WC:CD "Dreadnought" Name Vote!!

[JasonRocZ]

I remember watching the Mask #2 or 3 or whatever and the bad guy was named "Loki" often refered to as a jokestrrrr, Also keep in mind....Just because the flagship of the class is called "Artemis" doesn't mean that there won't be more than one "Artemis" class. I like "Fenrir" that seems like a cool name, plus think about it, it kills Odin and nothing could beat Odin!!!!

 

[Capn Johnny]

I think this ship looks coolio!

But (and this is just me being a nitpicker) if the ship is supposed to be a Dreadnaught class, then the registry prefix (IMHO) would be something more like:
DN-78 (or whatever number you plan on using)

to me CVS implies that it is classified as a Strike Carrier or Super Carrier..

anyway, just my $0.02

I still think it looks cool..

 

[ChrisReid]

I'm thinking he used CVS because that's what we see attached to the only Dreadnought in Wing Commander that we know the designation for (the CVS-65 Concordia). The various Fleet/Strike/Attack/Mega Carriers we see mostly used the regular CV with a few rare CVA/CVX numbers thrown in.

 

[Capn Johnny]

Yeah, I knew the Connie from Wing2 was a DN and that she carried the "CVS" prefix, and I agree its perfectly fine to use it in that way..

its just one of those little inconsistencies that has always bugged me about WC.. and its something I would have pushed to change back at OSI..

but, as I say, its nothing more than a pet peeve now, I guess.

-J

 

[Bandit LOAF]

CVS was always weird -- apparently it's a submarine-hunting carrier in real life?

The WC2 era writers bible seems to use "BAH" instead of CVS. Figure that one out.

 

[Dundradal]

CVS was always weird -- apparently it's a submarine-hunting carrier in real life?

If a carrier was denoted to only be used in the anti-submarine role then it would use the CVS prefix. It was mostly used in the Atlantic in connection to the hunter-killer groups and to two or three light carriers in the Pacific.

 

[JasonRocZ]

Yea...I think no matter what designation that we use for WC:CD that it would be inaccurate or feel wrong. But Chrisreid is right..I used the CVS designation because that's the only one we see in continuity in the WC Series...but....We could always revert back to the "BB" or something like that. Or it could just be refered to as the Artemis Class without a designation. Similar to like the Hades class...I don't believe we get a designation for the Cerberus...Or make it so that it doesn't have a class and be the only ship of it's design, so in essence it would be "The Artemis" without any mention of number......in any event it's probably wise for me to just call it the "Artemis" class battlecruiser or Artemis class dreadnought....Without noting a designation. I mean the WC:CD mod is for the most part non-canon. But at the same time I don't want to tie in something that isn't really part of the WC universe....So within the game it will just be called the Artemis class dreadnought....and if there's multiple Artemis class dreadnoughts...We can name them from there....without designation. Hope that all makes sense

 

[Ambassador]

CVS-66 Admiral Tirpiz

Tirpiz was an battleship class of it´s own. The Design was much ahead of it´s time making it the most advanced Battleship of it´s time. Well since the Tirpiz never came to use in battle, it took not less then eight allied Battleships and several smaller vessels to hunt her sister the Bismarck down.

So I think that would be an fine name for an proud ship.
A question by the way...
Is this ship also designed to carry fighters? Or why is an CV prefix used instead of an BB, DN or DX for experimental dreadnought?

 

[JasonRocZ]

I've since reverted back to the BB designation, and yes it will carry fighters

 

[Vinman]

I was thinking... it looks a bit too symmetrical. On a ship of this size, some asymmetry would make sense. Maybe an asymmetrical radar array, or some blisters on the hull.

 

[JasonRocZ]

This is a ship that I have to revisit because I really have to finalize alot of it and get it into the vision engine....I have to put in a shield generator. a few architectural details I guess you could call them. But it's gettin there

 

[Lt.Overload]

This is just an idea, but with if their are 2 different versions? For example, a green version will be a quick-strike assult version, when another is a slow mega-version, with a different color.

 

[JasonRocZ]

This is just an idea, but with if their are 2 different versions? For example, a green version will be a quick-strike assult version, when another is a slow mega-version, with a different color.

That's a pretty good idea but...I'm bustin my hump just to get the first one in the vision engine...And I've also Modded it since the last screenshots

 

[Lt.Overload]

Wouldn't just be easier to alter the mesh for the one already on the vision engine, instead of making a new mesh, just copy the first and edit some few points. The .mat is also an important factor, in case you have 2 version, both looking the same but with different colors.

 

[JasonRocZ]

I haven't put the Artemis in the Vision engine yet....I'm having trouble

 

[Confed]

I'd name it the Leviathan

 

[JasonRocZ]

Updates for this ship can be found here
http://www.crius.net/zone/showthread.php?t=23610

 

[Aeronautico]

Definitely miss the older design with the pointed hull. I kind of pictured it as a sort of supercruiser up to now.

 

[Aeronautico]

This ship STILL hasn't left me despite the age of this article, LOL. I always pictured this as a sort of secret weapon kind of vessel when Confed needed to break out the big guns, LOL. Sorry that it's been years since anybody gave it any love.

Seriously though, give it the pointed hull again. Chopping its nose off made it look a lot less sleek.

 

[Aeronautico]

This came out so long ago but I never stopped thinking about this awesome ship design.