Our representation of Halo's iconic space combat in the Homeworld 2 engine, which puts the player in command of some of the most powerful weapons fielded by the UNSC and Covenant and to provide a balanced and competitive experience.
SuperCarrier
(view original)
Post a comment
Description
Originally made for SOTP, but i like it so we'll be tweaking it to work with HHF and blend some of the other supercarrier/flagship ideas we have with it, like a destroyer sized MAC turret somewhere and some limited construction/repair bays.
really nice!
i see allot of different ships in it nice work
Breathtaking.
A thingy!
To be absolutely honest I would scale it down in size and have it something like an assault or heavy carrier not super carrier.
It doesn't really look like your kinda style for he larger ships that I have seen the medium sized ships yes but not the larger ships
The design is similar to the other small ships yes, but that's because i didn't want this to just be a bigger cruiser. I've never imagined the Supecarrier to just be some sort of dreadnought as most people seem to think of it, i think of it as something that's designed to be a mobile space station, able to launch and oversee a planetary invasion on it's own, or supply and maintain a fleet. That's why the design is far more utilitarian than the Marathon or other "big" ships.
I still think that it would be far more suited to assault or heavy carrier it would not be a hitter but rather as you said carry parts of planetary invasion forces and a lot of air support and likewise but rather than alone but in small groups
We'll be using it at a supercarrier over at SotP, the dissonance would be...pretty weird.
Because from what I have seen of their large ships the supercarrier here doesn't fit in with it that is why I would suggest using it for an assault carrier or something of the sort you know next size down or less but it does depend on them
That and the bridge is on the top. How many unsc ships that are larger than the destroyer have their bridge on the top (pre-halo3)
Bridge placement is a fairly moot thing, just because the Halcyon and the Marathon both have them in the same area doesn't mean much, because the Marathon's design was meant to be an updated Halcyon.
The bridge I might just add is a big target (one of the few things I dislike about the infinity) the bridges on the marathon and halcyon are also rather well hidden and to be honest on you Charon down to talos model look like they have well protected (hidden) bridges like the marathon and halcyon
Hidden...By being on the front, just under the main weapon system? If anything that's a worse place than on the top, because it's a complete no brainer to focus all fire on that forward area to both hit the bridge and disable the MAC.
That is, coming from a logical standpoint. Putting a bridge on the exterior of a ship isn't logical at all when remote optics exist.
That is true
But having the bridge stand out like it does on the carrier in this pic is even worse due to the ease in which you can hit it
Okay if I was to take the design I would change a few things
1) what is to be the bridge change it so the bridge is to be located in the centre of the ship not located above the hull. Then change it so where the bridge was on this design is the double mac turret you were talking about.
2) change the engines to have 2-3 big engines and have quite a few smaller engines dotted around them
3) have the underside a dock for the cruisers or something of that sort
4) give it anti-fighter and anti-frigate defences
5) change the front of it so the two bits that stick out don't
6) have docks on the side for frigates and the like
That or keep all of the above stuff (more or less) and give it the designation assualt carrier
Mind me that's just me
The engine format will be one of the things tweaked, the current one is just because Sins can't handle having different sized engines. Entire engine section will probably get a bit of a look at cause i got pretty bored at that point.
Capital ship docking will probably be through modules, more than likely the bits around the pelican bays will be replaced by small docking points and a cruiser will attatch at another point, probably not underneith however because of the way we do fighter hangars.
I didn't include turrets on the concept because it's primarily for SoTP, idk how they're doing turrets or even if they'll bother with such a large ship. Ours will of course have turrets like every other ship we've ever shown you in the last year.
I just can't see the Cruisers docking anywhere else there is nothing that fits
Still o be honest the overall shape doesn't seem to be able to really dock cruisers, something that you have been saying that has to be on the supercarrier (or at least I presume as it has been on all supercarrier designs I have seen so far)
It doesn't seem compatible with this mod as a supercarrier in sins I can see it in HHF though it just doesn't seem to work as a supercarrier
Have some faith, i never follow concepts to the letter when i model them, if i find something doesn't work (like cruiser docking) i'll change it.
Why does a cruiser have to dock with the supercarrier? Because his original supercarrier had a cruiser dock?
Also, I'm pretty sure our MAC turrets aren't going to be double-barreled. That's silly.
Because all of your previous incarnations of the supercarrier was able to hold a cruiser
The double mac turret I thought velo said there would be one but I could be wrong in which case will it even have a mac turret
I don't think we'll put a cruiser inside the supercarrier, no, but as Velo said, we'll have crane booms and such probably that will grapple the cruisers/frigates to dock them just like in the command fortress concept art.
Media.moddb.com
Velo said we'd probably use a MAC turret or two, just like the command fortress concept, but they won't be double barreled. That would be a really big gun.
I never said they won't be double barreled, they are meant to be the size of a destroyer and pretty much take up all the room for other upgrades.
True
May I ask if you will have a type of fortress ship
I just linked you our concept of a command/fortress ship. :P
Nah it's cool, it's what I live for.
Whoops didn't read it all
Won't happen again :)
I agree with this, other than that as it is a ship that would oversee an invasion, it would make more sense to have the bridge on the belly. So the bridge would oversee the planet. But I do understand why it is on top since the belly is packed with bays so there is really no space for such a big bridge.
But I really like the design, it has the feeling I personally would want with a carrier of such a scale.
Personally i'd imagine it the same way current carriers work - Different stations have different purposes. There'd likely be multiple control rooms around the ship close to their dedicated roles that report to the bridge. Halo and other sci-fi also have this silly idea that a bridge is the one point on a ship that things are controlled from - In reality it'd be far more like ships are today, there's under-deck command centers, but the bridge provides a clear visual platform from which a captain can command first hand, and that's always the idea when i design these things.
The Spirit of Fire had multiple command decks what are you talking about.
Pillar of autumn, frigates, etc all seem to just have the one placed on the exterior.
Relatively surprised you saw this. Which probably means you were bored just like me and decided to look at the last picture posted for any new comments.
you know if it was up to me( and i know it isent and it cant be, im to busy i would use the originonl model of the super carrier. that was a cool looking ship which had nice designs to it which i liked. but as i said it isent up to me
That's totes amazing!!!
I can't wait to field these babies against the Covenant!
you guys are proof that good things take time the thought and thinking that goes into every ship is amazing the watercolour sketches are great
I think it'd be best if UNSC Infinity was used as the supercarrier. But, great image, and it's best for your decisions over mine, but my statement was personal reference. No harm done, anyway.