Spring RTS Engine

I think the OTA designs were excellent. Had they had more polies to play with, I'm sure they'd have been much better, but considering when they were made, they manage to get a lot of character, easy recognition and some pretty funky designs despite very low polygon models.

I can easily recall the shape of a flash, a gator, an AK, a peewee, and two dozen other units. I can barely remember any designs from most other games.

Forboding Angel wrote:Regardless of what you "Intended", you came off as a complete dick for which you should apologize instead of defending your position.

This is what i hate about TAU and the OTA crowd, and even people here. They nitpick, regardless of whether there is a reason. You nitpick to the point that it's more simple to just stay off the radar and do your own thing.

It does not matter what I '"Intended"'. My position is defensible and I will defended it. I will not apologize for iterating the truth, no matter how much you dislike it. Why should I apologize because my monotonal and emotionless post offended someone sensitive?

Nitpick? how was i nitpicking? I did not tell him what he should do, i did not specify what my opinion my position was, I did not even make any suggestions. I did not tell to make the mlv's butt bigger or smaller. I did not tell him to make it more ota or less. I did not say I hate/like/am indifferent to his models. I did not tell him "make it more pink like this shiney unit in my cool mod [img]". my post is the equivalent of "wtf? the root of x^2-4=0 is not 2, it is +/-2!" or "omg! the war of 1812 didn't happen in 1811."

The below are real nitpicking:
- Goliath track covers look like concrete
- Corcv's side panels look like scrap metal
- Raider tracks are exposed (just an example, dont change it)
- Garpike looks like Armart
they have been posted in any of these threads. I don't see you lot jumping at them like rabid sharks over icecream trucks.

You know what I hate about the TAU and OTA crowd, or this crowd for that matter, or any crowd at all? As rare as they are, there will always be some overtly sensitive person who lashes out at people not for their opinions, not for their suggestions or comments, but for stating what is actually, truly, wrong. The people who get angry when you tell them, after a thousand screaming fanboys, about their obvious mistakes: that they did their lighting backwards, that they rendered their angles incorrect. Or even something that has no bearing on their person or their work beyond "hey! you, sir, are misinformed!" like Lenovo not being bought out by IBM, or the Oxford comma being valid grammar, or... Evolva is not OTA, there was not MLV in the 1997 release or TA, and did it not get a missile tube in CC. True stories!

To the rest of you: (I assume that) you assume that I am some OTA freak when it comes to Spring. your assumptions are wrong. I think (gasp!) that the OTA MLV's layout is ugly as sin and should be reworked completely into something that fits more with the style of the other Core constructors. I also think that if something is to be worked into spring, it should not follow TA designs beyond making homages. TA units are not to scale, they are designed to be viewed from above and zoomed out. Spring has the advantage of scale and closer zooming, why should spring units still be designed within the limitations of TA? TA units also lack factional character. The core are suppose to be a race of robots, yet their units can easily be swapped for arm, why do they still use bridge towers and cockpits?

Unlike the original post, the above is an opinion and it employs Creative Rhetoric And Posturing, you may be offended by it.

TRO, you and your art has always offended me.

I'm mildly amused that you indirectly referred to me as a TA fanboi. Now that's interesting...

Is this still going on?

Mr. D, I like the model, as I like all your models, but I am wondering about one design decision. Why reveal the back two wheels? Perhaps have them peaking out behind some paneling, much like the back wheels of early hybrid cars.

Only sensitive person I see is the one writing paragraph after paragraph to prove his threatened point.

Stealth870 wrote:TRO, you and your art has always offended me.

OMG! Stealth!

Forboding Angel wrote:I'm mildly amused that you indirectly referred to me as a TA fanboi. Now that's interesting...

Where is this?

SpikedHelmet wrote:Only sensitive person I see is the one writing paragraph after paragraph to prove his threatened point.

still needs work. Have to reach tl;dr level :D

Neuralize wrote:Mr. D, I like the model, as I like all your models, but I am wondering about one design decision. Why reveal the back two wheels? Perhaps have them peaking out behind some paneling, much like the back wheels of early hybrid cars.

I want them to be visible, so the unit doesn't look like a Paraplegic dragging his ass in the mud on the way into battle.

I was debating whether or not to use Tracks on the rear instead of wheels, but in the end I went with exposed wheels.

@TRO the important word in that sentence would be "Indirectly"