TRO 3145 art

[General308]

So I read "Divided we fall"  kind of excited me about the future story line of BattleTech.  So I picked up and was looking through TRO 3145 all I can say is oh my the art is bad.   I know with the Kickstarter Cataylst is trying to overhaul the art design.  But my goodness the newest stuff is the worse.  I hope they have a plan to update it.

[Caedis Animus]

I'm just going to say I strongly, strongly disagree with you and not expand otherwise on something I consider bad taste.

But updates aren't gonna happen, especially considering last I checked TRO 3145 art was really, really high quality compared to the old stuff and is one of the best received portions of the Dark Age that I've ever seen. Maybe because everything doesn't have pancake feet, Pipe cleaner arms, or MOAR RECTANGLES like certain other TROs. Your own personal dislike is regrettable, but of all the eras to get a redesign in terms of art direction, that's probably the wrong tree to bark up.

[Dmon]

I would say 3145 is actually not that bad, my only real complaint is that the art style changes several times within the book so as a whole it feels a bit mismatched.

It is a major issue that we have some of the incredibly dated artwork from TRO:3025 still getting used in "modern" books like the utterly embarrasing TRO:Succession Wars so the updates from the kickstarter can not come fast enough in my opinion.

[Sartris]

I would agree the art is more a victim of mismatched styles. I have noted before that the stylistic potpourri could had been clustered together in like styles  for better continuity.

Other designs are executed well artistically but the design itself I don’t feel fits the universe well like the Hanse MBT

Problem with art is that individual taste and is so disparately subjective that you’re not going to get any real consensus. Fortunately the minis don’t seem to suffer as much of the incongruence

[General308]

I would agree the art is more a victim of mismatched styles. I have noted before that the stylistic potpourri could had been clustered together in like styles  for better continuity.

Other designs are executed well artistically but the design itself I don’t feel fits the universe well like the Hanse MBT

Problem with art is that individual taste and is so disparately subjective that you’re not going to get any real consensus. Fortunately the minis don’t seem to suffer as much of the incongruence

I agree.  It is just a hodge podge of stuff that doesn't seem to fit.

[DarkSpade]

Was it all the art you didn't like, or do some examples stand out?

[General308]

Was it all the art you didn't like, or do some examples stand out?

The Firestarter and centurion for example for example.  The Shandra Advanced scout vechical.  Scampha hovertank..  Something is off on the font end geomatriy of that one.  Same with the MHI defense AA tank.   

The quality of the art hurts too..   For example Look at the Gunsmith.  It looks great really good art. Turn the page to the Cadaver and the quality of the art looks like it should be in a different book..  Same with the Renevant.. Nice high quality art work then you turn the page to the Wulfen and it looks like a different book.  You see it over and over again.  Good quality art to art that doesn't look like it belongs in the book over and over again.   Honestly As I go through it again I think it is that that bothers me about this book the most.

[dgorsman]

The print TRO is a compilation of various PDF ones from different factions, which if I remember correctly has somewhat more internally consistent art.

[DarkSpade]

That's probably a result of the TRO bringing so many of the clix mechs into Battletech. That's why they look so different.  They were made for a different game.  Rather than just let the different designs fall to the side, they decided to bring a lot of them into Battletech as "II" or Omni versions of those units even when the clix game didn't call them that.   

[Fat Guy]

We can blame WizKids for all the examples you don't like. All of that art is based directly on MW:DA sculpts.

Their quality was just like ours: all over the place. Simply gorgeous to fugly, and everything in between.

[General308]

We can blame WizKids for all the examples you don't like. All of that art is based directly on MW:DA sculpts.

Their quality was just like ours: all over the place. Simply gorgeous to fugly, and everything in between.

I am not going to blame Wizkids because Cat has shown it can it will update art with the Kickstarter.   

[Fat Guy]

The specific units he mentioned were WizKids fault.

[Phobos]

So I read "Divided we fall"  kind of excited me about the future story line of BattleTech.  So I picked up and was looking through TRO 3145 all I can say is oh my the art is bad.   I know with the Kickstarter Cataylst is trying to overhaul the art design.  But my goodness the newest stuff is the worse.  I hope they have a plan to update it.

Unless you are refering to the few abominations in the RotS TRO (Scapha and especially MHI AA Tank, I'm looking at you), I also have to disagree with that assessment. Plog's work, even if far below of what he is able to achieve (I guess that has to do with the difference in pay vs. free commissions?), is almost always good, David White is almost always great (aside from a few minor mishaps), most of the rest is at least acceptable.

[Colt Ward]

I like the Omni-Cent, and the mini has the option of pitting those stud bits on the shoulder.  I left mine off and filled in the holes with green stuff.

[Fat Guy]

The CkickyTech sculpt looks so much better when you cut them off.

[Colt Ward]

Cut off?  On the mini they are a add on part for at least the Prime, and I would not expect otherwise for the alternates.

[SteelRaven]

The Firestarter and centurion for example for example.  The Shandra Advanced scout vechical.  Scampha hovertank..  Something is off on the font end geomatriy of that one.  Same with the MHI defense AA tank.   

The Firestarter, Omni Centurion, Shandra and MHD all where designed by WK for there own minis in MW: DA years ago.



CGL acknowledged them rather than have a second generation of Unseen designs. The TRO in qestion is also almost 7 years old (wow, time file) years before the kickstarter and the following artwork.

Good news is that BT has never been WYSIWYG so if you don't like the omni Centurion, feel free to use another Centurion in it's place with the same stats.

As for the art, that's always subjective. I think it's the nature of the WK designs than the art it self considering the original designs by the same artist get praised quit often.   

[Fat Guy]

Cut off?  On the mini they are a add on part for at least the Prime, and I would not expect otherwise for the alternates.

The actual Clickytech mini, like SteelRaven posted.

[General308]

The Firestarter, Omni Centurion, Shandra and MHD all where designed by WK for there own minis in MW: DA years ago.



CGL acknowledged them rather than have a second generation of Unseen designs. The TRO in qestion is also almost 7 years old (wow, time file) years before the kickstarter and the following artwork.

Good news is that BT has never been WYSIWYG so if you don't like the omni Centurion, feel free to use another Centurion in it's place with the same stats.

As for the art, that's always subjective. I think it's the nature of the WK designs than the art it self considering the original designs by the same artist get praised quit often.

I get they are clickytech designs.  Doesn't change they look bad.   Know I know what Cataylst did.    But you have to ask if that look will sell.  You are right it was abo8ut 7 years ago that TRO came out.  Likely Cataylst hadn't even thought about seriously redoing designs like they have now decided to do.    I am just saying that the current era designs need to be given the same love.  The future of BattleTech is in 3150 going forward.   So I would hope they would put the same effort into the modern period of the game as they are the past.  (yes I know the past era designs get used in the current era as well)

[SteelRaven]

My dude, the KS art looks so good because it is brand new art vs something from 7 years ago and a better representation of what we will see in the future with the current line developer and art director.

 

[Colt Ward]

I know what the two Omni-Cents look like . . . I have half a dozen MWDA figures and a IWM mini.  The IWM mini reflects some changes to put it in line with BT's art.  Part of that is changing proportions somewhat but its a solid design.

The MH AA Def Tank hull wise looks like some modern armored vehicle designs.  I have not seen it as a IWM, not even sure its available as one.

[RifleMech]

As other have said, Art is subjective. Some will like it and other won't. There's a lot of retconned designs that I don't like. Some I like. Others I don't and some I think are just okay. I try not to let the art I don't like bother me. I have a harder time with unnecessary retcons.  I know there's all kinds of reasons to redesign a unit, in universe and out. The Unseen have an out of universe reason for being retconned. Others...I'm guessing its to update designs to be more like the video game or for younger players or something. Only they're old designs. They're supposed to be outdated.  So am I looking at a retcon, simultaneous production, or new production? Either of the later will work but unless it's explained in universe or a retcon I think they will cause a second generation of unseen.  :(

[Colt Ward]

. . . unless it's explained in universe or a retcon I think they will cause a second generation of unseen.  :(

This makes no sense . . . the Centurion Omni looks like-


Its been in books and in the art of products like ER3145, FM3145, and Shattered Fortress (I think) . . . now, I do not expect it to make it into as much art going forward b/c I expect them to start throwing more of the KS mech art into the products.  The Omni-Cent is IMO a lot more solid looking than the old Centurion which was a very tall thing design- this to me looks more like a trooper.

[Phobos]

The Firestarter, Omni Centurion, Shandra and MHD all where designed by WK for there own minis in MW: DA years ago.



CGL acknowledged them rather than have a second generation of Unseen designs. The TRO in qestion is also almost 7 years old (wow, time file) years before the kickstarter and the following artwork.
(...)
As for the art, that's always subjective. I think it's the nature of the WK designs than the art it self considering the original designs by the same artist get praised quit often.

I disagree... you cannot honestly believe that the quality difference between the MHI AA Tank and let's say D. White's Black Knight is merely down to taste and a less than optimal Wizkids sculpt.
Let's be honest, they had a ton of designs to cover with all the TRO 3145s that came out and decided to do it as quickly as possible while spending as little money as possible, which resulted in a) contracting more artists than usual (also some who are somewhat less talented than others) and probably b) paying (some? all?) artists less than they normally would. Why do I believe the latter? Because I know what some of those artists can do when contracted with free commissions and also what they did as official work before TRO 3145, while knowing what a few of them charge on free comissions. The drop in overall quality is the result, while I still maintain that most designs have been interpreted in an acceptable / good manner. A few pieces however are (in my opinion) absolute abominations.

[Colt Ward]

Your premise is flawed however . . . some of those MWDA designs were already out in the MWDA RS book while others had to have been considered for 'earlier' dates in TRO 3075 & 3085.  Which is why what was not covered and to fill any missing niches were added to TRO 3145 . . . 50 also came out a bit later.

[RifleMech]

This makes no sense . . . the Centurion Omni looks like-


Its been in books and in the art of products like ER3145, FM3145, and Shattered Fortress (I think) . . . now, I do not expect it to make it into as much art going forward b/c I expect them to start throwing more of the KS mech art into the products.  The Omni-Cent is IMO a lot more solid looking than the old Centurion which was a very tall thing design- this to me looks more like a trooper.

The Omni Centurion is a new design, as such I don't expect it to look like the older Centurion. I don't mind seeing it going forward. I wouldn't expect to see it in the past though because it is a different design.

Then we have the Flea 16.  It's also looks nothing like the Flea 4 and 15. Yet it's presented as a Succession War era design. Only it wasn't introduced until after the Succession Wars. Its also just a variant not a different mech like the Flea 14 or the Trooper. So why the complete redesign  for the 16 only to go back with the Flea 17?  Is it a retcon or something made just for the Dragoons?  What is it?

[Major Headcase]

I really like a bunch of the Dark Age designs and the artwork when added to Battletech publications is pretty good as far as I'm concerned. As for will they sell? They have been! I've bought quite a few. My favorites are the Malice and the non-omni version of the Black Hawk. The Thor mk II is pretty hot as well.  ;D   in fact I have been sacrificing little plastic cows and goats at night, praying the Dark Age version of the Dire Wolf would get made in metal someday....  :o
Art appreciation is the very definition of subjective. I've seen designs that made me wonder just what the Btech artists of the past were taking at the time and I've seen pieces that look absolute  amazing to me. I try not to pass judgement on other people's tastes.
Except coffee drinkers, they are obviously all communist saboteurs bent on ruining the worlds tea trade...  :D

[Colt Ward]

. . . in fact I have been sacrificing little plastic cows and goats at night, praying the Dark Age version of the Dire Wolf would get made in metal someday....  :o
Art appreciation is the very definition of subjective. I've seen designs that made me wonder just what the Btech artists of the past were taking at the time and I've seen pieces that look absolute  amazing to me. I try not to pass judgement on other people's tastes.
Except coffee drinkers, they are obviously all communist saboteurs bent on ruining the worlds tea trade...  :D

Its not a Dire Wolf, its called a Tomahawk II and IWM sells 4 different configs-

The Omni Centurion is a new design, as such I don't expect it to look like the older Centurion. I don't mind seeing it going forward. I wouldn't expect to see it in the past though because it is a different design.

Then we have the Flea 16.  It's also looks nothing like the Flea 4 and 15. Yet it's presented as a Succession War era design. Only it wasn't introduced until after the Succession Wars. Its also just a variant not a different mech like the Flea 14 or the Trooper. So why the complete redesign  for the 16 only to go back with the Flea 17?  Is it a retcon or something made just for the Dragoons?  What is it?

Never said the Omni-Cent will appear in older material, just that I expect artwork with KS re-designs to appear in say ilClan rather than a Omni-Cent being given the spotlight.  As for the Flea, is that another of your TRO Succession Wars complaints?

[RifleMech]

Never said the Omni-Cent will appear in older material, just that I expect artwork with KS re-designs to appear in say ilClan rather than a Omni-Cent being given the spotlight.  As for the Flea, is that another of your TRO Succession Wars complaints?

I would think that the art work should appear in books when the units exist. But is that art just different art, a different variant, a different unit with a shared name, a completely new unit or a retcon?   ???

Yes. The Flea 16 isn't a Succession War era variant. The Flea 4 and 15 are but not the 16. So why is the Flea 16 in TRO: Succession Wars?  ??? Why the redesign?  ???

I'm quite sure most would rather I quit the forums completely but my issues with TRO: Succession Wars doesn't effect just me. Why set a TRO in an a specific era and then include mechs from outside that era?  ??? I've been into Battletech since 1989 or 1990 and it confuses me. It confuses those I try to get interested in Battletech. Why make it more confusing?

[Colt Ward]

You are blowing my first statement up way more than it was meant to be and conflating it with your issues.  My observation was that while we had seen the Omni-Cent in some CGL Dark Age art from SBs, and MWDA used it a LOT more IIRC, I do not expect to see the Omni Cent in ilClan art but rather they use the latest set of products which would be the KS art.

You know the reason on TRO Succession Wars but refuse to accept it . . . the book is titled 'Succession Wars' not 'TRO Third Succession War' which means its going to have units from what was possible to be used from the end of the Star League to the Clan Invasion.  Which means it will go from the tech heights of the League through LosTech to the recovery before the Clans arrive but does not include absolutely everything.  Considering finding a cache of more advanced League left overs is a staple of the 3SW setting, even having machines lost during the tech decline works out since it gives players great examples of something they can 'find' as part of their story.  Its not confusing unless you want it to be, and you do b/c you prefer the numbered TROs . . . no one is taking those away, and as has been said the product is not aimed at you.