Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Joe Stalin
Unknown-Entity Initiative Mercenaries
|
Posted - 2010.01.05 23:39:00 -
[31]
Symmetry is irrelevant to a ship that doesn't experience atmospheric drag.
|
Jin Nib
Resplendent Knives
|
Posted - 2010.01.06 00:15:00 -
[32]
Originally by: Joe Stalin Symmetry is irrelevant to a ship that doesn't experience atmospheric drag.
Not quite. Symmetry of mass and thrust is pretty central to a vessel that doesn't experience surface friction. -Jin Nib Trading on behalf of Opera Noir since: 2009.03.02 03:53:00
|
Ak'athra J'ador
Amarr Red Federation
|
Posted - 2010.01.06 00:15:00 -
[33]
Originally by: Ryoji Tanakama The most sensible space ship design is essentially spherical. Minimum surface area from which to radiate heat, much harder to damage with energy weapons, no awkward moments of inertia to worry about, making turning a more efficient affair.
Nope, has the unused space problem (try putting levels and walls into a circle, you get loads of unused space).
|
Swiftgaze
Elysium Holdings Elysium Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.01.06 00:20:00 -
[34]
You cannot worship god in asymmetrical architecture.
|
DeathRavens
|
Posted - 2010.01.06 00:32:00 -
[35]
Totally agree with topic author. Just take a look on FIGHTERS/FIGHTER BOMBERS... This is how ships supposed to be!! Not a ships with 1 wing like we have... lol i really love this game,but i hate how ccp fails at creating most important job *ship models*.
|
DeathRavens
|
Posted - 2010.01.06 00:37:00 -
[36]
Originally by: Meeko Atari
Originally by: Ak'athra J'ador what are you talking about?
my ships look quite symmetrical
I would fly Caldari ships no matter how gimped if they looked this way!!
ROFL,same for me!
|
Mel'h N'gih
|
Posted - 2010.01.06 01:04:00 -
[37]
Originally by: Kijo Rikki That day, we learned that a Salthi will always turn ta the left. ItĘs got somethin' ta do with the way 'er engines an' ducts are arranged. So when you tail a Salthi, watch ta the left. That's where 'e'll go when 'e makes 'is break.
Wow ! You just gave me the urge to play WC1 ! |
Jin Nib
Resplendent Knives
|
Posted - 2010.01.06 01:12:00 -
[38]
Edited by: Jin Nib on 06/01/2010 01:14:04 Its not so much the asymmetry that bothers me but the lack of aesthetically pleasing balance in most of their designs. Take the Mega for instance, its a symmetrical ship and really has the potential to be one of the best looking in the game but it isn't. They just pushed it a little too far. Its back is too arched the front scoop things have slopes which are just a tad too shallow. The ass engines are misplaced and slightly too small. All those little things that are just a bit off are not overtly noticeable but they register anyways and end up making a rather crappy looking ship.
With Caldari they just went ape**** with making things look wrong. The scorpian would be great in general layout except its got that rtarded gimped up wing bit, and the tower thing for the bridge is too heavy and clunky looking as if it was stuck there by some angry toddler. The engines look like they should spin that ****er right into the nearest star.
Raven's same thing, could be a fantastic looking ship even asymmetrically but they just went ape**** on it trying to make it look wrong and different and it looks like a piece of ****.
Minmatar, where one would expect to see **** like this occurring has some of the most pleasing ships in the game. The rifter, the hurricane, the hound, the maelstrom, the nagflar, the nidhogger and hel. The only overtly bad looking one I can think off the top of my head is the Tempest and its just too obvious. Considering the aesthetic direction of Minnmatar even the phoon, scythe and bellicose hulls are strangely compelling.
It just strikes me as odd that when their design team sets out to do odd unconventional ugly **** they turn out good looking ships, but when they try and make something look good they make it look like they drew it when a ******ed monkey was jumping all over their workstation while slapping them in the face.
Yeah I got off topic and it was TL;DR but it's a really annoying issue so I feel justified. -Jin Nib Trading on behalf of Opera Noir since: 2009.03.02 03:53:00
|
DeathRavens
|
Posted - 2010.01.06 02:05:00 -
[39]
Edited by: DeathRavens on 06/01/2010 02:08:22 It just strikes me as odd that when their design team sets out to do odd unconventional ugly **** they turn out good looking ships, but when they try and make something look good they make it look like they drew it when a ******ed monkey was jumping all over their workstation while slapping them in the face.
Yeah I got off topic and it was TL;DR but it's a really annoying issue so I feel justified.
lol best explanation ever.I really hope some day most of the old ships will be redone. Typhoon... what is this? flying not finished hotdog in cosmos? Are you serious? /facepalm.Wont say about 60%/70% of other ships.
Edit: I fly 80% of the time only tech 3.. why? Take a look on them? Beatifull ships unlike many eve crap:(
|
lollerwaffle
Sileo In Pacis THE SPACE P0LICE
|
Posted - 2010.01.06 02:27:00 -
[40]
So I guess I'm the only weirdo in here that thinks the Moa and Scorp hull look pretty sexy . Especially the non-standard skins like the Gila/Onyx (♥) and Rattler/navy scorp.
In fact, it's the asymmetry that makes them sexy (to me). LOPSIDED LOVE!!
Originally by: salva dore Cloak should not be AFK solution. What do you think?
Originally by: AFK Cloaker
|
|
Aloriana Jacques
Amarr Royal Amarr Institute
|
Posted - 2010.01.06 03:01:00 -
[41]
Originally by: lollerwaffle So I guess I'm the only weirdo in here that thinks the Moa and Scorp hull look pretty sexy . Especially the non-standard skins like the Gila/Onyx (♥) and Rattler/navy scorp.
In fact, it's the asymmetry that makes them sexy (to me). LOPSIDED LOVE!!
You'd guess wroooooong. I think it gives them character and keeps them from looking like fighter-planes. So they make me happy. :) - - - Aloriana Jacques - Skill Sheet
|
Denalak
Gallente Maelstrom Crew Underworld Excavators
|
Posted - 2010.01.06 09:23:00 -
[42]
http://library.thinkquest.org/trio/TTQ05063/phibeauty1.htm
|
Hannibal Ord
Minmatar The Ore Pheonix
|
Posted - 2010.01.06 10:50:00 -
[43]
Originally by: Alezander Jagen
There's a theory of thought in Fighter design, (Real-Life) where the better preforming planes, are often the better looking planes. Someone tell me that the F-15, or the F-22 aren't absolutely sexy. Look at the Rifter, amazing, and one of the best looking ships in EvE. It's symmetrical!
As the son of a fighter pilot. "If it looks good it flies good." is the saying.
|
Marchocias
Silent Ninja's
|
Posted - 2010.01.06 11:09:00 -
[44]
Originally by: Ick Ickagami Or were the designers all on some particularly bad batch of crack that day?
CCP are well known for the ludicrous amount of crack they plough through during a days work. You can tell this by looking at the bounty system.
---- I belong to Silent Ninja (Hopefully that should cover it). |
lollerwaffle
Sileo In Pacis THE SPACE P0LICE
|
Posted - 2010.01.06 15:40:00 -
[45]
Originally by: Aloriana Jacques
Originally by: lollerwaffle So I guess I'm the only weirdo in here that thinks the Moa and Scorp hull look pretty sexy . Especially the non-standard skins like the Gila/Onyx (♥) and Rattler/navy scorp.
In fact, it's the asymmetry that makes them sexy (to me). LOPSIDED LOVE!!
You'd guess wroooooong. I think it gives them character and keeps them from looking like fighter-planes. So they make me happy. :)
hi5 o/
Originally by: salva dore Cloak should not be AFK solution. What do you think?
Originally by: AFK Cloaker
|
Trebor Notlimah
Lone Star EVE Group Veni Vidi Vici
|
Posted - 2010.01.06 16:38:00 -
[46]
Originally by: Jin Nib
Originally by: Joe Stalin Symmetry is irrelevant to a ship that doesn't experience atmospheric drag.
Not quite. Symmetry of mass and thrust is pretty central to a vessel that doesn't experience surface friction.
You're assuming an asymmetric ship would have the same thrust distribution as a symmetric ship -- clearly not the case in terms of Eve models.
|
Flitz Farseeker
Interstellar Stormfront
|
Posted - 2010.01.06 16:44:00 -
[47]
Originally by: Trebor Notlimah You're assuming an asymmetric ship would have the same thrust distribution as a symmetric ship -- clearly not the case in terms of Eve models.
So what's up with that big ass engine on the Exequror. Is it broken or something? Coz it's only putting out about the same power as an engine 1/3 the size on the other side of the ship.
Mirror that model so it has big ass engines out both sides and it might even be good enough looking to fly.
|
Ivana Twinkle
Amarr Polytechnique Gallenteenne
|
Posted - 2010.01.06 16:48:00 -
[48]
where did i read this before?
OWAIT
ALL THE OTHER THREADS ON THE TOPIC :-/
|
Stu Pendisdick
Caldari School of Applied Knowledge
|
Posted - 2010.01.06 16:50:00 -
[49]
Originally by: Flitz Farseeker
Originally by: Trebor Notlimah You're assuming an asymmetric ship would have the same thrust distribution as a symmetric ship -- clearly not the case in terms of Eve models.
So what's up with that big ass engine on the Exequror. Is it broken or something? Coz it's only putting out about the same power as an engine 1/3 the size on the other side of the ship.
Mirror that model so it has big ass engines out both sides and it might even be good enough looking to fly.
And you can get them bigass engines at Jones' Bigass Truck Rental and Storage:
http://www.jonesbigasstruckrentalandstorage.com/
|
Van PokerAlho
|
Posted - 2010.01.06 16:52:00 -
[50]
First I would like to say that the original poster was talking about beauty, not aerodynamics or whatever.
Second symmetry is beauty, if you dont know that I would recommend some reading about the issue instead of just typing for trolling or whatever.
Third I would also recommend some reading about Inertia in zero gravity for those who say "bla bla no air in space bla bla" bull****.
Now many ships are as ugly as possible and even dont knowing what circumstances will spaceship design have to deal with in the future this is a game, yes a game, so I make a contradiction here, BUT, if you think its a game then why not making nice asymmetric and symmetric ships, why they need to have a side stupid engine for some odd reason or whatever. Now if you think having realistic designs is important check the third paragraph I wrote starting with the word "Third".
|
|
Ehranavaar
|
Posted - 2010.01.06 17:15:00 -
[51]
Originally by: Ryoji Tanakama The most sensible space ship design is essentially spherical. Minimum surface area from which to radiate heat, much harder to damage with energy weapons, no awkward moments of inertia to worry about, making turning a more efficient affair.
in space radiating heat is mostly a good thing lest you cook yourself. one of the better arguments against high powered lasers and particle beams is the waste heat from them barbequing the ship they are mounted to. even half percent of the energy put into them not going out the barrel parboils the crew in short order.
|
Riedle
Minmatar Raptus Regalitor Black Legion.
|
Posted - 2010.01.06 17:24:00 -
[52]
Originally by: Ick Ickagami I've ready a lot of the "backstory", and much other random information about the game, the setting, etc., and have even gotten some reasonably interesting explanations for the odd physics and logical behaviour found in the game, but the thing that puzzles me most is the seemingly deliberate lack of symmetry.
Now, I can understand a lack of symmetry in Minmatar ships, as they are purportedly created from piles of who-knows-what discarded detrius and flotsam, and I can almost understand the lack of symmetry in Caldari ships as any aesthetic qualities, for their own sakes, would be seen as wasteful by the industrial machine.
Gallente and Amarr, on the other hand..........what is the excuse there? Gallente, the so-called "artisans" and "beauty admirers"......and the Amarr, with their purist look on "God's Creation".........how do they explain such odd shaped, nonsensical clattertrap designs?
Or were the designers all on some particularly bad batch of crack that day?
Perspiring minds want to know...........
Personally, I find symmetry boring and bland. Appropriate in some areas but not in all for sure.
|
Riedle
Minmatar Raptus Regalitor Black Legion.
|
Posted - 2010.01.06 17:31:00 -
[53]
Originally by: lollerwaffle So I guess I'm the only weirdo in here that thinks the Moa and Scorp hull look pretty sexy . Especially the non-standard skins like the Gila/Onyx (♥) and Rattler/navy scorp.
In fact, it's the asymmetry that makes them sexy (to me). LOPSIDED LOVE!!
LOL, not you are not the only one. I think the MOA is an awesome looking ship. The symmetry = Beauty is a young person's game. It's bred into our DNA. Being able to appreciate beauty that is not symmetrical is a sign of an educated mind.
+1 internets to you good sir! |
defiler
Mad Hermit Wayward Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.01.06 17:53:00 -
[54]
Originally by: TigerXtrm Today I had lunch with the Goddess, 'Ick Ickagami,' she said... 'I'm here to free you from the tyranny of the commonplace. I'm here to show you a new kind of beauty.' I asked her, 'What do you mean, goddess?' 'Symmetry, dear Ick Ickagami. It's time we did something about symmetry...'
YOU'RE UGLY!
(Bioshock reference for those who don't get it)
Also, I happen to kinda like the looks of the Moa, probably because it's ugly. A mean ship like that just doesn't care about pretty things, and I respect that.
Minding our own business since 2004 |
FarosWarrior
Amarr Sonnema
|
Posted - 2010.01.06 18:31:00 -
[55]
Originally by: Vengeance Raze
Originally by: Nova Fox Asymetric designs tend to lead to one other aspect, the lack of double redunant systems. This saves space and costs of making two of everything this of course trades of survivability and back ups. However in the world of eve where kenetic rounds slam so powerfully they wouldnt do much good to have such backup systems. This comes into the considerations of power drain, damage control and many more systems that should they have been symetrical would probably result in a ship easily 3-4x larger instead of the smaller profiles.
Also symetery leads to exploitable weaknesses in known sensible design, asymetric designs typially throw off this sense and since we as pilots are embodied into the ship itself instead of some targeting computer.
Dude, stop RP'ing so hard.
remember, EvE is a bloody MMORPG cheers, Faros
"As long as we're jammed we might as well throw those 1400mm's at them" Charlie Fodder, Clear Skies |
Glengrant
TOHA Heavy Industries TOHA Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2010.01.07 00:59:00 -
[56]
Originally by: Dorian Tormak
Am I right or am I right?
Neither. :-)
I love that EVE has original starship designs that not only assumed freedom from aerodynamic restraints - but also manage to not look like the same 5 fighter variations we have known from scifi movies for decades.
Seems this is one of those it's-a-matter-of-taste affairs. --- Save the forum: Think before you post. ISK BUYER = LOSER EVE TV- Bring it back! Laptop, NVidia7900GS, Ubuntu 8.04, WINE |
Kyra Felann
Gallente
|
Posted - 2010.01.07 03:26:00 -
[57]
Originally by: Callista Sincera For most people it does. Never seen the most beautiful face? It was a composite of hundreds of people with the right half being a mirror of the left.
They have done studies and found that the faces commonly seen as most pleasing to the eye are the most symmetrical. So, yes, normally symmetry is seen as more aesthetically pleasing than no symmetry.
|
Ryoji Tanakama
Caldari Firestar Drive Yards
|
Posted - 2010.01.07 12:46:00 -
[58]
Originally by: Ak'athra J'ador
Originally by: Ryoji Tanakama The most sensible space ship design is essentially spherical. Minimum surface area from which to radiate heat, much harder to damage with energy weapons, no awkward moments of inertia to worry about, making turning a more efficient affair.
Nope, has the unused space problem (try putting levels and walls into a circle, you get loads of unused space).
Nonesense.
You only need regular surfaces for humans to occupy. You can fit a regular flat-faced space inside the sphere, and use the remainder for storage of... say, water, fuel and food or cargo. Those things do not require flatness.
|
Van PokerAlho
|
Posted - 2010.01.07 15:02:00 -
[59]
Incredible the amount of lack of knowledge, please refrain yourself from posting bull**** if all you know is "common sense", there are reasons for things being symmetric, despite symmetry being more aesthetically pleasant which is irrelevant for warfare, asymmetry is generally because of small things like weapons for example, not a freaking giant engine on only one side, that is not beautiful and is not realistic.
And bull**** about "people who see beauty in asymmetric things are smarter people" bull****, people who like to think they are different and unique that's all. Each person have different tastes and some asymmetric things are nice and many symmetric things are ugly, look at raven, does it make any sense at all? ****ing wings going everywhere with what point? being useless? raise physic radius to be easily shot down?
The artists made a real poor job with ship design, very very poor, the designs are ugly, unpleasant, unrealistic, and in a general way completely stupid.
The explanations given for odd designs are a result from poor artist performance, they wanted to make unique designs, designs unrelated to other spaceship games and movies and they failed miserably because they wanted to be different.
20% of designs are very bad, and all the others are ok or good, many of the good ones are asymmetric, for example cormorant.
|
Vyktor Abyss
The Abyss Corporation
|
Posted - 2010.01.07 15:51:00 -
[60]
Originally by: Ick Ickagami Perspiring minds want to know...........
I think your mind has perspired..........
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |