| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 8 post(s) |
|
CCP Phor
C C P
C C P Alliance
18
   |
Posted - 2013.05.04 16:47:00 -
[151] - Quote
Altimo wrote:Nagarythe Tinurandir wrote:Altimo wrote:
This redesign is incredible, I wish i could have seen the presentation on it, I was really disappointed that we couldn't get that part of the stream on fanfest, as I feel that is very important for us older veterans.
i feel with you. i hope they put this presentation online at some point. they simply have to XD there was even advertisement in the art panel for this presentation. Altimo wrote:
With the paladin, Given that some of the people are displeased with the new apoc, maybe to a lesser extent, you could have something that resembles the "parted sections" but making them lower by about half. But definitely give it an upgrade like you did with the original apoc, I mean the geometry just looks a lot better. I look forward to seeing what you guys do to the tier 3 battleships, the typhoon and the domi and the armageddon.
for the paladin i just hope the find a clever way to position the turrets at a spot which looks not totally random. getting the kronos right needed some rather persistent player feedback. besides that, blood red & gold - will be one heck of a ship :D Yeah, I think all marauders should have a better turret placement that doesn't make it seem like "Oh hey where are the rest of my guns" And yes I agree the blood red and gold will definitely make the paladin just look beautiful and majestic. I can't wait to see it myself.
I'll try.
If i remember correctly there were some technical limitations for this though.
For once we need to provide more than 4 highslots on the shipmodel because of utility items like tractor beams etc that are also visible. And since the player decides in what order he fits his modules we can't decide what the turret arrangement will look like in the end. Having said that I remember that for the stealth bombers we were able to work around this and make the launchers always fit into dedicated launcher hardpoints. I'm not sure if that will work here as well though.
Another reason is that a limited number of hardpoints have been a limitation for game design before. So if for example we decide that one day the paladin will use 8 turrets instead of 4 the art needs to be able to support that decision.
CCP Phor | Concept Artist | Team TriLambda |
|
Provence Tristram
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
100
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 18:43:00 -
[152] - Quote
CCP Phor wrote:I'll try.
If i remember correctly there were some technical limitations for this though.
For once we need to provide more than 4 highslots on the shipmodel because of utility items like tractor beams etc that are also visible. And since the player decides in what order he fits his modules we can't decide what the turret arrangement will look like in the end. Having said that I remember that for the stealth bombers we were able to work around this and make the launchers always fit into dedicated launcher hardpoints. I'm not sure if that will work here as well though.
Another reason is that a limited number of hardpoints have been a limitation for game design before. So if for example we decide that one day the paladin will use 8 turrets instead of 4 the art needs to be able to support that decision.
I'm fine if the Paladin is slightly different... just don't go too far.  I think you've really struck gold with the new Apoc, and it appears that a lot of the community is behind this look. Frankly, I think this is a ship that all of Amarr can rally around. It's like a sleeker, deadlier looking Abaddon. What's not to love?
Also, I just want to throw in that I think the placement of the battery is one of the better, more believable jobs you guys have done. I've always wondered why, on a ship like, say, the Hyperion, the turrets were all clustered together. That seems like a dangerous design choice, when -- if you were firing to cripple your enemy's firepower -- even 'misses' could become hits. Switching gears, the Omen is in some ways even worse. Now, hits also knock out drive nacelles, slowing or even stopping the poor Omen.
With the Apoc, on the other hand, the battery is evenly distributed and, what's more, isn't located places where one might imagine engineering might be located. Thus, you can imagine that the Apoc would be able to duke it out for a very long time without sacrificing fighting capability. |
Patrakele
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
95
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 18:53:00 -
[153] - Quote
Nerdgazm |
Jonas Sukarala
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
138
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 18:56:00 -
[154] - Quote
it would be nice with typhoons new attack role if it could look less like a log (insert toilet humour here :) ) and look more menacing and nippy/lighter
'Tech3 ships need to be put down, like a rabid dog drooling everywhere in the house, they are out of line' CCP Ytterbium
Nerf missile range into place..... where is the TD missile change?-á ,...projectiles should use capacitor. |
Shinzhi Xadi
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
40
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 20:03:00 -
[155] - Quote
Pierre Echerie wrote:Well, whatever you do, don't modify the Abaddon, pwetty pwease. At least, keep its overall shape, if you dare touch the sexiest ship in this game.
Have you ever looked at the original concept art for the abaddon?
I would love if when the design team gets to that ship, they remake it to look a LOT more like the concept art. With proportions like the art shows. |
Rikimaru Ichikawa
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
9
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 01:23:00 -
[156] - Quote
Throktar wrote:I thought when Soundwave showed us the model in game it looked much better than that picture. I am very pleased with how this looks! Can't wait to see it on my Paladin :)
Yeah I can't wait as well for how it looks as a Paladin. Napoc will also be interesting. |
Rikimaru Ichikawa
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
9
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 01:44:00 -
[157] - Quote
CCP BunnyVirus wrote:http://imgur.com/5A9w99u
just to get a few more likes :D here have a navypoc screen
 Awesome!! Fix the cap issue pls now the artwork is done. 
That aside, can we get a sneak peek at the Paladin...? Will the change affect the Paladin for the 4th June, or is that later? |
Mag's
the united
Negative Ten.
14732
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 01:55:00 -
[158] - Quote
CCP BunnyVirus wrote:Krell Kroenen wrote:It's an improvement but nothing to write home about. The Stabber hull is still King of the remodeled ships. you havnt seen the navy version of it :D Let me guess. Much like the navy Mega, it's some ridiculous Camo job that ruins it. Amirite?
Malcanis for CSM 8.
Destination SkillQueue:-
It's like assuming the lions will ignore you in the savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless. |
Altimo
Homicidal Teddy Bears
31
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 03:13:00 -
[159] - Quote
CCP Phor wrote:
I'll try.
If i remember correctly there were some technical limitations for this though.
For once we need to provide more than 4 highslots on the shipmodel because of utility items like tractor beams etc that are also visible. And since the player decides in what order he fits his modules we can't decide what the turret arrangement will look like in the end. Having said that I remember that for the stealth bombers we were able to work around this and make the launchers always fit into dedicated launcher hardpoints. I'm not sure if that will work here as well though.
Another reason is that a limited number of hardpoints have been a limitation for game design before. So if for example we decide that one day the paladin will use 8 turrets instead of 4 the art needs to be able to support that decision.
Thank you for looking into it. I will say this, call me crazy but if 8 guns/launchers were on the marauders I would be really excited to see that.
Slightly off topic but when you guys redesign the machariel would you change the layout so it doesn't have that uneven look with the turrets. I was thinking putting the turrets on the side of the ship, then have the launchers on the top, or vice versa, to give the ship a more symmetrical layout turret wise.
|
C DeLeon
Pangalactic Punks n' Playboys
HUN Reloaded
116
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 05:05:00 -
[160] - Quote
CCP Phor wrote:
I'll try.
If i remember correctly there were some technical limitations for this though.
For once we need to provide more than 4 highslots on the shipmodel because of utility items like tractor beams etc that are also visible. And since the player decides in what order he fits his modules we can't decide what the turret arrangement will look like in the end. Having said that I remember that for the stealth bombers we were able to work around this and make the launchers always fit into dedicated launcher hardpoints. I'm not sure if that will work here as well though.
Another reason is that a limited number of hardpoints have been a limitation for game design before. So if for example we decide that one day the paladin will use 8 turrets instead of 4 the art needs to be able to support that decision.
What if all turrets/launchers are visible twice so 8 turrets/launchers on the modell while only 4 on the fitting screen and the 3 utility slot on top of that? |
Barrogh Habalu
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
456
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 11:14:00 -
[161] - Quote
George Wilkes Hill wrote:I like it! Apoc and Abaddon had a baby and made the new apoc
Tbh it looks to me more like "new Amarr design" ships like Oracle or Purifier than Abaddon. |
Aracimia Wolfe
The Cursed Navy
237
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 11:21:00 -
[162] - Quote
I rather like it myself. I look forward to flying one
Malcanis for CSM 8 https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=192717
\o/ \o/ \o/ \o/ m8m8m8m8m8m8m8 o7
|
Nagarythe Tinurandir
Tormented of Destiny
Cha Ching PLC
124
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 12:50:00 -
[163] - Quote
Altimo wrote:
Slightly off topic but when you guys redesign the machariel would you change the layout so it doesn't have that uneven look with the turrets. I was thinking putting the turrets on the side of the ship, then have the launchers on the top, or vice versa, to give the ship a more symmetrical layout turret wise.
the machariel is one of the ships least in need of a redesign... a higher res. texture would go a long way there.
there is just so much more gallente space cancer and caldari lego missmatch to be cured and fixed.
but i agree with you a symmetric distribution of turrets on the hull is always better then some weird uneven distribution, at least when the hull the turrets are placed on is more or less symmetrical itself (like the machariel). |
Talisa Latarien
Dark Tempest Enterprises
IMPERIAL LEGI0N
26
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 13:30:00 -
[164] - Quote
Nagarythe Tinurandir wrote:Altimo wrote:
Slightly off topic but when you guys redesign the machariel would you change the layout so it doesn't have that uneven look with the turrets. I was thinking putting the turrets on the side of the ship, then have the launchers on the top, or vice versa, to give the ship a more symmetrical layout turret wise.
the machariel is one of the ships least in need of a redesign... a higher res. texture would go a long way there. there is just so much more gallente space cancer and caldari lego missmatch to be cured and fixed. but i agree with you a symmetric distribution of turrets on the hull is always better then some weird uneven distribution, at least when the hull the turrets are placed on is more or less symmetrical itself (like the machariel).
Agree 100%! While some Amarr ships do look like their shape was rather dictaded by the graphics proformance limitation some time ago, most of those have some "spirit" that keeps them together. Minnie boats have this "jury rig" air around them, although certain hulls seem ridiculous. But most Caldari ships just don't look like ships, and no, I don't think Moa is the worst one - that one has some character, at least.
The whole idea about Caldari is we don't give flipping 2 cents about looks, as long as it serves some purpose. Now there are tons of ships that don't look like they have been built with any purpose in mind...
As for Machariels, Cynabals and Dramiels go, higher res textures outght to solve most of the issues, and, perhaps, a bit of hardpoint repositioning would do the rest. Actually, I even think the latter 2 are quite fine the way they are already. They have this distinct, unique look about them, which is both "alien" compared to most other ships, and yet like they actually might have a reason for their shapes. Cynabal even looks like space Porsche 911 (which it, undoubtedly, is  ) |
Sirinda
Ekchuah's Shrine Comporium
Kill It With Fire
168
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 13:33:00 -
[165] - Quote
CCP Phor wrote:Altimo wrote:Nagarythe Tinurandir wrote:Altimo wrote:
This redesign is incredible, I wish i could have seen the presentation on it, I was really disappointed that we couldn't get that part of the stream on fanfest, as I feel that is very important for us older veterans.
i feel with you. i hope they put this presentation online at some point. they simply have to XD there was even advertisement in the art panel for this presentation. Altimo wrote:
With the paladin, Given that some of the people are displeased with the new apoc, maybe to a lesser extent, you could have something that resembles the "parted sections" but making them lower by about half. But definitely give it an upgrade like you did with the original apoc, I mean the geometry just looks a lot better. I look forward to seeing what you guys do to the tier 3 battleships, the typhoon and the domi and the armageddon.
for the paladin i just hope the find a clever way to position the turrets at a spot which looks not totally random. getting the kronos right needed some rather persistent player feedback. besides that, blood red & gold - will be one heck of a ship :D Yeah, I think all marauders should have a better turret placement that doesn't make it seem like "Oh hey where are the rest of my guns" And yes I agree the blood red and gold will definitely make the paladin just look beautiful and majestic. I can't wait to see it myself. I'll try. If i remember correctly there were some technical limitations for this though. For once we need to provide more than 4 highslots on the shipmodel because of utility items like tractor beams etc that are also visible. And since the player decides in what order he fits his modules we can't decide what the turret arrangement will look like in the end. Having said that I remember that for the stealth bombers we were able to work around this and make the launchers always fit into dedicated launcher hardpoints. I'm not sure if that will work here as well though. Another reason is that a limited number of hardpoints have been a limitation for game design before. So if for example we decide that one day the paladin will use 8 turrets instead of 4 the art needs to be able to support that decision.
That'd be great! As it stands now Marauders have lots of visual unused real estate regarding guns. The question is, if these get filled up (which I would applaud), what's going to happen with tractors and salvagers? Where would they fit?
On that topic as well, weren't all those other active modules with effects also supposed to get a dedicated model originally? I'm especially talking about reps, transfers and EWAR of all kinds. |
Altimo
Homicidal Teddy Bears
31
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 15:16:00 -
[166] - Quote
Nagarythe Tinurandir wrote:
the machariel is one of the ships least in need of a redesign... a higher res. texture would go a long way there.
there is just so much more gallente space cancer and caldari lego missmatch to be cured and fixed.
but i agree with you a symmetric distribution of turrets on the hull is always better then some weird uneven distribution, at least when the hull the turrets are placed on is more or less symmetrical itself (like the machariel).
I'm not requesting them to redesign the Machariel, but I know that it will get a turn as with every ship, and the module layout is pretty much the only thing I want changed on it. I imagine the Mach will get the same treatment as the raven, looks almost exactly the same, with some parts slightly changed, when they get around to it.
I'd like to see the abaddon look more like the concept art. The concept art abaddon looks evil, a beast, and the abaddon needs to look like that! Caldari ships, well.. lol... that's just going to be quite an adventure.
|
Nagarythe Tinurandir
Tormented of Destiny
Cha Ching PLC
124
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 15:31:00 -
[167] - Quote
Altimo wrote:[quote=Nagarythe Tinurandir]
I'd like to see the abaddon look more like the concept art. The concept art abaddon looks evil, a beast, and the abaddon needs to look like that! Caldari ships, well.. lol... that's just going to be quite an adventure.
yeah, abbadon concept art rocks big time :D
i guess at the time it was just too much detail. the maelstrom concept art looks much more "jury riggy" then the actual model in game.
for caldari reworks, CCPs art department just needs to orient itself on the corax, tengu and the latest scorpion. makes for sober and utilitarian looking awesomeness with a pinch of deadly style (manticore).
|
Talisa Latarien
Dark Tempest Enterprises
IMPERIAL LEGI0N
28
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 21:32:00 -
[168] - Quote
Nagarythe Tinurandir wrote:
yeah, abbadon concept art rocks big time :D
i guess at the time it was just too much detail. the maelstrom concept art looks much more "jury riggy" then the actual model in game.
for caldari reworks, CCPs art department just needs to orient itself on the corax, tengu and the latest scorpion. makes for sober and utilitarian looking awesomeness with a pinch of deadly style (manticore).
Don't forget the sleek and deadly Naga - the very definition of Caldari gunboat! |
Judge Wilhelm
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 02:04:00 -
[169] - Quote
Judge Wilhelm wrote:Can we see her port side?
The left side that is? |
Klingon Admiral
Black Hole Cluster
17
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 02:29:00 -
[170] - Quote
Nagarythe Tinurandir wrote:[quote=Altimo][quote=Nagarythe Tinurandir]
for caldari reworks, CCPs art department just needs to orient itself on the corax, tengu and the latest scorpion. makes for sober and utilitarian looking awesomeness with a pinch of deadly style (manticore).
Don't forget that the whole philosophy of Caldarian spaceship design goes back to the Raata Empire's principle of "Let two teams work on the same ship and prohibit any communication between them".
However, I am probably one of the very few people who actually like the Blackbird design.
@ topic
Show us the Paladin already. |
Stan'din
Incursion Squad
Punkz 'n Monkeys
111
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 08:38:00 -
[171] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:CCP BunnyVirus wrote:http://imgur.com/5A9w99u
just to get a few more likes :D here have a navypoc screen Woah. Mind, blown. And I just put all my capital in the damned Ice market, so I can't go buy one! Argh! *head explodes*
Already bought my Paladin in 4 days its jumped up by 40 mill in amarr
Your about as much use as a condom dispenser in the Vatican. |
To mare
Advanced Technology
189
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 12:20:00 -
[172] - Quote
looks much more like an armor tanker than the old model.
but i liked the old model better |
James Razor
RazorCorporation
Crystal Lights
35
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 13:33:00 -
[173] - Quote
To mare wrote:looks much more like an armor tanker than the old model.
but i liked the old model better
Well, a lot of ppl like(d) the old model better.
Old Bitter Veteran, EX-GBC / EX-IT Member. |
Altimo
Homicidal Teddy Bears
32
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 13:41:00 -
[174] - Quote
Well it's not like everyone is going to like the new design of the apoc, however not everyone liked the original apoc in general.
I know some people who hate the way the typhoon looks, yet I am a fan of it, Same for the tempest. It will just take some time to get used to.
CCP Phor: you said that there was a limitation on hard points due to game design, does this mean that we will start seeing ships with more hardpoints than what we are used to in the future at some point? Should this limitation be overcome that is. |
Funky Lazers
shin-ra ltd
250
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 17:18:00 -
[175] - Quote
The thing is Devs said they don't like the machine-gun look of Apoc.
Why the new model still looks like one?
Whatever. |
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
4126
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 18:11:00 -
[176] - Quote
Funky Lazers wrote:The thing is Devs said they don't like the machine-gun look of Apoc.
Why the new model still looks like one?
Ummm, no, I really don't think that's what they said at all.
To carve a successful niche for yourself in EVE you need to be able to out sell, out produce, out fight,-á out run, or out wit your competitors.
If you can do none of the above, your only option is to complain on the forums that somehow you are at a disadvantage using the exact same tool set-áas the rest of the player base. |
Mia Restolo
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
97
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 19:07:00 -
[177] - Quote
CCP Phor wrote:I'll try.
If i remember correctly there were some technical limitations for this though.
For once we need to provide more than 4 highslots on the shipmodel because of utility items like tractor beams etc that are also visible. And since the player decides in what order he fits his modules we can't decide what the turret arrangement will look like in the end. Having said that I remember that for the stealth bombers we were able to work around this and make the launchers always fit into dedicated launcher hardpoints. I'm not sure if that will work here as well though.
Another reason is that a limited number of hardpoints have been a limitation for game design before. So if for example we decide that one day the paladin will use 8 turrets instead of 4 the art needs to be able to support that decision.
I was messing around on sisi when the V3 caps came out on there and I swear the phoenix model had all of the launcher slots locked to the same three hard points and it filled them in the same order no matter where you fit them in the fitting window. The lone turret slot it used to have always put the gun on the platform that moves when in siege. I imagine the same sort of setup could be used on the paladin. |
The Greenmachine Greenmachine
Green's Bicycle Shop
11
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 19:19:00 -
[178] - Quote
Ummmmmmmmm
They stole this model from a N64 game called
Star Wars: Battle for Naboo
http://image.gamespotcdn.net/gamespot/images/screenshots/gs/news/010205/starwars_790screen004.jpg
Case Closed |
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
4129
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 19:33:00 -
[179] - Quote
The Greenmachine Greenmachine wrote:
Yes, and the Armageddon was based on War Rocket Ajax.
To carve a successful niche for yourself in EVE you need to be able to out sell, out produce, out fight,-á out run, or out wit your competitors.
If you can do none of the above, your only option is to complain on the forums that somehow you are at a disadvantage using the exact same tool set-áas the rest of the player base. |
Funky Lazers
shin-ra ltd
250
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 23:55:00 -
[180] - Quote
Ranger 1 wrote:Funky Lazers wrote:The thing is Devs said they don't like the machine-gun look of Apoc.
Why the new model still looks like one? Ummm, no, I really don't think that's what they said at all.
This is exactly what they said.
Quote:
CCP BunnyVirus wrote:we are thinking of getting rid the machinegun look of the ship itself and i make sure that the amazing ccp phor will do a proper job with the concepting of the new one.
The link to this post is Here
Guess "amazing ccp phor" didn't do the job right at all.
Whatever. |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |