The beam velocity on the radion reactor is a bit too low for stable orbital flight - we've talked about that on the LAF-12 reactor units. Also, the beam cannons can be better at ground attack if there's a slight spread to them - basically, a particle thrower, if you may.
@AzureCorp Ok sorry for that threatening tone, but still, for a successor built on the airframe of the A-10 it feels very wrong to have only a single engine...
Single engine? IIRC one of the main survivability features of the Warthog is the twin engines! Like, if one gets damaged the other one can still bring it back to base...
@TMach5 And we still have a B-2 bomber that somehow can be used for both dogfighting and strafing. Don't worry, I'll tag you once I upload the plane - it's just not a challenge entry anymore.
@TMach5 It's just my original plan for the CAT1 entry turned out to be a discount B-2 Spirit that have quite some problems reaching the 300-part lower limit.
The picture link seems to be broken. Pretty sure whatever that discord link works better than the postimage one. Also, in case anyone's wondering, I don't even know what discord is.
Pretty sure the site can't really directly use that  link, and have to rely on the one that resizes it. But IIRC that discord link worked without hassle.
@Skylerthedrawer As in "story" or "plotline". So basically he meant he's gonna give us a glimpse into his own fictional universe when he reaches 1,500 points.
@Greggory005 Just realized its because I used the wrong ####ing link that it got resized. The original-sized version of the picture can be found on this link. Not sure which version is better, though.
Also, so what's the name of the picture site you're using?
@Skylerthedrawer I'm pretty sure it's lore reveal... In case anyone's wondering, Greg has basically written an entire novel featuring his various builds and the like.
@Greggory005 Also, a new revision to that picture Apparently for some reason I downloaded a resized image. Now fixed.
Also, the point is that I need someone to set up a basis for me to improve upon. The overall lines are great, the coloring is good, and it's through those that I even know which parts/areas required correction in the first place! So basically I might be able to fix someone else's drawing but I cannot set up a basis on my own - my hand-eye coordination is borderline nonexistent and so is my eye sight, so the only thing I can do is to try out random lines and see which one sticks!
@Greggory005 my pfp is traced gosh dang it ,this is not
Well that explains the problems about her left eye... imma slap your interpretation instead
"Slap", as in...
but its traced
So who is this lass traced from? I can see what seems to be pencil lines underneath.
And also, her left eye looks rather ...off. When you close an eye the corresponding eyebrow is supposed to move downward, and there really shouldn't be a double eyelid on the closed eye - and even then, that line shouldn't be that high - hell, for the first second I thought she had three eyes or so!
Well, anyways, this is my interpretation on what's supposed to be done, but I can't really tell if I only made it worse...
P.S. Try to make sure there aren't any extraneous lines/paint/strokes/whatever on the picture in your next drawing. There's an airbrush dot right above her right brow and there' an extraneous line extending from her bangs down to beneath her left eye in your picture.
@Revan13152 The reason why I asked? The last thing I need when discussing about someone's build is to have someone telling me that I used the wrong pronoun. And also, I now view you as a friend, so I now need to know if it's appropriate to call you things along the lines of "bro" and "my lad"! Yeah, guess it's just me being autistic enough to actually care about such things...
@Revan13152 Read my bio, we aspies aren't normally that good at art anyways, and it took me like what, five tries to get their aesthetics right. For each one of them. Just because we aspeis suck at arts doesn't mean we can't even get a basic idea down in orthographic.
@Revan13152 I mean, the point is to first get a clear picture on what you want to build: is it a fighter, a bomber, a transport, or something else? Then with that in mind, we can sketch down some basic shapes on what the plane will look like, including the aesthetics/artstyle, the wing configuration, the fuselage configuration, engine types, etc. Then we build. And try our best (with the help of XML, of course) to recreate what we wanted to make.
A few examples of my sketch: Starfire "Nightprowler" attack bomber, something I've been working on as of now. Roderick Airworks "Nimbus" high-speed bomber and Nelan Drive Yards "War Drake" Aerospace fighter, two projects I'll start working on after I finish my current project.
Revan, waterproof is first, a setting found only on missiles, and its job is to keep missiles functioning after it has touched water. I'm pretty sure they don't help with missiles and bombs disappearing after reaching a certain depth by any means.
@Revan13152 Well, it's not as if I myself am that careful myself... Like, for multiple posts, I only realized I made a typo half a week after I posted it...
Why would airships replace subs? I mean, they are still the most stealthy platform bar none and IIRC they'd still be better at commerce interdiction and nuclear deterrence...
So... is Karvakia China?
+2@RamboJutter
Not a PC issueWell I mean my laptop starts to melt at 300...
When the number of parts are starting to catch up with the real thing...
f i r s t
+1The beam velocity on the radion reactor is a bit too low for stable orbital flight - we've talked about that on the LAF-12 reactor units. Also, the beam cannons can be better at ground attack if there's a slight spread to them - basically, a particle thrower, if you may.
Holy molly... So this is your take on that Riko guy's sub?
@rexzion Just sorta felt "wait I should have followed that guy a while ago" and...
Ah, the ensign remover, eh?
@AzureCorp True, as long as you don't dive in too steep on a target and got caught by AA further out all is fine, right?
+1@AzureCorp Ok sorry for that threatening tone, but still, for a successor built on the airframe of the A-10 it feels very wrong to have only a single engine...
+1Single engine? IIRC one of the main survivability features of the Warthog is the twin engines! Like, if one gets damaged the other one can still bring it back to base...
+5@TMach5 And we still have a B-2 bomber that somehow can be used for both dogfighting and strafing. Don't worry, I'll tag you once I upload the plane - it's just not a challenge entry anymore.
@TMach5 It's just my original plan for the CAT1 entry turned out to be a discount B-2 Spirit that have quite some problems reaching the 300-part lower limit.
Ultimately decided against participating, there's no point in entering something that adheres to neither the spirit nor the words of the rules.
@Greggory005 Ok...
@Greggory005 So basically some sort of skype or zoom?
@Greggory005 "it work is"? Sorry for being a grammar fanatic, again.
Have you forgotten a certain parenthesis?
The picture link seems to be broken. Pretty sure whatever that discord link works better than the postimage one. Also, in case anyone's wondering, I don't even know what discord is.
Pretty sure the site can't really directly use that
link, and have to rely on the one that resizes it. But IIRC that discord link worked without hassle.@Skylerthedrawer As in "story" or "plotline". So basically he meant he's gonna give us a glimpse into his own fictional universe when he reaches 1,500 points.
@Greggory005 Just realized its because I used the wrong ####ing link that it got resized. The original-sized version of the picture can be found on this link. Not sure which version is better, though.
Also, so what's the name of the picture site you're using?
@Skylerthedrawer I'm pretty sure it's lore reveal... In case anyone's wondering, Greg has basically written an entire novel featuring his various builds and the like.
@Greggory005 Also, a new revision to that picture Apparently for some reason I downloaded a resized image. Now fixed.
Also, the point is that I need someone to set up a basis for me to improve upon. The overall lines are great, the coloring is good, and it's through those that I even know which parts/areas required correction in the first place! So basically I might be able to fix someone else's drawing but I cannot set up a basis on my own - my hand-eye coordination is borderline nonexistent and so is my eye sight, so the only thing I can do is to try out random lines and see which one sticks!
@Greggory005
my pfp is traced gosh dang it ,this is notWell that explains the problems about her left eye...
imma slap your interpretation instead"Slap", as in...
but its tracedSo who is this lass traced from? I can see what seems to be pencil lines underneath.
And also, her left eye looks rather ...off. When you close an eye the corresponding eyebrow is supposed to move downward, and there really shouldn't be a double eyelid on the closed eye - and even then, that line shouldn't be that high - hell, for the first second I thought she had three eyes or so!
Well, anyways, this is my interpretation on what's supposed to be done, but I can't really tell if I only made it worse...
P.S. Try to make sure there aren't any extraneous lines/paint/strokes/whatever on the picture in your next drawing. There's an airbrush dot right above her right brow and there' an extraneous line extending from her bangs down to beneath her left eye in your picture.
@Greggory005 Seems to be some sort of "access denied".
@Greggory005 Sadly, no.
Just realized: you can probably make an axis-captured B-17 and actually have the bomber formation call out "yo that bomber two o' clock sus!"
+4@Revan13152 There are three more of us aspies that I know of: MintLynx from Texas, Avro683Lancaster from Australia, and FeatherWing from the UK.
+1@Revan13152 The reason why I asked? The last thing I need when discussing about someone's build is to have someone telling me that I used the wrong pronoun. And also, I now view you as a friend, so I now need to know if it's appropriate to call you things along the lines of "bro" and "my lad"! Yeah, guess it's just me being autistic enough to actually care about such things...
+1@Revan13152 Read my bio, we aspies aren't normally that good at art anyways, and it took me like what, five tries to get their aesthetics right. For each one of them. Just because we aspeis suck at arts doesn't mean we can't even get a basic idea down in orthographic.
+1@Revan13152 I mean, the point is to first get a clear picture on what you want to build: is it a fighter, a bomber, a transport, or something else? Then with that in mind, we can sketch down some basic shapes on what the plane will look like, including the aesthetics/artstyle, the wing configuration, the fuselage configuration, engine types, etc. Then we build. And try our best (with the help of XML, of course) to recreate what we wanted to make.
+1A few examples of my sketch:
Starfire "Nightprowler" attack bomber, something I've been working on as of now.
Roderick Airworks "Nimbus" high-speed bomber and Nelan Drive Yards "War Drake" Aerospace fighter, two projects I'll start working on after I finish my current project.
@Revan13152 Also, what's your preferred pronoun?
+1Revan,
+1waterproofis first, a setting found only on missiles, and its job is to keep missiles functioning after it has touched water. I'm pretty sure they don't help with missiles and bombs disappearing after reaching a certain depth by any means.Below 15,000 meters / 45,000 feet? Seriously, it depends on what you're trying to build.
+1@Revan13152 Well, it's not as if I myself am that careful myself... Like, for multiple posts, I only realized I made a typo half a week after I posted it...
+1The old and trusty flare gun, for some reason it can only damage ships and can't even damage USS Beast while we're at it...
+1MOAR DAKKA! NEVAR 'NUFF DAKKA!! WAAAAAGGGHHH!!!
Well, other than the fact that bombs automatically disappear under water, not too much of an issue...
+1Ok, perhpas, just perhaps, you should put something like "activate 1 to fire the cluster" somewhere in the description...
+1@Sadboye12 I'm pretty sure you haven't missed any forum posts either...
+1Although I myself hate any weapon that's not "plug n' play" with a passion, the weapon is still pretty nice.
+1@Sadboye12 No, it's because I don't upload that many things...
+1@Sadboye12 No, I man IIRC you haven't missed out on anything as of yet...
+1@Sadboye12 ...Again? Thanks anyways
+1Who the hell's Ryouko?
Am I the only one who thinks the bottom one is better?
Wait wait wait wait where the -bleep- are the horizontal stabilizers?
+1@GCPrototypes Well, of course, if merchant ships are now mostly airborne, submarines will most likely fall out of military use...
Why would airships replace subs? I mean, they are still the most stealthy platform bar none and IIRC they'd still be better at commerce interdiction and nuclear deterrence...