This member has provided no bio about themself...

Comment History
Talhydras Sep 29 2011, 2:08pm replied:

Selor - thanks for the feedback! The team had always had some reservations about our old placeholder and UNH cruiser concept, so this spring I think it was I started work on a redesign. Instead of simply drawing what came first to mind, I sought out inspiration - other ships in fiction that reminded me of old Kushan vessels.

I'd been watching B5 and for the first time looked at the HW1 kushan destroyer and the B5 warlock. I was shocked, honestly, because they share such an enormous degree of similarity that, if the timing hadn't rendered it extremely unlikely, I'd swear one influenced the other. Seriously, look at the nose turret placement and architecture of the Warlock next to the HW1 Kushan DD - it's uncanny.

So that's how the Warlock entered my stable of inspirational designs as I went to the drawing board - really my tablet - to try and whack together a newer, blockier, sleeker, Kushanier ship. After a few weeks I kept drifting closer and closer to the Warlock. It had the same lines, proportions, and a lot of the same structural "languge" that the Kushan cruiser and especially destroyer were made with. The team wanted the UNH cruiser to reflect this - the smoother designs of the UNH frigates and destroyer were meant to be more modern while we wanted the cruiser to look old, rugged, and massive.

Eventually I kinda broke down - all my concepts were trying to be as Warlocky as possible without being a Warlock and it was driving me crazy. I had so much trouble getting past this that I decided finally to put my enthusiasm for the Warlock to work. Instead of trying to work around the largest piece of inspiration I had, I used it as the basis. HW's included lots of shout-outs before, and this one was one of mine. Plus, the Warlock's one of the most under-represented brilliant SF designs ever. I had hoped that my alterations - combined with the innate Kushan-ness of the Warlock wouldn't be jarring, but it would appear that to some it is. Oh well. :)

+2 votes     article: Homeworld:@ version released
Talhydras Sep 24 2011, 4:37am replied:

Dropbox or pastebin would be great, if all else fails get to our relicnews thread and drop it there and we'll do everything we can to figure it out! Thanks for the feedback! :D

+1 vote     mod: Homeworld:@
Talhydras Sep 22 2011, 2:53am replied:

Well, that depends on your definition of "vanilla" to some degree. It's certainly my intent to make sure that the UNH units resemble their HW1 predecessors to a far greater degree than any of the stock HW2 higgy ships did. For the Vaygr I wanted to make sure there was zero chance they could be confused with any of the other races, hence the all-new look. Thank you for your kind words, sir. :)

+3 votes     article: Homeworld:@ version released
Talhydras Sep 22 2011, 2:50am replied:

The Destroyer, Flare Gunship, and Battlecruiser are all Vaygr. The Heavy Cruiser belongs to the UNH faction - UNH standing for "Unified Navy of Higaara", the various kiith fleets combined. :) So 75% of them are.

+1 vote     article: Homeworld:@ version released
Talhydras Sep 19 2011, 4:11pm replied:

Don't worry - if we figure out that bug I swear I'll put out a release just for that. In the meantime I'm hoping to do some FX tweaks in general in the coming weeks. If too many more reports of this bug show up I'll just swap out the wacko FX for the Flare Gunship out with something that's never caused problems.

Just to confirm - is this whiteout ONLY happening with the Flare Gunship, or are you noticing it with other weapons? Historically we had problems once upon a time with the cruiser's heavy energy cannon.

Also on the subject of props, it takes me at most a few hours to scribble out a quick concept and Dark spends a few MONTHS turning it to reality and handling my OCD perfectionist micromanagement. So while I thank you for your attribution I'm serious when I say that it's cause of him alone that we've got Vaygr capital ships.

+1 vote     mod: Homeworld:@
Talhydras Sep 19 2011, 3:50pm replied:

I hope one of our next projects will end up being a Vaygr Carrier of some sort. Though if it turns out to be as big a project as the Battlecruiser, it might come out sometime in the Spring. Since the only Vaygr Carrier I've got a concept for that really clicks with me is their heavy carrier, it could be an even bigger project than the BC. It'd be able to inherit some parts and some textures, but at least 2/3rds of the hull would be totally different...

Thanks for your kind words about our Vaygr units. I just draw the concept art and poke at the geometry from time to time - the incredibly beautiful texturing over the meticulously detailed geometry is entirely due to the talents of Dark_Sentinel and praise should go to him.

+1 vote     mod: Homeworld:@
Talhydras Sep 19 2011, 3:46pm replied:

Both in universe and out of universe - sort of :D This was one of the first ships I designed when I started this project and I hadn't developed as much of an understanding of how I wanted Vaygr units to look so I consciously or unconsciously pulled lots of details from the Taii Inty, a personal favorite.

In universe, it's an advanced Vaygr ship that's been developed in part with stolen/borrowed/gifted Taiidani technology.

A much more obscure inspiration was the LF-03 Osprey from Pax Imperia Eminent Domain. And a Covenant Hunter.

+1 vote     media: release media
Talhydras Jun 13 2011, 6:14am replied:

Heheheh, glad you liked them! We're keeping them around in the .ship files, just commented out and replaced with cookie-cutter stuff like HW2 stock.

For painfully detailed information about ship roles and capabilities, I advise you to check out the readme.pdf that comes with the mod! Apart from that, really if you've played HW1 most of the ships' strengths and weaknesses follow that game. We're hoping to move away from HW2's rock paper scissors balance anyway, which largely obviates the need for a "unit role" line describing every ship's place in the rock-paper-scissors triangle. Bombers bomb. Assault frigates assault. Missile Destroyers destroy stuff with missiles. It's all pretty straightforward to me, at any rate ;)

The ships that most break from HW1 tradition are actually the Vaygr Destroyer and the Higaaran Cruiser; both of which possess extensive and formidable anti-strike-craft defense. Don't engage unless you've got flare or ion corvettes, or a ton of bombers!

+1 vote     mod: Homeworld:@
Talhydras Jun 13 2011, 6:11am replied:

Hey Stuart - sorry you feel that way :)
The original plan was never to keep these descriptions; we hope to eventually overhaul the UI so that it's much closer to HW1's minimalist list on the side of the screen as opposed to HW2's bottom bar with icons.

It appears we will be unlikely to fully eliminate the old UI elements in some game modes, so we are adding in some generic role information. I just got through doing that now, actually, and committing it to the repository so next release (which is slated for this summer) will be sanitized.

Thanks for sharing your opinion. We can only improve with feedback :)

+1 vote     mod: Homeworld:@
Talhydras Jun 4 2011, 3:46am replied:

It's supposed to look very fragile. It -is- very fragile, compared to its heavy cruiser counterparts. If it looks fragile, then the art is doing its job of communicating information about the ship to you.

It also has significantly more firepower than a heavy cruiser, while retaining the same maneuverability and having better acceleration. Generally heavy weapons and heavy armor are not mutually exclusive, until you have something for comparison. If Ship X and Ship Y are the same class, and someone wants Ship X to have stronger armor and weapons than Ship Y, it's almost a certainty that Ship X will have to be much slower, or Ship Y is much lower technology.

This ship here, the Morning Star-class battlecruiser, is slightly faster and quite a bit more able to accelerate than a heavy cruiser. It doesn't have the repair capability or raw hit points total of a heavy cruiser - but packs an initial salvo twice as powerful and has devastating sustained single-target damage output.

+1 vote     media: First light of the Morning Star
Talhydras Jun 4 2011, 1:26am says:

Dark can correct me, but it's something like 13k polies atm. A lot of that's going into things like goblins, and we may end up making a lower poly version that gets most of the detail through AO.

As far as the comments on the "thin connections" - This ship has traded away heavy armor for extremely heavy forward firepower. The design quite purposefully shows this off by seeming slimmer and more sparingly constructed than other ships of its class.

+1 vote     media: First light of the Morning Star
Talhydras Jun 1 2011, 2:44am replied:

"That thing on the left" Is (of course) a placeholder, but its replacement is nearing geometry completion. Currently we're working on finalizing the textures for the ship in the foreground.

It's safe to say this screenshot is actually pretty darn misleading, but if you've played a few games of Survival to wave 15, you might know what this -specific- ship is.

+1 vote     media: Still Alive
Talhydras Mar 7 2011, 7:30pm replied:

Hadespwr - Thanks for your comment! Sorry we didn't get back to you sooner.

The story for HW@ is set one hundred years after Higaaran Landfall. Far to the galactic north in a desolate and uninhabited region known as the Ocean of Silence, thermal scanners detect signs of a possibly enormous and alien civilization. Though all ships that venture near that region are never heard from again, the Unified Higaaran Navy secretly prepares a powerful military expedition based around the newly-commissioned 15th Mothership Battle Group.

Isolated in a young star cluster above the disk of the galaxy, the Vaygr are united forcefully into a vast pilgrimage by a charismatic and brutal warlord Makaan. His goals and motivations remain cloudy even to his allies. The great Vaygr expedition will have to contend with the unknown and the technologically and numerically superior navies of the Galactic powers, and nothing in their warrior culture could have prepared them for the battles they are being led into.

At its heart, the HW@ story is about vengeance and forgiveness. All of the principal characters have in some fashion or another lost their home, and they represent the full spectrum of response. Some seek atonement for their failures and redemption in the eyes of their peers, while others seek the power to never again be so vulnerable. The central axis of the story is the discussion between the magnitude of crimes and the degree of justice that can be extracted by the pursuit of revenge. How does one exact repayment for the lost safety and security of home, the missing friends and family, from just one individual? When has guilt been absolved? Can it ever be, even in the fullness of infinite time?

I hope this answers your questions...

+1 vote     mod: Homeworld:@
Talhydras Dec 17 2010, 4:53pm replied:

Actually it's mostly inspired by World in Conflict. HW@ is mostly meant to mimic Cataclysm and Homeworld 1 style storytelling, mission design, and ship design. On the FX side of things, the goal has always been to look as good as possible within engine limitations, not necessarily -exactly- recreate FX from HW1 and Cata.

+1 vote     media: New Death Animation
Talhydras Dec 8 2010, 1:52pm replied:

Are you using patch 1.1? Also, can you go to <your homeworld2 directory>/bin/release folder and send us your hw2.log file? It will help us look for specific crash causes that might have evaded our admittedly limited testing.


+1 vote     media: awesome screenshot
Talhydras Nov 28 2010, 1:36am replied:

Yep! Someone suggested we look into that concept back in the day, I had some ideas... then it snowballed from there. We've been going for a more high-speed refinement of the original kushan designs than a total reboot for the new higaaran fleet.

Sadly textures are probably a long way off, but trust me you're not alone in wanting to see this in all its glory. Thanks guys!

+1 vote     media: Publicity
Talhydras Nov 28 2010, 1:32am replied:

I expect it's because you guys aren't patched to v1.1. Make sure you are patched all the way up before installing.

Please, if you do get more crashes, do send the errorlogs! Thanks!

+1 vote     mod: Homeworld:@
Talhydras Jun 3 2009, 8:47pm replied:

I'm sorry we've taken so long to reply, Nixon. I know it's really pedantic to ask, but have you read the readme? It hopefully will answer your questions (or at least point you in the right direction). As the maker of this package, I can say that this isn't an effects mod that will upgrade the graphics in stock HW2. This is an effects package for other modders mostly to pick apart and use as a resource (though it is relatively easy to apply the effects to stock ships once you know how).

If you are interested in learning how, please drop a line at our relicnews thread or send me a PM.

+1 vote     download: HW@ effects package
Talhydras Jan 15 2009, 5:43am says:

Shock trooper:

These things have existed at one time or another and were semi-viable. The Chinese Airship isn't inconsistent because it still looks functional though unconventional. Propaganda's healing effects are odd, but not fantasy (crew inspired to effect battlefield repairs). Propaganda HAS been used in the real world as a means of motivating an army. It's semi-legit, just like gyrojets.

The Tesla coil gets a pass. It's an homage to C&C's portrayal of the Russians throughout the RA series. 3 whole games compared to one concept that IMO wisely wasn't followed up on. I don't actually have to build any, they require a gen point and as such are optional.

The Hover Crusader is still inconsistent. Nobody's made a tank with stilt-like struts that support tread-hoverfan combo units that transform in combat. The entire assemblage is just as technically unfounded as a chronosphere or a magic carpet. Allow me to compare this fantasy transforming unit to another one in fiction in order to demonstrate why the "Fans exist, hovertank OK" justification doesn't hold: Yes, military aircraft did have swinging wings at one point, and small walking robots are being made by scientists. That doesn't make Macross stuff any less silly, and presenting such fantasy alongside real units would look just as jarring.

CONSTRUCTIVE: The hover mechanic seems forced; USA's mobility with or without hovertank is unmatched. The tankmode unit is much nicer than 'nilla Crusader. I'd recommend exploring the C&C1 Orca for realistic fan-powered units. As for exciting US MBT design features... the focused-blast effects of the Quick Kill active defense would be unique and interesting. Or adopting the MCS's planned armament of a cannon capable of direct and indirect fire missions, giving T1 US tanks the ability to fire over obstacles unlike other T1 tanks. ECT research for better range and damage.

+2 votes     media: new US Crusader Hover Mode
Talhydras Jan 14 2009, 3:40pm says:

I think saying that good gameplay -requires- an unrealistic unit with unrealistic abilities is lazy design. Or to turn it on its head, associating realism with bad gameplay is equally lazy. Whether or not its 100% realism, inspired by real stuff, or complete fantasy, any military in a legitimate game has to be consistent in its treatment. Some people are more sensitive to this than others. The moment you break consistency, whether in balancing or in art direction, it no longer feels complete and the fun takes a hit.

I personally would have considerably more fun if the Crusader strongly resembled a real tank in form and function, because it would be more consistent. The other light tanks are all based on real units of the T-series, and other earlygame US units are hummers and avengers, real stuff. It doesn't have to be an Abrams or anything... the Golem isn't -exactly- Obyekt 279, and the Battlemaster isn't -exactly- a T-80, and the laser avenger isn't exactly a real Avenger, but they're all more or less the same distance from reality. Hover Crusader's way different.

Just because the hover drive is unrealistic does not make it more fun, and more abilities isn't always more fun either. The US side still has an excellent selection of high-mobility units in the hummers, little birds, and comanches. In terms of units with solid mechanical and engineering basis, a GLA equivelant to a transforming light tank with a hover engine might be a Flying Carpet soldier. (This of course makes me imagine T5 GLA generals power that summons a Genie that gives you a wish.)

0 votes     media: new US Crusader Hover Mode
Talhydras Jan 14 2009, 2:01am says:

Compare the Crusader II to an Abrams, which by the time of the mod is half a century out of date (like the C-130 and B-52 today). The Abrams weighs ~67 tons, has at thickest a meter of chobham armor, and a 120mm cannon capable of firing APFSDS rounds that reliably defeat 50cm of composite armor (aka a T-72 tank). From the main website, the Crusader II weighs 22 tons, has built in transformation equipment that breaks up the armored side to deploy turbofans, not to mention the internal turbofan equipment, and a 90mm cannon. Sounds like they'd have to either invent super light-weight chobham armor, which would be much better put to use making invincible helicopters and planes, or they'd HAVE to strip out armor, hence: glass.

Electrothermal-chemical fired 120mm shells have the same muzzle energy as a 140mm cannon shells and are considered the logical counter to the T-95, not a 90mm popgun. 90mm cannon haven't been used as primary US battle tank gun since the Vietnam War on the Patton series, and certainly wouldn't be capable of destroying modern MBTs, let alone ERA-upgraded battle tanks. So, yeah... water pistol. A 90mm gun-armed MBT in a universe with, what does the Golem have, a 150mm cannon and enough armoring to withstand a hit? Better shells and cannon design make a big difference (see the ETC I mentioned), but when the other guys are using bigger guns at the same tech level...

As an element of jarring and uncharacteristic pure fantasy, a transforming hovertank might have been removed from the alpha for a reason. Whether or not the RotR devs worked hard on the Crusader II, it's still a poor addition. Yeah, it sucks and it's not nice to say, but nobody's above criticism. Not even the devs. Rise of the Reds would be a better mod without it. America already has the highest mobility army in the game, with two transport helicopters, two gunships, hummers, and on and on. What the US faction actually needs is something that can form an anvil to crush enemies against.

-1 votes     media: new US Crusader Hover Mode
Talhydras Jan 13 2009, 9:30pm says:

Pointing to the FCS program as a justification for this unit is a little flawed. Military development is based not on what you have, but what you need. Since the current military threat is infantry combatants in urban situations, it's logical to evolve towards lighter weight, super mobile units that can avoid or retreat from ambushes, and navigate constricted environments. Their armor only has to be light enough to keep away rifle shots. This isn't the case in ROTR, so projecting future US forces off of current trends is not accurate.

Threat dictates response, for ANY armed force. Developing a super mobile hover light tank is illogical because the US in the real world and in RotR faces no new threat that this vehicle responds to. Unless I greatly misunderstand things, it's a lightly armored, high mobility unit with light armament in the form of a 90mm gun. The Hummvee is a lightly armored, extra high mobility unit which can be equipped with missiles and machineguns, meaning it is effective against infantry units AND armor. The Towvee's missile, realworld and in the mod, is likely MORE effective against armor than the a 90mm cannon.

The ROTR mod has gone to rather great lengths to depict a /certain level/ of realism consistently across all factions. Most units are either approximations of real units (hummers, all the planes and helos, dozers, soldiers) or stuff that's conceptual (gyrojet rifles for the Russian shock troops, microwave tanks for america, point defense lasers). Dismissing me as a "total realism" fanboy is a failure of communication. What I'm calling for is /consistency/. Seeing a transforming Back to the Future hovertank with little stilts turning treads to turbofans next to a hummer and a ghillie-suit sniper, facing off against a tunguska, a BMP, and some T-series tanks... It's a simple game of "one of these things is not like the other". Hover crusader just doesn't fit.

-2 votes     media: new US Crusader Hover Mode
Talhydras Jan 13 2009, 4:38pm says:

I'm going to say this twice: This is a well textured and nicely made unit.

But this unit is a terrible addition. The US already has fantastic and cheap early-game helicopter gunships that are based on realistic units. Why do they need an expensive, undergunned, underarmored main battle tank that is also another gunship? It's completely unnecessary, totally unrealistic, and the hover-treads look less aerodynamic than the original treads.

I give full mad props for the texture and geometry; the flying configuration just seems silly to me, and the concept seems horribly out of place in this mod. The real world already has flying tanks, they're called helicopter gunships. They're unarmored and shaped like helicopters for a reason, because it doesn't work any other way. I know there's always an element of suspension of disbelief, but realistic depictions of real world technology (hummers, A-10s) alongside unrealistic depictions of fantasy technology is jarring and silly.

Useful feedback: With the Russian Federation having access to two tanks that reliably smack the crap out of the US's units, what the US logically would produce (instead of this) is an improved Paladin with advanced armoring, laser protection against missiles and artillery shells, and at LEAST a 120mm cannon. In other words, something like the "overrated" Abrams tank, like in the real world.

Or they'd implement the M-270 borne ATACMS with BAT submunitions, which was developed to counter possible russian tank columns. Something that is at least founded on something realistic.


-1 votes     media: new US Crusader Hover Mode
Talhydras Jan 7 2009, 2:26am says:

Question: Will it blow up DRAMATICALLY when damaged?

+1 vote     media: Chinese Breeder Reactor
Talhydras Oct 20 2008, 5:42pm says:

OK, it depends on your installation. If you got the "loose files", what you do is extract the install to the directory where you installed Homeworld2. Now, go to homeworld2/bin/release. There should be a homeworld2.exe file there. Right-click, create a shortcut.

Now, right click on your new shortcut and hit 'Properties'. There should be a dialog box in this window labeled Target, that displays the path to your homeworld2.exe file. something like X:\Sierra\Homeworld2\Bin\Release\Homeworld2.exe

You want to add -overrideBigFile to the end of it, like so:

X:\Sierra\Homeworld2\Bin\Release\Homeworld2.exe -overrideBigFile

+1 vote     mod: Homeworld:@
Offline Since
Nov 17, 2013
United States United States
Member Watch
Track this member
Comment Statistics
Posts per day