StarCraft

Empty · Post by **Empty** » Tue Jul 08, 2008 6:42 pm

Question Mark did a great job on it, the Carrier has had a marked improvement, needs some tweaking but it looks well, much more... Carrierish?
EDIT: New carrier posted, and hte OP updated.

The designs willbe uploaded soon, but there's a bit more perfection to be done, and an arbiter.

Question Mark · Post by **Question Mark** » Tue Jul 08, 2008 7:35 pm

Behold the 1st original epical fail BC, created by Empty... >.>

Empty · Post by **Empty** » Tue Jul 08, 2008 7:39 pm

Nothing to see here, keep walking, that is most DEFINITELY not the original prototype, nothin here keep moving ma'am.

Droid · Post by **Droid** » Wed Jul 09, 2008 2:47 am

lol.
The new one is a lot better.
Its not a stack of section 16's and 25's anymore

(no comment on the one with the ÜberStretching)

Lizzie · Post by **Lizzie** » Wed Jul 09, 2008 2:53 am

The new battlecrusier is indeed a vast improvement.

Nevindar · Post by **Nevindar** » Wed Jul 09, 2008 3:22 am

Nice improvements on the SC ships. Do you use ingame pictures or artwork as references?

antisocialmunky · Post by **antisocialmunky** » Wed Jul 09, 2008 3:23 am

Question Mark wrote:Behold the 1st original epical fail BC, created by Empty... >.>

KILL IT WITH FIRE!!!

Empty · Post by **Empty** » Wed Jul 09, 2008 10:40 am

Nevindar wrote:Nice improvements on the SC ships. Do you use ingame pictures or artwork as references?

Question mark used reference on most of his hulls, I did it mostly from memory [Massive starcraft fanboy here

]

EDIT: Oh and munky, good luck killing it with fire, it has enough deflectors to cover the entire hammer at the start.

Swamp Fox · Post by **Swamp Fox** » Wed Jul 09, 2008 10:54 am

What did section 25 ever do to you

? Ignoring the uber-stretching, I think your ships are interesting. I'm hoping to see more of these. The shape is an... interesting one at least, so in my humble opinion I can't find much wrong. But again, that's just my opinion. Mainly though, since I've never played Starcraft, I'd like to know if the front is supposed to look that odd. If so, then no complaints here.

Empty · Post by **Empty** » Wed Jul 09, 2008 11:01 am

You are looking at the page 1 pictures?

The BC on the top of this page was an uh, first beta.

Let's just say someone still had it's blueprint around. <_<

EDIT: I've got some new ships to share, a WIP interceptor and an Arbiter.

Wraith for scale, yeah I fixed is blaster up on the nose, I didn't realise how ugly it was, he's getting a redo, he's a tad ugly

Arbiter has been redone too.

Question Mark · Post by **Question Mark** » Wed Jul 09, 2008 11:06 am

i still have all the versions of BC we've made, so do you Empty. i'm still abit disgruntled about the head of Ver 3, looks out of proportion to me.

Empty · Post by **Empty** » Wed Jul 09, 2008 11:09 am

I reckon it's fine, looks good as it is.

Ixranin · Post by **Ixranin** » Wed Jul 09, 2008 11:24 am

I'd suggest using smaller sections to make a more gradual curve on the Arbiter's two rear prongs. The current version is angular and suffers from part resizing.

Question Mark · Post by **Question Mark** » Wed Jul 09, 2008 11:27 am

we're workin on 2 dif ver's of the arbiter, mine and his revision on it. we both agree it's ugly atm.

Empty · Post by **Empty** » Wed Jul 09, 2008 11:32 am

New revision and question marks version done, I'll leave it up to you guys to choose which remains.

Simply txt 'Lulz' to 193321 if you want to vote for the left.
Or txt 'Epic' to 193322 if you want to vote for the right.

EDIT: Woops forgot the picture <_<