Drawings for weemadando

Post by **weemadando** » 2007-08-31 01:18am

Chardok wrote:...Do I see Bronze-age Zepplins?

No. Not yet. Though doubtless some maniac somewhere in the Mediterranean is experimenting with VERY VERY VERY early hot air balloon theory.

Havok · Post by **Havok** » 2007-08-31 01:44am

weemadando wrote:
Chardok wrote:...Do I see Bronze-age Zepplins?
No. Not yet. Though doubtless some maniac somewhere in the Mediterranean is experimenting with VERY VERY VERY early hot air balloon theory.

Well, actually he does, since I drew them in both train pics.

Fingolfin_Noldor · Post by **Fingolfin_Noldor** » 2007-08-31 01:53am

Well, if you have rail roads, there's nothing to stop them from mounting a huge cannon for transport on rails, or a railroad gun all together.

Post by **weemadando** » 2007-08-31 02:41am

Fingolfin_Noldor wrote:Well, if you have rail roads, there's nothing to stop them from mounting a huge cannon for transport on rails, or a railroad gun all together. :)

I sketched early on a crazy-arse "railheading fortress" where it lays two lines of track parallel (by it, I mean slaves) and is effectively a massive, armoured shield over a pair of locomotives and the work area with cannons mounted upon it. It looked much like the "ironclad" that TMK drew, but only on land.

Then I realised what a goddamn stupid idea it was.

Havok · Post by **Havok** » 2007-08-31 03:30am

weemadando wrote:
Fingolfin_Noldor wrote:Well, if you have rail roads, there's nothing to stop them from mounting a huge cannon for transport on rails, or a railroad gun all together.
I sketched early on a crazy-arse "railheading fortress" where it lays two lines of track parallel (by it, I mean slaves) and is effectively a massive, armoured shield over a pair of locomotives and the work area with cannons mounted upon it. It looked much like the "ironclad" that TMK drew, but only on land.

Then I realised what a goddamn stupid idea it was.

C'mon man. Think Roman! EXTRAVAGANCE AND GRANDIOSE PLANNING!!!

Fingolfin_Noldor · Post by **Fingolfin_Noldor** » 2007-08-31 05:56am

The Soviets had armoured railroad cars with big guns. Moscow by the way, was "New Rome" after the fall of Constantinople.

Thanas · Post by **Thanas** » 2007-09-02 04:00pm

Fingolfin_Noldor wrote:The Soviets had armoured railroad cars with big guns. Moscow by the way, was "New Rome" after the fall of Constantinople.

A laughably weak propaganda claim....

Anyway, back to the drawings: Absolutely cool. However, what was the writing the officer had on his lorica? I am unable to figure it out.

Also, I have just finished reading the germanicus saga, and the pictures would be perfect for an illustrated version of it.

Havok · Post by **Havok** » 2007-09-02 05:42pm

Thanas wrote:Anyway, back to the drawings: Absolutely cool. However, what was the writing the officer had on his lorica? I am unable to figure it out.

Optio Centuriae and Maximillion, G. on the lorica and Classarri X Auditrix on his forearm.

Havok · Post by **Havok** » 2007-12-18 05:16am

I'm still on the case. Just a sketch for right now.

Post by **weemadando** » 2007-12-19 03:00am

Nice. My work got trashed due to a HDD failure so I'm rebuilding all my fluff etc at the moment from scattered e-mails and backups. Anyway, its not like there was a real schedule attached to this.

Havok · Post by **Havok** » 2007-12-19 03:05am

I've got some good stuff, but to big to fit in my scanner. It's coming along.

Havok · Post by **Havok** » 2008-01-12 02:32am

As Iron Maiden said; "Run to the hills! Run for your life!!" Rome lands in the Americas.

Post by **weemadando** » 2008-01-12 02:55am

I like... With a few variations.

Definitely have to get around to re-writing all my fluff bible stuff so you'll have more clearly defined setting info.

The_Saint · Post by **The_Saint** » 2008-01-13 10:52pm

The big ship in the background reminds me of the Exxon Valdez from Waterworld. Thinking of tanks I have in my mind an image of a steampunk Sturmtiger or Brummbar spewing steam-pressurised greek fire... short range at best... Who needs range when it's a in-your-face fire-spewing cast iron monster?

Post by **weemadando** » 2008-01-14 12:12am

The_Saint wrote:The big ship in the background reminds me of the Exxon Valdez from Waterworld. Thinking of tanks I have in my mind an image of a steampunk Sturmtiger or Brummbar spewing steam-pressurised greek fire... short range at best... Who needs range when it's a in-your-face fire-spewing cast iron monster?

Attaboy.

That's exactly what I'm talking about.

Zablorg · Post by **Zablorg** » 2008-01-14 12:21am

weemadando wrote:
The_Saint wrote:The big ship in the background reminds me of the Exxon Valdez from Waterworld. Thinking of tanks I have in my mind an image of a steampunk Sturmtiger or Brummbar spewing steam-pressurised greek fire... short range at best... Who needs range when it's a in-your-face fire-spewing cast iron monster?
Attaboy.

That's exactly what I'm talking about.

Such a world would need an enourmous amount of fossil fuels. I'll keep that in mind for fluff. Sent you a PM, btw.

Post by **weemadando** » 2008-01-14 01:21am

Not really an issue - the Romans control Europe (lots of coal) and have a definite stake in Persia (lots of oil).

And an "enormous" amount of fossil fuels? They'll probably still use less in a decade than the US would in a day now.

Zablorg · Post by **Zablorg** » 2008-01-16 05:16am

So much better than hav's, am i rite?

Havok · Post by **Havok** » 2008-01-18 11:07pm

Oh my my my. Perhaps we should change the thread title to "Drawings for Weemadando by Havokeff and other people that can, y'know, draw fingers".

Keep on trucking Zablorg.

pieman3141 · Post by **pieman3141** » 2008-02-04 04:00am

Siege-sized flamethrowers would be cool. Slaves pump the naphtha (of course), and another slave holds the firing ... spark/torch thing.

How would you incorporate early uses of electricity?

I have an idea about the geopolitics of this world, sparked by the China/Egypt comments:

The world is divided into a bunch of states. Rome never implemented the Hadrian Doctrine, and kept on expanding northwards and eastwards, while being able to keep their empire intact through setting up better communication (a semaphore system, for example), and better organization and stability of rule. They do not manage to conquer Africa. In fact, Africa is ruled by Egypt. Carthage might have existed in the past, but Egypt took care of that.

The difference between Egypt and Rome is that Egypt stopped conquering after it took over Saharan and Sub-Saharan Africa, Arabia and Axum. In the Middle East, there exists a bunch of Egyptian client states (Hebrew and Arabic). Officially independent, but there's a lot of Egyptian influence.

China is allied with Egypt (for whatever reason), and constantly sends its clients (Japanese, Koreans, Mongols, Turkic tribes) westwards to fight Rome as well. This solves the barbarian problem for China. Rome has already Romanised its barbarians.

Rome's territory is basically all of Europe, Anatolia, plus the Caucasus territories, and bits of Siberia. Essentially, after Europe, it's any territory north of the Black Sea.

Why is Rome fighting Egypt? Oil and land and prestige. The Middle East is hot territory. The Egyptian hegemony currently controls it, though.

The other front might be the Western Hemisphere. Egypt and Rome both have ports in the Atlantic, and China can have access in the Pacific. California, Cascadia, and Alaska (regions) are all under Chinese influence.

Egypt might control the Caribbean and Central America, while Rome might have the Eastern Seaboard region plus the St. Lawrence valley (the same settlement plan as our English and French used, basically).

Zablorg · Post by **Zablorg** » 2008-02-04 04:04am

pieman3141 wrote:Siege-sized flamethrowers would be cool. Slaves pump the naphtha (of course), and another slave holds the firing ... spark/torch thing.

How would you incorporate early uses of electricity?

I have an idea about the geopolitics of this world, sparked by the China/Egypt comments:

The world is divided into a bunch of states. Rome never implemented the Hadrian Doctrine, and kept on expanding northwards and eastwards, while being able to keep their empire intact through setting up better communication (a semaphore system, for example), and better organization and stability of rule. They do not manage to conquer Africa. In fact, Africa is ruled by Egypt. Carthage might have existed in the past, but Egypt took care of that.

The difference between Egypt and Rome is that Egypt stopped conquering after it took over Saharan and Sub-Saharan Africa, Arabia and Axum. In the Middle East, there exists a bunch of Egyptian client states (Hebrew and Arabic). Officially independent, but there's a lot of Egyptian influence.

China is allied with Egypt (for whatever reason), and constantly sends its clients (Japanese, Koreans, Mongols, Turkic tribes) westwards to fight Rome as well. This solves the barbarian problem for China. Rome has already Romanised its barbarians.

Rome's territory is basically all of Europe, Anatolia, plus the Caucasus territories, and bits of Siberia. Essentially, after Europe, it's any territory north of the Black Sea.

Why is Rome fighting Egypt? Oil and land and prestige. The Middle East is hot territory. The Egyptian hegemony currently controls it, though.

The other front might be the Western Hemisphere. Egypt and Rome both have ports in the Atlantic, and China can have access in the Pacific. California, Cascadia, and Alaska (regions) are all under Chinese influence.

Egypt might control the Caribbean and Central America, while Rome might have the Eastern Seaboard region plus the St. Lawrence valley (the same settlement plan as our English and French used, basically).

That's all very good, but you really should be in the development forum, not here.

pieman3141 · Post by **pieman3141** » 2008-02-04 04:07am

Ghetto edit/addendum:

This world's history is obviously not ours, so the "Hadrian Doctrine" comment might be irrelevant, as there might not even be a Hadrian.

I'm thinking that Rome remains a semi-republic. As your pictures do not incorporate much evidence of emperors (aside from the train), it could still be plausible that Rome is somewhat republican. Why? The Punic Wars, IMO, created the Roman mob. Since there's no Carthage, there's no devastation of the Italian countryside, so the farmers stay put. Thus, there's no instability that lead to the 1st C. BC crisis.

Now, that doesn't mean that the Republican system from that time persisted. Systems change, after all. Consuls might've been abolished, and dictators were set up again, only this time, it was for, say, a 10-year term.

That picture (image, in the Latin sense) on the train could be a famous dictator instead of an emperor.

Zor · Post by **Zor** » 2008-02-04 04:15am

I just realized, this would make a Kickass Empire: Total War type game. Rome, China and Egypt vying for control of the world, dealing with various Barbarians and savages and with empires clashing on land with armies of Musket weilding Legionaries and Cannon armed Chinese levees and at sea with Orisis' mighty holy fleets and smoke belching Ironclads of the Emperor of the Civilized World and the Son of Heaven a truely epic scale!

Zor

Shroom Man 777 · Post by **Shroom Man 777** » 2008-02-04 04:24am

With Mohammedians and Nordic Viking Barbarians proliferating Chinese Bamboo Tube Cannons and old-fashioned grenades as well!

Fingolfin_Noldor · Post by **Fingolfin_Noldor** » 2008-02-04 10:43am

Zor wrote:I just realized, this would make a Kickass Empire: Total War type game. Rome, China and Egypt vying for control of the world, dealing with various Barbarians and savages and with empires clashing on land with armies of Musket weilding Legionaries and Cannon armed Chinese levees and at sea with Orisis' mighty holy fleets and smoke belching Ironclads of the Emperor of the Civilized World and the Son of Heaven a truely epic scale!

Zor

I think Rome, India, and China will be a better idea, really. Eygpt was a shadow of its former self and was essentially a protectorate of Rome by the time Caesar went there.