Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 41 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: need cast for next video #16557

    Shark
    Participant

    I liked the bit you had with me in the first video 😉
    Heck, I just plain liked the first video.

    I volunteer for another one…
    *Keeps grandma at gunpoint*
    It might also be easier to capture some cooler stuff if there’s a bit of planning behind.
    I haven’t been playing a whole lot recently though, I know. Been busy with other stuffs. But I’d have time in the weekend.

    in reply to: Model and Weapon challenge. #16421

    Shark
    Participant

    @cambo wrote:

    After multiple crashes of milkshape this is what I’ve got after a few hours…

    don’t know when I’ll get time to texture it… 🙁

    Cam

    I’m in two minds about this. Should I kill you a few times on Scorched3D or should I proceed and try to make something better than what you can produce.. 😉
    Or maybe a third option. Should I try and make something else… 🙂

    in reply to: Model and Weapon challenge. #16413

    Shark
    Participant

    Aaah. Thankses. I’ll see if I can get started on the undercarriage tomorrow, wheels and stuff.
    And don’t worry, I wont rush it. Don’t have enough spare time for that anyway 😉
    Chances are it’s going to be some weeks, at the very least.

    On a funny note. The first link you gave. Way down at the bottom there’s a side and top view “schematics” with measurements (might turn out useful). That thing can actually tilt 90 degrees. It shouldn’t amuse me that much, since it _is_ an AA gun after all. I can’t help but think how conveniently that fits into S3D, though 😉

    Of course, as with most of the models, there will still be other discrepancies. Mainly from the fact that it wont ever be shooting at airborne targets. Except from the odd flying tank every now and then, but hey…

    in reply to: Model and Weapon challenge. #16409

    Shark
    Participant

    To heck with time. I’m actually considering doing a wheeled bofors gun, akin to this one:

    I might not be able to finish it right away, but patience is a virtue… And well, I need some better pictures than that one, especially from the backside. There are a lot of nitty-gritty details on those things, which I want to get sort of right…
    And there are several different models. It would be nice if I could find some good pictures of one specific model, but that’s kind of hard on Google 😉

    in reply to: Model and Weapon challenge. #16406

    Shark
    Participant

    @deathstryker wrote:

    Hey Sharks can move across the land while somehow grasping a bazooka so I don’t even wanna hear about the impossibilities of a pillbox moving!

    Hah. Actually, when I made that model, I wanted to place the shark in a big waterbowl/tank with wheels or tracks under it (don’t ask me how the bazooka would shoot through the glass without destroying it), but it seems that you can’t make use of transperancy for the models 🙂

    @deathstryker wrote:

    Started doing some drawings on the pillbox to see how I wanted it and I think I’ve finally gotten it the way I want it. Here’s the concept art.

    EDIT: Just realized that the shape of the pillbox is gonna pose a problem with turret rotation. I may have to make the Pillbox move with the gun or make a less oblong pillbox.

    The only pillboxes I’ve seen was from C&C – Read Alert, and they were shaped as hexagons or octagons with a viewport/shooting port out from each of the sides. It’d propably work better with the 360 degrees of rotation, but I’m not sure if such a pillbox was ever made in real life.

    I was considering trying my luck at it in Blender if I wasn’t so busy with other stuffs. It’s a nice not-rounded shape, surely easier than the shark was 😉

    in reply to: Dirt kill #16322

    Shark
    Participant

    Cool. I didn’t know dirt could kill either 😀

    Anyway. Another effective and unintentional kind of self-kill would be bouncing the shot back from another shield. Killed myself at least once that way. Can’t remember if I did it entirely a second time. But I really did _Laugh Out Loud_ 😉

    Just remember this kids: Don’t attack a shield dead on in zero wind. Always aim a tiny bit to the side.

    in reply to: Polls #16102

    Shark
    Participant

    42. Definitely 42!
    Though yes, the number of polls has been overflowing a bit.. 🙂
    @gcamp wrote:

    Definitely 42 … or perhaps 36, I think the real problem is no one really knows what the question is 😉

    Oh, nono. Think about it. If the question and the answer were both to be known about in the same universe, that universe would instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarrely inexplicable… This may already have happened, of course, but there’s a certain amount of uncertainty surrounding the matter.

    Oh, who doesn’t love hgttg?.. 😉

    in reply to: Requesting "Soul Cube" as a weapon #16068

    Shark
    Participant

    Sounds creative yeah. But it’d need to be thought through properly. It could also become too powerful. Three kills does seem a bit of a small price for such a shot. 5 kills does sound better. Good players often rack up over 10 kills throughout a game. It might turn the game a bit too much in favor of the skilled players if it’s too few kills..
    Another idea I just came up with, which I think you’ll like, Reactor. Make the Soul Cube variable in strength. You could make it so the damage drained by the Cube is directly proportional to the number of souls contained in it. For instance, 1 kill = 10 damage, 2 kills = 20 damage and so on.
    Or maybe exponential:
    1 kill = 5 damage, 2 kills = 10 damage, 3 kills = 20 damage, 4 kills = 40 damage, 5 kills = 80 damage, or some such thing.
    In the last case, it might become too powerful with too few kills again (too great advantage for “teh skilled ones”), but it’s variable.

    Nice idea. But of course, if ever implemented, it should be weighed so that skilled players wont get too much of an advantage or the opposite 😉

    in reply to: Player Name colors #15580

    Shark
    Participant

    I’d just make it simple, keep the randomizer and prevent it from choosing a color that’s already in play.
    There. Still the funnyness of random with the added benefit of no color duplicates 🙂

    in reply to: think saylor moon = moke/#1 #15516

    Shark
    Participant

    Yeah, even if he seems suspicious somehow, we should be careful not to judge any new player who’s good and has a bit of brash language, just because of recent incidents. 🙂

    in reply to: think saylor moon = moke/#1 #15513

    Shark
    Participant

    I wont comment on the possibility of this guy being 1 and/or mokelok, because I haven’t played with him or anything. (Actually, I’ll admit I’m sort of holding a small break from S3D. I propably wont be at home in the weekend anyway. So I figured, why not see if I can leave it at 1000 kills and a 13th place till the stats reset, which I’m guessing will come sometime very soon. Would be a bit cool if I could pull off having those two numbers with me on the saved stats list 😉
    Anyways, I just dropped in to ask how skill points are calculated? I mean, how did he pull this off?:
    Skill sorted stats
    A mere 87 kills, and already 1977 skill points? O.o
    Quite remarkable, I must admit… And I’m just longing to hear an explanation as to how he did it..

    in reply to: Change Shields Back to 38.0 Settings? #15246

    Shark
    Participant

    @boy wrote:

    Very small damage would be all that is needed, even as low as one point per bump. this is of course not really all that important since on the flip side, it will make people use more creative ways to take out shields.

    Yeah.. I have only played one full game with these new shields, so I’m not entirely aware if roller-damage as such is enabled, but it’s my impression that it isn’t. The problem with roller-damage, I suspect, is the possibility of removing a shield instantly if you make the roller spawn right at the edge of the shield. It takes a little bit of precision, but it isn’t all that hard.
    Now, if it was possible to do the roller-damage thing without allowing them to completely destroy a full shield just by hitting that way, I might agree to such a change… But until then, I say they’re absolutely fine without 🙂

    in reply to: On behalf of…. #15420

    Shark
    Participant

    And five bubbles and a tail-flap!

    I love the work that’s been done on Scorched3D, it’s wonderful!
    Indeed, it rocks like tasty salmon (“yummblubble”).

    in reply to: Change Shields Back to 38.0 Settings? #15237

    Shark
    Participant

    @gcamp wrote:

    After this topic
    http://www.scorched3d.co.uk/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1492
    the voting score has been reset to the correct amount.

    I thought the polls looked a bit suspicious. Good job of catching him 🙂

    @1 wrote:

    Leave big weapon for newbies.If you can play well there is no matter to use BIG shields and BIG weapons…Use normal weapon and normal shields.This is like (old shield/baby roller) = (new shield/lucky hot napalm) or (new shield/few heavy diggers to disarm shield+weapon to kill) but takes much less shots.Look at JT’s screenshot to understand what i talking about.

    Even though I don’t think it’s going to help arguing with you, I’ll do it anyway. If not to sway your opinion, then maybe to sway others 😉
    When I say I like being forced to use bigger weapons, I mean it in the way that it can maybe get a bit boring using baby rollers _almost all the time_. The old shields posed no challenge. Heck, I never even used diggers or hogs to make rollerpits, I just fired a baby roller in the right spot and presto, instant kill.
    So what are the roller and the heavy roller then for? Exclusively newbies? No, please. I want a reason to be using them too. And the hot napalm, for that matter. And shields are that reason. While the weapons to defeat shields can be expensive, the shields themselves are not too cheap either.
    Socalled “newbies” might buy big weapons to get a few quick kills. Skilled players will buy them to defeat shields.
    In the games I’ve been in since the release of 38.1, double or triple wins haven’t really been such a big problem, either.
    As I said, I’m with people on making a compromise of some sort, but don’t change it back to 38.0. It’s more fun with stronger shields 😉

    in reply to: Change Shields Back to 38.0 Settings? #15234

    Shark
    Participant

    Made a decision. I vote “no”. Keep them as they are now. I’m absolutely willing to go on compromise though. But at least don’t take them all the way back to 38.0. I really like being forced to use other, bigger weapons at times 🙂

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 41 total)