These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

The new Apoc model

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Barrogh Habalu
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#161 - 2013-05-05 11:14:12 UTC
George Wilkes Hill wrote:
I like it! Apoc and Abaddon had a baby and made the new apoc Big smile

Tbh it looks to me more like "new Amarr design" ships like Oracle or Purifier than Abaddon.

Future of T3 cruisers - multi-tool they aspired to be instead of sledgehammer they have become
Aracimia Wolfe
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#162 - 2013-05-05 11:21:38 UTC
I rather like it myself. I look forward to flying one

Kill it with Fire!

Nagarythe Tinurandir
Einheit X-6
#163 - 2013-05-05 12:50:59 UTC
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
#164 - 2013-05-05 13:30:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Talisa Latarien
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 Cool)
Sirinda
Ekchuah's Shrine Comporium
#165 - 2013-05-05 13:33:26 UTC
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
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#166 - 2013-05-05 15:16:07 UTC
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
Einheit X-6
#167 - 2013-05-05 15:31:27 UTC
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
#168 - 2013-05-05 21:32:59 UTC
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
Doomheim
#169 - 2013-05-07 02:04:03 UTC
Judge Wilhelm wrote:
Can we see her port side?


The left side that is?
Klingon Admiral
Carcinisation
#170 - 2013-05-07 02:29:37 UTC
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
Pandemic Alpha
#171 - 2013-05-07 08:38:58 UTC
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
#172 - 2013-05-07 12:20:18 UTC
looks much more like an armor tanker than the old model.
but i liked the old model better
James Razor
RazorEnterprise
#173 - 2013-05-07 13:33:35 UTC
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.
Altimo
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#174 - 2013-05-07 13:41:57 UTC
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
Funk Freakers
#175 - 2013-05-07 17:18:37 UTC
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
Vae. Victis.
#176 - 2013-05-07 18:11:58 UTC
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.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Mia Restolo
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#177 - 2013-05-07 19:07:55 UTC
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
#178 - 2013-05-07 19:19:11 UTC
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
Vae. Victis.
#179 - 2013-05-07 19:33:06 UTC
The Greenmachine Greenmachine wrote:
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

Yes, and the Armageddon was based on War Rocket Ajax.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Funky Lazers
Funk Freakers
#180 - 2013-05-07 23:55:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Funky Lazers
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.