Conqueror class BB 1949 DOD WoWs
Page 2 of 2

Author:  acelanceloet [ January 11th, 2018, 12:05 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Conqueror class BB 1949 DOD WoWs

I doubt you have done enough clones of Vanguard then Krakatoa, because we on the discord have seen this ship grow from nothing to it's current shape. In addition, I just spend a few minutes trying to align parts of the vanguard drawing on the sb main site (because I got curious after your comment) with this drawing and I found nothing except for the propellers, anchors, directors and weapons, which are all parts.

It is certain the design of the ship takes influences from Vanguard, but I see no reason for credits for Bombhead as the Vanguard shipbucket drawing was not involved. I am no mod so I cannot make any decisions about stuff like this, but as somebody who has been in fights over credits in the past, please be so kind to not make accusations based on 'I recognise from my memory' without doing a check first. people can get in trouble over things like that and quite a few new artists have left over discussions started by an false accusation like this.

btw, your comments are mostly about the ships design, which is not the authors work, but that of the WoW artists/researcher. Please be so kind to remember that, when you call an excellent first drawing like this 'a good first effort but.....'

Author:  Deskjetser [ January 11th, 2018, 12:52 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Conqueror class BB 1949 DOD WoWs

Hi Krakatoa and erik_t, I understand your concerns and I'd just like to address some of them if possible by mirroring a bit of what acelanceloet said. (Thank you very much for your kind words btw!)

The parts used from Bombhead's Vanguard are as follows;
- Anchors (1:1 copy)
- Flag (edited/smooshed slightly)
- Propellers (very slight shading addition)

The reason for no crediting was that I've been informed these are parts, and as such no crediting is needed, though needless to say they are very good pieces and highly similar to Conquerors equipment barring the flag which was added for artistic purposes.

As for the midships raised MkVI mountings, I agree with what you say; However mirroring what acelanceloet said, this isn't my design, though perhaps I could've added an extra px on each side.

The 16.5" main battery is also only based off of the N2? study, if I didn't get the study wrong. :oops: My guess as to the MkII would be that since they're 1920s design studies, they were perhaps given a slight re-design for use on a late 40s vessel.

Lastly, erik_t; You mentioned the secondaries being split between 5 directors? Assuming you're talking about the MkVI, there are only 4 of those. 1 fore, 2 midships, 1 aft.

I hope this helps! Thanks for the feedback. :D

Author:  erik_t [ January 11th, 2018, 1:05 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Conqueror class BB 1949 DOD WoWs

Ah, okay. Conventionally, we would demarcate the bottom of the forward director tower with a black horizontal line rather than a gray one, because right now it looks like the tower is coming up directly from the side of the forward superstructure.

I didn't want to overly focus on that, mostly I think it's a nice drawing. A hell of a first or second effort, to be sure!

Author:  Deskjetser [ January 11th, 2018, 1:11 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Conqueror class BB 1949 DOD WoWs

Ah yes, I can see where you got confused!

[ img ]

Hopefully this clears things up.

Thank you also!

Author:  MihoshiK [ January 13th, 2018, 1:08 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Conqueror class BB 1949 DOD WoWs

If this has four triple turrets, why are the superfiring turrets a smaller size than the deck level ones? Makes no sense.

Page 2 of 2 All times are UTC
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited