EVE Search - Archon V3

All Channels

Test Server Feedback

Archon V3

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
Dogfishful Sal's Waste Management and Pod Disposal The Mockers AO 0	Posted - 2013.04.23 19:59:00 - [1] - Quote Pre V3: http://i.imgur.com/STWoCtQ.png Post V3: http://i.imgur.com/rYZVpqd.jpg The most notable difference is the engine length. The V3'ed Archon has a reduced main engine length, which is around a 100m reduction. I don't like this new look and I prefer the older engine model. Why did CCP decide to shorten the length?

CCP BunnyVirus C C P C C P Alliance 468	Posted - 2013.04.23 22:31:00 - [2] - Quote Dogfishful wrote: Pre V3: http://i.imgur.com/STWoCtQ.png Post V3: http://i.imgur.com/rYZVpqd.jpg The most notable difference is the engine length. The V3'ed Archon has a reduced main engine length, which is around a 100m reduction. I don't like this new look and I prefer the older engine model. Why did CCP decide to shorten the length? we didn-¦t like it 3D Artist

Lazarus Valkarov End-of-Line 0	Posted - 2013.04.23 22:58:00 - [3] - Quote CCP BunnyVirus wrote: we didn-¦t like it WE do however like the larger engines, that's what matters. : )
Tonto Auri Vhero' Multipurpose Corp 87	Posted - 2013.04.23 23:03:00 - [4] - Quote I don't trust it. Too much sheen in places, where it's completely inappropriate. Makes the model totally toy-looking. Pretty and nice, but hardly "real". Not to mention, "capital". Looks especially bad with "High" shader quality. Like it all covered in machine oil.
SMT008 SnaiLs aNd FroGs Verge of Collapse 580	Posted - 2013.04.23 23:14:00 - [5] - Quote To me, the new Archon looks cooler than the old one except for one thing. There is less black paint on it.
Lazarus Valkarov End-of-Line 0	Posted - 2013.04.23 23:19:00 - [6] - Quote I dislike everything about it. It looks more plastic than anything. You already know I hate the reduced engine size, which is always something I've loved about it. And it's entirely too shiny for an Amarr ship. As SMT008 simply put, needs more black paint. It looks less like it's going to send a swarm of drones out and more like it's going to throw legos at you in hopes that you step on them. Which of course, is far worse than any drone could ever do.
Dogfishful Sal's Waste Management and Pod Disposal The Mockers AO 1	Posted - 2013.04.24 00:37:00 - [7] - Quote I think CCP will do much better if they listen to us customers more. I really don't think that a few artists should make changes based on their opinions and assume that the majority of customers will share their opinions. Sure, the artists did an excellent job on the Vagabond, but the majority of the players wanted a new look for it; that's why it was a success. I also share the same opinion as SMT008 does regarding the 'black paint' in the current model on TQ. It wasn't until I compared the two models one after the other did I realize how much more 'toy-looking' the V3'ed model looks, as said by Tonto Auri. Lazarus Valkarov also hates the reduced engine size. This only adds to the toyish appearance. Remember all those toy models of famous objects in famous movies designed for little kids? All of them have exaggerated proportions, and this new Archon feels just this way: it has exaggerated proportions (in this case much smaller engine size). At least can't we meet somewhere in the middle, increase engine length slightly on the new model and maybe make the interior structure darker than it currently is? Edit: my main complaint is engine length, but if the inner structure can become slightly darker that would be a huge bonus as well
Sven Viko VIkolander Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic 47	Posted - 2013.04.24 01:06:00 - [8] - Quote Unless it causes lag, big ships should be bigger...nuff said
melisant Corollary Forest Fairytail. 0	Posted - 2013.04.24 01:17:00 - [9] - Quote Here is an idea for next April fools, swap the all carrier and super carrier models for one day. Sit back, relax and enjoy GD. In all seriousness, I like the new Archon better, needs a little more black paint though like SMT008 said.
Destoya Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion 77	Posted - 2013.04.24 01:20:00 - [10] - Quote The only ship type that actually needs a size increase is the supercarriers really. The regular carriers could be a bit bigger, but theyre pretty good at the moment. (I also do wish to undock from the gallente admin nullsec stations that are so ubiquitous without bumping forever or fitting nanofibers, it's hard enough as it is in an armor rigged archon)
Xer Jin DIVERGENT PROXY 5	Posted - 2013.04.24 03:43:00 - [11] - Quote i'm just here to point at the whiners and laugh haha
Aglais Liberation Army Li3 Federation 231	Posted - 2013.04.24 03:51:00 - [12] - Quote Tonto Auri wrote: I don't trust it. Too much sheen in places, where it's completely inappropriate. Makes the model totally toy-looking. Pretty and nice, but hardly "real". Not to mention, "capital". Looks especially bad with "High" shader quality. Like it all covered in machine oil. Noticed this problem on a lot of Amarr ships, actually, and also the Osprey Navy Issue. There's 'metal shiny' and then there's 'oily wet shiny', which is what a lot of Caldari ships are for no reason. I can't believe I'm saying this but the old shaders captured the gunmetal sheen of Caldari hulls better than the new ones. :s
Makari Aeron The Shadow's Of Eve TSOE Consortium 48	Posted - 2013.04.24 05:12:00 - [13] - Quote I actually think it would look better with almost no engines. No need for visible e-peen when it's rocking resists. CCP RedDawn: Ugly people are just playing life on HARD mode. Personally, I'm playing on an INFERNO difficulty...
Legion40k ZOMBIEBEACHPARTYPATROL Circle-Of-Two 9	Posted - 2013.04.24 08:47:00 - [14] - Quote Reduced engines are alright IMO, they always looked a little odd and now they're at least... stockier... Still not sure about the colour I'm getting from my monitor - I can't shake the feeling its a slab of chocolate though I've no clue what to change (other than make the hull black like before) to fix the illusion of deliciousness in space \o/
Logan LaMort Screaming Hayabusa 1300	Posted - 2013.04.24 10:53:00 - [15] - Quote Of course when everything is V3'd and we get the new lighting, the shaders will look pretty different.
Donedy Snuff Box Urine Alliance 45	Posted - 2013.04.24 14:08:00 - [16] - Quote Black inside was better.
Commissar Kate Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive 1232	Posted - 2013.04.24 14:31:00 - [17] - Quote Archon looks good, I love all the force fields that were added to the carriers. Set Lasers for Fun!!!
George Wilkes Hill Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 16	Posted - 2013.04.24 15:53:00 - [18] - Quote That new archon is awesome!
Ctaus Born-2-Kill 0utNumbered 0	Posted - 2013.04.24 16:39:00 - [19] - Quote I agree, its is a vast improvement on the old model. Of course it doesnt look exactly like the old model, that is a good thing as far as I am concerned.
Marcus Junius Nephilim Ordo 0	Posted - 2013.04.24 19:55:00 - [20] - Quote Dogfishful wrote: I think CCP will do much better if they listen to us customers more. I really don't think that a few artists should make changes based on their opinions and assume that the majority of customers will share their opinions. ... I like the new Archon. I would rather the Art department functioned as they do now than having players vote on the best proposed artwork. A lot of man hours would be wasted on things never adopted. Far more than now.
Dogfishful Sal's Waste Management and Pod Disposal The Mockers AO 2	Posted - 2013.04.25 00:42:00 - [21] - Quote Marcus Junius wrote: I like the new Archon. I would rather the Art department functioned as they do now than having players vote on the best proposed artwork. A lot of man hours would be wasted on things never adopted. Far more than now. I'm not talking about the whole model; everything is much better, especially the effects, but I simply find the engine length too short. Currently the ship feels balanced between the front and back, but with the V3 the front feels heavier now, meaning the engines are lacking visible mass. Edit: also player feedback would be the primary course setter for the artists; it most definitely would be a waste of time making different changes. I would just rather see something where the artists are more open to criticism on the model itself. I've done my very small share of 3D model art and what I know is that you would be able to easily adjust physical proportions to small extents without needing to rework the texture as it will lose resolution the further the proportions are tweaked.
ITTigerClawIK Galactic Rangers R O G U E 244	Posted - 2013.04.27 13:13:00 - [22] - Quote CCP BunnyVirus wrote: Dogfishful wrote: Pre V3: http://i.imgur.com/STWoCtQ.png Post V3: http://i.imgur.com/rYZVpqd.jpg The most notable difference is the engine length. The V3'ed Archon has a reduced main engine length, which is around a 100m reduction. I don't like this new look and I prefer the older engine model. Why did CCP decide to shorten the length? we didn-¦t like it i have to say i was expecting more armour on the top
Sobach Fourth Circle 126	Posted - 2013.04.28 20:48:00 - [23] - Quote Lazarus Valkarov wrote: CCP BunnyVirus wrote: we didn-¦t like it WE do however like the larger engines, that's what matters. : ) YOU like the old engine. Fortunately, you do not constitute the playerbase. I hate the old engine, much prefer the new one. Dogfishful wrote: I think CCP will do much better if they listen to us customers more. I really don't think that a few artists should make changes based on their opinions and assume that the majority of customers will share their opinions. Yes, nothing like a bunch of people, all with varying tastes (though most with zero artistic talent) dictating to the art team what should or shouldn't be done, sounds like an awesome recipe for disaster.
River Zapata Talon And Caldari LTD Brothers Of The Enclave 2	Posted - 2013.04.29 20:33:00 - [24] - Quote I don't like the new archon :/ the old one looks so much better.
Shun Makoto Caldari Independent Navy Reserve The Fourth District 15	Posted - 2013.04.30 17:14:00 - [25] - Quote Sobach wrote: Lazarus Valkarov wrote: CCP BunnyVirus wrote: we didn-¦t like it WE do however like the larger engines, that's what matters. : ) YOU like the old engine. Fortunately, you do not constitute the playerbase. I hate the old engine, much prefer the new one.. Agreed. Old Engines look like **** compared to the new ones. Caldari Independant Navy Reserve Fourth District Patriot Faction Former 22nd BRDU - Retired Milita Wing Commander
krickettt The Six-Pack Syndicate Hashashin Cartel 15	Posted - 2013.04.30 18:41:00 - [26] - Quote Definitely prefer the new engines. Though I do miss all of the lights/windows that were on the top of the ship.
Equto Imperium Technologies Get Off My Lawn 19	Posted - 2013.04.30 20:45:00 - [27] - Quote I too miss the black with lights on top, the engine are kinda meh for me either way
impli Tr0pa de elite. Pandemic Legion 27	Posted - 2013.05.01 13:12:00 - [28] - Quote Archon V3'd is good as it is ... no need to bring back the old graphics .. +1 new V3d Archon.
Sirinda Ekchuah's Shrine Comporium Kill It With Fire 168	Posted - 2013.05.01 20:08:00 - [29] - Quote I would've expected and preferred a more armored appearance, TBH. Other than that, I like the new model. Now please turn the Aeon into something that doesn't look like half a starship bolted to half a runway.

Pages: 1 :: [one page]

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.