It doesn't look like
much. Then again, at the first-steps
stages, not much looks like much at all.
I am working from the graphics for the MWO version of the Archer, and I
expect that I'll keep fairly close to that in a lot of ways. There are some very distinctive lines to the
Archer, and those I have to keep. I like
the look of the arms on the MWO design.
Truth be told, there are a lot of the designs from MWO that I prefer
over the TRO drawings. I suspect that
part of it comes from the dynamics of the online game vs the creativity of just
drawing pictures.
I guess the engineer brain in me just balks at many of the TRO drawings. They just look "wrong." The Hatchetman, for instance. The legs are just too spindly for a machine designed for combat to begin with, and even moreso as the H is supposed to close into melee. The standard expectation for a Battlemech in melee is the kick, and considering the damage done through a kick, that would be one of the more heavily armored locations. I get that is one of the design flaws, but there is 'not armored enough' and then there is 'are you kidding me, how do those work at all?'. I intentionally added a bit of beefier armor to the mech I built, and overall, it still had a spindly look compared to the heavier mechs. It makes sense, with the Hatcheman being a 50 ton vs the Victor's 70.
In MWO, the
designers appear to take physics and machine dynamics into consideration as
they design. I think they underestimate
the size of the small mechs, but the mediums and up seem to fit close to my
mind. Mixing the MWO looks with TRO
classic stylings is a nice middle ground for a traditionalist like me.
The Archer is going
to follow many of the stylings of the MWO look, because it does keep those
distinctive lines intact. I plan to do
the -2W variant with LRM-20s and SRM-4 launchers. As I think of the design, I'm looking at a
design that puts 2 launcher covers on the shoulders.. The traditional long
covers that lift up to reveal the LRM-20s, and on the front angle, a smaller
box-like cover that drops down to reveal the SRM-4's. Again, from a design standpoint, large covers
are kinda silly, so I have to think if I'd prefer to do Mad-Dog-like hatches
that cover each tube individually. That
would be logical from an engineer's perspective, but from the "it looks
like the Archer" perspective, it diverts from tradition.
I have time, I'm only on the foot. You know, I realized just now that I always start with the foot. I did the same with the HCT and the same with the Atlas I designed. I start with the size of the foot and build up from there. Am I the only one that does that?
I have time, I'm only on the foot. You know, I realized just now that I always start with the foot. I did the same with the HCT and the same with the Atlas I designed. I start with the size of the foot and build up from there. Am I the only one that does that?
So, looking at the
development, I'm thinking how to do this.
Once I have the foot designed and finished, I'll do the shin then
thigh. For consistency, I'm planning to
make them symmetrical, so I can just cast foot/shin/thigh parts so I don't have
to build them to match precisely. : )
Anyway.. We're
off.
No comments:
Post a Comment