20517 replies to this topic

[Metus regem]

Adridos, on 14 February 2018 - 01:46 PM, said:

GOT EM! Thanks.

http://jrients.blogs...s-revealed.html


Was actually even older than I remembered, this is from before AdeTita.

Welcome!

Wow, I've never seen those before (well at least in regards to WH that is)... oldest miniatures I've ever seen in actual play were 25mm base metal Rouge Trader era Terminators and RT era Land Raider Spartan (that was build by mashing a Rhino and Land Raider together)....

[Jay Leon Hart]

Adridos, on 14 February 2018 - 12:56 PM, said:

Nah...

Speaking of, W40k titans, they're copied from Battletech which is copied from anime so yeah. That Warlord Titan has the face of the Monster, not the other way around. To reiterate, Games Workshop made metal casts of Battletech machines for the original titans. To say nothing of stealing the rules and everything.

The old minies are there on the internet, but you'll need to one up my google-fu to find them ATM.

I'm not seeing any similarities between any BattleTech 'mech I know of and the GW 1988 Warlord Titan


I much prefer the 3rd edition version form 1997

[Jay Leon Hart]

Adridos, on 14 February 2018 - 01:46 PM, said:

GOT EM! Thanks.

http://jrients.blogs...s-revealed.html


Was actually even older than I remembered, this is from before AdeTita.

Oh, so from the original 1987 Rogue Trader days? Wowzers! Bad GW, bad GW!

[Ovion]

Jay Leon Hart, on 14 February 2018 - 02:01 PM, said:

Oh, so from the original 1987 Rogue Trader days? Wowzers! Bad GW, bad GW!

Yup.
Games Workshop outright took and plagiarized other peoples work, unashamedly.
Which is what makes it even more absurd with their aggressive litigation of the past few years.

[Jay Leon Hart]

Water Bear, on 14 February 2018 - 04:57 AM, said:

As I'm sitting here looking at my Awesomes and my Zeuses, I think what this game really needs is an 80 ton IS 'mech that's...got decent hardpoints. There's 1 Zeus and half an AWS (out of the like 5 I own) that are actually workable.

If you like high mounts? Uziel or Blood Asp high? Legacy
If you like pre-Clan Invasion 'mech? Thug
If you like the BattleMaster and don't care about the timeline? Warlord

[Uncle Totty]

Adridos, on 14 February 2018 - 01:25 PM, said:

Here's a shot of the mech:


And the internals:


The X68k version has slightly more details on the internals but I think these ones are clear enough for what they are.
And yes, these are genuine pictures taken from Mechwarrior 1's mechlab, the game where Battletech got the IICs from.



Adeptus Titanicus predates Epic by quite a margin. It's what epic eventually derived from. First it was the mechs going at it and then they started adding other units, et cetera, et cetera.
Once again, I'm sorry but I'm unable to provide the damning evidence since the new re-release of the game makes looking for this obscure stuff particularly painful.

Odanan, on 14 February 2018 - 01:44 PM, said:

Isn't this the MW1's Rifleman?

The one you posted is the Rifleman IIC (maybe from MW2?)

But yeah, there are clearly the "rocket launchers".

BTW, good to see you back here Adridos. Don't be a stranger.

http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Rifleman_IIC

[Valdarion Silarius]

Adridos, on 14 February 2018 - 01:25 PM, said:

Here's a shot of the mech:


And the internals:


The X68k version has slightly more details on the internals but I think these ones are clear enough for what they are.
And yes, these are genuine pictures taken from Mechwarrior 1's mechlab, the game where Battletech got the IICs from.



Adeptus Titanicus predates Epic by quite a margin. It's what epic eventually derived from. First it was the mechs going at it and then they started adding other units, et cetera, et cetera.
Once again, I'm sorry but I'm unable to provide the damning evidence since the new re-release of the game makes looking for this obscure stuff particularly painful.

Wow, I never saw those images before even if they are from the Japanese port of MW1. Nice find. Those things that you are referring to as "rocket launchers' are simply supposed to be support pylons on the radar dish for the battletech Rifleman IIC.

Going back to the Macross Destroid Defender (aka the IS Rifleman), aren't those bins on each side of the mech supposed to be ammo bins? Or are they missile covers for the mech? I honestly can't see how they can compare those ammo bins to the Rifleman (IIC) from MW1 despite my bias views on the whole subject.

[Metus regem]

Arnold The Governator, on 14 February 2018 - 03:37 PM, said:

Wow, I never saw those images before even if they are from the Japanese port of MW1. Nice find. Those things that you are referring to as "rocket launchers' are simply supposed to be support pylons on the radar dish for the battletech Rifleman IIC.

Going back to the Macross Destroid Defender (aka the IS Rifleman), aren't those bins on each side of the mech supposed to be ammo bins? Or are they missile covers for the mech? I honestly can't see how they can compare those ammo bins to the Rifleman (IIC) from MW1 despite my bias views on the whole subject.

Ammo bins, they are twin AC/s on each arm.

[Valdarion Silarius]

Metus regem, on 14 February 2018 - 03:48 PM, said:

Ammo bins, they are twin AC/s on each arm.

I thought so. I'm just confused on how you can get the "missile pods" support pylons mixed up with the ammo bins from the Destroid Defender aka IS Rifleman.

[Adridos]

Arnold The Governator, on 14 February 2018 - 03:55 PM, said:

I thought so. I'm just confused on how you can get the "missile pods" support pylons mixed up with the ammo bins from the Destroid Defender aka IS Rifleman.

For them to be support pylons, they'd need to be attached to the dish. But still, they are ammo bins as per original Destroid and as such not really outside of BTech's scope. Even if they're ammo bins on a design with no ammo.

I still stand by the fact it's a derivative design and it's clear as day when you don't have an agenda to push, though.

[Metus regem]

Arnold The Governator, on 14 February 2018 - 03:55 PM, said:

I thought so. I'm just confused on how you can get the "missile pods" support pylons mixed up with the ammo bins from the Destroid Defender aka IS Rifleman.

In the first edition of the Robotech RPG book there is a great picture that shows the ammo feed in the Defender (Raider X), I'll try to find the image online someplace later....

[Adridos]

Metus regem, on 14 February 2018 - 04:44 PM, said:

In the first edition of the Robotech RPG book there is a great picture that shows the ammo feed in the Defender (Raider X), I'll try to find the image online someplace later....

You don't have to.

[Valdarion Silarius]

Adridos, on 14 February 2018 - 04:31 PM, said:

For them to be support pylons, they'd need to be attached to the dish.

In which they are. I did my best to highlight where the support pylons are attached to the dish.



The reseen Rifleman IIC lacks the support pylons that the original had. The RFL-IIC 8 artwork visually is the only mech (from what I can see by the angle) that has the radar dish attached directly above the head. It is honestly hard to tell.

Adridos, on 14 February 2018 - 04:31 PM, said:

I still stand by the fact it's a derivative design and it's clear as day when you don't have an agenda to push, though.

To each their own. The images that you have supplied from the in game MW1 Japanese artwork could pass as a derivative for the Destroid Defender, but do realize that there are several artist renditions of the Rifleman IIC (both reseen and unseen interpretations) and how it could be put into MW:O without it looking like anything like a Macross derivative. Since PGI is going with reseen redesigns for the classic mechs I fail to see how this:



looks anything like this:



or this:



I really hope that Alex polishes up and make the reseen Rifleman IIC more beefier because I am not the biggest fan of it's looks.

Edited by Arnold The Governator, 14 February 2018 - 05:34 PM.

[Metus regem]

Adridos, on 14 February 2018 - 04:48 PM, said:

You don't have to.

Thanks for digging that up for me!

[Adridos]

Arnold The Governator, on 14 February 2018 - 05:32 PM, said:

In which they are. I did my best to highlight where the support pylons are attached to the dish.

This is a piece of concept art from the game and the game clearly says they are separate as seen in all the in-game pictures I've provided. You can't just selectively pick which pictures from the game you consider right and wrong depending on which ones are not entirely clear on that aspect of the design and which ones show it clearly.

[Odanan]

Adridos, on 15 February 2018 - 01:45 AM, said:

This is a piece of concept art from the game and the game clearly says they are separate as seen in all the in-game pictures I've provided. You can't just selectively pick which pictures from the game you consider right and wrong depending on which ones are not entirely clear on that aspect of the design and which ones show it clearly.

You guys are too worried about concept arts that aren't even consistent between each other...

Anyway, Adridos, those are very cool. Where are you getting them? Are there others?

Edited by Odanan, 15 February 2018 - 03:10 AM.

[Adridos]

Odanan, on 15 February 2018 - 02:01 AM, said:

Anyway, Adridos, those are very cool. Where are you getting them? Are there others?

Painstakingly making them. I've uploaded the outside shots here: http://bgb.booru.org...rior_1+japanese

Internals, not so much as they only show the insides in the other version of the game. Though I reverse engineered some old floppy saves to become filthy rich in that one as well so I'll upload all the internals by the time you'll read this, probably.

[Bishop Steiner]

Arnold The Governator, on 14 February 2018 - 05:32 PM, said:

In which they are. I did my best to highlight where the support pylons are attached to the dish.



The reseen Rifleman IIC lacks the support pylons that the original had. The RFL-IIC 8 artwork visually is the only mech (from what I can see by the angle) that has the radar dish attached directly above the head. It is honestly hard to tell.


To each their own. The images that you have supplied from the in game MW1 Japanese artwork could pass as a derivative for the Destroid Defender, but do realize that there are several artist renditions of the Rifleman IIC (both reseen and unseen interpretations) and how it could be put into MW:O without it looking like anything like a Macross derivative. Since PGI is going with reseen redesigns for the classic mechs I fail to see how this:



looks anything like this:



or this:



I really hope that Alex polishes up and make the reseen Rifleman IIC more beefier because I am not the biggest fan of it's looks.

Here's the thing with that top pic Arnold... because of the angle, we only assume that those touch, because at first glance we can't see any separation. And at that angle, it would be impossible to do so. But it could be simple perspective bias, such as the lasers on the sides of the Dervish's paddles getting misinterpreted, or how many artists thought the Hatchetman only had one hand.

We've seen misunderstandings become "canon" before from the idiocy of the hand actuator snafu in the King Crab, to the Dervish's lasers, to the Assassin's cockpit.

As for the Rifleman? I always assumed they were as you say, support pylons (odd ones, but the whole sombrero and camera face is a bit odd), because the sole art was based off that one VMI image that I had seen. IF the other predates it, then we see another disconnect from what was intended, and what, through misinterpretation, became "the norm".

Whenever possible, I'd like to see Alex give a nod to what the original artists intended, personally. Which would have a side benefit of them being able to maybe find ways to give the IIC non insta death hitboxes.

Solo mi dos pesos.

On a separate subject, my latest redesign, which probably should be in Reseen Resin format in 4-6 wks?

[Valdarion Silarius]

Bishop Steiner, on 15 February 2018 - 06:18 AM, said:

I always assumed they were as you say, support pylons (odd ones, but the whole sombrero and camera face is a bit odd), because the sole art was based off that one VMI image that I had seen. IF the other predates it, then we see another disconnect from what was intended, and what, through misinterpretation, became "the norm".

Whenever possible, I'd like to see Alex give a nod to what the original artists intended, personally. Which would have a side benefit of them being able to maybe find ways to give the IIC non insta death hitboxes.

I mean hell, if they are truly meant to be missile hard points from the original concept art then I am all for it. Might as well make the prime even more OP when everyone calls it a cheese mech. Let the tears flow I say.

Adridos, on 15 February 2018 - 01:45 AM, said:

This is a piece of concept art from the game and the game clearly says they are separate as seen in all the in-game pictures I've provided. You can't just selectively pick which pictures from the game you consider right and wrong depending on which ones are not entirely clear on that aspect of the design and which ones show it clearly.

Bishop is right. There are so many inconsistencies with what we got canon wise vs what the original MW1 Japanese port made for the mech, to the point where I do not think there is a conclusive answer to be had here. Whoever imported the mech artwork over to North America may not have realized what I've been calling "support pylons" and what you have been calling "missile bays" to actually be canon and what not. All that I do know is that the Prime does not have any canon missile hard points, and none of the stock models had them up until the introduction of the RFL-IIC 4.

[Valdarion Silarius]

Since this topic has got me thinking, I wonder if the original Warhammer IIC (aka Japanese Warhammer) was not supposed to have an SRM-6 rack (or missile hard points) in the top right part of the mech to begin with? When it was imported to Battletech in North America and remade as an entirely new mech, it was added then?