j'ordos Posted February 22, 2004 Report Share Posted February 22, 2004 Well, I've been thinking about the craft cannon a bit, here's a preliminary and simple model. Based on CT so it's 6-barreled, and I encased it in an aerodynamically shaped pod, since it's supposed to be installed in a weapon bay like the missiles, and probably will have to be lowered outside the bay in order to fire it. Other than that, there's not much to say about it, so here goes: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikker Posted February 22, 2004 Report Share Posted February 22, 2004 it needs a hardoint at the top, like on mine. I also think it looks too much as a missle, but it would fit well in the category of a human cannon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cpl. Facehugger Posted February 22, 2004 Report Share Posted February 22, 2004 (edited) Could we get a ammo chain coming off of the Craft Cannon? (like a machine gun or something?) Edit: Sneaky topic merge... Edited February 22, 2004 by Cpl. Facehugger Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Breunor Posted February 22, 2004 Report Share Posted February 22, 2004 Regarding the cannon. I merged that topic into here so it's all together. Here's a picture of a real cannon I found, I agree that it would need to be somewhat aerodynamic, but it's also basic human tech as well. So maybe having parts that are sleek without having the entire weapon be a smooth shell? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j'ordos Posted February 22, 2004 Author Report Share Posted February 22, 2004 Yeah I know, I looked up pics too, but those are for a helicopter gunship I suppose, with speeds of around 200-300 km/h, and I doubt that'll work on an interceptor flying at mach 2 (well, I don't know if a pod is good enough, but still better I think ) after all, the other weapons are stored internally, and it can't fire from there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cpl. Facehugger Posted February 22, 2004 Report Share Posted February 22, 2004 Maby it doesn't need to have a pod at all? Maby there are holes in the fuselauge that the cannon can fire out of? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j'ordos Posted February 22, 2004 Author Report Share Posted February 22, 2004 (edited) [quote name='Cpl. Facehugger' date='Feb 22 2004, 10:22 PM']Maby it doesn't need to have a pod at all? Maby there are holes in the fuselauge that the cannon can fire out of?[/quote] That would seem quite weird, making internal bays for stealth increase and drag reduction and then cutting holes in them to get the opposite effect After all the cannon's installed in the same place the missiles are, and those missiles don't fire through holes in the fuselage . Now, I could add an external ammo feed (although I figured the ammo would reside inside the pod as well), a rail to connect it to the craft, a protective shield around the barrels, a shell ejector, some cooling fins, and whatnot. Maybe those additions will make it look somewhat more down-to-earth, for those wanting that edit: found some pics of another gun pod: [url="http://www.aircraftresourcecenter.com/AWA1/201-300/walk251_SUU-23A_gun_pod/walk251.htm"]http://www.aircraftresourcecenter.com/AWA1...pod/walk251.htm[/url] Edited February 22, 2004 by j'ordos Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Breunor Posted February 23, 2004 Report Share Posted February 23, 2004 I figured you based it off that pod and I agree that since it takes a weapon slot it should pretty much function like the others. Having the ammo internal to the system makes the most sense, it's the easiest to swap out then. Perhaps we could something like this: since this model will really only be seen in the X-Net, there are plenty of polys to play with, could we just use the external pod shell, but then show a cut-away which exposes the internal workings a little? Remember Demich's model for the cannon HWP? It was a vehicle-sized gattling system, very nice but it was like 30K polys. What about something like that inside the pod (and at under 6K polys of course)? I can also see using this model and calling it a day too, nothing says it has to be complicated looking, and it does fit with modern military design. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j'ordos Posted March 19, 2004 Author Report Share Posted March 19, 2004 (edited) You mean somewhat like this? I don't know whether that would be a good idea, before you know it we'll be making cutaways from everything, and who knows where we'll end? Exploded views of every item in the game? I thought maybe some transparent panels, so the ground personnel can easily inspect the pod without having to dissasemble it right away, maybe that would be enough edit: yeah, the detail is still lacking, I know WIP Edited March 19, 2004 by j'ordos Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Breunor Posted March 19, 2004 Report Share Posted March 19, 2004 The clear side panel sounds good, just something so that the player gets an idea of what's inside the housing would be good. I agree that having the gun always internal would beg the question why it couldn't be always in there like in a real jet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest drewid Posted March 20, 2004 Report Share Posted March 20, 2004 if it's in a wing pod it could be colour coded as well as being a different shaped pod Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fux0r666 Posted May 21, 2004 Report Share Posted May 21, 2004 As for the gunpod, bear in mind that those sorts of things are usually mounted on ground attack (read: air to ground) aircraft. Usually interceptor aircraft have onboard cannons if they have them and integrated avionics to aid aiming them. For the plasma cannons and those weapons that appear to be too big to house in the fuselage of the craft I think having a gunpod with them on the end would make a lot of sense. What do you think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikker Posted May 21, 2004 Report Share Posted May 21, 2004 [quote name='fux0r666' date='May 21 2004, 01:20 AM']As for the gunpod, bear in mind that those sorts of things are usually mounted on ground attack (read: air to ground) aircraft. Usually interceptor aircraft have onboard cannons if they have them and integrated avionics to aid aiming them. For the plasma cannons and those weapons that appear to be too big to house in the fuselage of the craft I think having a gunpod with them on the end would make a lot of sense. What do you think?[/quote] hmmm....thats a good question. I imagine them to be on the sides of the ship, as for v 1.0, there are 2 holes. I think they go into the fuselage, but not where? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Breunor Posted May 21, 2004 Report Share Posted May 21, 2004 While the original cannons were considered a seperate weapon just like a fusion ball launcher, I haven't heard many people ever use it. I personally dropped it and picked up either another missile launcher for extra punch at range. Perhaps there's not much of a balance issue to leave the cannon in permanently, except that I think the xml layout for the craft has a fixed 2 weapons? If a third were added, that would be an internal cannon. The firepower difference is minimal and would be more realistic than mounting a chain gun to a hardpoint I agree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j'ordos Posted June 8, 2004 Author Report Share Posted June 8, 2004 (edited) Ok, I have been working on the cannon again, I've redone the pod to make it less missile-shaped . Aside from some tweaks left and right, is this one better than the previous one? (the straight part on the top is where the cannon is attached to the aircraft hardpoint) This is the side view: Edited June 8, 2004 by j'ordos Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j'ordos Posted June 8, 2004 Author Report Share Posted June 8, 2004 Top view: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j'ordos Posted June 8, 2004 Author Report Share Posted June 8, 2004 And an interior detail shot: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
red knight Posted June 8, 2004 Report Share Posted June 8, 2004 Impresive detailed interior, a little of bump mapping on there and we have a heck of XNet model. Greetings Red Knight Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Breunor Posted June 8, 2004 Report Share Posted June 8, 2004 I agree, that weapon looks very believable. Very nice job! As always, make sure to put a copy up on the server for safe keeping. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cpl. Facehugger Posted June 8, 2004 Report Share Posted June 8, 2004 (edited) Technically, we only have to have one model for the craft weapons, right? Since we'll never see them in the battleview, we can make just a high poly version? Hmm... Here's an idea: How about in the hangars we have racks with the various craft weapons in them? Like in the beginning, you have [explosive] Sidewinder or Titan missiles lying around in the hangar. Then, when you advance in technology, those missiles turn into plasma cannons and finally gravity bomb launchers? Edit2: Just eyecandy, but it could help immerse the player in the game IMO. Edited June 8, 2004 by Cpl. Facehugger Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikker Posted June 8, 2004 Report Share Posted June 8, 2004 [quote name='Cpl. Facehugger' date='Jun 8 2004, 03:16 PM']Technically, we only have to have one model for the craft weapons, right? Since we'll never see them in the battleview, we can make just a high poly version? Hmm... Here's an idea: How about in the hangars we have racks with the various craft weapons in them? Like in the beginning, you have [explosive] Sidewinder or Titan missiles lying around in the hangar. Then, when you advance in technology, those missiles turn into plasma cannons and finally gravity bomb launchers? Edit2: Just eyecandy, but it could help immerse the player in the game IMO.[/quote] hmmmm, thats sounds nice. But it should be max. by the ammount of weapons you acturly GOT (they got shot you loose them ) The model looks good, but you might want some more bumpy exterrior IMO. something more then a plane shell. The interrior looks great, but is all that detail nessesary? Can it zoom all that way in? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vaaish Posted June 9, 2004 Report Share Posted June 9, 2004 Very nice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j'ordos Posted June 9, 2004 Author Report Share Posted June 9, 2004 I have redone the shell, I believe it's better now (oh yeah, Mikker, don't worry, there's still some detail to be added there, I just don't want to until I'm sure I've got a good base to start on ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j'ordos Posted June 10, 2004 Author Report Share Posted June 10, 2004 Here's with some detail added: cooling fins and the spent casings ejector. Also, the preliminary location of the transparent covers is shown. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Breunor Posted June 10, 2004 Report Share Posted June 10, 2004 Coolio, with the texturing and materials you've done in the past, this will look very good. Nice job! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikker Posted June 10, 2004 Report Share Posted June 10, 2004 much MUCH better! Darn, that thing looks great! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j'ordos Posted June 10, 2004 Author Report Share Posted June 10, 2004 (edited) [quote name='mikker' date='May 21 2004, 06:34 PM'][quote name='fux0r666' date='May 21 2004, 01:20 AM'] As for the gunpod, bear in mind that those sorts of things are usually mounted on ground attack (read: air to ground) aircraft. Usually interceptor aircraft have onboard cannons if they have them and integrated avionics to aid aiming them. For the plasma cannons and those weapons that appear to be too big to house in the fuselage of the craft I think having a gunpod with them on the end would make a lot of sense. What do you think?[/quote] hmmm....thats a good question. I imagine them to be on the sides of the ship, as for v 1.0, there are 2 holes. I think they go into the fuselage, but not where?[/quote] Hmmm... I seem to have missed this part in the discussion Making the gun internal makes perfect sense, but since it was a seperate weapon that had to be added to a hardpoint like the missiles in xcom1, I figured we were going to keep it that way. And installing it in an aerodynamic shell seemed like the only other option when trying to make it at least believable as an interceptor weapon. We can of course still change that and make the cannon internal, if we keep the same weapon stats that's not suddenly going to sway the balance of air combat to the xcom side (although I can see a definite use for it if we allow the player to set certain weapons on 'hold fire': downing small scout UFO's with the onboard cannon by closing in range without firing missiles, instead of blowing them up all the time ) [quote name='Mikker' date=' Jun 10 2004, 03:01 PM']much MUCH better! Darn, that thing looks great![/quote] Well, I'll consider this a job well done if anyone would almost install a cannon in an interceptor despite of what the stats show anyway, if we're going the internal cannon road, there's no need for the pod and it'll look like this: edit: forgot to mention it'll also reduce polycount from about 4,5k to 3,5k (unoptimized that is, there's still room for reduction) Edited June 10, 2004 by j'ordos Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fux0r666 Posted June 10, 2004 Report Share Posted June 10, 2004 (edited) It's also possible to say that when one installs the more advanced gunlike weapons, that the guns become obsolete and are removed to make room for powercells and other such things, since the gun and ammunition has considerable weight and takes up a fuselage compartment that is better used for other things. With this as a possibility, it would necessitate that the more advanced aircraft also have provisions for internal cannons... So, since the model is excellent both with and without the aeordynamic shell, I think the xnet entry ought to include both options with mention of the various mounting possibilities. I think a good xnet graphic could include a cut-away view of the interceptor with the cannon mounted internally aswell as a picture of the pod underslung on a hardpoint of some generic aircraft whose fuselage is out of the shot. editted for grammar. Edited June 10, 2004 by fux0r666 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Breunor Posted June 10, 2004 Report Share Posted June 10, 2004 I agree with the idea that the aircraft have guns regardless of the "heavy" weapons mounted, but as far as I know the current craft design contains 2 weapon slots only. Since we want to recreate the original for now, we should stick to the external weapon. This thing is capable of firing slugs a really long way compared to typical weapons, 10km. IMHO that type of power justifies a large housing and all that. Gameplay of this thing is another thing, I never used it personally. But I suggest we keep both versions, because I'd expect this would be one of those early mods, v1.001, having guns built into all craft, in addition to the 2 weapon mounts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cpl. Facehugger Posted June 10, 2004 Report Share Posted June 10, 2004 Yes. I concur with Bruenor. We should use the pod until V1+ Anyway, could we get a nice firing animation for it? Come to think of it, some nice eyecandy for the X-Net might be to have firing animations for all the weapons in the game. (Like a...press here to see the weapon in action! button) Its just eyecandy, but it could be fun eyecandy. I'd just hold it down to see the thing spinning and bullets flying out of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SupSuper Posted June 11, 2004 Report Share Posted June 11, 2004 [quote name='Cpl. Facehugger' date='Jun 11 2004, 12:21 AM']Anyway, could we get a nice firing animation for it? Come to think of it, some nice eyecandy for the X-Net might be to have firing animations for all the weapons in the game. (Like a...press here to see the weapon in action! button) Its just eyecandy, but it could be fun eyecandy. I'd just hold it down to see the thing spinning and bullets flying out of it. [/quote] instead of a separate button the user could just click the model window (where the model is shown) and the animation would play. i agree, eyecandy but fun eyecandy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Breunor Posted June 11, 2004 Report Share Posted June 11, 2004 If we have all the necessary animations done for v1 and there's some free time, I think that's a fair thing to consider. But There's a lot of work between now and then... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j'ordos Posted June 11, 2004 Author Report Share Posted June 11, 2004 (edited) [quote name='SupSuper' date='Jun 11 2004, 07:20 PM'][quote name='Cpl. Facehugger' date='Jun 11 2004, 12:21 AM'] Anyway, could we get a nice firing animation for it? Come to think of it, some nice eyecandy for the X-Net might be to have firing animations for all the weapons in the game. (Like a...press here to see the weapon in action! button) Its just eyecandy, but it could be fun eyecandy. I'd just hold it down to see the thing spinning and bullets flying out of it. [/quote] instead of a separate button the user could just click the model window (where the model is shown) and the animation would play. i agree, eyecandy but fun eyecandy [/quote] I think the eyecandy for this baby is something for v1+++++++++ Let's recapitulate, shall we? Shot fired: [list] [*]firing mechanism animation [*]recoil is absorbed by those concentric cylinders behind the barrels (so barrels move back) [*]round exits barrel, muzzle flash. [*]barrels rotate [*]visible ammo rounds in belt move up [*]new shell comes out of the ammo feeder (that thing coming from the ammo drum in the rear) [*]spent casing ejected from... well... spent casings ejector [/list]uhmm... enough for now Edited June 11, 2004 by j'ordos Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikker Posted June 11, 2004 Report Share Posted June 11, 2004 in my opinion, the thing looks better with the casing, it also makes more sence. Having the gun expsed could be a bad idea arrodynamicly. But both look badarse! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
red knight Posted June 11, 2004 Report Share Posted June 11, 2004 Definitly I like the cased version far more... Greetings Red Knight Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MagicAndy Posted June 11, 2004 Report Share Posted June 11, 2004 cased version rules save the uncased one for when they get shot down over an alien base and have to rip it off the hull and fire it from the hip it a desperate last stand. Ok time for bed i think... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fux0r666 Posted June 11, 2004 Report Share Posted June 11, 2004 Hehehe. If he could lift it, he could use it to fly home. Aircraft cannons fire shells as big as your thumb at 6000 rpm. He could strap it on and sail away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j'ordos Posted June 14, 2004 Author Report Share Posted June 14, 2004 (edited) I've been playing around a bit, trying to come up with a texture for the cannon pod, and here's an early attempt at it (well, there's still room for improvement, but that'll take more than the 30 minutes I had now ) Oh and don't mind the interior, it's not done yet, and neither is the cannon itself. Oh yeah, what I wanted to know: the missiles are one-shot weapons, so they're brand new anyway, but what about this thing? Should I add a little weathering like it's seen some action, or should I keep it brand new? Edited June 14, 2004 by j'ordos Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fux0r666 Posted June 14, 2004 Report Share Posted June 14, 2004 Usually aircraft components are kept pretty clean as dust and carbon deposits and the like increase the aircraft's drag coefficient. flecks of paint off of it and stuff would look nice. If you were dying to make it dirty you could make scorch marks directly backwards out of the ejection port to suggest gunpowder staining at high speed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Puasonen Posted June 15, 2004 Report Share Posted June 15, 2004 (edited) I think X-Net has pictures of items as they are brand new. Of course it could look cooler if you'd make it look used but if you think about it, X-Net entry is kind of a weapon ad made by the manufacturer and who would put an used item in a picture of an ad? Edited June 15, 2004 by Puasonen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Breunor Posted June 15, 2004 Report Share Posted June 15, 2004 I agree with having the weapon look new, like Puasonen said they will be clean display models, rather than a unit in actual use. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j'ordos Posted September 14, 2004 Author Report Share Posted September 14, 2004 (edited) There's a question I have about the texture for the cannon: since the internals will be visible through the transparent covers, what's the best solution to display the inside of the shell? Using a 2-sided material (don't know if that's supported though) or making a simpler copy of the outer shell and put it inside it, connecting it at the front edge and where the covers are? Oh yeah, about that Quantum Projectile, I'm not really sure about that one... looks like a cocktail shaker to me edit: ok, that was about the first one, although I still think the same way, if slightly less. I think designing a projectile like this is pretty hard. It has to look agressive/dangerous, sleek and simple yet complicated, all at once... Edited September 14, 2004 by j'ordos Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts