Messages

1

Artwork / Re: Armor model updates

« on: September 07, 2010, 03:02:06 pm »

Pretty much done. Thoughts?



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

It does look good, I'd say the texture fixes my original concerns. Nice job.

There's one thing I've noticed in this picture though -- the shoulder pad rims are so high at the neck that the wearer wouldn't be able to turn his head from side to side. Since some of the new animations may involve head-turning, can you fix this to avoid clipping issues?

Regards,
Winter

2

Offtopic / Re: STREET: Clairvoyance released (Winter's second novel)

« on: September 07, 2010, 05:10:36 am »

Q4 next year, most likely.

Regards,
Ryan

3

Offtopic / Re: STREET: Clairvoyance released (Winter's second novel)

« on: September 03, 2010, 04:18:12 pm »

Hey, congratulations!  

I noticed the first book seems to be getting good reviews and ratings on Amazon.com, for your sake I hope it has been paying off.  I also noticed they have a version for the Kindle (not that I have one of those).

I have to confess, I'm guilty of the fact that I've never gotten the first one, I haven't had time to sit down and read a good book in quite some time.

I did notice they have a feature on Amazon's website that allows one to read a few random pages, also.

Simple fact is, it's a good book. It's got action, science, humour, romance, twists and turns, the whole nine yards. It's worth the purchase. You should definitely, definitely get it.

Edit:  Dammit, I can't believe that happened - I read a few of the first pages in Amazon's online preview viewer, and now I'm hooked.     Now it looks like I'll have to actually get a copy!  No, I'm not just saying that, very few books can grab me like that in just the first few pages.

Yesss . . . One of usss . . .

Regards,
Winter

4

Offtopic / STREET: Clairvoyance released (Winter's second novel)

« on: August 31, 2010, 02:51:25 am »

For the locals here who have enjoyed my STREET series of gritty cyberpunk mayhem, the second volume is now out in print and ready to buy from fine stores everywhere! This is a spectacular-looking book, the penultimate part of the trilogy, and well worth having.

Check our Ordering page for details on where to get it.

Regards,
Winter

5

Artwork / Re: Armor model updates

« on: August 18, 2010, 09:41:36 pm »

Hey Origin, fantastic work as always! The only thing I don't like about this model is the helmet -- it makes the whole look just a little too medieval in its styling. Do you think you could bring the model/texture a bit more up to date?

Regards,
Winter

6

Artwork / Re: New civilian (child) model

« on: August 01, 2010, 05:26:44 am »

Not bad. It looks fine to me, the more variety we get in map stuff and civvie models, the better.

Regards,
Winter

7

Artwork / Re: UGV weaponry

« on: July 20, 2010, 06:24:20 am »

will there be a chance to recover and repair an inoperable UGV? Understandable if not

That one's still up for discussion in the design team.

Regards,
Winter

8

Artwork / Re: UGV weaponry

« on: July 19, 2010, 07:49:37 pm »

Just a note, the Phoenix is actually upside-down in those shots. Since it hovers/flies, the turret needs to be on the bottom.

Regards,
Winter

9

Artwork / Re: UGV weaponry

« on: July 07, 2010, 08:16:38 pm »

When you go above 2000 rpms, with rotating barrels, you get increased stability and accuracy. There's even a test video on you tube comparing the m240 to the m134. The m134 turns out to be roughly 9 times more accurate!
Strange, but true....

Aha..found it:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wiry7ysVA9Y&feature=related

What I mean to say is that they aren't even produced to go higher than needed. They are "capped" at 3000-4000 (with 6000 for a few) even if they actually rarely fired at full speed.

Hrm. I can't watch the video, since the connection I'm on now can barely handle streaming radio. However, even if it is correct -- still not convinced at the moment -- we have to consider that changing a source article requires translation in every other language. I really don't think this is remotely significant enough to warrant that procedure just for some background figures.

Regards,
Winter

10

Artwork / Re: UGV weaponry

« on: July 06, 2010, 01:19:31 pm »

These two lines caught my attention. For multiple reasons.

1. muti-barreled machine guns are actually MORE accurate than single barreled ones. I admit, I mis-read it initially.

Source? I can't imagine a computer-operated rotary gun on the same mount to be more accurate than a single-barrel one, since you have either recoil and torque working against accuracy or just recoil. And you'll have to show me figures that aren't set by human gunners.

2. 6000 bullets in 20 seconds implies a rate of fire of 18000 bullets per minutes. That is simply way too excessive. While gattling guns are capable of great speeds (the highest known RoF is 12000), it's just too wasteful, so the usual rate of fire is 3000-4000 rpm's. More is simply not needed, especially in support role.

Which is why it's rarely run at the full rate of fire, as mentioned in the article.

Regards,
Winter

11

Artwork / Re: UGV weaponry

« on: July 03, 2010, 02:25:07 pm »

Someone correct me here, but heh description of the UVG chaingun specificly mentions it's NOT multi-barreled.
 
I'll make several different UVG weapons, just to be sure. A granade laucnher, regular gun, laser gun, and whatever else I can think of.

I've just checked my files, and it does no such thing, especially since it was written for the multi-barreled autocannon Sitters made with the Ares.

Regards,
Winter

12

Artwork / Re: UGV weaponry

« on: July 03, 2010, 02:37:56 am »

Well the smaller size just means they could fit through doorways, not that you should be able to spam them. Like any UGV, there's only so many that you should be allowed to fit in the UGV pods on the dropship.

As for competing with soldiers, that seems like an issue already on the table, since the Ares and Phoenix (and later, more advanced versions) already compete with snipers and support infantry that fight in the open.

Not so. You'll never be able to bring more than a handful of big UGVs to the battlefield due to dropship size restrictions.

Do you folks have a wishlist of all the UGV's you'd eventually like to have, plus any descriptions of them?

For example I heard at some point that you had plans for advanced UGVs, partially based on alien technology, for the mid to late game.

No wishlist at the moment. We have plans for one more UGV, based on alien tech as you said, but that's pretty much it. I can't imagine we'd want more UGVs than that.

Regards,
Winter

13

Artwork / Re: New Rocket Launcher

« on: July 03, 2010, 01:22:22 am »

How's this?

Good for me.

Regards,
Winter

14

Artwork / Re: New Rocket Launcher

« on: July 02, 2010, 11:16:49 pm »

@ Winter

Do you think this is good to go then--

Sure, looks good to me. Unless you're feeling very generous and want to put some kind of border on the top and bottom of the colour code so it blends in a little better with the rest of the shell?

Regards,
Winter

15

Artwork / Re: UGV weaponry

« on: July 02, 2010, 11:07:51 pm »

The near future will bring in a big way roughly man-sized armed UGVs that can follow soldiers wherever they go, be it through cramped urban environments, or terrain impassible to larger machines.

TALON SWORDS, MAARS and 'BigDog' are strong examples of this direction.

Similar such UGVs could make a good compliment to and fill a role between the backpack recon and 'tankette' UGVs. I could model a couple 1x1 combat UGVs for UFOAI if you'd like.

Honestly, that sort of thing might (emphasis might) be realistic for future combat, but I can't see it being appropriate for UFO:AI. It would detract from gameplay by either reducing the importance of human soldiers or cluttering up the battlescape with 8-10 of the little bastards. It won't get my vote.

It looks like you only have a wheeled and hover version, the ares and phoenix, respectively. At least that's all that seems to be in your svn data sources directory, unless I missed it.

I don't know what's in SVN, but I know for a fact that Sitters modelled  wheeled, tracked and hover versions of the Ares specifically. If I'd meant the Phoenix I would've said so. 

If the the phoenix was a UCAV, it would need to have its turret on the bottom, like a gunship, to engage targets on the ground, rather than on the top like a hovercraft.

Yes, that is how the Phoenix was planned.

Regards,
Winter