| Deviant Login | Shop | Join deviantART for FREE  |
Take the Tour  |
| Digital Art / Drawings / Sci-Fi | ©2008-2013 *MikeDoscher |
The Journal Portal
Browse Journals |
Polls |
deviantART [dee·vee·un'nt·ART]
Keep in Touch!
|
Deviousness `anmari has been spreading her infectious positivity throughout our community for over 6 years. Throughout this time Ana has been at the core of all things devious, passionately developing an eclectic gallery, helping organise devmeets, participating in chat events and also recently completed dedicating her time as a Community Volunteer. We are absolutely delighted to bestow the Deviousness Award for May 2013 to `anmari, congratulations! Read More
|
Sta.sh
But IF it was state of the art,high-class,slap-me-wake-what-the-hell-sci-fi-design..,well then I´d find it-OH! WAIT!Honestly,I got nothing more I haven´t said a thousand times.
So I start out with critique,eh?
Well,I don´t have the slightest idea about all the technological details you guys were talkin bout the last pages (although I´m really impressed and enjoyed reading all that,it´s VERY interesting for me),but I have some thoughts about the general design.I always only think of cool looking and at most shallow functionality anyway.
well, my sci-fi roots are in a universe where Lasers are green and red and explosions in space make BOOM.
As yours are too,I presume...just can´t imagine anyone watching those Doscher designs is NOT originally a fan of the good ol´ 80-80..
well,what I was about to be talkin about is that that I´d suggest some slight modifications in the design of the tank concerning the geological region,beyond the camouflage colours.
I mean ok,it´s a hover-tank so probably it´d do quite good in ANY terrain,but sometimes some fake functionality just gives a design one last realism kick,considering that most readers/watchers/gamers don´t know too much aout the technical facts..sorry for the blabbering.
I'm going to try and poke holes in the functionality like several other deviants. We're all tech nerds here.
The weapon on the right looks like a beam weapon. What are the uses for beam weapons in this universe?
Also, it seems like wasted potential to link two distinct weapons to a single traverse. Even if the beam is supposed to work in tandem with the gun and focus on a single target, wouldn't it be better if the beam could traverse on its own and engage secondary targets... ?
But anyway, to say that it's a bad idea because "it's a manned tank" is silly. What about tanks in WWI and WWII that have machine guns beside the main gun? Those were all aimed independently. What about the antiaircraft guns mounted on top of modern battle tanks? Those are examples of manned tanks with independent weapons systems.
Even if the Springbok has only two crew inside, you can still give the secondary gun a computerized targeting system to acquire and engage targets on its own.
And besides, I thought WWI tanks didn't need a main cannon cuz they'd mostly be facing enemy infantry than vehicles anyway. So they didn't have a main gunner: everyone manned one.