Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Majestic Moose
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 13:15:00 -
[31]
Edited by: Majestic Moose on 21/06/2010 13:16:48 Caldari prefer long range engagements - where manoeuvrability is less of a concern, and it mirrors well in their spaceship design.
Besides, for all we know all the heavy gear could be placed around a central axis, with all the spurs and appendages housing light sensory equipment, away from the noise generated by the other facilities.
|
Vhan Jarrah
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 14:48:00 -
[32]
Originally by: AterraX
Originally by: Vhan Jarrah Why are you comparing real life spaceships to virtual battleships that can reach warp-speed, mine asteroids and do battle?
I assume real-life spaceships look ugly for the same reason the first cars looked ugly...function took priority over form and the technology for them was basic. As the technology improved and more people could afford them, companies concentrated on aesthetics to compete in the market. It only seems natural that if spaceships were as commonplace and easily made as they are in Eve that the companies who made them would spend some time on aesthetics to get an edge on their competitors.
In cars is has more to do with aerodynamics, than anything else. Why do you think most cars have the same or similar shape today?
Because of airflow...but in space there is no airflow...hence no need for wasting resources on stuff like "fancy shapes"..resources that could be used on more purdent systems.
You guys think the ISS look "streamlined"?
I like how you dodged the parts of my post that pertained to Eve. Very good.
Also, you expect us to believe that you think people like Ferrari, Lamborghini, Lotus, Pagani, Aston Martin, Jaguar, Porsche, Bugatti or Chevrolet...to name but a few...pay no attention to aesthetics of their cars?
I think Shayna had the right idea.
|
Hathor II
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 14:59:00 -
[33]
Why some of you guys get it wrong ? .. i'm not talking about Caldari manoeuvrability or Range or missles , i'm talking about caldari ship's look ! everytime i fly Raven families , i think ship have no Balance because have a short Wing and a longer wing so i'm agree with those friends who said "Caldari ships must be Re-Designed " .. not all of them , we have nice ship in caldari , i like Drake's looks , Hawk , specially Scorp type now :-P BUT , hope CCP re-design some of those "Flying Junk-Matall" ships , at least do some balance between Left-side of ship with Right-side :P
Thanks
|
Kaltooth
Amarr
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 16:11:00 -
[34]
Why? Why does this come up? Caldari ships never cared about aethetics. The ships are built for function, not form. In space there is no resistance to matter if they are balanced or not. While I like the new scorpion model, I also already miss the original model. The camera center point needed to be changed, but that was it imo. All caldari ships (original release, not the later additions like the drake, rohk, and cap ships) are supposed to be tacked on parts to fit the role. I could argue that this art director needs to sit down with the launch eve client and study the models and see what was attempted to be conveyed and go from there.
Minmatar: minimalist approach. Solar panels used to offset most power core going to engines. Speed and smaller sig (solar panels provide little cross section) the hallmark.
Amarr: Sturdy symmetrical ships. Heavy armor plating to give a beefy feeling while suggesting a slower than normal speed.
Gallente: Organic lines. Not always symmetrical, but leans towards it. Middle ground stats compared to the amarr and minmatar. Drone bay visible on all ships due to continued reliance on them.
Caldari: Design asthetics ignored. Modules added for the role envisioned. Reinforced shielding system reduces need for armor plating and reinforcement of various parts on the ship. Exposed sensor rods gives better than average sensor and targetting systems.
|
Draknishar
The Exploited. Gentlemen's Club
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 17:04:00 -
[35]
They did say at fanfest at the thing were people told the guy what to draw, I think, that earlier in eve they didn't actually care if they made ships that would work but now they try to.
I think caldari proves this best of all. :P
|
Czechlion1977
|
Posted - 2010.06.23 06:15:00 -
[36]
Originally by: The Lynxpardinus It is not so much that they are ugly, but that they are impossible to fly ships. There is a reason ships are symmetrical along their axis of movement, just by looking at the engine placement of most Caldari ships and w/o being an engineer or doing any math you easily see that those ships should be spinning out of control instead of moving forward. It is called "suspension of disbelief" most people cannot tell why, but instinctively they know there is something wrong with Caldari hulls and thus find them ugly.
In flight, an aircraft can be considered as being acted on by four forces: lift, weight, thrust, and drag.[2] Thrust is the force generated by the engine and acts along the engine's thrust vector. Lift acts perpendicular to the vector representing the aircraft's velocity relative to the atmosphere. Drag acts parallel to the aircraft's velocity vector, but in the opposite direction because drag resists motion through the air. Weight acts through the aircraft's centre of gravity, towards the centre of the Earth.(Thank you wikipedia )
As there is no gravity and no atmosphere in space,I believe you are wrong about the whole "spinning out of control" thing.And I'm pretty sure you are wrong about Caldari ships being ugly.I love Caldari ships,especially new Scorpion and my all-time-favourite Drake.
|
Jupacha
The Marauding Asha'men Important Internet Spaceship League
|
Posted - 2010.06.23 21:53:00 -
[37]
Who cares if they are symmetrical? The missiles are and that is all I care about.
And the Drake and Scorp are both sexy -- Because Internet Spaceships are a BDEAL -- |
Lady Karma
|
Posted - 2010.06.23 22:05:00 -
[38]
Edited by: Lady Karma on 23/06/2010 22:06:20
Originally by: The Lynxpardinus
Almost got it again, good effort but still got it wrong, and now you are actually making my point: Here is the actual craft that transported the astronauts to the Moon. Notice how it is still symmetrical along the axis of movement? (I chose the picture of the toy because the wire used to attach the ship to the base actually follows that axis) Symmetry is important for 2 related things, making it easy to calculate the center of mass and engine placement.
That command module was launched from an atmosphere. Symmetry has never been important in a SPACE ship, aerodynamics are important in an atmospheric ship, and that leads to bi-lateral symmetry. No plane or craft is even symmetrical about all three axis. (sputnik came close, if you ignore the antenna)
Stop projecting your human desire of perfection onto inanimate objects.
If you were trying to look like an uneducated sci fi space ship battle fan, you have won.
Thanks for playing.
|
CG Oglethorpe
Minmatar Universal Army Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2010.06.23 22:10:00 -
[39]
Those huge things on the Minmatar ships, those aren't solar panels.
Those are radiators, a very necessary and realistic thing that real space ships are going to need. Getting rid of waste heat in space is a very very big deal, and large sail-like radiators are a great way to do it.
|
Killer Gandry
Caldari TerraNovae
|
Posted - 2010.06.25 01:09:00 -
[40]
Originally by: Strazdas Unstoppable cardari is greedy. they care about money, not art.
I beg to differ here. We aren't greedy, atleast we invest in education you illiterate Gallente.
|
|
Ambaseter Doggy
|
Posted - 2010.06.26 21:18:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Czechlion1977
As there is no gravity and no atmosphere in space,I believe you are wrong about the whole "spinning out of control" thing.And I'm pretty sure you are wrong about Caldari ships being ugly.I love Caldari ships,especially new Scorpion and my all-time-favourite Drake.
ok listen yes there is no atmosphere. but dont forget inertia. inertia is a object in motion wants to stay in motion unless acted on by a = and oppsite force. back owrds for starting. if the force is moree power full on 1 side that side will move forward more quickly than the other. that causes it to start spinining as it gets inertai from spining.
|
Mithfindel
Aseyakone
|
Posted - 2010.06.29 09:02:00 -
[42]
Let us for a moment forget that EVE is about submarines in space.
Every race does actually have ships with unbalanced engine placement. Also, as a note, inertia has absolutely no effect here as a concept. The symmetry of the outline does not have either. The weight distribution within the vessel would be the key. Considering that the usual hand wave on the fluid physics is that the effect is caused by the warp core carried by all capsuleer ships, then likely any asymmetry relating to thruster placement can be explained by the warp core location within the ship's hull.
On a completely artistic view, I still hold the opinion that having all ships to look like flying cigars, stealth boats or bricks would be incredibly boring. (Bring back the old Scorpion!)
|
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Important Internet Spaceship League
|
Posted - 2010.06.29 13:10:00 -
[43]
The old Blackbird (looked a bit different than the current one) had a very charming way of not being symmetric... Assymmetric isn't always bad.
What IS looking horrible however is the Moa hull - it looks like a lego block with a head, a tail and a cool big engine/whatever on the side... Makes me cry when looking at it.
IMO Moa is the only ship on caldari side that really needs a change and It should have had a higher priority than the scorpion... Caracal doesn't exactly look super great but it grows on you I guess -
I'm a nice guy!! But plz hook me up with some pew pew... |
Steakkbone
Capital Construction Research Pioneer Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.06.29 23:05:00 -
[44]
cause you don't need to look good to be good at pve
|
Mithlar Kvash
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2010.06.30 19:08:00 -
[45]
Originally by: Kaltooth
Minmatar: minimalist approach. Solar panels used to offset most power core going to engines. Speed and smaller sig (solar panels provide little cross section) the hallmark.
Amarr: Sturdy symmetrical ships. Heavy armor plating to give a beefy feeling while suggesting a slower than normal speed.
Gallente: Organic lines. Not always symmetrical, but leans towards it. Middle ground stats compared to the amarr and minmatar. Drone bay visible on all ships due to continued reliance on them.
Caldari: Design asthetics ignored. Modules added for the role envisioned. Reinforced shielding system reduces need for armor plating and reinforcement of various parts on the ship. Exposed sensor rods gives better than average sensor and targetting systems.
^^ Exactly right, Whether or not the physics work, the design of Caldari ships sets them apart from all other races.
|
Arkanor
Gallente Ixion Defence Systems
|
Posted - 2010.07.07 08:26:00 -
[46]
Edited by: Arkanor on 07/07/2010 08:28:33 The Caldari ships seem to have suffered the most in the past from a few too many whacks from The Ugly Stick, but I think the ship design in general has improved as of late.
The Ferox looked like a great ship (by comparison) when it came out, and still looks pretty decent. Compare to the tangled tube mess Blackbird, the skinny Caracal (not quite so bad), the ridiculous Moa, or the silly off-balance Raven and Scorp and it didn't have a whole lot to compete against.
However, all the T2 BC's look pretty cool, The T3 BS all seem to have a "good" design (good in that it looks like it COULD physically work in fantasy land, and at the same time the design principles stick mostly to what their race is known for). |
Ganimede1054
|
Posted - 2010.09.09 07:00:00 -
[47]
Edited by: Ganimede1054 on 09/09/2010 07:04:58 I don't find anything flawed in the battleship design department of the caldari. Every caldari standard battleship looks very appealing. Drake also looks good. I would dare to say that even the old scorpion had at least an interesting designed and moreover looked good. The asymmetric design of caldari ships is well crafted and it is their trademark. I find gallente ships, instead, to be really ugly. All that twisted metal into an organic shape that sometimes induces vomit. Minmatar ships are probably the most believebal design of all races. Its industrial trademark makes the Minmatar the only race to reflect utilitarian design in all its physics and mathematical aspects. About Amarr is pointless to discuss. They have the best looking ships with minor exceptions.
|
Akira Menoko
The Farmer's CO-OP
|
Posted - 2010.09.17 20:52:00 -
[48]
Edited by: Akira Menoko on 17/09/2010 20:53:01 While space is big and mostly empty, it isn't completely empty. You still have stray atoms, molecules, and other particles floating around. At low speeds these wouldn't have much effect when they hit your ship and slow it down (drag), but it might at higher and more relativistic speeds (50% the speed of light maybe?) since you'll be hitting more of these in a shorter period of time at greater speeds. So an aerodynamic design for ships may be more realistic for when they travel those speeds.
As far as inertia goes and engine placement, you do want them placed around your center of mass to be most effective and keep your ship from spinning.
Edit: Center of Mass, not Center of Gravity
|
Purgo
|
Posted - 2010.10.05 06:42:00 -
[49]
Most new ships are trending towards symmetrical and boring so be happy. I'm quite pleased with each ship having a distinct silhouette, makes it simple to see what it is at a glance. I dont need to see Space Shuttle A and Space Shuttle B, C, D in eve.
|
Sexy Suzie
|
Posted - 2010.10.07 02:32:00 -
[50]
The problem is different people like different looks. Personally i liked the old Scorpion look much better then the current one. The current Scorpion looks like fishfood not a ship! I very much like the Raven design. Rokh is nice too. Caldari Navy Hookbill is sweet as is the Merlin.
Griffin and Bantam is silly designs. Caracal is not a great design either. Moa is plain ugly.
|
|
cyndrogen
|
Posted - 2010.10.22 00:21:00 -
[51]
If you want to see some beautiful space ship designs take a look at the millenium falcon, it still has an asymmetric design but has a sense of scale that the caldari ships or any ships in eve for that matter lack.
Even the imperial star destroyers have a sense of scale because the parts that make up the ship have variation which help ground the scale. There is both big and small parts which work well together and not just slapped on.
The window placement on caldari ships is laughable and has no basis in reality. It just looks slapped on to break up the dark exterior with some tiny bright hilites to give it a bit more contrast.
Also the X-wing, Y wing and all the tie fighters have a unique shape but preserve scale with careful placement of details.
When designing a ship one should keep in mind what makes up a ship. Engine rooms, crew quarters, medical bay, bridge, cargo hold etc. If the ships were designed with these fascilities in mind they would look grounded in reality as oppose to the way they look now.
I'm pretty sure the designers who made the eve ships did not once think about the compartments of the ship but instead just tried to make cool looking shapes which ultimately look nothing like a ship.
Design from reality then exaggerate and push the envelope. Take a look at real ships to see what makes them look unique and maybe them we might get something that doesn't look so much like a video game.
|
Nisru Moth
Amarr Imperial Academy
|
Posted - 2010.11.16 13:32:00 -
[52]
Of Caldarian Ship design i like the Kestrel, Cormorant, Drake, Rokh, Badger. The Bantam on the other hand could easily win an award for being the ugliest ship in EVE, imho. Caldari ship design really offers extremes: some of the very best and many of the absolute worst ship designs by sheer looks (and to me that certainly is an important aspect. Since i have to look at my current ship most of the time playing EVE, i don't want it to be an ugly brick in the skies as with the Bantam).
But then again, each race has its share of ugly ship designs. Minmatar's "Mammoth" and "Stabber" are high contenders for "ugliest ship award" as well, i think.
|
Nisru Moth
Amarr Imperial Academy
|
Posted - 2010.11.16 13:57:00 -
[53]
Originally by: cyndrogen ...The window placement on caldari ships is laughable and has no basis in reality. It just looks slapped on to break up the dark exterior with some tiny bright hilites to give it a bit more contrast....When designing a ship one should keep in mind what makes up a ship. Engine rooms, crew quarters, medical bay, bridge, cargo hold etc. If the ships were designed with these fascilities in mind they would look grounded in reality as oppose to the way they look now...
I absolutely agree! I have wondered about that many times myself. And not only Caldari vessels. Many ships look as if their designs were in fact a hindrance to their profession. The Bantam is supposed to be a small mining frigate with extra cargo space. Why not have it look like a flying mini hauler with two miming lasers attached. Imho that would make sense. To any "real" design team the job would have been to build a workable, simplistic spaceship around the cargo bay and supply mining dedicated equippment. That's it! No extravagant designs, please. Keep the costs low, mass produce.
Or, come to that, why do Minmatari ships have solar panels? Do they generate energy that way? Why do these panels overlap on the Thrasher and Cyclone? Is it a practical design approach to have solar panels overlap each other thus blocking solar rays from one another? No, it's just a fancy design. Why are turrets on many ships aligned? So that one turret's line of fire is directly blocked by another turret immediately in front of it. In such a poor design approach a "real" space ship would blow itself apart at the first volley of it's own guns.
Why need Transformer style tech III strategic cruisers?
I know, it's just a game but i would enjoy it even more if design approach was a bit more probable.
|
mmmPork
|
Posted - 2010.11.17 04:14:00 -
[54]
Originally by: AterraX
Originally by: Shayna Brellis *sigh*
You keep ignoring the main point. Either you are flat-out incapable of understanding...or a troll. Either way there's no point in arguing any further.
Yeah run away after a lot of Ad Hominem and no arguments to counter
Hey, ***ard.
Go graduate from highschool before trying to convince people you have more than a pea for a brain, okay?
|
Diesel47
|
Posted - 2010.11.18 00:11:00 -
[55]
The Moa and Blackbird hulls are so ugly it should be a crime.
It is as if they intended to make those ships look like ****.
|
Kabaal S'sylistha
Caldari Technomage Trilogy Comrades-Of-Two
|
Posted - 2010.12.01 04:11:00 -
[56]
Edited by: Kabaal S''sylistha on 01/12/2010 04:13:34 Screw it. This pic
Inofly in circle I swur -More Pewpew, Less QQ- |
Derekian
The Scope
|
Posted - 2010.12.11 02:28:00 -
[57]
Beautifulness depends on taste.
I love caldari ships
Drake is much better looking then the cane or the binger.
The raven is also pretty awesome.
Rokh and scorpion is kinda generic, but isnt that bad.
|
Rage MorbidCloud
|
Posted - 2011.03.05 15:29:00 -
[58]
I agree, caldari ships are ugly. Ammar ships are so pleasing to the eye where caldari ships are not. I love flying caldari ships because of the use of missles. besides that, i would not.
|
Splinter 07
|
Posted - 2011.03.06 04:27:00 -
[59]
Pre patch cruise missiles, nom nom nom :D
|
Spurty
Caldari V0LTA VOLTA Corp
|
Posted - 2011.03.06 23:10:00 -
[60]
Newton called, he said "space Catherine wheels" which has already been pointed out by some dude.
Hoppit!
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |