New Single Seater tank! Tumbril Storm and Lynx Rover - video
- Thread starter Montoya
- Start date
Introducing the Tumbril Storm - Roberts Space Industries | Follow the development of Star Citizen and Squadron 42
Roberts Space Industries is the official go-to website for all news about Star Citizen and Squadron 42. It also hosts the online store for game items and merch, as well as all the community tools used by our fans.
robertsspaceindustries.com
Introducing the RSI Lynx - Roberts Space Industries | Follow the development of Star Citizen and Squadron 42
Roberts Space Industries is the official go-to website for all news about Star Citizen and Squadron 42. It also hosts the online store for game items and merch, as well as all the community tools used by our fans.
robertsspaceindustries.com
I'm giving the Storm a try or will if I'm still alive and functional when it gets in game.
The Lynx Q&A is now up here: https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/engineering/19263-Q-A-RSI-Lynx
Good to know about the added beverage cushioning ...
Speaking of beverages ... gotta run ... got one waiting!
Good to know about the added beverage cushioning ...
Speaking of beverages ... gotta run ... got one waiting!
PlayWithMeOrDie
Commander
yay, another bunch of LTI tokens! ....
I'm not amused or enthralled by any of em. Ima gonna pass.
I'm not amused or enthralled by any of em. Ima gonna pass.
According to ISC, it has finished Greybox, and into material\detail stage (or possibly LOD0), so it may not be too far away.
Looking at the roadmap, There's only one "unannounced" vehicle that the US Vehicle team are shown as currently working on (ISC stated it was the US team creating it), with work scheduled for completion in early August (Work on that vehicle started at the start of the year).
Patrick Spaceman
Grand Admiral
....Baby TANK...do..do..dodo...do...baby TANK..do..do..dodo...do
You're describing the artwork. I'm worried about the software.
Na na na na na na na na na na na na na na na na... BATMAN!
That includes the software:
The "Tech content" is the only thing that differs between this and the Lynx. Even for the Corsair, that section didn't extend much past the "art" and "design" portions, either.
@Montoya The 600i Explorer comes with (eventually) a exclusive Origin Rover w/ radar & scanners for surface exploration.
Is that not the G12? I always thought that was Origins rover?
Sadly it won't clear the ramp hydraulics on the MSR but it will fit in the Carrack.
The G12 is an origin rover but is a Placeholder on the 600i Explorer.
The 600i Explorer will have a unique rover for surface exploration.
On the Pledge page - the concept rover is shown in the hangar of the 600i Exploration version.
regarding the Tumbril Storm:
and my own opinion:
I'm no expert on real-world tanks, but i do know a few things, being over 30 years old and having served some time in the israeli military.
the Storm has a terrible design. not only is it bigger than it should be, as pointed out by the above video, it also places the driver seat in the front, with the exit hatch facing forward.
this is a major problem - normally, the front of the vehicle will be oriented towards the enemy. this means that you, as the driver of this vehicle, will put yourself in the line of fire.
your vehicle will take hits from the front, which is where you are seated. a well placed shot by the enemy will kill you and leave the rest of the vehicle much less damaged.
to further emphasize my point, I want to compare it to a real world example: the Merkava main battle tank of the israeli military forces. the design of the Merkava has the engine in the front; this is a design choice that means the engine takes all the damage from enemy fire. in this hypothetical scenario, the tank is then incapacitated, but its armor still protects the crew inside because the crew is in the rear half of the vehicle. they can then exit safely through the rear hatch and retreat from the fight with the tank providing hard cover for them.
not enough comparison for you? how about: cars. yes, cars. your car which you drive, most likely daily, is designed specifically with the engine in the front, because the engineer(s) who designed your car thought about the possibility of a frontal collision. your car is designed to absorb all the damage from a frontal collision, keeping you safe from all of it.
that means you don't die from damage that comes from the front.
this is not the case with the Tumbril Storm. if the Storm takes a hit, it will far too likely be from the front. the damage is going to hit the driver. and if that's you, you're basically dead right then and there. the light armor of the tank won't offer much protection.
but let's say, you somehow, by sheer miraculous luck, did survive the hit and the tank's systems took all the damage. congratulations, you survived a major blow and it only incapacitated your vehicle.
but now you're stuck.
you have 2 options:
you can either opt to stay in the vehicle - and this means you'll take another hit from the enemy. and you're a giant sitting duck because the tank is relatively big for its classification.
you will die. there is no saving you.
your other option? exit the vehicle through the front hatch - and expose yourself not just to cannon fire, but small arms fire as well.
you will die even faster. now you're definitely beyond saving.
tl;dr the tumbril storm is designed to make sure you fail and die. it's terrible.
and my own opinion:
I'm no expert on real-world tanks, but i do know a few things, being over 30 years old and having served some time in the israeli military.
the Storm has a terrible design. not only is it bigger than it should be, as pointed out by the above video, it also places the driver seat in the front, with the exit hatch facing forward.
this is a major problem - normally, the front of the vehicle will be oriented towards the enemy. this means that you, as the driver of this vehicle, will put yourself in the line of fire.
your vehicle will take hits from the front, which is where you are seated. a well placed shot by the enemy will kill you and leave the rest of the vehicle much less damaged.
to further emphasize my point, I want to compare it to a real world example: the Merkava main battle tank of the israeli military forces. the design of the Merkava has the engine in the front; this is a design choice that means the engine takes all the damage from enemy fire. in this hypothetical scenario, the tank is then incapacitated, but its armor still protects the crew inside because the crew is in the rear half of the vehicle. they can then exit safely through the rear hatch and retreat from the fight with the tank providing hard cover for them.
not enough comparison for you? how about: cars. yes, cars. your car which you drive, most likely daily, is designed specifically with the engine in the front, because the engineer(s) who designed your car thought about the possibility of a frontal collision. your car is designed to absorb all the damage from a frontal collision, keeping you safe from all of it.
that means you don't die from damage that comes from the front.
this is not the case with the Tumbril Storm. if the Storm takes a hit, it will far too likely be from the front. the damage is going to hit the driver. and if that's you, you're basically dead right then and there. the light armor of the tank won't offer much protection.
but let's say, you somehow, by sheer miraculous luck, did survive the hit and the tank's systems took all the damage. congratulations, you survived a major blow and it only incapacitated your vehicle.
but now you're stuck.
you have 2 options:
you can either opt to stay in the vehicle - and this means you'll take another hit from the enemy. and you're a giant sitting duck because the tank is relatively big for its classification.
you will die. there is no saving you.
your other option? exit the vehicle through the front hatch - and expose yourself not just to cannon fire, but small arms fire as well.
you will die even faster. now you're definitely beyond saving.
tl;dr the tumbril storm is designed to make sure you fail and die. it's terrible.
