Some evaluation needed

Antares · Post by **Antares** » 2005-05-18 05:18pm

Hi all,

i need some opinions about my collection of works for my scifi race Third Wave.
Please tell me what of those things you like best (any why) and what is the worst (and why).
Thanx for you help.

If you need additional information about the models please visit:

http://www.thirdwave.de

The collection:

kheegster · Post by **kheegster** » 2005-05-18 05:20pm

The infantry unit is the most original, and outrageously bad-ass.

Fleet Admiral JD · Post by **Fleet Admiral JD** » 2005-05-18 05:24pm

I like the cruiser, meself.

Antares · Post by **Antares** » 2005-05-18 05:25pm

Just some additonal info about the mech, which i forgot to mention.
I is designed to be dropped from orbit into the groud without any futher systems. If done so it will look like this

http://www.thirdwave.de/pics/3wmechclosedside.jpg

The jets inside the legs will be used to deaccelerate and for landing.

Batman · Post by **Batman** » 2005-05-18 05:36pm

The cruiser strongly reminds me of Privateer's Paradigm but looks good besides that.
The MBT looks good.
The pseudo-APC doesn't. Why is the turret mounted so far forward?
The fighter I refuse to comment upon.

Dangermouse · Post by **Dangermouse** » 2005-05-18 05:41pm

I like the Cruiser and the Mech best. I really like the color scheme used across all the units. The Cruiser actually reminds me of the Starbridge from Escape Velocity Nova. Its both sleek, intricate looking, and highly detailed. It works really well with the race, and is all in all, a really nice looking ship.

I agree with Batman, I do not like the wheeled tank as much. The turret, beside being far forward, also seems to have a pretty thin cannon. The two tanks were not the land units I was imagining when I first saw the cruiser and the race. I was imagining more of a hovercraft type design instead for some reason.

Antares · Post by **Antares** » 2005-05-18 05:41pm

The cruiser strongly reminds me of Privateer's Paradigm but looks good besides that.

The cruiser was inspires by the paradigm, you are right

The pseudo-APC doesn't. Why is the turret mounted so far forward?

Because the center contains ammunition and the back the engine/power supply

The fighter I refuse to comment upon.

Why do you refuse to comment on it?
Does it look so utterly crap or is it simply disturbing?

Antares · Post by **Antares** » 2005-05-18 05:42pm

Dangermouse wrote:The two tanks were not the land units I was imagining when I first saw the cruiser and the race.

That's a good point, thanx

Dangermouse · Post by **Dangermouse** » 2005-05-18 05:44pm

Antares, does the figher's cannons swing out from within the main wings? If so, thats kinda neat actually. I didn't notice it at first.

Edit: I voted for the fighter, mainly for this feature. The cruiser almost had my vote but the swing out cannons were unexpected and a pleasant surprise. And I may or may not regret posting this before Antares clarified my question since I will look like the a complete idiot if in fact they do not swing out.

Antares · Post by **Antares** » 2005-05-18 05:50pm

Dangermouse wrote:Antares, does the figher's cannons swing out from within the main wings? If so, thats kinda neat actually. I didn't notice it at first.

Yes they do. In landing/docking mode it locks like this:
http://www.thirdwave.de/pics/3wfighterclosed.jpg

The first tone to claim that it looks like a swiss pocket knife will be shot

Dangermouse · Post by **Dangermouse** » 2005-05-18 05:52pm

Antares wrote:
Yes they do. In landing/docking mode it locks like this:
http://www.thirdwave.de/pics/3wfighterclosed.jpg

The first tone to claim that it looks like a swiss pocket knife will be shot

That rocks.

Batman · Post by **Batman** » 2005-05-18 06:50pm

Antares wrote:
The pseudo-APC doesn't. Why is the turret mounted so far forward?
Because the center contains ammunition and the back the engine/power supply

And the reason the ammo supply can't be put elsewhere is?

The fighter I refuse to comment upon.
Why do you refuse to comment on it?
Does it look so utterly crap or is it simply disturbing?

I can quite simply not think of one good reason for it to look the way it does.
What's the point of those swing-out cannon?

Dangermouse · Post by **Dangermouse** » 2005-05-18 06:58pm

Batman wrote: I can quite simply not think of one good reason for it to look the way it does.
What's the point of those swing-out cannon?

<Shrugs> Compactness for carrier storage? Adjusting the angles of the cannons for convergence? Thats all I have. Batman, I am guessing you value "form follows function?" I liked it mainly from the aesthetic viewpoint.

Antares · Post by **Antares** » 2005-05-18 07:07pm

Batman wrote:
Antares wrote:
The pseudo-APC doesn't. Why is the turret mounted so far forward?
Because the center contains ammunition and the back the engine/power supply
And the reason the ammo supply can't be put elsewhere is?

What reason is there to but it not into this section?
The ammo then benefits from the vehicle section that is less exposed to enemy fire. It is protected by a large front section and a large back section. Only from the side it can be reached difrectly.

I can quite simply not think of one good reason for it to look the way it does.
What's the point of those swing-out cannon?

Firstly making it more compact
Secondly together with the main wings being able to swing up/down/forward/backward, a target can be locked better at different distances and fire can be focused at a single point simply by swinging the cannons/wings.
It also provides some ability to attack several frontal targets at once.

Absolute fixed forward guns like, for instance the X-Wing, makes even less sense for me

Both were recognized by Dangermouse easily (Thanx dude

)

Comosicus · Post by **Comosicus** » 2005-05-19 01:25am

Although all of them are impressive (good work mate

) I do like the cruiser best.

** puts flack jacket **

Now, that you mentioned it, I do think the fighter looks like a Swiss Army Knife

** ducks for cover **

Shroom Man 777 · Post by **Shroom Man 777** » 2005-05-19 11:18am

Hey, Sea Skimmer helped design the APC thing, so there's nothing really wrong about its design.

I love them all. Though the thing is, the APC and the MBT don't really jive with the rest of the alien race. Sure, a future human nation, they'd be pretty spiffy, but the alien, the fighter, the cruiser, the walker - they just look too different. Not that they're ugly or anything, because they're beautiful.

I'm not voting though. Too hard to choose, the tank and the APC are just too awesome for me.

salm · Post by **salm** » 2005-05-20 09:55am

The most impressive ones are clearly the Battleship and the Infantry Alien Queen.

The Third Wave is the worst. I don´t think that it would work. I looks like it would tip over because of the extra Segment in the legs. It would be unnecessarily difficult for this creature to keep its balance.

Antares · Post by **Antares** » 2005-05-20 10:34am

salm wrote: I looks like it would tip over because of the extra Segment in the legs. It would be unnecessarily difficult for this creature to keep its balance.

Hmm.. perhaps you are right. But the creature should mainly run on 6 legs anyway like the earlier version:

http://www.silentthunder.de/pics/runnerice.jpg

StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Some evaluation needed

What is the most impressive work?

Some evaluation needed

Re: Some evaluation needed

Re: Some evaluation needed

Re: Some evaluation needed