Tiberian Apocalypse - Hover Predator

[Alex06 39]

The Tiberian Apocalypse team have released a new, untextured render, featuring the Predator Tank, now a hover tank. This new unit presentation template will be featured in future updates, from now on.

 

' rel='lightbox'>http://media.moddb.com/images/mods/1/10/9383/18_12_2012_Predator_2.jpg

 

Click here to take a peek at their image gallery.

[Golan 6]

Ha, nice one! Always thought the Predator design was ideal for making a TS style hovercraft out of it, this one is a pretty good execution!

[Gben 20]

I do like the concept that GDI develops and deploys hover technology en mass to it's arsenal - but I always hated that the GDI hover anti-air unit (the slingshot) retained it's infantry crushing ability of most vehicles.

 

I would support a GDI faction that uses hover technology which gives movement boosts, receives an armour nerf and loses infantry crush abilities.

I think it makes an interesting faction.

[Guest Stevie_K]

The amount of pressure produced by a hovercraft engine lifting up a tank, would likely kill any person that ends up below it. Why get rid of squishing? It's a core C&C thing!

[Nmenth 290]

The thing doesn't have any air skirts, it is doubtful it would run on an air cushion. If it uses jet engines, a person would surely die if run over, but it would also be a very inefficient use of fuel. If it uses anti-gravity, a person would probably be perfectly fine underneath it. Whether it can squish a person or not depends entirely on what the modders had in mind when creating the vehicle.

 

However, it is my personal opinion that a hover vehicle being able to squish infantry seems very odd.

 

The Hover MLRS of TS was not able to crush infantry, so the argument of it being C&C tradition is unfounded.

[Guest Stevie_K]

Oh yeah, those anti-gravity engines are pretty nifty.

 

The Hover MLRS of TS was not able to crush infantry, so the argument of it being C&C tradition is unfounded.

Yes, and next time I'll make sure to let you when I'm talking about personal interpretation. We can't have people confusing that with the hard facts now can we?