#21
Posted 27 December 2015 - 11:05 AM
#22
Posted 27 December 2015 - 02:30 PM
Edited by Ed Steele, 27 December 2015 - 02:30 PM.
#23
Posted 27 December 2015 - 10:23 PM
Marack Drock, on 27 December 2015 - 01:43 PM, said:
That's a question you'll have to ask PGI. Besides, I only do this as a hobby and not as a job, so there's less people yelling at me to get things done right.
Ed Steele, on 27 December 2015 - 02:30 PM, said:
I don't presume to know the thought process of PGI designers, but there's a certain style to the MWO mechs: every mech that needs to be tough needs to look tough as well. Meaning just about every assault mech will look fat and thick.
#24
Posted 28 December 2015 - 01:24 AM
SelectiveCape12, on 27 December 2015 - 10:23 PM, said:
Oh, how i wish the Centurion was skinnier.
Also seeing the old missile bay with multiple tiny doors makes me depressed and angry at the current Dynamic weapon geo crap.
#25
Posted 28 December 2015 - 09:34 AM
#26
Posted 28 December 2015 - 10:11 AM
#27
Posted 28 December 2015 - 02:02 PM
I'm also diggin that Awesome, I think the narrow waist would help the in game model.
And lol at the catapult. Very nice job making it look like TRO, but boy am I glad it doesn't look like that in game (scaling aside).
#28
Posted 28 December 2015 - 03:21 PM
Rizzelbizzeg, on 28 December 2015 - 02:02 PM, said:
I'm also diggin that Awesome, I think the narrow waist would help the in game model.
And lol at the catapult. Very nice job making it look like TRO, but boy am I glad it doesn't look like that in game (scaling aside).
I agree, the Mechs should have the correct arm length and the larger hitboxes that goes along with it.
#29
Posted 03 January 2016 - 05:17 PM
Ed Steele, on 28 December 2015 - 03:21 PM, said:
I agree, the Mechs should have the correct arm length and the larger hitboxes that goes along with it.
The BT Mad Dog actually has a larger torso than its MWO design, meaning a lot of people will be crying even more if certain hitboxes were ever adjusted accordingly. But I wholeheartedly agree about the arms being better with the gun barrels.
Edited by SelectiveCape12, 03 January 2016 - 05:17 PM.
#30
Posted 04 January 2016 - 01:14 PM
#31
Posted 04 January 2016 - 07:35 PM
I generally just go with whatever pictures I find on Google images for a lot of the proportion sizes. Some of them may or may not be correct, but it's the overall shape that I'm after. Not to mention quality control isn't really my forte, as a lot of the models I've done have a few bits and pieces out of place.
#32
Posted 05 January 2016 - 03:51 AM
#33
Posted 06 January 2016 - 05:57 PM
Edited by KiyoshiKazuya, 06 January 2016 - 05:59 PM.
#34
Posted 07 January 2016 - 08:54 AM
But true enough, the MWO design of the Timber Wolf is obscenely thick and blocky (possibly for balance reasons, making heavies easier to hit by making them thicker). And on the other side of the spectrum, the BT design looks like its arms will come off under its own weight. I like to think I struck a balance between the two.
#35
Posted 07 January 2016 - 09:21 AM
#36
Posted 07 January 2016 - 07:26 PM
#37
Posted 07 January 2016 - 08:55 PM
SelectiveCape12, on 07 January 2016 - 07:26 PM, said:
Great, I will make it in paper, because It looks perfect, maybe launchers are a little bit to big.
#38
Posted 08 January 2016 - 12:30 AM
SgtMagor, on 04 January 2016 - 01:14 PM, said:
Becareful what you ask for... that thing is a walking CT shot from all angles ( The head )
#39
Posted 10 January 2016 - 11:18 AM
Here's the link to the Timber Wolf model: https://www.dropbox....MWO_tbr.7z?dl=0
I've included a couple extra formats in the archive 'cause I'm not sure what format everyone uses for importing. I mostly just stick to .fbx in 3ds max. The textures are also included if anyone requires them.
#40
Posted 13 January 2016 - 10:57 AM
Dire Wolf
Mad Dog
5 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 5 guests, 0 anonymous users