Warzone 2100 Forums

They don't seem very functional, what are the benefits of putting landing/rearming pads onto a platform like that?

wari wrote:They don't seem very functional, what are the benefits of putting landing/rearming pads onto a platform like that?

Functionality?
I agree it doesn't seem practical as of our understanding of the present day technology. We could always create a theory to make it seem more practical to the fictional aspect of the game, couldn't we? But apart from the hurdle of conceiving such a theory, it is a good artistic rendition, that's just my opinion though.

What do you think?

perhaps a different form of under support could be used - storehouse for the VTOL ammo....

lav_coyote25 wrote:perhaps a different form of under support could be used - storehouse for the VTOL ammo....

Ah, Good one. That would make more sense, a storehouse underneath.. Now how would that look?

Berg wrote:Quick change artist this is not showing alpha channel so fence is not seethrough.
Concept only
I think the fences like this are better thanks for feedback.
Regards Berg

In my opinion, this is more like what Per had requested for.. Does anyone else like this model?

looks better . . . now how does it look in game? would be the only way to tell if it works or not.

lav_coyote25 wrote:now how does it look in game?

it looks ugly and doesn't fit the game hi-tech style. especially the texture.

MaNGusT wrote: lav_coyote25 wrote:now how does it look in game?

it looks ugly and doesn't fit the game hi-tech style. especially the texture.

Best I don't even bother to put it in Game then.

MaNGusT wrote:

lav_coyote25 wrote:now how does it look in game?

it looks ugly and doesn't fit the game hi-tech style. especially the texture.

It's only a concept model, Berg did say that he was open to suggestions. Why not suggest ways in which it could be improved?

j0shdrunk0nwar wrote:It's only a concept model, Berg did say that he was open to suggestions. Why not suggest ways in which it could be improved?

Don't both josh constructive critic are often absent in this forum..I won't tread on the real artists toes any more!

Berg wrote:... constructive critic are often absent in this forum..I won't tread on the real artists toes any more!

That may be true Berg, but you shouldn't let negative criticism or comments let you down like that. If Per doesn't like it, then that's fine, you will still be contributing by providing him more options. But you shouldn't quit trying before he says anything, IMHO.

lav_coyote25 wrote:perhaps a different form of under support could be used - storehouse for the VTOL ammo....

Berg, lav_coyote25 did make a constructive suggestion, he liked the top platform of the second model, maybe you could work on that?

lav_coyote25 wrote:now how does it look in game?

MaNGusT wrote: it looks ugly and doesn't fit the game hi-tech style. especially the texture.

berg said: Best I don't even bother to put it in Game then.


and i say put it in game. i know its not textured to the way it may end up - others dont have the same views i have ... next time - ask me directly. and dont quote me the way you did as it seems to me to say that i hated the model. which i did not say.

j0shdrunk0nwar wrote:It's only a concept model, Berg did say that he was open to suggestions. Why not suggest ways in which it could be improved?

Okay... even original textures have fake lights and shadows baked on them, I mean ambient occlusion. also, Berg's texture is blurry and doesn't have enough details.
As for model, it's too low poly. more "hi-tech" details pls.

For reference, low polycount is fine by me.