Darth Windu Posted February 12, 2005 Share Posted February 12, 2005 Hi folks. I was looking at the ISD, VSD and RAS, and thinking of how the VSD fits in between the RAS and ISD. Basically, the VSD looks to me (in the game at least) to be an ISD that has been shrunk with cheek fairings added. What i'm wondering is, should the VSD show more of a transition from the RAS to the ISD, or should it be left as it is? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swphreak Posted February 12, 2005 Share Posted February 12, 2005 Left as it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sith4ever99 Posted February 12, 2005 Share Posted February 12, 2005 JK dont kill the newbie:( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lukeiamyourdad Posted February 12, 2005 Share Posted February 12, 2005 >_> That's what a VSD is and always has been. Let's redesign the AT-AT. This thread sucks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lonepadawan Posted February 13, 2005 Share Posted February 13, 2005 VSD should remain as it always has been. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Windu Posted February 13, 2005 Author Share Posted February 13, 2005 luke - you seem to have missed the point. The VSD was never seen in the films, and hence it doesnt matter if it is redesigned. Also, what I am suggesting is the VSD be redesigned to fit more with what it is supposed to be. After all, the VSD is supposed to be the forerunner to the ISD, and yet shows absolutely no design progression from the RAS and ISD. Redesigning the ship would give it more credibility and frankly it would look better. Really, at the moment, all it is is a smaller ISD with superficial cheek fairings - for all intents and purposes they are identical. As for the AT-AT, it is all about the evolution of the vehicles and ships. In this case, we go AT-TE --> AT-AT. Now, if EU created something in between the AT-TE and AT-AT, would you expect it to look like an AT-AT with extremely minor superficial changes, or ywould you expect it to look like a cross between the AT-TE and AT-AT? That same goes for the VSD. The line we have is RAS --> ISD, with EU making it RAS --> VSD --> ISD. Therefore, logic dictates that the VSD should show a design progression from the RAS to ISD. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lukeiamyourdad Posted February 13, 2005 Share Posted February 13, 2005 The armament is different but no matter. I can't see what you mean by similarity with the RAS. They look different, only about the same size. Anyway, there is more then superficial from the VSD to ISD. Performance and usefulness is also different. You're looking at it the wrong way. It DOES matter if it is redesigned. You cannot take an already existing vehicle, one who has a particular name and has been seen in many games and just change it. The poll says it all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jan Gaarni Posted February 14, 2005 Share Posted February 14, 2005 I feel a fight brewing. Windu, don't make pointless threads to try and fish for a fight. I realize you're not a fan of anything EU, but the Victory Class was designed by the team making the movies. EU have polished it up alittle, but that's it. End of story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.