|
Post by Doug on Jan 30, 2007 20:05:28 GMT
EDIT: Following the production of a very nice graphic by Bolshevik, it was generally agreed that the hive bergs would be built upon already existing lumps of rock/asteroid/etc which were floated upon the oceans...
I know that people had basically come to some sort of conscencus on the 'clave, but I thought I probably should set up a thread for people to discuss anything more they wanted to about the general appearance of the hive-bergs...
|
|
vendile
Enginseer
The doodler
Posts: 234
|
Post by vendile on Jan 30, 2007 20:13:39 GMT
if Necris, Pyr and I post up our images here it will help greatly.
|
|
|
Post by Doug on Jan 30, 2007 20:19:41 GMT
It would indeed, when they join...
|
|
|
Post by takaetun on Jan 30, 2007 22:55:29 GMT
In all reality, B wouldnt work. It would be simply too dangerous. A would work, as long as those lower levels at the little pointy bit werent inhabited except by a skeleton crew.
|
|
|
Post by Doug on Jan 30, 2007 22:59:09 GMT
When have reality or the laws of physics ever played a part in the 41st millenium?
|
|
vendile
Enginseer
The doodler
Posts: 234
|
Post by vendile on Jan 30, 2007 23:03:47 GMT
from a mixture of being inspired by my 'design A', Chaplain Pyrs sketch, and Necris' 3D piece; I think that perhaps and interesting idea would be for the main body to be made from a form of floating stone(it does exist, extremly porus, but still very strong - floats and doesn't break easily.)
This stone could be the basis of all the hivebergs, the main thing that lets them float. With the oldest and most important parts of the bergs being housed in the rock, whilst the newer parts have been built onto it.
Infact, i'm off to do some quick rough pieces on this idea in photoshop(don't expect anything amazing, just simple)
|
|
vendile
Enginseer
The doodler
Posts: 234
|
Post by vendile on Jan 30, 2007 23:04:56 GMT
by Chaplin Pyr: by Necris:
|
|
|
Post by Doug on Jan 30, 2007 23:16:24 GMT
Oh, you managed to get them up...good...still, it'll be good when everyone whose been contributing so far's joined....
I look forward to seeing that idea sketched out, btw - sounds interesting...
|
|
xisor
Servitor
A Squat Semi Humanoid
Posts: 3
|
Post by xisor on Jan 31, 2007 7:26:30 GMT
I'm still fully convinced that they should (thematically, at very least, lest I try'n invoke a physicist), lie deeper in the water. Visually, the concepts are essentially correct, except that it should (IMO) be more of a 1:10 proportion of "above" vs "below" rather than the current 1:2 or 1:3 ratio.
So whilst example 'B' looks rightest, I'd have had it 1- far deeper in the water, 2- proportionally smaller on top and 3- lieing lower at it's 'widest point'. Other'n that, however, it all looks roughly accurate.
I'd also expect these Hives to be exceptionally well secured against underwater-style sabotage. Whilst flooding compartments is still intensley dangerous, it should never really pose a threat to the Hiveberg itself. Maybe dangerous to the 'surface siders' with even a tiny 'dip' in the height it lies at, but otherwise: they'd be quite resillient beasts!
I am, of course, assuming that the vast majority of 'owned' and 'important' space used surface-wise and above-sealevel would be owned by either the exceptionally rich (refinery/oxygen maker-plants/argi-colony/starship terminal/docking port owners, or, less so, Adeptus Terra/Mechanicus/Ministorum/Ad Astra Telepathica officials [prob. inc. Hiveberg governors/leaders/etc])
Thus it'd make sense for the top side to be immensely smaller than the bottom bit.
|
|
|
Post by necris on Jan 31, 2007 14:58:18 GMT
Ok so I went back an did a little editing of the burg I've done, I love computers programs for letting me do things like that and heres what I've done now Not much of a difference from the persective view I know but from this you can see the base is wider and the surface side larger (and filled more)
|
|
|
Post by Doug on Jan 31, 2007 19:48:44 GMT
Looking good there, Necris
I'm inclined to agree with Xisor on where the things should sit in the ocean, for all of the reasons he mentions...
|
|
|
Post by thenephew on Jan 31, 2007 20:45:13 GMT
While I personally prefer Necris' nice and polished versions, it seemed to me that the general consenus was a much more natural, rough hewn look, like Pyr's taken to a much larger scale. I do like the piers(?) coming out the side. Although the Necron overtones are...I dunno...just sit with me wrong. I'm also less keen on the spires that appear on every single one. While it's perfectly possible, even probable, that several will, it would seem more realistic to have as flat and low a centre of gravity on these things as possible.
|
|
vendile
Enginseer
The doodler
Posts: 234
|
Post by vendile on Jan 31, 2007 20:52:23 GMT
who ever said imperial designers were sensible?
|
|
|
Post by thenephew on Jan 31, 2007 21:48:47 GMT
I suppose we need to stay with GW's love of turning every $#+@&%£ building in the Imperium into a cathedral. Oh well.
|
|
|
Post by takaetun on Feb 1, 2007 3:26:41 GMT
It IS a theocracy, after all... I'm not sure Pyr's sketch works, as it seems like they just dug it out of a mountain, and I'm not sure about Necris'. Brilliant work, and I hate you for the ability to do it, but it looks like it was pre-fabricated. Hives start as cities, remember, then they just keep throwing buildings on top of it. Or below, in this case...
|
|