Something big

[Havok]

Shit man. It's been a while, but I was getting sick of the wanktastic bazzilion gun ships. This TIE is pretty sweet and a nice change.

[fractalsponge1]

Um, thanks?

I was doodling the other day, probably channeling Cantwell, trying to build a destroyer between a Venator and an ISD. Think of it as a shot at a Victory-class. "wings" very speculative at the moment.

[VT-16]

Reminds me a bit of the old Marvel-era battlecruisers.

[Crossroads Inc.]

If you do "Wings" on a vicstar, I prefer the "closed" ones, I always imagined the wings to host extra banks of Turbolasers, it seem to make the most sense.

[fractalsponge1]

TBH, if I don't know if I'll keep any wings on, just curious what they would look like.

Can't really imagine what they would be in actuality; they seem too big for the usual "repulsors" explanation. Maybe a combination repulsor/radiator system? If X-shaped, I can see it being useful as a shroud for a flank missile battery, increase the chances for a clean launch under fire by extending armor-supported shields to better cover the tubes. None of this asinine bridge stalk-launcher business; maybe for point defence missile launchers, but a ship as big as a Vic should have a main battery of Venator/Accalamator sized strategic weapon tubes.

Turrets would definitely be centerline or terrace mounted if the X-wing format stays, otherwise the arcs would be pretty horrible. Vic's are probably Venator-scale powered at least, so twin 70s? Or maybe have a scattered mixed battery, since it's Rendili and maybe they don't have as clear an idea of what they want or need as market-leading KDY, and Vics are missile-boats more than gun-boats. More weapon variety, more chances for funky detailing. Some ISDI-style twin 175s, perhaps, big guns to back up big missiles to go after big ships in fleet action, like TF battleships...

[Thanas]

If you do "Wings" on a vicstar, I prefer the "closed" ones, I always imagined the wings to host extra banks of Turbolasers, it seem to make the most sense.

Repulsorlifts for atmospheric flight, maybe.

[Crossroads Inc.]

TBH, if I don't know if I'll keep any wings on, just curious what they would look like.

Can't really imagine what they would be in actuality; they seem too big for the usual "repulsors" explanation. Maybe a combination repulsor/radiator system? If X-shaped, I can see it being useful as a shroud for a flank missile battery, increase the chances for a clean launch under fire by extending armor-supported shields to better cover the tubes. None of this asinine bridge stalk-launcher business; maybe for point defence missile launchers, but a ship as big as a Vic should have a main battery of Venator/Accalamator sized strategic weapon tubes.

Turrets would definitely be centerline or terrace mounted if the X-wing format stays, otherwise the arcs would be pretty horrible. Vic's are probably Venator-scale powered at least, so twin 70s? Or maybe have a scattered mixed battery, since it's Rendili and maybe they don't have as clear an idea of what they want or need as market-leading KDY, and Vics are missile-boats more than gun-boats. More weapon variety, more chances for funky detailing. Some ISDI-style twin 175s, perhaps, big guns to back up big missiles to go after big ships in fleet action, like TF battleships...

The "X-wing" style Vicstars have always been associated with heavy missile launchers along the inside. The explanation being as you hit on,m that the outsides were 'shields' to allow for clean fire. Personally I think its daft since you can put missile tubes right into a ship and hide them almost totally without the need for the bent x-wing business.

As for 'traditional' wing design, I prefer the Repulser lift/shield theory. Vicstars were considered the biggest ship to be able to land on a planet, safely, and one would imagine massive extra repulser lifts for the job.

I won't post someone else's art directly in your thread, but here are two links to what I consider to be rather good portrayers of Vicstars.

http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b389/ ... torySD.gif
http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b389/ ... SEntry.gif

The second one is nice and is done in a "Faux ICS" style entry. I also consider that one a good judge of a "different" style bridge, since unlike all other ISD's, Vicstars were built by another company.

[fractalsponge1]

I might have bought the repulsor theory before the prequels and their ICSes. Acclamators and even Venators (which are longer than, but have comparable volume to a VicStar), can maneuver themselves just fine in atmosphere with repulsorlifts that are nowhere near the size of the VicI wings.

Radiators then? I know it's silly, but it just doesn't seem right to call a ship a Victory without some sort of wings Though there is the Balmorra comic VSD-like ship to consider...

[fractalsponge1]

A lot of fighter renders in an updated gallery:

[LokeGroundrunner]

im digging the triple wing setup, however i believe that this design would be inneficient for close quarters combat like that in the interior of the death star in return of the jedi.

[LokeGroundrunner]

as an additional note, in regard to the assertor class dreadnought, the bunches of turbolasers placed all over the top ond bottom, due to the size of the ship i wondered how much larger these turbolasers are compared to the dby turrets on the venator class destroyer

[fractalsponge1]

I was just going to block out the shape, and ended up doing most of the cockpit... oh well.

[Raesene]

Hey, a Scimitar assault bomber ! Thank you

I like the Victory-concept with wings, but what about the corvette... ?

A small request: can you do a TIE Interceptor with red stripes on the solar panels ? What is your opinion of the T.I.E. starfighter with the seven-cornered solar panels, do you it on your to-do list too ?

[fractalsponge1]

Corvette is on hold, along with many other things that should eventually finished.

I'll see about the stripes, no promises, but give me a ref

What is the 7-cornered TIE? Sounds weird.

Here's the seal for the top hatch (very subtle):


And, some guns. You know, once in a while, this stuff turns out pretty well, if I do say so myself *pats own back*

[Raesene]

For the Red Stripes: Baron Fel's 181st Imperial Fighter Group/Wing

Regarding the 7-cornered Panel TIE, I would have bet it's the T.I.E starfighter described in one of the new RPG books, but this one's panels have eight corners, so no reference - I must have misremembered (but will post a reference should I find something for this brain phantom).

[Thanas]

Ah, the Scimitar....my favorite of all Bombers in the SW universe.

[Azron_Stoma]

This sudden tangent onto Fighters and such wouldn't have anything to do with a certain upcoming Essential Guide now would it?

Or is it just creator's ADD (I get that all the time)

In any case, great stuff as always.

[fractalsponge1]

^Nope, sadly nothing solid on that yet...

New shots, did the wing mesh, paneled the center section. The essential guide labels two obvious warhead launchers as repulsorlifts, a grievous mistake that I have corrected :p Using XG1-scale launchers, not the smaller ones from the T/D/ln/I etc. Will still have the diagonal launchers below, but these two feed into magazines set further back. I'm envisioning them being standard torpedo/missile launchers, with the diagonal chute/launchers being modular for varied payloads.

[fractalsponge1]

Launchers. Yes, the first launcher does clear the fuselage (I checked).

XG1-caliber, modular.

[LokeGroundrunner]

you should try and work up a concept for the ellisium class star dreadnought from the sith fleet

[fractalsponge1]

What is that? The Pellaeon-class knockoff from TOR?

[JointStrikeFighter]

I really wish I could envision a way for downwards firing launchers to make any sense

[Ryan Thunder]

I really wish I could envision a way for downwards firing launchers to make any sense

Clearly it's an atmospheric model.

[fractalsponge1]

What's the problem with multiple downward launchers in space anyway? If anything it'd be better than forward launchers; higher salvo rate from multiple launch and a launch angle away from head-on incoming fire.

To be fair, if it weren't part of the original design I probably wouldn't have thought of it.

[takemeout_totheblack]

A few questions:
How many per tube?
What kind of firepower are we talking about here?
How strong are the guns?

As for the downwards facing pods? Meh, Proton torpedoes are capable of some pretty freaky turns (Death Star a'splosion is evidence of this) so it doesn't really bug me on a technical level.