .cmp of the ship, I would love to have a go at texturing...

I've been learning from AoM and Treewyrm over the last little while, but I'm not really a great model maker:P

Seth

---

Signature by Sleipnir.

[Zork]

i like the actual model... the flat and brat design...
it was a good choise to hold the groundform...

it looks ok... but if it is possible you can remove this wing on the bottom site in the front...

---

[Xing]

looks good.

---

[Eppy]

I've been trying to Outcastify, if you will, the Hiigaran Battlecruiser. This is a thin ship; it was meant to be that way. This is sort of an attempt by me to emulate the Hiigaran ship while making something recognizably Outcast out of it. I want to preserve the very well-thought-of combat characteristics of the current Dessie while making it look better; I've also been trying to break away from the tube design. I might have a go at expanding the lower hull into something wider, though, it shouldn't expand the hitbox too much.

---

Quick comment - we thought that Panzer was the Leader, Swift. -Agmen

Which Dreadnought was that?

One of your nine.