Messages

76

Gallery / Re: Titanic (continued)

« on: July 08, 2013, 08:43:39 PM »

you are also telling me that the titanic 2 is nearly unsinkable,
so i was right. thats what they said last time

Titanic was the safest ship in the world at the time, just as Titanic II will be now. The difference is, we now track just about everything which might get in the way of a ship now. The amount of damage needed to sink Titanic II is downright ludicrous, and a cause for such an event is even more difficult to think of! I honestly can't name a likely threat to Titanic II.

77

Gallery / Re: Titanic (continued)

« on: July 08, 2013, 08:27:30 PM »

and where are you getting all this information about Titanic 2 being unsinkable?

From Deltamarin (the firm designing the ship) and Blue Star Line (the company that will own her). Harland and Wolff, the builders of the Titanic, and White Star Line, the owners of the ship, never claimed the ship to be unsinkable, and Clive Palmer, the man funding Titanic II, says it would be cavalier to call the Titanic II unsinkable. Deltamarin, however, says that Titanic II will be safer than any cruise ship in the world when she launches, and based on their responses to questions they were given from people commenting on a blog post on the Deltamarin website (the information from which I described above), I have no reason to doubt their claims.

78

Gallery / Re: Titanic (continued)

« on: July 08, 2013, 07:00:59 PM »

Actually, from what I heard, the Titanic diverted it's course into the Arctic ocean, or very near it, where many icebergs were rumored to be found.

Wrong: they received ice warnings, and diverted the ship's course to be further south than the most southerly transatlantic passenger shipping lane at the time.

thats exactly what they said last time. they said that nothing could sink her, and thats exactly what your saying. im sure Titanic 2 wont sink, not very many cruise liners do.

No, the media hyped the ship up as "practically unsinkable" or "as much as possible unsinkable," but there was still the very plausible and real threat of icebergs. Also, the Titanic II won't be a cruise ship, she has more balls than that. Titanic II will make money sailing across waters that most cruise ships wet themselves at night thinking about.

79

Gallery / Re: Titanic (continued)

« on: July 08, 2013, 05:18:00 PM »

that's what they said the last time

No, that's not. Last time, there were rumored and known dangers which could not be averted very effectively, such as icebergs or rogue waves. Nowadays, though, such events are being constantly monitored and relayed to ships (and even if the monitoring centers manage to miss one, sonar and radar act as close-range secondary defenses), and techniques have been developed to combat them. On top of that, Titanic II in particular has had improvements over the original Titanic to better battle things like ship-to-ship collisions or even rogue waves.

Thus, we can effectively rule out ship-to-ship collisions, icebergs, and rogue waves as probable causes for a loss of Titanic II. What does that leave us with as far as likely events?

80

Gallery / Re: Titanic (continued)

« on: July 08, 2013, 02:01:40 PM »

lol, any boat will crash and sink if you poke a hole in it.

It would take much more than a hole to sink Titanic II. Said hole poker would need to get past her state-of-the-art sonar and radar, and be unnoticed by any second-hand source in range of her satellite communication system. Furthermore, Titanic II has what appears to be more watertight compartments than Titanic had, and even a watertight deck to divide those existing compartments into smaller sizes. What's more, she has a lifeboat capacity of well over 6,000 (the eighteen modern lifeboats of 250 people each, plus the eight modern life rafts which I read from a second-hand source can hold a total of 800 people between them, plus the historical lifeboats which Deltamarin, the designers of the ship, say will be seaworthy enough to act as tenders for harbor excursions), while her additional design and technological features will ensure that even if she does sink, she will take as long as possible to do so.

All in all, I can't even conceive of any realistic threat which could sink the Titanic II (including icebergs because those things have been tracked by the International Ice Patrol ever since the year after Titanic sank, and the IIP boasts having not had a single ship listening to them ever strike ice), and even beyond that sink the ship in a way that would lead to a significant loss of life.

81

Gallery / Re: Titanic (continued)

« on: July 07, 2013, 04:22:12 PM »

How much do you still have to do? The exterior looks maybe 80% to me

Interiors are barely even started. To say we have 80% to go would be a generous estimate! So far, the only room that it would be safe to call "complete" would be the starboard side private promenade; the swimming pool and third class general room will need to get a major overhaul for accuracy and brick efficiency.

So as for how much we need to do, chalk up "99% of the interior"

I feel like it can be safely said that the exterior is almost done, though: we just need to install the two leadsman's platforms, finish the inside of the fourth funnel, add in some new windows that were modeled by Demian (the same user who gave us those custom wheels and telegraphs in the bridge -- his work is excellent AND fast!), install two more navigation lights and finish one, fill in some gaps in the after side of the aft well deck, install quite a few light fixtures, and finish the hull (somehow).

82

Gallery / Re: R.M.S Queen Mary 1

« on: January 30, 2013, 12:01:12 AM »

Hi! RMS Gigantic here, research support for Bones4's Titanic. I admit that we are rather taking our time with the RMS Titanic at the moment due to universally busy schedules for those involved, but enough about the Titanic at the moment.

I like the design of the hull, though the hull looks very vertical. I'm wondering if you're planning on giving her her keel? You also have me curious as to what resources you're using for research (not saying there's anything inaccurate, I would just like to know), and how ambitious you are being with the project.

83

Gallery / Re: V21 Save

« on: September 02, 2012, 08:35:50 PM »

Is that NVidia card in a gaming laptop? If so, your laptop might have two built-in cards, with your laptop using the wrong one.

84

General Discussion / Re: FIXED: I Cannot See the New Shadows

« on: August 12, 2012, 02:45:37 AM »

I was linked this by a TicTac: http://i.stack.imgur.com/2GSLl.png

After changing the circled option in the NVidia control panel to my NVidia card, not only do I see the new shaders and shadows, but my game runs a lot faster as well!

85

Development / Re: 2012/08/10 - Bugs

« on: August 12, 2012, 01:45:25 AM »

You have an intel graphics processor, it's the most common problem with v21

Actually, it's an NVidia GeForce GT 550M. I am installing some new drivers for it, though.

86

General Discussion / Re: I Cannot See the New Shadows

« on: August 10, 2012, 11:38:42 PM »

Intel users aren't the only people who don't see them even when they are enabled. As of now I don't think anybody knows what is causing the problem.

This would be better if you posted it in the Shadows and Shaders Bugs topic.

Hopefully this gets fixed soon.

Posted my DxDiag to the topic you linked.

Fricking Indie games

87

Development / Re: 2012/08/10 - Bugs

« on: August 10, 2012, 11:37:20 PM »

I cannot see the new shaders and shadows. My DxDiag is attached.

88

General Discussion / FIXED: I Cannot See the New Shadows

« on: August 10, 2012, 11:30:02 PM »

Hello, I am having a problem with the new update: I cannot see the flagship feature of V21! All of the lighting looks just as it would have in previous versions of Blockland. I have been to a few servers and no one has yet been able to help me, so let me clarify on a few things:

• Before anyone says, "You need to turn them on, idiot!", I have set the shaders to high and hit "done" as well as "apply" without any shadows appearing. I have also tried setting it to minimum, low, and medium.
• Before anyone says "Your computer/graphics card isn't strong enough, idiot!", I am running Windows 7 with an NVidia GeForce GT 550M for a graphics card, with an Intel i7 processor backing it up on a gaming laptop.
• Before anyone says, "You downloaded Blockland for the wrong operating system, dimwit!", I updated to V21 from V20, and V20 gave me no problems.

So, with all of that out of the way, can anyone help me?

I also do not think that I can see the new shaders, either.

89

Clan Discussion / Re: [AoB] Architects of Blockland - 2012

« on: July 28, 2012, 04:05:45 AM »

A little something I made for the AoB Print Pack, portraying Mage's latest shenanigans:

What, you're not gonna give me credit for my recreation of Riddler's limousine? D:

Also, I'm noticing that the retractable top isn't there. Was this done while it was a work in progress?

90

General Discussion / Re: ▓BlockoWorld 2012 - Pushed back to Monday. Read OP for more info.▓

« on: July 28, 2012, 03:53:28 AM »

I was going to miss half of the convention as it was previously assigned, so I like this date. I do see how Monday is inconvenient for so many people, though. I am just fine with rescheduling the convention to this weekend.