However, Do not fear limited functionality as CIG will always give us a way to make money with ships (except for the javelin or idris). As a drop-ship it should carry a small deployment (6-10) marines and be used for battlefield fire superiority. The redeemer is first and foremost a gunship, not a mobile base. That fan-made mock-up would be the exact same as a Retaliator with a dropship module in the front and a cargo module in the rear as replacements for the Bomb-bays.Īgreed. The original design was a compact gunship / dropship and the V-lock nacelles were an integral part of it. I really hope the Redeemer does not turn into that fan-made monstrosity. I don't know, I am grasping at straws here. Maybe Aegis got a partnership with the Banu or Aegis being sneaky again and making contact with and sharing tech with the Kar'thak? I know the Redeemer is a purpose-built gunship, but it could the modified for recon/surveillance, electronic warfare ship, or a command & communications ship. Rather than omit one of the Redeemer's distinguishing features, perhaps the glowing domes could be re-purposed into something else, like an advanced tactical sensor and communication array, or sensor jammers that project "ghost ships" on enemy radar/sensors.
#Star citizen redeemer generator
I also think the Redeemer's glowing "shield domes" need to be re-designed to conform to the established shield generator design. I think CIG should re-design the Redeemer with conventional engines, probably 4 x TR3s, which can pivot 360 degrees on the engine pylons and scissor open for vertical take-off and landing. Now we've seen the final design of the Xi'An and its engine thrusters are nothing like the Redeemer's, so that explanation wouldn't have worked either.īeyond just the VectorLock thrusters, I also don't like the scissor design of the engine nacelles, and the inexplicable reason why they don't rotate downward and scissor open for landing and take-off, which is what you'd expect. If the Redeemer was a MISC ship and the engines were a prototype Human-Xi'An hybrid thruster design, that would've been more plausible - at the time. But the Redeemer is supposed to be an Aegis Dynamics, so it seems peculiar they'd diverge so radically from the norm of human-made engine thrusters. Perhaps if the Redeemer was made by a new up-and-coming ship manufacturer that had invented this new thruster tech, I could understand why the ship had that unique type of engines. I hope the Redeemer's engines should be changed, because that goofy "VectorLock thruster" thing just doesn't make sense.
If CIG does re-design the Redeemer to fix the ventral turret, I hope they perform a rework of the entire ship, similar to what they did with the Freelancer and Constellation. But now, it makes more sense to re-design the Redeemer with an elevator to the ventral turret. I think they were pressed for time and chose an easy fix. I sorta understand why T4H designed it that way, so it didn't mess up the engineering room with a turret elevator. If the turret or the extending tunnel suffered damage, the gunner would be trapped inside the turret, or would be unable to get into the turret in the first place. I agree that the ventral turret is poorly designed with that "tunnel-chair", because it's needlessly complicated, slow, and vulnerable to damage. This is just speculation from my end at the moment, since the redeemer's stilla bit off, but this is in my mind the best solution to the 'bottom-turret-problem'
Get rid of the silly tunnel-chair, and have the turret entrance be in the engineering room's floor.
I'll probably replace the bottom turret with the flippy-upside-down-turret system that's in the tali as well for bottom turrets.
0 kommentar(er)
