more to come.
![](https://static.mwomercs.com/forums//public/style_images/master/icon_users.png)
![](https://static.mwomercs.com/img/house/merc-corps.png)
The Marauder (Re-Design And Concept Page)
Started by Bishop Steiner, Jul 05 2013 11:47 AM
48 replies to this topic
#41
Posted 20 July 2013 - 05:25 AM
#42
Posted 26 July 2013 - 08:26 AM
In regards to all the Harmony Gold pettiness...
I'm gonna leave this here..
http://www.shortpacked.com/
I'm gonna leave this here..
![;)](https://static.mwomercs.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/wink.png)
#43
Posted 26 July 2013 - 08:42 AM
Love it! Id take one in heartbeat, it was always my most favorite Mech... though i would prefer the one with the more closed head.
#44
Posted 26 July 2013 - 02:54 PM
I dont think they will release marauder
at least in next few years, im pretty sure
![;)](https://static.mwomercs.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/dry.png)
#45
Posted 26 July 2013 - 03:07 PM
Unfortunately i can only say a big NO to them all. If we cant get the real look of a Marauder it will not be a Marauder and therefore useless for sentimental value.
Its better to just take some other 75 ton mech and use that one instead of disrespecting the Marauders memory by making it look strange and disappointing a lot of people.
Its better to just take some other 75 ton mech and use that one instead of disrespecting the Marauders memory by making it look strange and disappointing a lot of people.
#46
Posted 26 July 2013 - 03:51 PM
Carl Wrede, on 26 July 2013 - 03:07 PM, said:
Unfortunately i can only say a big NO to them all. If we cant get the real look of a Marauder it will not be a Marauder and therefore useless for sentimental value.
Its better to just take some other 75 ton mech and use that one instead of disrespecting the Marauders memory by making it look strange and disappointing a lot of people.
Its better to just take some other 75 ton mech and use that one instead of disrespecting the Marauders memory by making it look strange and disappointing a lot of people.
yes, and you will be forever destined to disappointment. I prefer to be more proactive and realistic.
#47
Posted 27 July 2013 - 03:34 AM
Okay, love it (V2 with shroud), would like to see a few slight tweaks.
- don't agree with the artillery style (elevation adjustable) fit of the AC, could it be in a fixed mount like the shadowhawk, or in a box mount above the shoulder, (which would have a common mounting rail to the 2x srm6 variant, which would have a similar mount on the left.)
-shadowhawk style window on head/cockpit?
Other than that, looks good, and I'd accept it as a MAD.
Why wouldn't Shimmering Sword's artwork work? Wasn't it used as a TRO cover?
- don't agree with the artillery style (elevation adjustable) fit of the AC, could it be in a fixed mount like the shadowhawk, or in a box mount above the shoulder, (which would have a common mounting rail to the 2x srm6 variant, which would have a similar mount on the left.)
-shadowhawk style window on head/cockpit?
Other than that, looks good, and I'd accept it as a MAD.
Why wouldn't Shimmering Sword's artwork work? Wasn't it used as a TRO cover?
#48
Posted 27 July 2013 - 07:56 AM
Gryphorim, on 27 July 2013 - 03:34 AM, said:
Okay, love it (V2 with shroud), would like to see a few slight tweaks.
- don't agree with the artillery style (elevation adjustable) fit of the AC, could it be in a fixed mount like the shadowhawk, or in a box mount above the shoulder, (which would have a common mounting rail to the 2x srm6 variant, which would have a similar mount on the left.)
-shadowhawk style window on head/cockpit?
Other than that, looks good, and I'd accept it as a MAD.
Why wouldn't Shimmering Sword's artwork work? Wasn't it used as a TRO cover?
- don't agree with the artillery style (elevation adjustable) fit of the AC, could it be in a fixed mount like the shadowhawk, or in a box mount above the shoulder, (which would have a common mounting rail to the 2x srm6 variant, which would have a similar mount on the left.)
-shadowhawk style window on head/cockpit?
Other than that, looks good, and I'd accept it as a MAD.
Why wouldn't Shimmering Sword's artwork work? Wasn't it used as a TRO cover?
His version of the RESEEN was used on XTRO. The Reseen is fine. The most popular posted SS work is his take of the Unseen, which is entirely too similar to the Macross original, as are MOST of his designs.
SS could obviously do something totally new, and has way more talent than I, but I have not seen a lot of "original" redesigns from SS. Or David White for that matter. Flying Debris and ShortPainter seem to be the guys who do the most in that field, and both are being employed in Battletech Projects, too, (Though I believe SPs is an unofficial one).
I'm just cranking out concept stuff, and don't claim to be on their level, but I will admit it's getting f*cking old having their stuff constantly posted on my thread.
Also, the MWO art has an elevatable AC on the shoulder of the ShadowHawk.
Edited by Bishop Steiner, 27 July 2013 - 08:00 AM.
#49
Posted 27 July 2013 - 04:35 PM
Oh yeah, I see it now (re:- shadowhawk).
There is no denying that there are a huge number of skilled artists who have tried their hand at Battletech art, but even I will admit that it's frustrating opening a thread started by one artist, hoping to see their unique designs for some old classics, and instead finding the thread hijacked ( even accidentally) with art from another artist, whose work, whilst good, you've seen everywhere.
There is no denying that there are a huge number of skilled artists who have tried their hand at Battletech art, but even I will admit that it's frustrating opening a thread started by one artist, hoping to see their unique designs for some old classics, and instead finding the thread hijacked ( even accidentally) with art from another artist, whose work, whilst good, you've seen everywhere.
Edited by Gryphorim, 27 July 2013 - 04:35 PM.
2 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users