| |
In lugnet.space, Theodore Sammis II wrote:
| |
While I like Andrews plane, and can see where you classify it as
‘conventional’, my question is - how unconventional is too unconventional?
I know this borders on threadjacking or bumping, but I’ve been wondering if
my latest bird was *too* far
out to classify as Crimson Skies...
|
I don’t think it’s the shape of your plane that makes it a stretch for CS as
much as it’s the high-tech looking weaponry. Exchange that stuff for some large
primitive looking machine guns and I think you’d be a lot closer to the CS
style... making the front canards a bit more squarish would probably also make
it look less futuristic.
-Grand Admiral
.space Curator
|
|
| |
In lugnet.space, Mark Sandlin wrote:
| |
I don’t think it’s the shape of your plane that makes it a stretch for CS as
much as it’s the high-tech looking weaponry. Exchange that stuff for some
large primitive looking machine guns and I think you’d be a lot closer to the
CS style... making the front canards a bit more squarish would probably also
make it look less futuristic.
-Grand Admiral
.space Curator
|
hmmm, bulkier, more primitive guns, I think I can manage that :)
thanks for the input!
TRS
|
|
|
