Jump to content


T110's Northern Migration


  • Please log in to reply
6518 replies to this topic

Taiho #5801 Posted May 18 2017 - 22:42

    Staff sergeant

  • Beta Testers
  • 3081 battles
  • 416
  • Member since:
    01-10-2011

View PostKenshin2kx, on May 18 2017 - 13:53, said:

 

The same type of problem as in "ST: Enterprise" ... its hard to get convincing franchise alignment in terms of 'look and feel' because technology has advanced along with a different set of viewer demands and expectations from the show ... interestingly the unusual shape of the new ship has generated a number of theories, starting with its resemblance to a very early Ralph McQuarrie mock up sketch for a Federation starship, resemblance to the IDIC symbol and even a possible influence to Klingon designs.

 

To be fair, the bridge design isn't necessarily something I'd complain about on Enterprise. It looks more like a modern ship bridge/CIC ~140 years in the future, but where they didn't take the time to really pretty things up beyond what was necessary to not look kludged together. Skip forward another century, and they've taken the time to put more emphasis on form and brighter colors compared to the more warship looking NX's bridge, so every looks "smoother" in comparison. Another century after that, and we're at the point where functionality is handled completely by touchscreen (I guess they got things working smoothly enough that they aren't worried about needing buttons), and so form is even more present with no bumps or ridges on the console surfaces.

 

The bridge we see in the DSC trailer looks like it wants to be an NX bridge with JJverse touches set in a time frame when it should be brighter (more diplomatic impression friendly?) and more smooth.



EmpressNero #5802 Posted May 18 2017 - 23:30

    Major

  • Players
  • 10715 battles
  • 10,887
  • Member since:
    03-27-2011
Oh hey, I got an email saying my copy of Hunnicutt has shipped.  Good times.

DerViktim #5803 Posted May 18 2017 - 23:33

    Major

  • Players
  • 18152 battles
  • 5,431
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    10-02-2011

View PostEmpressNero, on May 18 2017 - 17:30, said:

Oh hey, I got an email saying my copy of Hunnicutt has shipped.  Good times.

 

Same here... for some reason Gmail decided my invoice was spam though.

Starne #5804 Posted May 19 2017 - 00:01

    Major

  • Players
  • 7501 battles
  • 5,048
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    01-31-2011

So another Russiagate update:

 

Reuters is reporting that "Current and former US officials" believe that there were at least 18 undisclosed communications (calls and emails) between Trump advisors and Russian officials or individuals with close ties to the Kremlin in the final several months (April through November, apparently) of the 2016 presidential race. The communications reviewed so far have reportedly contained no obvious evidence of wrongdoing. However, the amount of direct and indirect communication between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin is considered to be highly unusual.

 

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-russia-contacts-idUSKCN18E106

 

 


Edited by Starne, May 19 2017 - 00:02.


KilljoyCutter #5805 Posted May 19 2017 - 00:08

    Major

  • Players
  • 8469 battles
  • 22,425
  • Member since:
    05-07-2011

View PostStarne, on May 18 2017 - 18:01, said:

So another Russiagate update:

 

Reuters is reporting that "Current and former US officials" believe that there were at least 18 undisclosed communications (calls and emails) between Trump advisors and Russian officials or individuals with close ties to the Kremlin in the final several months (April through November, apparently) of the 2016 presidential race. The communications reviewed so far have reportedly contained no obvious evidence of wrongdoing. However, the amount of direct and indirect communication between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin is considered to be highly unusual.

 

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-russia-contacts-idUSKCN18E106

 

 

The funny thing is, quite a few of the contacts would have been far less damaging to the people involved if they had just said "Yeah, I talked to _____ from the Russian government in April" when they were directly asked about whether they'd had those sorts of contacts during confirmation hearings, etc.  See, Jeff Sessions. 

 

 



Starne #5806 Posted May 19 2017 - 00:11

    Major

  • Players
  • 7501 battles
  • 5,048
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    01-31-2011

View PostKilljoyCutter, on May 18 2017 - 18:08, said:

 

The funny thing is, quite a few of the contacts would have been far less damaging to the people involved if they had just said "Yeah, I talked to _____ from the Russian government in April" when they were directly asked about whether they'd had those sorts of contacts during confirmation hearings, etc.  See, Jeff Sessions. 

 

 

 

It's (almost) always the (attempted) cover-up that gets you, not whatever it is you did or did not do.

Edited by Starne, May 19 2017 - 00:12.


Legiondude #5807 Posted May 19 2017 - 00:22

    Major

  • Players
  • 19968 battles
  • 22,813
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    08-22-2011

Dug up my PDF of Firepower while I wait for the book to ship to look up the Chrysler K tank, (un)surprisingly the vehicle appears to be underarmored in the front(178mm vs 152.4mm in game) and overarmored on the sides(76mm vs 101.6mm in game)

 

Two strange things here:

1. Hunnicutt reads almost as if there's a "gradient" type distribution of steel to these plates, like the oblique elliptical cast hulls and turrets of the M103/Patton era

2. The decimal measurements of the in armor values of the hull(which are imperial measurements of 6 and 4 inches respectively), alongside the gradient distribution on the turret suggest that new documentation was found on the project contrary to Hunnicutt's findings. I suppose the question goes out to The_Chieftain if this was an error on reading the original documentation on Hunnicutt's part or was there more than one iteration of the design before funding ran out at the end of the war?


Edited by Legiondude, May 19 2017 - 00:26.


EmpressNero #5808 Posted May 19 2017 - 00:23

    Major

  • Players
  • 10715 battles
  • 10,887
  • Member since:
    03-27-2011
Roger Ailes is dead.

Edited by EmpressNero, May 19 2017 - 00:24.


Kenshin2kx #5809 Posted May 19 2017 - 01:42

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 13866 battles
  • 3,593
  • Member since:
    07-20-2014

View PostTaiho, on May 18 2017 - 11:42, said:

 

To be fair, the bridge design isn't necessarily something I'd complain about on Enterprise. It looks more like a modern ship bridge/CIC ~140 years in the future, but where they didn't take the time to really pretty things up beyond what was necessary to not look kludged together. Skip forward another century, and they've taken the time to put more emphasis on form and brighter colors compared to the more warship looking NX's bridge, so every looks "smoother" in comparison. Another century after that, and we're at the point where functionality is handled completely by touchscreen (I guess they got things working smoothly enough that they aren't worried about needing buttons), and so form is even more present with no bumps or ridges on the console surfaces.

 

The bridge we see in the DSC trailer looks like it wants to be an NX bridge with JJverse touches set in a time frame when it should be brighter (more diplomatic impression friendly?) and more smooth.

... yes, I thought so too, and very enduring in design :D   Take a close look at the tubular railings in Enterprise ... if I am not mistaken, you can buy nearly (if not identical) models of railing at the likes of Home Depot or Lowes ... I would think that  by the time of Enterprise, safety railings would not rely on joint couplers for construction ... rather a single seamless tube with textured finish or impact absorbing covering to mitigate against accidental impact.   Ugh ... oh yes, the disorienting juxtaposing of the old and the new universe ... so confusing.



lostwingman #5810 Posted May 19 2017 - 01:47

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 22355 battles
  • 24,183
  • [PBKAC] PBKAC
  • Member since:
    01-11-2011

View PostEmpressNero, on May 18 2017 - 17:30, said:

Oh hey, I got an email saying my copy of Hunnicutt has shipped.  Good times.

 

View PostDerViktim, on May 18 2017 - 17:33, said:

 

Same here... for some reason Gmail decided my invoice was spam though.

 

Same here, if Nero hadn't mentioned it I wouldn't have seen it.

Apple_Jack #5811 Posted May 19 2017 - 01:50

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 11660 battles
  • 918
  • Member since:
    01-30-2011

Sorry guys,

 

 

http://imgur.com/a/xf9Bn

Looks like Gaijin is adding the Starship, T95, and Vickers to WarThunder, along with an Italian lineup.

My dream tanks are coming true, just not in WoT



KilljoyCutter #5812 Posted May 19 2017 - 01:52

    Major

  • Players
  • 8469 battles
  • 22,425
  • Member since:
    05-07-2011

View PostEmpressNero, on May 18 2017 - 18:23, said:

 

I'm told we shouldn't speak ill of the dead, so I'll just say this...

 

 

 



Avalon304 #5813 Posted May 19 2017 - 02:33

    Major

  • Players
  • 14716 battles
  • 4,924
  • Member since:
    09-04-2012

View PostApple_Jack, on May 18 2017 - 16:50, said:

Sorry guys,

 

 

http://imgur.com/a/xf9Bn

Looks like Gaijin is adding the Starship, T95, and Vickers to WarThunder, along with an Italian lineup.

My dream tanks are coming true, just not in WoT

 

Look at them! 2 Chieftains! Fancy!

KilljoyCutter #5814 Posted May 19 2017 - 03:33

    Major

  • Players
  • 8469 battles
  • 22,425
  • Member since:
    05-07-2011

Wasn't there an announcement a while back that the Iowa, Montana, etc were finally going to get the error in their citadel layout fixed? 

 

 



Aloeus #5815 Posted May 19 2017 - 03:34

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 22396 battles
  • 904
  • Member since:
    02-25-2012

View PostKilljoyCutter, on May 18 2017 - 19:33, said:

Wasn't there an announcement a while back that the Iowa, Montana, etc were finally going to get the error in their citadel layout fixed? 

 

 

 

6.6 apparently. WG is dragging their [edited]about it. 

KilljoyCutter #5816 Posted May 19 2017 - 03:35

    Major

  • Players
  • 8469 battles
  • 22,425
  • Member since:
    05-07-2011

View PostAloeus, on May 18 2017 - 21:34, said:

 

6.6 apparently. WG is dragging their [edited]about it. 

 

Well if they're going to do it I can say I'm grinding the tin-sided North Carolina for a reason...

SpectreHD #5817 Posted May 19 2017 - 05:24

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 16267 battles
  • 14,722
  • [TT] TT
  • Member since:
    07-12-2010

View PostLegiondude, on May 19 2017 - 07:22, said:

Dug up my PDF of Firepower while I wait for the book to ship to look up the Chrysler K tank, (un)surprisingly the vehicle appears to be underarmored in the front(178mm vs 152.4mm in game) and overarmored on the sides(76mm vs 101.6mm in game)

 

Two strange things here:

1. Hunnicutt reads almost as if there's a "gradient" type distribution of steel to these plates, like the oblique elliptical cast hulls and turrets of the M103/Patton era

2. The decimal measurements of the in armor values of the hull(which are imperial measurements of 6 and 4 inches respectively), alongside the gradient distribution on the turret suggest that new documentation was found on the project contrary to Hunnicutt's findings. I suppose the question goes out to The_Chieftain if this was an error on reading the original documentation on Hunnicutt's part or was there more than one iteration of the design before funding ran out at the end of the war?

 

I doubt WG did it for historical purposes. Armour is a balancing stat now and can be anything WG wants it to be.

Edited by SpectreHD, May 19 2017 - 05:30.


Legiondude #5818 Posted May 19 2017 - 05:31

    Major

  • Players
  • 19968 battles
  • 22,813
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    08-22-2011

View PostSpectreHD, on May 18 2017 - 22:24, said:

 

I doubt WG did it for historical purposes. Armour is a balancing stat now and can be anything WG wants it to be.

Though paper tanks armor is alot more flexible than IRL ones, thus the "(un)surprisingly" bit



Daigensui #5819 Posted May 19 2017 - 07:27

    Major

  • Players
  • 21907 battles
  • 28,536
  • [KANCO] KANCO
  • Member since:
    11-09-2012
Grille 15 is so, so nice. I just wish the team would spot a bit better so I can slam the enemy to dust.

GoldMountain #5820 Posted May 19 2017 - 08:31

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 41 battles
  • 7,143
  • Member since:
    01-06-2011
I find the chrysler k tank completely ridiculous. And so are the new VK tanks.

Absolutely no thought or design work put into them at least the t110 line turned out someone decent despite the ridiculousness of the e5's cupupla.



Now at Dunsfold aerodrome for supercar day. No Rita, seems that some prawns got the better of her the other day.




27 user(s) are reading this topic

4 members, 23 guests, 0 anonymous users


    Avalon304, Apache1990, Taiho, SpectreHD