Tactical Command
http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/

Holes in the Range
http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=78&t=19695
Page 1 of 4

Author:  Easy E [ Mon Nov 15, 2010 9:23 pm ]
Post subject:  Holes in the Range

Greetings,

I know that this forum is mostly dead, but I'm going to try to revive it a bit. :D

Now that FW has announced that they will not be doing anymore to support AI, what holes do you think currently exist in the range?

From there, we can start filling.

Author:  Otterman [ Mon Nov 15, 2010 11:20 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Holes in the Range

I've always wanted a SM Tempest. Maybe I'll make one someday.

Author:  zedmeister [ Tue Nov 16, 2010 10:28 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Holes in the Range

SM Tempest
SM Hyperious/Hunter (platform and tank)
Ork Eavy Flak gun
Tzeentch Daemon Flyers (Silver Tower, Firelord, Doomwing)
Dark Eldar Flyers
Necron Flyers

Also, the Storm Raven I suppose...

Stealth edit to slip in:

Caestus Assault Ram (not sure how this'd work?)

Author:  nealhunt [ Tue Nov 16, 2010 2:58 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Holes in the Range

Well, I don't play AI, but from an Epic perspective, I'd like to see SM Tempest before anything else. After that, Zedmeister's list looks pretty good to me.

Author:  Easy E [ Tue Nov 16, 2010 3:25 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Holes in the Range

Oooh, Daemon Flyers.... I had forgotten about some of those...

Author:  illuvitar [ Thu Nov 18, 2010 7:45 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Holes in the Range

A.I. deserves some attention, it's a fun game. I'de still like to see some of the fighters and bombers from B.F.G. be available for the game.

Author:  Athmospheric [ Thu Nov 18, 2010 10:14 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Holes in the Range

Furies and starhawaks would be huuuuge and unable to fly in atmosphere (I think a Fury is 200 Tons, about the *maximum* take-off weight of a B52). I don't even think they have wings...

Actually, if some where to be done, I would probably get one of each for the modelling pleasure of it and collection, compulsion, but I can't see them working in AI. Unless we were to develop an AI expansion for space dogfight, but that would require quite some work (infinite level of altitude, no notion of diving or climbing, turn ratio linked to acceleration capability...). Might be fun to do though :)

Author:  The_Real_Chris [ Thu Nov 18, 2010 11:41 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Holes in the Range

Actually fluff wise they are atmosphere capable and are 2 man fighters. However I doubt they bother with being able to take off planetside. Surviving entry and exit of an atmosphere though seems fine considering all the shielding they need to survive operating close to cap ships in a fleet action with all the hard radiation being bounced around.

Author:  Athmospheric [ Thu Nov 18, 2010 1:22 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Holes in the Range

Well in the BL novels they can only barely enter the upper layer of the atmosphere if they are to remain able to return to their carrier. Their is a passage when Zane (the Ace fury pilot of the novel) chase enemy drop pods in the gravity well to the limits of his fighter capabilities. It's not about entry stress, it's about aerodynamics. A space fighter doesn't care about it, and could be very agile in space while perfectly incapable of flying in atmosphere. I always thought of them as wingless for example.

And as a spacecraft would rely purely on thrusters to change direction, the rockets that could be used in the nose of the craft to do so in space would be quite insufficient to do so in an atmosphere, where aerodynamic forces are much stronger than inertia. Inertia is the dominating factor in vacuum, where aerodynamics simply don't exist, while in atmosphere, aerodynamic is a very dominating factor, all the more so for fast stuff such as aircrafts and specially fighters, and inertia is something almost completely negligible apart from very heavy stuff (sea ships).

I think as usual, there might be a few contradictions in the fluff anyway. I'd be glad to actually see a fury model, but I think it would be much more characterful anyway if it looked like a space specific craft : heavy, wingless, very large motors, small cockpit... those stuff are supposed to fly in straight line on inertia for tens of thousands of miles on patrol, and then have huge enough motorization to actually decelerate, turn and dogfight in space... Without going to the extreme that actual realism would require (realistically, dogfight in space is just fanboy wet dreaming), I'd like a model to suggest that difference. I would be disappointed if it where just to look like a fancy modern jet fighter.

But of course, to each his own, the space fighter looking like a SF jet fighter is still quite a popular cliché. I just don't like it that much.

Author:  The_Real_Chris [ Thu Nov 18, 2010 1:58 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Holes in the Range

I've always imagined then as fairly brick like, somewhat like the bomber from homeworld (or a tornado :) - kept so according to the chief of the RAF we have a modern capable airforce). So yes no wings and stuff needed, just shed loads of thrust. Considering how tough the Imperial stuff is meant to be entry and re-entry shouldn't be a problem and it would be a case of using raw thrust to ensure minimum mobility.

Background wise there is a scence in one book where two fighters escort a shuttle planetside basically fly down with it, prep the landing zone by zapping a few city blocks then peel off fairly immediately to make it back to their carrier, so certainly no dogfighting involved, more a fairly ballistic entry, manouver to avoid incoming ground fire on the way down then a straight boost back to orbit.

Author:  Athmospheric [ Thu Nov 18, 2010 2:02 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Holes in the Range

The_Real_Chris wrote:
I've always imagined then as fairly brick like, somewhat like the bomber from homeworld (or a tornado :) - kept so according to the chief of the RAF we have a modern capable airforce). So yes no wings and stuff needed, just shed loads of thrust. Considering how tough the Imperial stuff is meant to be entry and re-entry shouldn't be a problem and it would be a case of using raw thrust to ensure minimum mobility.

Background wise there is a scence in one book where two fighters escort a shuttle planetside basically fly down with it, prep the landing zone by zapping a few city blocks then peel off fairly immediately to make it back to their carrier, so certainly no dogfighting involved, more a fairly ballistic entry, manouver to avoid incoming ground fire on the way down then a straight boost back to orbit.


Yes, I remember that scene too, now that you mention it. Oh well, GW background wouldn't be as fun if if was consistent. Rule of Cool once again :)

Author:  Easy E [ Thu Nov 18, 2010 4:05 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Holes in the Range

I believe that book was Gordon Remmie's (sp) work when BFG first hit, so a long time before AI. The books were Execution Hour and Shadowpoint.

Chaos forces need some fluffy ground defenses in AI too.

Author:  Athmospheric [ Thu Nov 18, 2010 4:13 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Holes in the Range

Yes, both the passage I refered to with the ace pilot diving to chase drop landers and the one TRC refered to wit the fury escorting a lander to the ground are from those books.

Author:  The_Real_Chris [ Thu Nov 18, 2010 4:14 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Holes in the Range

No doubt the entry method is important, not full military power diving into the gravity well :)

Author:  Athmospheric [ Thu Nov 18, 2010 5:53 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Holes in the Range

On the "Fury" subject, I quite like designs such as this one made by spartan games. It does not look very 40K, but i quite like the wingless design with a rather strong emphasis on the engines.

Image

Page 1 of 4 All times are UTC [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/