[Community Game]: Capital ship and floating base conceptualization.

[Retroboy]

k so you have anti-gravity, and you can start a combination of
- retrofitting actual naval vessels to make 'em hover and fire in a downward arc,
- lifting entire cities into the air, and
- designing airborne aircraft carriers, supply vessels, artillery platforms and all other heavy craft.

The age of true airborne warfare has begun.

This thread is for the concept artist to go wild.

-- Retro

[The5thElephant]

I keep picturing Cloud City steampunk style in my head. Lots of steam and heavy smoke trailing behind it.

[JAL-18]

Real quick photoshop cause I can't scan in my stuff yet. Right now I'm trying to nail down a visual style for the anti-gravity units. I'm thinking that all "converted" ship designs ( originally wet-navy, but reconfigured for air combat) would have an AG "cradle" added to the keel of the ship. The screws and rudders would be replaced by an AG device that would be used as the main means of propulsion. (Rather then just keeping the ship up)

I used an Atlanta class ship cause I like the layout of the six 5 inch turrets, and I think this would make an excellent anti-aircraft ship. (Which is what the ships were in real life.Think Aeolus from FS2.)

(For anyone who caught it, I realise that the Atlanta CL's were built in the 1940's-10 years too late for our purposes. I would like the 5" turret layout to be represented somewhere in the game though)

http://img2.photobucket.com/albums/v11/navalfreak18/Naval%20Stuff/AGAtlanta.jpg

[Ultra FrEaK_Y]

maybe it could be like Project nomads (http://www.project-nomads.de/english/index1.htm) with the steampunk floating city's or islands

[Progenitor]

i picture a huge ship, with several cities in domes along it's spine, this ship would be floating around in geostationary orbits and can enter the atmosphere to replenish supplies which can't be produced by it's onboard cities.

[dukes]

i picture a huge ship, with several cities in domes along it's spine, this ship would be floating around in geostationary orbits and can enter the atmosphere to replenish supplies which can't be produced by it's onboard cities.


The dome-orbital system wouldn't really fit with the 1920/30's theme. I think dome's would give it a much more futuristic look, and although space flight would be easier with this anti-gravitic device, I'm not sure the technology would be available to survive in space at that time.

I like JAL-18's idea, but it could do with a few more guns around other sides (bottom/edges) as right now it'll hav to be very low-flying (low-hovering?) to be able to shoot anything, and would be very vulnerable to ground attacks.

[Retroboy]

Progenitor, the issue with placing things in orbit is that they can't be attacked by propellor-driven fighters. This is kind of a gameplay issue more than an artistic one, but when you start introducing vacuum and hard radiation, the cost of retrofitting WWII vessels would become astronomical. I just don't think they had sufficient 'tech in the 30's to be able to do that sort of thing, even with anti-gravity.

Jal - looks good, although IMO it needs some sort of underside defense as well. For an agrav power source, perhaps the "floating gimbal" concept could apply (discussed in here:
http://forums.relicnews.com/showthread.php?t=29499) http://hwcommunity.com/~retroboy/flying_city_concept.GIF

I like the idea of having glowy circuits distribute the antigrav over the surface of a vessel - will post a pic or two tonight.

-- Retro

[FluxX]

<--- Goes into Antigrave dev' design mode!
The idea I had, would be a ant-graviton drive.

Uing a normal petrol engine, you would make some anti-gravitons with a special device. Perhaps two magnets spinning in a barrel :P .

Then, you would "pipe" these anti-gravitons around to your repulsar pads.

Makes for a really mechanical look to a high tech device.

[Handarazuur]

I would say they're modified pre-WWI or WWI ships. Considering that a war's going on, they wouldn't really have the resources to design and build whole new ships.

Besides, having something like the Bismarck floating over your head would be bloody cool.

[Rusty]

http://users.pandora.be/gilles_homepage/FoatingCity.jpg

I know, it sucks, but its just an idea about how i would see a floating city, i have some nice and easy editable pictures of WW2 Airplanes...

Bleh well, go mock at me...

EDIT: Those wires hanging are against fighters attacking the grav, as it would be a weakpoint...

[Retroboy]

FluxX, fyi the theory is being covered in the thread in General Discussion that I linked to above, although it most definitely will have some strong tie-ins to the visual appearance of the device.

Hand - having a floating destroyer squadron taking on a battleship at close range, while fighters dogfight in nearby skies - THAT visual is what made the game concept so appealing.

-- Retro

[FluxX]

Theory is done! Its in there! Go check it!! :)

But you still need to design the engine...

[Riess]

Very quick concept of what a converted WWI battleship might look like, based on the Austro-Hungarian Admiral Tegetthoff class.

Pic here (http://groups.msn.com/MartinKoza/stuff.msnw?action=ShowPhoto&PhotoID=78)

[Retroboy]

GJ, Riesstiu. the gravity thingummy looks quite good with the blue glow. I'd something similar in mind, except my idea would see some of the topside guns sacrificed to make internal room for the lower ones, and the hull at the bottom would be a bit more flattened.

-- Retro

[skibb]

k my floating city...

http://hosting.hwcommunity.com/040728055737-space%20city.GIF

TEH colors are inverted b/c as we all know-colors are opposite in space (plus looks coolar) :F
very simple.

/edit
RAWR WORKS NOW

[dukes]

That doesn't work skibb... and its not a good idea to post in .bmp (like 10 times the size of .jpg :| )

[FluxX]

Colours are oposite in space??? Skibb!!! :dolt:

[Retroboy]

it doesn't work because Skibb blew his bandwidth.

Skibb, open it in MS-Paint, then choose File/Save As, and select .jpg. (keep the original, though, in case you want to ever edit it in the future).

-- Retro

[chees123]

Made a quickie photoshop edit to get what I visualized with the invention of anti-grav technology.

Ladies and gentlemen, I present to you the Abbadon class Battlecruiser in bombardment position!

http://bfg-guild.com/img/Abbadon.jpg

For those of you who can't read German, it says:

"Abbadon class Battlecruiser"

"1. Main Cannons"
"2. 15 cm cannons"
"3. Flak batteries"
"4. Anti-Gravitational Generators"

I might do a few more of these later.. they're fun! :D

EDIT: Thanks RiesstiuIV!!

[Riess]

You really should leave the German translation to someone else. I don't know about "Kategorien-Schlachtkreuzer", but "Beschießung Geschütz" is no german expression. :D

[chees123]

Yes, I realize the German is a bit off..

for Kategorien-Schlachtkreuzer

Kategorien - Category
Schlacht - Battle
Kreuzer - Cruiser


for Beschießung Geschütz

Beschießung - Bombardment
Geschütz - Cannon

I know it's a bit sketchy, but it's all I could come up with. :p

[Riess]

Hehe, okay, come to me if you need German expressions... I'm not fluent with military talk, but it'll do... :P

1. Hauptgeschütze for Main Cannons

Schlachtkreuzer is okay, "Schiffstype: Schlachtkreuzer" would be fine

for 2. I can't think of anything. Best just find the caliber and put that. xx mm-Geschütze or whatever.

3. Flak-Geachütze - Flak is, after all, German
4. Gravitation is Schwerkraft, so make it Antischwerkraft-generator (Germans like to use long words)

And I'm really sorry for the off-topic post.
Tut mir leid, vom Thema abgekommen zu sein.

[chees123]

Okey! Fixed those (thanks!) and made a brand new creation.

Behold! The Russian 'Kronshtadt' Class Heavy Cruiser!

http://bfg-guild.com/img/Kronshtadt.jpg

Notice any similarities? Yeah, me too. Maybe the ships will look similar (have flag of "Air Navy" waving on it for indication) but behave differently.

I'm sure something's wrong with my Russian (no offense intended.. i'm just not a language guy :p), but here are the translations anyways:

"'Kronshtadt' Heavy Cruiser"

"1. 38 cm cannons"
"2. 15 cm cannons"
"3. Flak guns"
"4. Anti-Gravity Generators"

If anyone here is a Russian expert, feel free to correct me! :D

[deadguy]

Most turrets used to be held in by gravity - I wouldn't want to be the engineer in charge of that part of the redesign.

[chees123]

Well, I took "k so you have anti-gravity.." and took it to an extreme. Couldn't you just lift the turrets using the anti-grav technology and bolt them into place in the flying city shipyards?

With that, I present my final capital ship concept, the U.S.S. Hornet.

http://bfg-guild.com/img/Hornet.jpg

I think this sorts out the three major cap ship classes I'm visualizing (Battlecruiser, Smaller than a battlecruiser (:p), and Carrier), but if any more concepts for any class of ship is requested I'll hop to it.

[Gyokuran]

I like Riesstiu's concept a lot, while the glowing things make it look a bit to high tech, the steam stacks counter ballance that very well.

While these ships are going to be in the air and need to have good fire arcs, I do not see very many turrets on the underside of the ships. They would be very dificult to man, install, and design. While they can make the whole ship float, I dont think the technology would be refined enough to actually make each turret weightless. Also dont forget engines, the ships need some method of propelling them selves though the air. Also, from a game play standpoint, capital ships cant have very many anti fighter weapons, otherwise they turn into godships. Generally ships have to be orented at capital ship combat, anti fighter role, or carrier. Its not very fun to attack a ship that can not only sink your battle ships, but swat your fighters like flies.

I'd imagine ships that have heavilly armored undersides to protect against ground defenses, with most of the anti ship weapons at the top. I think they would carry a large bomb payload for droping on ground positions/floating cities. Anti fighter guns would mostly be placed along the sides to give broad fireing arcs at incoming fighters.

[chees123]

For manning, installing and designing underside turrets:

Design is easy. Flip the turret around, and simply reverse the innards so that someone could stand/sit straight up at the bottom of the turret at the firing controls.

Installing is easy. Have a loader utilizing the anti-gravitic engine/capability haul the turret onto the ship, and bolt it down to the ship so it doesn't fall (surely something could be fleshed out) or just install a smaller version of the anti-grav drive to the turret itself, and to your point, hell, it's a video game. If it looks good and is at least pseudo realistic it doesn't matter the practicalities. This whole thing hasn't been fleshed out other than "anti-grav tech exists", so in essence the entire ship including the turrets could be exempt from the laws of gravity.

To the anti-fighter guns with the larger guns. On my lineships/battleships (the biggest of their class, meaning big baddies), I only see 4 flak guns on the Russian ship and 9 on the Bismarck-esque ship (really freaking big). These guns are obviously not accurate and wouldn't do much damage if hit. I hardly see them as "godships". The only case of really strong anti-fighter weaponry being the carrier, and hell, you'd only have one or two of these anyways and a few good hits with a 'anti-grav torpedo' would 'sink' that, so you need to have a lot of anti-fighter guns on it. Besides, send 1 destroyer up on that thing, and it's 'sunk'; nothing large enough to challenge a battleship on that thing. For an example of what I was going for, check out the Point Defense Systems mod for HW2.. every capital ship now has several anti-fighter guns (look a lot like WWII-esque tracers and such) that try and hit their targets, but rarely do, and do little damage to the craft when they do.

I hardly think of capital ships as having 'bombs' as that would be reserved for the bomber aircraft. If necessary (as happened with World War II shelling.. these are meant to be the first ships to be converted to anti-grav travel, and thusly quickly retrofitted and modified) the ships could simply hover above (WWII: off the coast of) the cities and shell the hell out of them with the guns on the bottom, hence the large artillery cannons on the bottom. For the anti-fighter guns on the sides, you can't really tell that's the case from my pictures, can you? :p

And you're right! I forgot engines!

*hobbles off to add engines*

EDIT: Half-assed engines added.. will try again tomorrow :p

[Carach]

i always imagine more airship kind of fighting designs, but i do liek the russian one the most

[Progenitor]

well why not have a battleship, with turrets along the sides, which can be maneuvered downwards but not up. i mean like the broadsides of some ship, but the barrels can be moved to point to the ground for surface bombardment.

thise would allow the bridge and systems to be mounter right-side up and still have the armoured hull below the ship.

[Koki]

Dunno if anyone knows, but - there was a game called 'Stratosphere', where you commanded giant flying fortresses, and even could modify them as you see fit.

The idea was that in the game-world there were flying rocks(Giant flying rocks), which you coul use - monted reactor, few engines(Few different types), and weapons(Many different types). You could even add spikes at front, to smash your enemies. Check the game site&screens, it may give you some nice ideas.


As to the current projects - one thing. Why ships are long and thin? Because they need to cut through water. Is there water in the air? No.

Just taking the ship and mouting A-grav generators would work if there isn't much time(i.e., WAR is breaking off ;)). You have to think, what shape would be the best for flying fortresses? Round? Maybe spherical? Or cigar? It doesn't need to be smooth like fighter craft, because it's supposed to be slow, but it should be generally oval.


Also, Retroboy - you showed up that A-Grav device can be 'turned' to move ships forward/backward. What about it weren't possible? IMVHO it would be better, because you could add, like, propulsion. Which could be destroyed, heheheh.

Ok, enough of this gibberish.

[dukes]

About the propulsion thing, maybe the drive can be "fine tuned" during development of the technology, only allowing very small things to hover, sloly being increased in power to allow much larger things to hover (culminating in flying cities), and as the larger things are being made hovering, the drive is "tweaked" to allow lateral movement. Same again, from small drives up to larger drives... or even the other way, so that its only BIG things which can move laterally because the drives have to be so big, and slowly technology gets better and better to mount them on smaller things (with super-speedy specially designed fighters and bombers coming only very late in the game).

[Retroboy]

Suggest we move discussion on how the drive and propulsion works to the GD thread - this one's for graphics. ;) (Koki - perhaps there you could discuss what forms any alternate propulsion technologies would take.)

-- Retro

[Vijil]

problem: people are gonna look at these and go "wtf that looks like an upside down ship"

solution: use these as inspiration, not final designs. Converted ships would not be inverted.

[dukes]

Another thing: Anti-grav torpedo things wouldn't take out super-carrier type ships in one shot. The thing that does it on the sea is the big hole that makes them sink (and the fact it can split the ship in two is still a problem, but thats only with a good hit). The ship can still function fairly well, as long as something vital (e.g. the drive itself) isn't hit.

I can actually see the HW2 engine being good for this... we just need a "ground" level, as HW2 has shown that modules for ships and having different parts of ships works fine (engines being separately targetable, etc.)

[FluxX]

HW2 engine would not work! Fuuuulllll stooooppp!

[Retroboy]

I agree with Vij. The cost and effort of retrofitting it by slapping on an entire bridge would be enormous. Much easier to carve holes in the lower sides and stick turrets out that can gimbal down - that way, you don't have to redesign every single room on the vessel to accomodate crew upside down.

I'd also suggest there be some sort of landing process (perhaps even in water) in case the thing's power source gets low or it needs maintenance that requires walking around outside. A big pointy bridge situated straight down would severely limit this.

dukes - the problem with the HW2 engine is that it's configured to be an RTS. There would be a tremendous amount of effort to try and convert it to also handle FPS capabilities, and I doubt Relic made it that flexible in the first place.

-- Retro

[Handarazuur]

I can sort of see an idea in my head; I just can't draw it.

Basically, a WWI or earlier seagoing cruiser blended with very light weapons. When you think about it, all an enemy would have to do is disable one of these antigrav machines, and the ship would list uncontrollably.

The units, therefore, would have to be deep-set inside a ship's hull to prevent a lucky yet fatal shot.

[Vijil]

Hand Im going with your plot idea, since its the best yet imo:

In 1914, a man is killed in a Sarajevo bar. A few hours later, the Archduke of Austria, Franz Ferdinand, passes through. World War I never happens. And things start to look very different.

Tanks are never conceived, as trench warfare never necessitated their creation. Machine guns do not arrive on the scene until nearly 1920. Chemical and nuclear warfare remain science fiction.

Planes as we know them cease to exist, as zeppelins can do much more at a lower cost. The Hindenburg is never filled with hydrogen, and hence does not catch on fire. Zeppelins and other similar airships are a common sight, taking the place of expensive and time-consuming ocean-borne tankers and bulk carriers. Not only are the zeppelins larger, but they can move faster as well, and can move over continents instead of going around them (the Suez and Panama canals are shut down). Coming years earlier than in our timeline, they dominate long-distance travel.

Politically, the lack of a war changes the face of the Earth. Japan and the US remain isolationists. Russia remains an autocracy. Hitler completes a peaceful term of service in the Reichswehr, grows out of his racial hatred, and goes on to be the German Ambassador to Greater Britain. He is, in the words of the British Prime Minister, "a pretty nice guy".

The Ottoman Empire is never wiped out by the Allies, and remains a major Eastern power.

Economically, the new timeline is much better than ours. The Depressions never happen, and the average person is much richer than in ours. By the beginning of the 1920s, Europe is economically in a situation similar to that of the "baby boom era". Germany, Austria, France and Greater Britain, which includes Canada, Australia and New Zealand, have a major trade agreement. The European Economic Alliance is the most powerful economy in existence, roughly comparable to the US economy of the early 90s.

Technologically, this timeline is slightly worse off than ours. All the innovations developed during the war are lost. Rockets, tanks, and planes remain in the realm of sci-fi. Einstein's theory of relativity is a major improvement on ours, leading to increased research in the fields of quantum physics and spacial distortion. This will eventually lead to the creation of the antigrav technology.

The technology is created by a German scientist. Unfortunately, the designs are stolen by agents from the Ottoman Empire, who begin developing their own attempts. To the horror of most of Europe, they manage to develop a working model first, and begin planning for the conquest of the continent. Fearing disaster, the German government releases the patent to all European powers, hoping they can stand united. One such power is your country. One of many countries that broke off from autocratic Russia, you are close to both sides. The thrill of the new technology, however, is too tempting for some, and reverse-engineered ships begin appearing in Sinohon (the unofficial name of the Japanese/Chinese alliance) and Russia. Europe breaks up in the confusion; alliances are neutralised, trade agreements are disregarded, and your country suddenly finds itself in the midst of a global conflict.

As the war continues, new technologies are developed to counter enemy units and tactics. The Zephyr Gun, for example, is a ship with a huge railgun, powered with the same technology as the antigravs. It is designed and built to counter enemy missile attacks. This could be changed for whatever units are decided upon.

Alright folks, draw what hand says.

[dukes]

Bah, I wasn't really thinking of the FPS bit of it :X How about cata, that allowed a first person view (even though the controls weren't there :P ).

One engine to consider might be the UT2004 engine, as that is based on FPS BUT allows RTS too. There is even a mod for it called Unreal Annhilation, a remake of Total annihilation BUT it allows you to go and control 1 unit, so you can wander around as a Kbot directing your troops if you like. I know this game really needs to be the other way around (like hostile waters, as I've mentioned previously) with FPS first and RTS second, but considering UT2k4 is an FPS by design, I don't see why that would be a problem (would probably be easier really). The thing is you need something that can handle an M:TW style map view as well as an FPS main view, with RTS elements available. 'Tis a hard request on any engine really.

[Vijil]

ok so anyway

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v226/vijil/ship.jpg

its very rough and scribbleh, but you can see the basics of what Im getting at.

[Riess]

Looks very cool, Vijil, but I'm beginning to agree with Retro in that it would be very practical for capships to be able to land. What if they needed to switch off their engines for maintenance? They could only land in a prebuilt dock (and a huge one at that).
I'm trying to design something fitting now.

[Yuryu]

Vijil I LIKE your design. Keep up the good work.

Working along the same line as Vijil, only with smaller vessels (that thing is freakin huge!). I also have an impression of a floating city kinda thing.
Of course, you have to wait till friday to see it, since I can only scan them then.

[Vijil]

my one can land. although you cant see it cos of the colouring, the sticky out bits on the bottom can be winched up.

[Riess]

Now... yes. I can imagine the antennae and all being retracted. Water landing (the potentially easier and somewhat softer way) is well out for your design. (Well, mine too.)
I'm seeing now the differences in how each of us imagines the antigrav thingies somewhat different. I like your 'giant coil' approach. I'm really concerned about the propulsion thing though. Props aren't gonna do much good accelerating a massive thing like this. Only forms of propulsion I could think of are jets (not yet invented and they'd have to be huge to move the thing, too), rocket engines (nah) or something derived from the agrav engine (most probable, IMO).

[JAL-18]

For the propulsion thing: my designs have replaced the screws and rudders and installed another AG device that functions perpendicular to the normal AG device. (See my Atlanta)

I agree that ships should be able to land in the water, and for that reason (and others) I think we should limit the amount of weapons we place on the keels of these things. I like Gyokuran's last paragraph:


I'd imagine ships that have heavilly armored undersides to protect against ground defenses, with most of the anti ship weapons at the top. I think they would carry a large bomb payload for droping on ground positions/floating cities. Anti fighter guns would mostly be placed along the sides to give broad fireing arcs at incoming fighters.

Realistic, yet still cool. (Destroyers would be perfect for city-bombing duty: replace the depth-charges with bombs. Battleship's are anti-capital, cruisers are anti-air, and destroyers are escorts/city-bombers)

[Retroboy]

How about we designate "capital" ships in one of two generations:

First-generation ships are basically 1920's/1930's naval vessels that have been retrofitted to contain the antigravity device and use its technology. This, the basic hull is for the most part identical to standard boats of the era. You'd rip holes in the hull for downward-angling guns, provide landing facilities for aircraft... that sort of thing.

Second generation ships are those that are specifically designed around the antigravity propulsion system, and are constructed in the years after its popular deployment. They might still look somewhat like standard naval vessels, because they might be built using standard shipyards of the time, but they'd be much more gadgety and doodad-y.

Thus, Vij's excellent sketch would be a 2nd generation ship, although truth be told it looks like it would have some serious challenges when trying to land in a field.

(Vij - please add your history idea to the GD forum post so it won't get missed later? ;) )

I've created a new thread asking for designs of machinery that would generate the antigravity field.

-- Retro

[Murka]

Vijil, how could you forgot Israel?
MOM, HE FORGOT ISRAEL! :(

lol, great plot idea

[Carach]

israel wernt around i nthe 1920s/30s

[Murka]

I know, It was a joke... :D

[Carach]

of course it was :D

[Falcon-]

Ok my take at a floating City - linked because of big image size.

ONG CLICK ME FOR IMAGE (http://cox-internet.com/martyb/city3.jpg)

Ok descriptions time. The gravity device was built below the city as they hollowed out space for it. In the race to be the first to lift off, they powered it on and brought everything within the device's range out of the ground. This became the trend because it was the easiest process in which to bring an entire city into the air.

1. City Power - still relies upon coal/natural gas at least somewhat to power the gravity based energy plant.

2. Bridge Landing - When lifting off, part of a suspention bridge was brought along for the ride and is now used for landing. It can also be reversed into a takeoff zone during attacks.

3. Gravity Device - Right in the center of the land mass.

4. Gun emplacements - Ripped from out of date naval cruisers, high caliber gun emplacements were put in accross the city to defend from other cities or 'naval' attacks. These emplacements are also supported by many small caliber anti-figher gun emplacements. However, fighters are mainly used to counter enemies fighters - such as carriers today.

5. Hanger 1 - Because the fighters have a rudimentary VTOL ability, an area of the landmass has been carved out for an armored hanger area. Mainly used for landings, because aircraft can slow faster without fear of stalling.

6. Airstrip - An airstrip was either built after lift off or ripped from the ground (unlikely).

7. Gun Emplacements 2 - Gun emplacements are also embeded in concrete in the city area. Also, many buildings have anti-figheter turrets placed where there is room.

Just my take, cool work so far guys.

[A176]

I find the concept of a floating city with Earthy underneaths a tad too cliche.

[Dino Dude]

i know this is in the 20/30's but wouldnt it make sense to have 'walls' protecting the city, otherwise the place could be flattened with a few bombs and then the city wouldnt be very useful ;)

[The5thElephant]

Errr that wouldn't make ANY sense man. First of all I assume you mean a dome because bombs can fall past walls on the sides. A dome could cause even MORE danger because of the chance of collapse. Also a city in the air is no different from a city on the ground in terms of strength and they don't build domes over cities on the ground even now so yeah doesn't make sense.

[Dino Dude]

i didnt mean a dome i meant walls, but they still pose a collapsing problem. i guess it didnt make any sense, just another crazy idea lol. but the cities would still need some form of protection apart from escorting ships and weapon systems (realises that this adds strategy to the game)... ok so walls and domes dont make sense for protecting the cities, what would though? (apart from gun turrets and the likes as they wont protect from bomb damage)

[FluxX]

If you have the city in sections... each with its own grav drives, and basically self surficient, you can only take down part of it at a time. (sorry for all the commas).

This is a good model for player controled citys/cap ships. As large amounts of damage could be delt, yet the player can still have some ship left to retreat with.

A bit like the "clone" or "inshurance" in EVE which stops a player being sent back to level 1.
With sectioned citys/cap ships, a player could be defeated, but not loose all that he has, and thus have some reason to keep playing, and not give up.

[incarnate]

wow...losts of posts.

first off...vijil's history is a solid base...makes complete sense. should def. be implemented.
as for ship design, they should look like shit to begin with. honestly. i know if i was on the brink of conflict with a newly designed antigrav engine, i would simply slap it onto my ship and not give a damn about redesign right away. remember...it takes MONTHS to build a cap ship. with this in mind, the first generation (using retros idea...also good) would be very slow, very bulky, and very underprotected. i'm sure many would be easy targets. to tie this in with concept designs (so that i dont get yelled at for rambling in the wrong forum :D ), ships should have massive ag drives underneath and where every else they fit. top decks would be a mess housing more guns (aa especially) and energy supply. also, hulls will have some sort of prop driven propulsion. i highly doubt Ag drives can push against air, but maybe a later generation can put that to use.
as for added weaponry, hulls will be cannibalized...liked the idea of cutting holes and sticking in turrets. high caliber guns like 20 mm and 30 mm for anti air...some larger for bombardment. (might need reverse ag drives to counter the firing of larger cannons..like b.ships had ballast.) not to mention added armor on the bottom. most ships were built with armor only covering down so far, since most of the hull is under water...saves money and weight. i'd prolly throw on some catwalks and bulkheads on the hull to mount machineguns and for maintenence.

*edit* to better AA protection of the undersides, could use ball turrets. Anyone ever see Memphis Belle? American b-17's used these turrets underneath. poor bastard climbs in and uses foot pedals to move the turret to counter fighters. many of them got blown away. but i'd expect a lot of these ships to go down easy in the beginning anyway. quick sketch of these things implemented: (linked for space)
Capitol Ship Changes (http://img54.exs.cx/img54/4644/GameConceptCapChanges.jpg)

*edit* just had a thought about later gameplay and figured to throw it in for concept possibilities: after years of research and miniturization, infantry could be equiped with AG packs to allow aerial assaults on ships and cities. just think...the pirates of the 20th century ;)

there are some great ideas flowing around this forum. good possiblities. i'll finish some concepts tonight and post.

DOUBLE POST

didnt want to go back to back. but i spent some time (a whole 10 minutes) sketching a cap. probably cruiser or dest. needs some work, especially the back..but i ran out of paper. thinking light on the weaponry..maybe 12 incher in front and back or 2 in front and the fighter landing pad to transfer personnel. all else should be described in the sketch. in terms of propulsion, i figured as long as we are sticking with props...i replaced the small rotor with a big bomber prop...maybe several would be needed. plus for turning..i think first generation ships might just use a bigger rudder?? tell me what you think
http://img66.exs.cx/img66/5750/Cruiserv2.jpg

*btw...anyone who is looking for easy web hosting, imageshack offers 1 mb file size for several pic types. easy reg. too

*edit. excuse me hand and vigil. thats a great idea hand. sorry for the mix up

[Vijil]

Um, people that was not my history idea. Its Handarazuurs, which I thought was good.

[Noir]

Am I the only who thinks that all this reminds me of the ships from the Alpha Shade comic?

[Langy]

Hand's history is nice, though the one thing I don't like about it is that Hitler still got to power and became 'a nice guy.' I think we should toss that idea and make it so he never came to power at all, that way sidestepping any potential issues with people who don't quite like Hitler. Plus, if we do do that, I wouldn't be surprised if Germany would ban the game:p They have some really wierd game censorship laws, so they'd probably ban it anyways, but what the hay.

Anyways, I don't like Vijil's sketch. Kinda odd for me to say that, since he normally kicks some serious bootaye, but I just don't like the rings for the antigrav device. I really can't see that working for cities especially. I much prefer the device being on the inside of the ship, non-visible for the most part, or if it is visible, it should look highly mechanical.

I've been thinking about propulsion, and I was wondering if it would be fine to just make it so that the gravity drives seriously cut down on the mass of the ships, thus making it possible for propellors to move the ships just like with Zepplins or planes. It would still need the anti-grav component as well as the mass reducer, but with the mass reducer thing we could have ships using propellors moving through the air. And I think that'd look absolutely awesome. It's more of a graphical thing than a technical thing, I think, because it's in order to give it the right look rather than the right tech.

Just a few ideas. Feel free to take my ideas and run with them - I've decided not to participate in this community game very much for various reasons, but you can feel free to take my ideas and use them. Hell, use them as your own if you want. I won't mind, though it might make you look like a liar if others see this post and you take all my ideas and call them your own.

[Koki]

How about we designate "capital" ships in one of two generations:

<OMG THEY CUTTED THE POST LOL>


Thumbs up. I was thinking about this myself.



Ok, more rant from me. Brace yourself or skip the post 8)

First, without deciding how how the A-Grav system works, we are running dark. there are two ways - either it is making itself weight 0, and also eveything you stick to it will fly too, no matter how heavy - then ships would have been build around it. Let's take Titanic and put a A-Grav thing inside - whooops, it broke in half! Ok, so if we put 8 along the hull, everything will be allrighty, unless someone will stick A-Grav to an iceberg.

Or, the thing is making a part of space around it(I.e. sphere, diameter 20m for every m of A-Grav)) be gravityless(? - sp). And, for example, to make things funnier, how would behave two fields one on other? Maybe turn the gravity up? 9,8 m/s into space, lol.

Last thing, how does it look like? fighter built around a trashcan will look different from one built around tube which must have certain proportions(i.e. lenght/width = 8:1 - now built me something ;)).

And last thing. Are there diesel engines or not? Hard to imagine a plane with a steam engine, even if it doesn't need to maintaind certain speed.

/rant

[Gyokuran]

Falcon's concept is pretty much identical to what I had in mind.

[Vijil]

its really too cliched though if you ask me. We also need to maintain an old school feel.

[Retroboy]

Vij, the issue is that EVERYTHING's too cliched these days. Out-there concepts are seldom popular. We've already had a few negative posts about how this doesn't agree with standard physics in other threads, and I suspect that number would leapfrog if someone tried to take the universe in a truly innovative direction.

Koki - I think most people agree it makes sense to require some electricity to power the thing, which means diesel on larger vessels. Anyways, for those asking for more clarity on how it works --> see this as-yet-unbumped thread. (http://forums.relicnews.com/showthread.php?t=29620)

-- Retro

[Koki]

There are too many scattered threads. Anyone gets the same impression?

I'd put it all into the separate sub-forum, exept the images one.

[incarnate]

agreed w/ koki. make one thread contain ALL the relevant threads. it takes me 5 minutes to find the right one to post in.

i think there should be some alternate power source involved. if all else fails, couldnt the plane glide for a while? assuming the wing thing remains. plus you need propulsion and might as well keep some kind of prop onboard...if nothing else but for looks

[Koki]

I don't know, they didn't care that much of a human life back then. I mean, they mostly weren't even issuing parachutes.

It fails - you die. It's that simple.

[FluxX]

No, they usually did not have paracutes, or had to crash land.

I don't think it was down to lack of care of life (althought that is partly true) but down to the limits, and desperate cuircumstances.

[Retroboy]

There are too many scattered threads. Anyone gets the same impression?
I'd put it all into the separate sub-forum, exept the images one.FYI, I suggested this in the opening days of the project, but it was thought that only a few people would post if it was a dedicated forum. There'd be more hits if it was part of GD, instead of off to the side.

-- Retro

[Artoo]

Well, I'm actually wondering if the entire floating city idea isn't overkill... If this is done I think it should be represented by dedicated structures built to fly from the very beggining. Why not create airborne cities like that, instead of, for example, making London fly??

Who the hell would want to make a ground-based city with all of its land-based infrastructure airborne in the first place?? Also, no mather what, those flying cities created from normal ones would have to be many miles wide... overkill imho

The above was triggered by how we seem to be trying to maintain a certain dose of scientific probability and a huge flying city with chunks of earth on the underside doesn't fit to that imo :p

[FluxX]

No, looks corny.

Steam punk capital ships, or castle like structures might work?

[Jaen-ni-rin]

What bout this ???

http://warlords.swrebellion.com/gallery/non-mod-related/battleship

[Progenitor]

that looks a bit too...advanced...

but it looks so very nice...

[Jaen-ni-rin]

You can stylize it's lower part of hull for a ship.

And check this out :

http://www.deviantart.com/view/7855032/

[Progenitor]

omg, those floating cities....nice

[Elukka]

That pic is breathtaking. I think something like that would be great for the game, if those sci-fi buildings were changed.

[Ammon Ra]

kool gravity city ;)

However, i agree with flux that the idea of creating floating cities is excessive. it can never be self sustaining. just the amount of oil/diesel required to keep it up would be immense. Instead of floating "cities", floating citadels/castles would fit much better. i.e. large floating citadels are established over important cities, somtiles a few dozen are set up. so a city like london would have at least 8 citadels guarding it and acting as depots, shipyards, maintenance for the hundreds of cruisers, frigates and thousands of fighters that country has.

To get you a picture of what i mean, think skrapyard & Tipharis in the manga series: gunnm, aka battle angle alita. the floating city (actually a space elevator) requires a constant supply of food and supplies form the lower city. ect. Something in that direction, but with a diesel-punk feel.

€ :2cents: :)

[Jaen-ni-rin]

What about this (This is made by ... ME:) in Photoshop) :

http://members.lycos.co.uk/jaennirin/pics/shippy.jpg

[Koki]

Jaen-ni-rin - those are your pictures? Totally rock... the cities, oooh...

Reminds me of NetStorm(Another game in air, this time net-oriented strategy with flying islands).

Regardless, I'm with Artoo on this one. Floating cities? What for? Whou would want a city to fly?

Maybe a flying bahama island, moving away from storms and always in sun, but we have a war here...

[Jaen-ni-rin]

No, only this last crappy ship picture is mine.

Anyway, I only found it, and as it was brought up on the forum I wnated to show an illustration of it.

[Bob McDob]

You can stylize it's lower part of hull for a ship.

And check this out :

http://www.deviantart.com/view/7855032/

That's what I'm meaning for, babe.

[incarnate]

i like the citadel idea. but by having air and lad structures, how will that play into a conquest type of idea. this is the wrong thread so i'll be super brief and post my thoughts in the correct one.

anyway, citadels shouldnt be huge...they should house fighters and maybe a few enclosed docks for smaller caps. some additional docks for bigger ships to refuel/rearm. hold fuel, ammo, parts, food, tools, etc. to keep the fleets flying. housing for troops, some scattered buildings, etc. but it doesnt have to be monsterous. i would see the large citadels as being the forward staging posts mid way through the game. allowing a base of operations above the enemy. so this would make for either a highly 3d citadel or maybe a flatter, more conventionally designed one.

[Enterprize]

I can see the reason for wanting only citadels and fortresses, but if cities only used steam power then it'd be more logical because steam can be recycled back into water with ease...Or going another route entirely, the aforementioned (in another thread) sail idea.

Surely a few cities would be airborne... And on the idea of a wall...if we had interitum adhere pretty strongly to itself when electricity is run through it, we could use it as the interior of a city-wide wall (looking cool and having a reason) which would get rid of the cliche and most of the fairly nonsensical clump of earth under the city.

[FluxX]

Steam power is not recyclable :rolleyes:

The water is, the Coal is not.

But you could use the "gravity" engine to heat the water, thus making your power souce, be it a inpossible one.

[incarnate]

ok...one of the big problems i foresee with giant hovering cities is game space. it would take DAYS to assault a city, on land or in air. plus to have a high res model that is part of the game (not just background like the cap ships in the death star 2 mission in xwing alliance..grr) would destroy the users computer. having paris in the sky being attacked by several wing of fighters and bombers is a little extreme. plus the logistics are completely against it. its something that could be done, but i'm not sure how much sense it would make to make your cities float just for the sake of it.

it would make more sense to have new additions of the city be built on AG devices, saving land space. a dock for transports maybe. new coal power plants could be made to operate above the city to keep it cleaner. that could kill 2 birds with one stone. if you assault the cities' floating powerplants and such (cutting down on massiveness of stuff in the missions) you could lay siege to the city without having major computer problems.

[Enterprize]

Steam power is not recyclable :rolleyes:

The water is, the Coal is not.

But you could use the "gravity" engine to heat the water, thus making your power souce, be it a inpossible one.
Erk. Sorry, that was incredibly stupid of me. >.X too late at night...

But we could use the water to cool whatever parts of the device would heat up after its been going, requiring only a fraction of the coal...

[J.O.]

I'm gonna do agenaration 3 floating station, a true military-civilan citadel aremed with "futuristic) weaponry, watch out tomorow for my first sketch, after I end with the sketch I will see if I can pass it to 3d :bandit:

[Rusty]

The Game died allready T_T

[Jaen-ni-rin]

Really ???

[IgnusDei]

a shame.

THIS is what airships should be like.

http://www3.telus.net/ignusdei/funnies/Sylvana.jpg

damn, paperstarships would kill for one of these...

[Jaen-ni-rin]

Right, it's great. However it's maybe too futuristic, but I like this design. This model is homemade or bought (if I can ask) ?

[IgnusDei]

just a pic i got off a magazine. dunno if the guy just printed it hisownself or if you can order it from somewhere...

[thegoatman]

I should have expected IgnusDei to bring Last Exile into this :D

Personally, i think Sylverna is clunky. I like the more common Anatolian ships (the green ones).

Them and their steam-powered weapons.........

[Progenitor]

have anyone thought of the ridiculous possibility of this community game? i mean, you discovered anti-gravity technology, and you have not discovered atomic power?? so you use steam to power the anti-grav engines...but they need a continuous supply of coal (or do they use focused sunlight to turn the water into steam and recycle it?) to power them, which forms a logistics problem.

steam powered cannons...omg they are oh so creative.

[IgnusDei]

in last exile, the agrav engines are ultra high tech cores lent to the less advanced countries by a mysterious guild, so they work independently from the rest of the ship, which is basically a hull with guns.

[[bulletproof]]

Ignus, the airship in that link has a very cool anti grav system, some sort of coils and rails. I think THAT makes the most sense of any of these anti grav designs, and if anything, should be used on the floating cities as well as ships.

[Gyokuran]

Skies of Arcadia also had some good airship designs, but not to many people played it.

http://img55.exs.cx/img55/4830/Armada.jpg

Most of the valuan flagships look to modern/bizzare but they have some interesting designs.

http://img55.exs.cx/img55/1379/Flagships.jpg

[Vijil]

that ship is directly from last exile, and we really want to stay away from that look dont we?

[Jaen-ni-rin]

So maybe any new original design ???

[Riess]

Bumpety!

2nd Gen. Destroyer:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v436/RiesstiuIV/gen2floatey.jpg

1) The AntiGrav Machine is hidden behind thick layers of armor. Also in there: Tubes for AntiGrav torpeoes (or rockets, which you prefer).
2) The lower cannons are covered by armor sheets when the ship needs to make a water landing. A similar, yet smaller gun is located at the rear.
3) As Antigrav machines get more powerful, more armor is used to protect the bridge, engines, etc.
4) A short runway for the destroyer's small group of defense fighters (3-4)
5) Small guns for anti-fighter defense.

[Jaen-ni-rin]

Riess, you rule !!!!
A for design,
A for execution.

Overall note: A - Very Cool work

[Havock]

:duck:

old model of mine:

http://members.lycos.nl/durandalarw/coolheid.JPG

[Riess]

Ooh!
Except for the too spaceshippy red thrusters, that's awesome!

[Progenitor]

what's wrong with red thrusters?

though blue thrusters would look cool...ion drives:D

[Jaen-ni-rin]

Cool for 3rd generation.

[Jaen-ni-rin]

The ship that is on this pic looks cool for a (3rd generation) heavy cruiser :

http://img51.exs.cx/img51/7880/whoaa1.gif

[Ammon Ra]

holy crap!

:jaw:

Those Baloon/plats are interesting...:)





and that aircraft thingie aswell...:P

[deadguy]

That's a clip out of Last Exile. And those are all anti-grav machines, not baloons - you're looking at them nearly head-on if I'm seeing them right.

[Ammon Ra]

Baloons, anti-gravity, same thing. The point is that they both float at a specific height. On is relativly low-tech, the other is theoreticly impossible. :p

[unless you find a material that exhibits diagravitation... ;)]

1st gen: modified ww1 boats, yes?
2nd gen: Craft specially built around these "antigravity" [diagravitational is physicly correct, although i doubt the word even exists...;)] devices.
3rd gen: is...? the modern version of the ships if we let the story progress that far?

or did i miss a post somehere on pages 5-7? :D

[Le_Petit_Lapin]

I'm lost. What the hell is everyone talking about? Sounds good whatever it is. If I'm reading it right, and it is a game of some sort then it would be possible to release 1st gen as the standalone game, and then 2nd and 3rd gen as expansion packs?

If you try doing it all at once people on thedesign team, and the modellers are going to get bored rather quickly, expecially as no one seems to be able to agree onwhat the ships should look like.

Also throwng together a storyline wouldnt go amiss, as it would let you see just what you do eed to model and what you dont. Making a floating city would be great, but if one doesnt crop up along the games storyline, and therefore never appears in game, whats the point in discussing it?

[Mac_Bug]

http://www.martiniere.com/laputa.jpg

http://www.activeforever.com/Images/Products/ProductImage_841_687014_FS.jpg

http://www.suu.edu/sast/tech/engineering/cad/images/TV-remote.jpg

http://www.house.gov/evans/images/tv_remote.JPG

I've always played battleship with my remotes!

[Blackmoore]

Le_petite, It's the community game. Here's the link (http://forums.relicnews.com/showthread.php?t=29496) That's a nice painting thing MacBug, exactly what I imagined.

[Supernova]

Hmm, is the community game still "alive" if so, I would much like to start throwing out designs - after reading 30 or so pages of stuff in the other half dozen threads this seems like a lot of fun.

[Supernova]

Well, I decided not to wait for an answer, esp. since there are two threads near the top in this forum alone... Anyways, I don't draw as well as vij, or ingus, or pretty much anyone else, but I had a cool idea. So, I started modeling that idea, it was orginally intended to just be a very quick sketch model, and indeed some of the early scaffolding attest to that, however, I really like the design and just kinda went to town for some reason, All in all, about 2 hours worth the work, and an hour of rendering - radiosity + 200k polies + AA = long render time......
http://www.lwg3d.com/upload/wip/2004/10/12-640925_tn.jpg (http://www.lwg3d.org/upload/wip/2004/10/12-640925.jpg)
http://www.lwg3d.com/upload/wip/2004/10/12-640960_tn.jpg (http://www.lwg3d.org/upload/wip/2004/10/12-640960.jpg)
What is it? Well, its a zepplin's passenger/crew section thats had some of the tail end cut off. Then a bunch of scaffolding attached to hold several diesel engines mounted to the backend (for power) as well as all the fuel - which is on top - and the all important anti-grav-thingies. As for its role, well strap a few guns to it and it could be a gunship or small frigate, couple torpedos and it could be a nice patrol boat.

I wasn't 100% sure what kind of engines are (a-grav) are being used, the general idea was that its just a special alloy that lets u run electricity through it and it floats (levititanium). So, I just mounted 3 pads on the under side of the hull that act as the "repulsor pads" to lift this thing up.

[SvK]

So I see that repulsor-zeppelin and think, 200k polygons in 2 hours, this guyis good! Where di you spring from? Then I noticed the username. :)

[Jaen-ni-rin]

OMG ROCK ROCKZ ROCKZ !!!!

This would be cool for Bishop class transport :D
Very cool model, but for animatics only.
Is it possible to bring the polys down to 2-4k ???

[Supernova]

lol thanks svk - made my day :)

Actually, with alpha mapping, I could easily get it down to 2000 or less. heh just a hint to whoever builds the rendering engine - alpha mapping is good...

[Jaen-ni-rin]

That would be great, but propeller holders will look kinda fragile. Now we only need to wait for graphics engine. I humbly suggest Truevision3D (http://truevision3d/) which is free for non-commercial use. If we plan for commercial release then actual payment system is here (http://www.truevision3d.com/tv3d_buynow.php)

And some screenies (first three are from 6.5 beta, last one is from 6.2):

EDIT: Promply moved to main gallery thread.

[Ultra FrEaK_Y]

wow looks good

[Riess]

Nice, but there IS a Main Gallery thread. Considerations about the graphics engine should go there, not here, mhkaaay?
And, yes, nice.

P.S.: Did I just single-handedly revive the project? :D

[Alliance]

not REVIVE, more like jump start.

[Ammon Ra]

:)

i think you'll like the renders of a few concept meshes i made in the last two days.

a G1 destroyer, G2 destroyer, and a bi-engine transport/light bomber. i'll upload them tomorrow so don't lock the thread in the meanwhile *cough* @ deadguy ;)

[and a general bumb]

[Jaen-ni-rin]

Ooh great, can't wait to see them :)

[Ammon Ra]

http://www.geocities.com/ski_ammonra/images_3.html
Destroyer Generation 1
Desteroyer Gen1 foreward. Those tubes with cylindrical things are the anti-gravity devices. Don't ask how they work, they just do :p
the last one is a concept for a G2 destroyer. It's a wip, but i have no idea what to do with it...

http://www.geocities.com/ski_ammonra/images_4.html
Another view of the G2 destroyer. it does have 4 medium turrets latched to the underside of it's hull. You can't see it properly, but it's underside hull is still relativly well shaped for landing in water. Which is where i'm assuming these floating ships will land for fueling, repair, maintenance ect. Creating an entire land-based infrastructure seems too expensive imo

The last two screens are of a concept light bomber design. No wheels, no, as it's a concept design. Actually they're all concepts. :)

Desty G1 is around 40k triangle. rendered in 10-20min with lightracer. :) Build time was around 4-6 hours?

Enjoy

-Re.wind

[No1lives4ever]

I like the bomber most :)

[Ammon Ra]

Hrm, figures :p

The only thing is that it looks too much like a ww2-esque plane rather than an alternat ww1 bomber...

[Jaen-ni-rin]

G1 is cool.
G2 can be.
The plane is cool.

[Ammon Ra]

The Gs's hull is cool, but the superstructure is "Meh..."

Theorizing plans for a "tie-bomber" bimaran bomber. [two hulled, think p262]