Marauder Concept / Design Contest - (Unofficial) - Ended
#201
Posted 03 November 2013 - 11:36 PM
#202
Posted 03 November 2013 - 11:39 PM
GalaxyBluestar, on 03 November 2013 - 09:54 PM, said:
you watched ferraris race. you swoned over the f40 you've grown up seeing this thing on the road and on the track for ages.
so finally you save the money you've waited long and hard for this one and go to the dealership to purchase that star ferrari.
then the dealer offers you a lancia stratos... it has a ferrari engine and in it's own right is a good car. still you know how it ends. they're two different things, now a detamaso or such would almost win out but a lancia doesn't fit and the dealership says sorry that's all we have now.
You're exaggerating just a tad there, GB.
You're not getting a different car. You're getting the same car with a newer, updated look. The spec sheet is exactly the same, and performance is exactly the same. It's like going from the old Mustang body style to the new one. Or the old versus new Camaro. Or even taking a car and adding a body kit to it.
Some people weren't around to admire the Marauder look that was stolen from another company. And some people, like me, were around but recognize that the old look is illegal and have accepted that the new official look is the way forward.
GalaxyBluestar, on 03 November 2013 - 09:54 PM, said:
That alien lobster style 'Mech look wasn't designed for this game and wasn't supposed to be in this game.
The Project Phoenix TRO Marauder IS the Marauder. You simply cannot accept that fact.
...still waiting for your response to my post in the other Marauder thread too.
Edited by Durant Carlyle, 03 November 2013 - 11:41 PM.
#203
Posted 04 November 2013 - 01:21 AM
Durant Carlyle, on 03 November 2013 - 11:39 PM, said:
That alien lobster style 'Mech look wasn't designed for this game and wasn't supposed to be in this game.
You're exaggerating just a tad there, DC. it wasn't stolen it was brought from someone who as it turned out much later didn't have the rights to sell it. HG is a tad guilty their too as the rights they got were under the same misconstrude ownership so really neither BT or Robotech has the real rights. that's not stealing and nobody as far as i'm awear of is in jail for such a crime.
Durant Carlyle, on 03 November 2013 - 11:39 PM, said:
GBS is unaccepting of things moving on
and i could say you're trying to bury the past and many potential customers memories, ideals and or aspirations. let's continue our discussion HERE
Edited by GalaxyBluestar, 04 November 2013 - 01:27 AM.
#204
Posted 04 November 2013 - 11:16 AM
Enjoy,
Tirick
#205
Posted 04 November 2013 - 04:17 PM
Dadrick, on 03 November 2013 - 09:33 AM, said:
Here's a preview of my redesign of the Marauder for the contest. Enjoy the mechporn!
only thing i can say on this is the waist . if you tilt it and push the body forward a lot more you will hit the look almost spot on
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Marauder
#206
Posted 04 November 2013 - 10:23 PM
MadFJohn, on 04 November 2013 - 04:17 PM, said:
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Marauder
The problem with that is the center of gravity would also be pushed forward and the mech would fall forward or the hip/torso joint would be under constant strain trying to keep the mech upright. It's one of several reasons why the Macross design just doesn't work.
EDIT: Other reasons:
- Original design had hip/waist/torso joint at about a 60-degree angle, which means if it tried to torso twist (which is a standard feature for MWO mechs) it would instead corkscrew at 60 degrees instead of turning to the side.
- impossibly small connection between dorsal cannon and torso could not support weight of barrel let alone feed ammo through it and move.
- scrawny biceps could not support weight of heavy weapon forearms, which were described as such specifically so it could engage in hand-to-hand physical combat without damaging the PPCs.
- In MWO, arms that are placed much lower than the cockpit are proving to be a severe detriment and/or design flaw. This would be exaggerated on the classic Marauder design, where the cockpit would already be just above its waist height and place the weapon firing points at near knee-level.
Edited by DirePhoenix, 04 November 2013 - 10:34 PM.
#207
Posted 04 November 2013 - 10:27 PM
I'm not keeping it tall skinny lobster thing. That pod is designed for a green haired Zentraedi dude in the 80's. Keeping it MWO style as in realistic-mecha you could see marching around outside.
Hopefully I don't screw it up...
#208
Posted 04 November 2013 - 11:01 PM
DirePhoenix, on 04 November 2013 - 10:23 PM, said:
EDIT: Other reasons:
- Original design had hip/waist/torso joint at about a 60-degree angle, which means if it tried to torso twist (which is a standard feature for MWO mechs) it would instead corkscrew at 60 degrees instead of turning to the side.
- impossibly small connection between dorsal cannon and torso could not support weight of barrel let alone feed ammo through it and move.
- scrawny biceps could not support weight of heavy weapon forearms, which were described as such specifically so it could engage in hand-to-hand physical combat without damaging the PPCs.
- In MWO, arms that are placed much lower than the cockpit are proving to be a severe detriment and/or design flaw. This would be exaggerated on the classic Marauder design, where the cockpit would already be just above its waist height and place the weapon firing points at near knee-level.
agree with all of that and i hope my design get's past that scrutiny, fingers crossed. although some designs just cannot be changed to suit the top gameplay mechanics. not everyone can have arms like jagers and stalkers or have the tanking yet manauverability of a highlander. it's up to the devs to make gameplay mechanics for the arm slunged groundwellers be of some sort of level footing to the high hardpoint poptarters. i'll leave that for other fourmers to discuss somewhere else. by that last point the catapracts without JJ's have horrific design flaws.
i think madfjohn was refering to changing the torso pitch on the pivot so that the top of the cockpit becomes more like the front of the cockpit.
we'll have to wait for a reply on that.
Edited by GalaxyBluestar, 04 November 2013 - 11:05 PM.
#210
Posted 05 November 2013 - 07:42 AM
MadFJohn, on 04 November 2013 - 04:17 PM, said:
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Marauder
I made a decision when designing the torso to center it and the arms on the legs for balance. The original art always bothered me in that regard as it looked horribly off kilter. As for the pitch of the torso, that has more to do with me trying to show the mech from a top down view.
#211
Posted 05 November 2013 - 12:20 PM
#212
Posted 05 November 2013 - 12:27 PM
Marauder3D, on 05 November 2013 - 12:20 PM, said:
Yes. That and the fact that original is absolutely a no go.
So if we have any chance what-so-ever of having the marauder in MWO it has to be based off the new design rather than the old. As much I like Shimmering swords marauder style it's way to close to the original to ever stand a chance of making it through the HG filter.
Personally I build mine more towards a fusion of the Phoenix version with a few nods to the original.
Can't wait to see all the entries.
#213
Posted 05 November 2013 - 05:41 PM
not really a problem for the waist baring and such nor the balance . part of why the legs are pushed forward at the feet like a birds to handle the change of center of gravity . think of the ware at the hip at this angle is not as much as the ware a car's wheel bearing have at 90 degrees. But i still loving your art and i will live with the way it is and it does not have a directly front canopy that drove me nuts lol.
now to keep it as a chance i will say do not change the waist this way it keeps it out of the original art
Edited by MadFJohn, 05 November 2013 - 05:50 PM.
#214
Posted 05 November 2013 - 10:29 PM
#215
Posted 05 November 2013 - 11:09 PM
#216
Posted 05 November 2013 - 11:53 PM
MadFJohn, on 05 November 2013 - 05:41 PM, said:
not really a problem for the waist baring and such nor the balance . part of why the legs are pushed forward at the feet like a birds to handle the change of center of gravity . think of the ware at the hip at this angle is not as much as the ware a car's wheel bearing have at 90 degrees. But i still loving your art and i will live with the way it is and it does not have a directly front canopy that drove me nuts lol.
now to keep it as a chance i will say do not change the waist this way it keeps it out of the original art
Couple things: Birds don't have their feet jutting out as far as the Macross art does, and birds also have femurs, which people always leave off of "chicken walkers" (bird legs aren't actually "backwards"). The hips of birds are set farther back, but birds also don't torso twist (they have necks).
Edited by DirePhoenix, 05 November 2013 - 11:54 PM.
#217
Posted 06 November 2013 - 01:47 AM
(click for wallpaper size)
#218
Posted 06 November 2013 - 09:10 AM
Teliri, on 05 November 2013 - 10:29 PM, said:
GalaxyBluestar, on 05 November 2013 - 11:09 PM, said:
This is correct Galaxy.
I encourage everyone to enter the contest though. Even if you can just do a sketch, the main direction of the contest is to get some design ideas out there. It'll show huge support for the Marauder!
Edited by MoonUnitBeta, 06 November 2013 - 09:21 AM.
#219
Posted 06 November 2013 - 10:48 AM
#220
Posted 06 November 2013 - 12:25 PM
Marcobra, on 06 November 2013 - 01:47 AM, said:
I like the legs, but not for a Marauder. Remove the top segment of leg altogether, and use the top "knee" as the hop joint. I don't like the length of the fuselage either. Arms are good, though I miss the ball joint.
Remember folks, the 'Mech doesn't have to be weight balanced or even appear so -- if it did, a lot of existing designs simply wouldn't work as they are overweighted to one side or the other. Balance is what we have the multi-ton gyros for.
2 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users