Defiance's Eyecandy Thread

Quarto

Unknown Enemy
Sorry for double-post, but @DefianceIndustries posted while I was posting :p.

Also - that image from WC4, if you look at the in-game model in the viewer, the image is backwards. The shot is clearly angled toward the bow but the Hellcat but the Hellcat is spotted pointing aft? So the question becomes: is the hangar correct in the image or the game model? My thoughts are that the model is more correct since it was captured off the original high-poly model so the four revetments are at the bow, not the stern.
Actually, I think you're wrong on this one. The shot is clearly angled toward the stern - if it was towards the bow, we'd see those big prong things in space outside of the bow of the ship. As for which version is more correct, I think you always should go with the higher detail version - in this case, the non-gameplay version of the hangar. Keep in mind, it is highly probable, indeed almost certain, that the hangar and the ship were modelled separately. Even in the FMV scenes, you just don't need a fully-modelled hangar interior while rendering a cutscene showing the carrier flying by.

But both versions are just versions. They're not definitive. After all, how do you reconcile them with the reality of the game? Where are all the fighters the Lexington carried, if you have just a few parking bays along one side? For that matter, where is the half of the flight deck that got taken over by the Black Lance in the novel? Now, granted, the novel was written under the impression that this is a Confederation-class ship, with two separate flight decks. But it's well worth reconciling by having parking bays along both sides (as I said above). There probably should also be a couple of really distinct repair bays, with weird sci-fi equipment that allows a ship to be lifted up and stuff. You know, go wild! Don't stop at recreating what they had in 1996.
 
Fun bit of trivia - in UE, when we show the interior of the Princeton during one of the endgame cutscenes, we actually had an upscaled model of the carrier just for that occasion. I wanted lines and lines of fighters, to highlight the fact that this is a fleet carrier rather than some escort piece of junk, and I did want the carrier to appear as big as it often felt in WC4 outside of the cockpit.

At the end of the day, I think with WC carriers, you can do one of two things - either you downscale any WC1, WC3, and WC4 fighters you have, or you upscale the carrier. Indeed, the games certainly do this as well. Stats are one thing, gameplay is another.

By the way, you should definitely have more of those hangar-like storage spaces along the sides of the flight deck. Right now, you've only got a couple of them, and only on one side of the deck. Another thing you should do is add a whole bunch of junk and doodads to the deck, the kind of stuff that can be seen in that WC4 shot above, and in the cutscenes from the game. You know, boxes, barrels, towing vehicles, ordnance, all that kind of stuff. Otherwise, you run the risk that at the end of the day, the hangar deck will still feel low-detail.

Also, didn't I say I'd be staying off the CZ for a few months? Bugger. I gotta break this habit :p.
Yeah I scaled everything to the 27 meter Hellcat, but if you wanted to go all WCP on it, the Hellcat should only be 13.5 meters which makes it slightly smaller than a real-world F-16 (@ 15 m). And don't worry, I planned on stacking do-dads, crates, and a truck on the deck before I'm through. As for the extra cubbies, the model is pretty clear, those four revetments only exist on the starboard side. but I can knock out a few extra spaces on the other side for supply storage.

LexHang.JPG


This shot is from stern to bow so the reason I think the image is backwards is that if you look at the wall panels, you can clearly see there are (actually four) panels from the stern to the revetments, but only 1/2 panel to the bow. As for why the image doesn't have the prongs in it, your guess is as good as mine unless of course the developers somehow inverted the hangar model in production.

It's all kind of academic anyway. I take your point about more detailing and making things seem correct to the description, not our own damn lying eyes. :p
 
Last edited:
Rescaled the Lexington hangar along WCP guidelines (ie. a 13.5 meter Hellcat and a 16 meter T-bolt) The look is closer to the scale in the still images. Also added a second set of revetments aft of the doorway and some other tweaks. The indented section of the ceiling will probably end up housing a tracked crane of some variety. I tried just running pipes and it looked like crap...:)

Hangar-rescale1.jpg Hangar-rescale2.jpg Hangar-rescale4.jpg
 

L.I.F.

Vice Admiral
Rescaled the Lexington hangar along WCP guidelines (ie. a 13.5 meter Hellcat and a 16 meter T-bolt) The look is closer to the scale in the still images. Also added a second set of revetments aft of the doorway and some other tweaks. The indented section of the ceiling will probably end up housing a tracked crane of some variety. I tried just running pipes and it looked like crap...:)

View attachment 9256 View attachment 9257 View attachment 9258
Still waiting for the ship's cat and its dynamic fur modelization when it gets caught in the combined turbulent wake of two fighters at once, though. The ship cannot be considered as finished without it, you know. :-P
 
Still waiting for the ship's cat and its dynamic fur modelization when it gets caught in the combined turbulent wake of two fighters at once, though. The ship cannot be considered as finished without it, you know. :-P
I'm such a slacker, I still didn't put Plier's wrench in the Durango...
 

DustinKit

Veteran Spaceman
Rescaled the Lexington hangar along WCP guidelines (ie. a 13.5 meter Hellcat and a 16 meter T-bolt) The look is closer to the scale in the still images. Also added the best gaming mouse here a second set of revetments aft of the doorway and some other tweaks. The indented section of the ceiling will probably end up housing a tracked crane of some variety. I tried just running pipes and it looked like crap...:)

View attachment 9256 View attachment 9257 View attachment 9258
Amazing designs Defiance!
 
Last edited:
I've been on something of an arena kick lately. I was finishing up my Excalibur and ran across the concept art from Arena for their version of the F-103. I found the concept intriguing (if a bit too Aerotech) so I did a rework of my other F-103 in the same vein. I always considered the Excal something of the WC equivalent of an F-15, so it would seem appropriate that it might evolve along similar lines. In the late/post Nephilim war era, I imagine the Excal filling a role similar to an F-15 E, A good space superiority platform enhanced with light strike capability, packing along 4 or so Valiant light torpedoes in addition to it's normal missile compliment. If it were to go into vision, it would have thrust-vectoring engines enhancing it's pitch (ala Vampire - no not the whole nacelle that would be silly) And I made it a tandem cockpit for a RIO.

ArenaExcal1.jpg ArenaExcal2.jpg ArenaExcal3.jpg ArenaExcal4.jpg

And what Arena kick wouldn't be complete without a Rapier? I enjoyed making this one, I don't often spend so much time doing subsurface modeling so this was a nice challenge.

Rapier44X_Clay1.jpg Rapier44X_Clay2.jpg Rapier44X_Clay3.jpg

I'm also modeling out some do-dads, crash carts, and missile trucks to clutter up the Lexington's deck with. more on those later.
 
**********
ENCRYPED - ULTRA SECRET - Eyes Only - Enter Security Code:
...A7BTNC89PK1 - Accepted...Decoding.......
TO: Space Marshal G. Tolwyn
FROM: Capt. H. Paulsen
Subject: Project Typhon Summary
Transmission begins as follows:
**********

Space Marshal,

I'm pleased to announce that the prototype of the next-generation carrier is in the final stages of fitting out near Axios and is on-schedule to be delivered
as promised. I hope that you will be able to attend the launch, however with events in the Borderworlds proceeding as planned, the crew would certainly understand
if your schedule wouldn't allow for an in-person send off. I can personally attest to each one's willingness to serve the greater good.

To address some of your concerns from your last communique; I understand that on paper, her defenses seem lackluster. Your concerns about no dedicated anti-captial
ship weaponry is understandable, however the design team assures me that the rapid-fire dual-purpose light anti-matter turrets will be able to defeat a Southhampton
in a one-on-one match-up due to the Typhon's superior targeting and tracking software - and are an exceptional deterrent for incoming bombers. Additionally, the three
anti-fighter laser turrets are positioned to defend the weak points on the hull, primarily the hangars.

Regarding your request for additional RFLAM guns, the design team has reviewed it and found that any additional turret mounts would disrupt Typhon's stealth signature
and tax the optical camoflauge generators. It's unfortunate as I agree with you sir, that one more turret might make the difference in a multi-ship engagement; but Typhon's
best defense, as designed, is her stealth profile and, of course, the F-107 Lances aboard.

Regarding her stealth profile. I know you were eager to get the results from the stealth drills. I am pleased to report that Typhon actually exceeded our expectations.
Under EMCON conditions without her optical camoflauge engaged, running at 1/3 speed, her sensor cross-section was roughly equivalent to that of a mid-war transport -
say a Drayman troopship. Her profile did increase at higher speeds, though even at flank speed Typhon's emissions weren't any greater than a destroyer-class vessel.
At full stop she was almost impossible to find. With her active camoflauge engaged Typhon was all but invisible to sensors even at half speed.
The hunter-killer group assigned spent the day scouring the system and banging away with active sensors and only came close twice. Typhon was able to detect and reposition
without giving away her position. The designers did want me to pass on that based on their tests, the camoflauge sensors and heat baffles can't sustain speeds greater
than half for more than a few minutes without suffering damage or breaking down. I've attached the actual data results in an addendum at the end of this message.

I did want to pass along a concern from our friend on the appropriations committee. As you are aware Typhon was not inexpensive to build, it cost almost as much as Vesuvius.
Our friend was able to hide Typhon's budget as cost overruns in the construction budgets for Vesuvius and Mt. St. Helens. They wanted me to warn you that the Assmebly
is going to be stricter on budgets this fiscal cycle, so it won't be possible to hide future construction budgets in the same fashion. I know that if everything goes
to plan this won't be an issue. However we should potentially consider an alternate source of funding for future carriers; our friend suggested we look at a few sources
including community outreach, technical re-training and readiness.

Personal Note: Captain "E" is asking questions about things he shouldn't, I reccomend that we act sooner rather than later on that count.

Capt. H. Paulsen

TCS_Typhon1.jpg


Typhon_Fin4.jpg Typhon_Fin1.jpg Typhon_Fin2.jpg Typhon_Fin5.jpg Typhon_Fin6.png
 

FekLeyrTarg

Commodore
I wonder how effective the camouflage would be against the Nephilim, who proved to be capable of penetrating cloaking devices according to a deleted line in "Prophecy".
 

Quarto

Unknown Enemy
That is cetainly not unpretty! :) But... I find it hard to envision how on earth this carrier fits any reasonable number of fighters onboard. Sure, you could stuff a lot of Ferrets in there, but Dragons? I wonder if you would consider adding a very rough wireframe cutaway of the interior of the ship's flight deck. Where are the fighters stored? I assume that behind those big doors might be some hangar bays - about six-eight of them, each with room for just one fighter. I guess there might also be an elevator on the flight deck, leading down into an additional hangar area beneath the deck, where probably a bunch of additional fighters could be stored, along with the repair areas and spare parts. I'd really love to see you whitebox-prototype the fighter storage areas, to give us some idea of what this carrier could actually store.

Also - any reason why it's Typhon, rather than Typhoon? Does Typhon have some meaning I am unaware of?

Also also - any chance of you doing a Copernicus-class science vessel any time soon? It would be a cool addition, particularly since from the looks of it, it's probably a multi-purpose hull, with cargo-carrying and other configurations.
 
Top