Need a modeler?

[sitters]

i would like to answer you TrashMan - but i don't know the answer

i also haven't read the whole thread here - so i don't know whether the answer is something hidden in it already. but if not, Winter, BTAxis, please tell him what he should consider to change for future models.

I think in the first place some attitude.

Also he say, don't have a problem of making concept models, why doesn't he make them then ?
A little bit imagination from his side, and he can adapt his craft for fitting in the game.

Little bit less flaming and more think and modelling.

[TrashMan]

LOL..I'm hardly the only one who needs to work on his attitude...

Look sitters, I'm working on several projects ATM (Freespace2, BOTF2, SOTS, UFO:AI, etc...) , so I really don't either the time or will to make a dozen concept models for UFO:AI without having a clue as what is required in the first place. As it is I currently don't even have a point in the right direction.
All I got so far is "your model sucks" and no specific CONSTRUCTIVE comments - like WHY it sucks.

So to make things easier I'm attaching the render of the last version of the Starchaser mesh. It will be easier to analyze with direct visual reference.

[attachment deleted by admin]

[DuKe2112]

The plane has one problem in itself: the engines. The proportions to the wing seem off.
The body is angular as well, but still has flowing transitions to the wings.
Maybe try the same with the engines. And make the top fin more solid and flowing into it as well.
Oh and the cannons look like they could hit the front fins, which look strange anyway, best remove those fins entirely.

That would make a fine plane, but unfortunatelly it still won't be our starchaser as described in the wiki. I also noted that the saracen as it is based on the blackbird is rather unsuited for dogfighting. (but thats a different discussion: http://ufoai.ninex.info/forum/index.php?topic=3161.0) There may be a need for another interceptor, that could be this former design.

The Starchaser however need a very different design.
First of all it needs antimatter engines, yours still look like jet engines.
The body has to be something between the dragon and the stingray. It needs a definitiv alien feel, but should still be obviously of human design..

[mattheus]

First of all it needs antimatter engines, yours still look like jet engines.
The body has to be something between the dragon and the stingray. It needs a definitiv alien feel, but should still be obviously of human design..

For antimatter engines fuel is also used much more matter - for atmospheric flight its also economical to use air inflow, but much smaller then in jet case. Even smaller then ramjet or scramjet. Take a look at SR 71 and you see - its inflows are really small. I agree that it needs also some sure signs that it uses alien technology - maybe weapons or at least currently missing texture. Its looking like human supermodern fighterjet and as it - it's very nice design!

[TrashMan]

The Starchaser however need a very different design.
First of all it needs antimatter engines, yours still look like jet engines.
The body has to be something between the dragon and the stingray. It needs a definitiv alien feel, but should still be obviously of human design..

Do all antimatter engines need to look completely alike? Do they even need to be circular? I've seen test craft with vector thrust engines that where very boxy. What I'm asking - do they have to look exactly like the engines on the dragon (and alien fighters)? The Stingray has engines that look totally different.

I thought the Starchaser was human take on alien tech - thus, it was supposed to look human, but more advanced - while the Dragon and Stingray would be the more alien looking. Guess I was wrong.

[BTAxis]

Well yes, the engines do need to look more or less the same. That's the point of making a model that fits in with the general style. You try to add certain features that other designs share.

[TrashMan]

Well yes, the engines do need to look more or less the same. That's the point of making a model that fits in with the general style. You try to add certain features that other designs share.

Then why do the engines on the Stingray look different?
Come to think of it, I don't even think jet engines on various aircraft look nearly the same - mostly because they're inside the airplane and you see just the intake and exhaust and you can play a lot with those.

[TrashMan]

Given that Winter is the one who's opinions weigh the most I'll wait for him to give me some guidelines before I even lift my hand (regarding UFO:AI).

[freegamer]

I think in the first place some attitude....

...Little bit less flaming and more think and modelling.

After reading the last 4 pages of this bizarre thread - where TrashMan has, in those parts, been nothing but polite and constructive, whilst you have been essentially obnoxious and lost objectivity - I don't understand why you do not take heed of your own advice.

Perhaps this response was warranted (I did not read the rest of the thread, nor do I care to) but you should at least be decent enough to comment on the specific issues of a contribution instead of stonewalling it.

If you can't be objective, how can you accept the responsibility of managing [a part of] something as fluid and dynamic as an open source project the size of UFO:AI?  This thread has wasted a lot of time, and for no reason, and TrashMan is unusual in that he has put up with it.  Most would have matched your temper and left.  In an environment where skilled contributors are at a premium, that is not desirable, not at all.

How can you control a contribution if you can't control your temper?

[Chriswriter90]

Freegamer has a point.

Oh, I thought the Starchaser looked too big, I originally thought it was a dropship.

[sitters]

Sorry guys, but if the dime is not falling here, I can also do nothing about it.

Willem

[TrashMan]

Oh, I thought the Starchaser looked too big, I originally thought it was a dropship.

It's the cockpit. I designed it as a two-seater. No problem changing that. the even older version was more..blocky, had a shorter nose and one-seat cockpit with a blocky canopy.

Anywayz, to explain what guided me to make it as I did. As anyone, I started with some assumptions on what it's supposed to be.
I wanted large wing surface for atmospheric flight, but I also wanted a more unorthodox shape than a copy of current fighter shapes. Something that looks like it could be a space fighter too. It was supposed to be the fastest Phlanax fighter IIRC, so I gave it big engines to further drive the speed point. Yeah, I could have smoothed the engines, but for me a somewhat blocky engine with a blocky nozzle gives a feel of high-tech, as opposed to all those smooth, curved, organic schtick one sees often. And from a practical stanpoint too - it's easier to mantain.
The gunz are just an add-on (separate subobject)

[TrashMan]

This thread has wasted a lot of time, and for no reason, and TrashMan is unusual in that he has put up with it.  Most would have matched your temper and left. 

Which I might very well end up doing. I offer my services, I express my interest in making the Starchaser and all I ask is a point in the right direction.
Instead of explaining what is wanted (so I could make a model you'd guys like) I have been ignored all this time.
The Starchaser could have been finished a long time ago if someone would have given me the time of day.....

[BTAxis]

Why don't you start on something else? The Starchaser discussion is pretty much over anyway.

[TrashMan]

That's the point. I wanted to work on it (I like making fighters) and I was sumarily ignored FOR MONTHS until the job was given to someone else.
Why should I work on anything else only to be ignored again?