anyone else think the cannons look silly?
- Thread starter Rusty
- Start date
So what would look "right" to you, and reduce the cartoony perception?
I can't see that in the current art direction myself, but everyone sees differently.
Having weapon hardpoints on a solid structure makes sense, they have to physically fit inside it when not deployed, and they have to be mounted in a position so as not to obscure too much of the pilots vision, yet be solid enough to not tear themselves free with recoil forces, or their own mass stressing materials.
Just imagine mounting large, multibarreled gatling weapons at the end of long, flimsy wings with no rear support to sustain either their static or reactionary mass. Nobody would do such a thing, surely!
I can't see that in the current art direction myself, but everyone sees differently.
Having weapon hardpoints on a solid structure makes sense, they have to physically fit inside it when not deployed, and they have to be mounted in a position so as not to obscure too much of the pilots vision, yet be solid enough to not tear themselves free with recoil forces, or their own mass stressing materials.
Just imagine mounting large, multibarreled gatling weapons at the end of long, flimsy wings with no rear support to sustain either their static or reactionary mass. Nobody would do such a thing, surely!