716 replies to this topic

[m0nk33]

OMG SWEET!!! Thank you FD and piranha you rock!!!

[Dennis de Koning]

Aidan, on 25 April 2012 - 10:07 AM, said:

Those rounded surfaces are expensive render-wise. The over-riding design principle for anyone creating a real-time simulation video game is to design for good game performance over "beauty".

The direction isn't so much to save tri's as much as it is to make it look good, so the (lack of a rounded) nose was not designed with tri-count in mind.
The philosophy behind recreating the 'Mechs is more in line with the notion that they are designed with utilitarian functionality in mind. Function should appear to override form. An Abrams tank is designed to be a functioning war machine and that's all; it is by chance alone that it just so happens to look cool as well; coolness was not in the minds of the architects. We want the 'Mechs to reflect this feeling. Also, It should feel like a Mech's name was inspired by it's design, not designed to look like what it was named.

[Zwergonfire]

Great design!

Though, I still plan on piloting an Awesome when I get the chance, despite Captain Doofus McDoomswinger's portrayal of an assault pilot.

[Ramien]

So, thoughts on upgrading from the standard 3-L model:
Drop the SRM(6) to an SRM(4)
Drop one heat sink, replace with double sinks (I hate heat issues)
Replace exoskeleton with Endo-Steel (even the 3-L only has standard internals)
boost engine to a 280 to negate need for crit allocation for heat sinks (and to give a much higher top speed)
If endo steel can't be replaced aftermarket, drop engine down to a 245, put the srm 6 back in, and put the free ton into armor

Thoughts?

[Solis Obscuri]

Dihm, on 25 April 2012 - 10:27 AM, said:

FYI, there's the original Raven RVN-1X, which doesn't have all the Lostech goodies. Also, the RVN-2X, which doesn't have the goodies either. The Raven in the picture SHOULD be the 2X, since the FedSuns "upgraded" all their captured 1Xs to it. I don't see a large laser though.

Well, I suppose. I'm mostly disappointed by the description of the ECM - I'd love a version that disrupts C3, Artemis IV, Narc, Targeting Computers and Streaks, and even better still if it could spoof with ghost targets, but a OLOLCAN'THITMECAN'TTRACKME device is the last thing I want to see.

[Fresh Meat]

best looking mech yet, it actually looks like a dedicated war machine.

[CaveMan]

It looks like a Russian attack helicopter. Very nice, much better than the cartoony-looking original.

[Exploding Boy]

Don't get me wrong, I actually liked the TRO art for the Raven, but I like this one for different reasons. It seems more...complete; more realistic. The old one, though prettier perhaps in some ways, always seemed like a bit of a frankenstein job: like pieces from two different mechs were slapped together, or a second designer picked up where the first left off.

The Men Shen later is a good example of a mech that seems to adhere to a single design language like the TRO Raven did not with its sloping, sculpted, curvy body with boxy or geometric attachments everywhere.

[northwolf]

Catapult = check, Raven = Check, i'm ready for war

[Solis Obscuri]

I do kind of like the look - it's like something between a greyhound and a Dassault Mirage, but with a definite "beak". My only criticism is that the torso looks kind of disproportionately small to the hips and legs, which isn't what I'd expect in a 'mech with that much equipment packed into its arms and torso.

[tyrone dunkirk]

I have a feeling a LOT of old school Raven supporter's might be pissed... but OH MY GOD! I love this! Especially the fact that it's Davion

[Aidan]

Dennis de Koning, on 25 April 2012 - 10:39 AM, said:

The direction isn't so much to save tri's as much as it is to make it look good, so the (lack of a rounded) nose was not designed with tri-count in mind.
The philosophy behind recreating the 'Mechs is more in line with the notion that they are designed with utilitarian functionality in mind. Function should appear to override form. An Abrams tank is designed to be a functioning war machine and that's all; it is by chance alone that it just so happens to look cool as well; coolness was not in the minds of the architects. We want the 'Mechs to reflect this feeling. Also, It should feel like a Mech's name was inspired by it's design, not designed to look like what it was named.

Dennis,

I sit corrected. But I think we can both agree that FD's "faceted" approach to many rounded and smooth surfaces found in various TRO hand sketches, does reduce poly count and increases in-game performance efficiency while still presenting the "functionality" of which you speak.

Over all IMHO, the Raven is a delighful compromise and looks very functional.

[Dennis de Koning]

Aidan, on 25 April 2012 - 10:51 AM, said:

Dennis, I sit corrected. But I think we can both agree that FD's "faceted" approach to many rounded and smooth surfaces found in various TRO hand sketches, does reduce poly count and increases in-game performance efficiency while still presenting the "functionality" of which you speak. Over all IMHO, the Raven is a delighful compromise and looks very functional.

Absolutely, it does reduce count; but the faceted design in Alex's concepts are largely due to his geometric style, which looks cool - it's win/win.

[SuckyJack]

I've gone over the mech with a fine tooth comb now that it has been asked to take a second look. There is without a doubt the Sword and Triangle from the CapCom logo poking out around the faction symbol.

But I can't find any hidden messages for myself. Either it's not there, or I'm missing it horribly.

Edited by SuckyJack, 25 April 2012 - 10:56 AM.

[Adridos]

I could have swallowed the Bushwacker look, seriously.



But the Davion insignia just kills it for me. This is not a Raven, end of the line.

[osito]

Another excellent design, thank you fd. The Raven looks clean and mean, just the way it should.

[WithSilentWings]

McDoomswinger or... MC Doomswinger?!

I'm have mixed feelings. It's always been one of my favourite mechs. Missing the distinctive curved cockpit window and the curved "beak" is a little upsetting, but it certainly is a modernized/industrialized take that likely makes a lot more sense than the original.

Also, it's gotta be the first time I've seen the feet done this way and I like it for this mech.

[Elwood Blues]

No Osiris yet, but I will definitely take a Raven. Can't wait!

[Aidan]

Dennis de Koning, on 25 April 2012 - 10:54 AM, said:

Absolutely, it does reduce count; but the faceted design in Alex's concepts are largely due to his geometric style, which looks cool - it's win/win.

Yes it is !

*thumbs up ! *

[Sigmund Sauer]

I like how the mechs that I thought looked like crap before are being redone and now they look amazing! I can't wait to pilot this thing!

Also why are there French flags painted on it's legs and nose?