| Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page] |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Hathor II
   |
Posted - 2010.06.20 21:30:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Hathor II on 20/06/2010 21:31:17
can some Game designer tell me why Caldari ships are Ugly ? ONLY cool ship looking is Scorpion now , mostly they are like Handicap ships !
|
Voggles
|
Posted - 2010.06.20 22:15:00 -
[2]
I like the Widow too..
|
Strazdas Unstoppable
|
Posted - 2010.06.20 22:16:00 -
[3]
cardari is greedy. they care about money, not art.
|
Barkaial Starfinder
Minmatar
Conflagration.
|
Posted - 2010.06.20 22:25:00 -
[4]
I like the Heron, Merlin..
Caracal and Grifin maybe
Oh and Scorpion now.
|
fatherted1989
Red Horizon Inc
|
Posted - 2010.06.20 22:32:00 -
[5]
plenty of decent looking caldari boats.
in no particular order;
kestrel,merlin,condor,caracal,drake,ferox,scorp,rokh,chimera,wyvern.
+T2 variants
|
Leon777Leon
Incidental Damage
-Mostly Harmless-
|
Posted - 2010.06.20 22:33:00 -
[6]
mainly because caldari ships are not symmetrical, the new scorp is... as is the merlin, but the blackbird, what is with that? dev's we're on LSD when they designed that ship...
if you ever find yourself in a fair fight, you screwed up somewhere |
AterraX
Caldari
|
Posted - 2010.06.20 22:34:00 -
[7]
This is EvE...not hello-kitty, pimp my pixels.
Caldari ships are the only ships looking anything like real spaceships.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Fact of EVE forums: They will always come an anounomys alt-toon and question someones character... |
Mithfindel
Aseyakone
|
Posted - 2010.06.20 22:37:00 -
[8]
In the matter of fact, the Caldari ships are gorgeous. The issue is that after years of spaceships = fighter planes in space thinking, the early art style of EVE Online, which underlines asymmetry does not seem very pleasing. However, after getting used to the ships, they look pretty nice. Except the Bantam, unless you like old-style vacuum cleaners. Luckily, unlike the other ships which theoretically might all have a role, there's no reason to use the Bantam for anything.
|
Hathor II
|
Posted - 2010.06.20 22:38:00 -
[9]
Agree, some ships are really cool look , but lots of Caldari ships are really Bad Design , do you think Raven is looks good ? what about E-War ships ? Crow ? what about Charon ? ... the Left-side of ships is not same as Right-side ... 99% of other races have nice ships , at least Acceptable , BUT caldari Designer is worst designer i ever seen ! Scorpion was really ugly befor they change it to new look , now Scorp is best Caldari look .... hope CCP do something about this Disaster Design ... at least set Left-Side of ship = Righ Side  
|
Eomar
Veto Corp
|
Posted - 2010.06.20 22:42:00 -
[10]
i think its down to the old school design philosophy that went something like:
lets make ships that are unique, that look different to everything thats normally done, and that clearly identifies each as belonging to a certain race.
the amarrian battering ram approach, the matari rust and ducttape etc.
personally i like the asymetric look, its different to the generic IRSPACESHIP look that is dominant in sci-fi.
particularly when you take into account that having a cool looking spaceship doesnt gain you much from a practical standpoint: solid, maintainable and utilitarian being the preferrable options.
lets face it, they may not be pretty, but theyre clearly caldari and clearly belong to eve online.
i get the feeling that a lot of the original ship designers and artists have been promoted or moved on, or maybe have been told to follow a different philosophy, cos the newer ships seem to be trending into generic spaceship territory.
|
|
|
Hathor II
|
Posted - 2010.06.20 22:57:00 -
[11]
 Originally by: AterraX
This is EvE...not hello-kitty, pimp my pixels.
Caldari ships are the only ships looking anything like real spaceships.
You mean this  http://i33.tinypic.com/244unlz.jpg
even in worst si-fi movies/games/whatever , spaceships looks acceptable , not Flyting Junk Metall !!  
|
The Lynxpardinus
|
Posted - 2010.06.20 23:14:00 -
[12]
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.
|
AterraX
Caldari
|
Posted - 2010.06.20 23:32:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Hathor II
Edited by: Hathor II on 20/06/2010 23:00:46
Edited by: Hathor II on 20/06/2010 22:59:53
Originally by: AterraX
This is EvE...not hello-kitty, pimp my pixels.
Caldari ships are the only ships looking anything like real spaceships.
You mean this http://i33.tinypic.com/244unlz.jpg
even in worst si-fi movies/games/whatever , spaceships looks acceptable , not Flyting Junk Metall !!
*chough*
Or this
Just because people think spaceship = planes...dosn't mean it's so.
Symmetry = boring.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Fact of EVE forums: They will always come an anounomys alt-toon and question someones character... |
Messoroz
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 00:50:00 -
[14]
Edited by: Messoroz on 21/06/2010 00:51:26
<NVM>
|
The Lynxpardinus
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 02:39:00 -
[15]
Originally by: AterraX
*chough*
Or this
Almost made a good point there except that space labs and stations are not spaceships. Nice try, thanks for playing
|
DeadNite
Caldari
Inquisition Industries LLC
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 03:02:00 -
[16]
Originally by: The Lynxpardinus
Originally by: AterraX
*chough*
Or this
Almost made a good point there except that space labs and stations are not spaceships. Nice try, thanks for playing
He solidified a perfect point. There is no need for sleek symmetrical aerodynamics in space.
Weakness in attitude becomes weakness of character. -AE |
Aldee
Federated Holdings
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 03:17:00 -
[17]
Is it because they look like fish or bugs or some sort of insects?
|
AterraX
Caldari
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 06:13:00 -
[18]
Edited by: AterraX on 21/06/2010 06:13:11
Or the best example, the only craft we buildt to transport humans between worlds.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Fact of EVE forums: They will always come an anounomys alt-toon and question someones character... |
The Lynxpardinus
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 06:55:00 -
[19]
Edited by: The Lynxpardinus on 21/06/2010 06:58:06
Originally by: AterraX
Edited by: AterraX on 21/06/2010 06:13:11
Or the best example, the only craft we buildt to transport humans between worlds.
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.
Caldari ships are ugly because they do not work
|
Opertone
Caldari
Metalworks
Majesta Empire
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 07:10:00 -
[20]
caldari ships need to be redisigned
Draw concepts and offer them to CCP, concepts to replace existing ships
use drawing board, photoshop or paint + scanner, upload your concepts and inspire CCP
|
|
|
Draknishar
The Exploited.
Gentlemen's Club
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 08:58:00 -
[21]
Many make the argument that caldari dont care about looks only that the ships work. well most of them wouldn't. I wouldn't mind ships being a bit asymetrical but come on, some ships are just stupid. :P
|
AterraX
Caldari
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 09:40:00 -
[22]
Originally by: The Lynxpardinus
Edited by: The Lynxpardinus on 21/06/2010 07:07:29
Edited by: The Lynxpardinus on 21/06/2010 06:58:06
Originally by: AterraX
Edited by: AterraX on 21/06/2010 06:13:11
Or the best example, the only craft we buildt to transport humans between worlds.
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.
Caldari ships are ugly because they do not work
Originally by: DeadNite
He solidified a perfect point. There is no need for sleek symmetrical aerodynamics in space.
What point are you talking about? nobody was saying anything about aerodynamic shapes (which BTW do not need to be symmetrical) until you showed up.
The only reason for the Apollo craft to be shaped like that is because it has to exit and enter our atmosphere.
Again, in space there is no atmosphere...so the only ships in EvE that resemable TRUE spacecrafts (that dosn't land on planets with an atmosphere) are the caldari.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Fact of EVE forums: They will always come an anounomys alt-toon and question someones character... |
Shayna Brellis
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 11:07:00 -
[23]
Originally by: AterraX
The only reason for the Apollo craft to be shaped like that is because it has to exit and enter our atmosphere.
Again, in space there is no atmosphere...so the only ships in EvE that resemable TRUE spacecrafts (that dosn't land on planets with an atmosphere) are the caldari.
You keep focusing on the 'aerodynamic' bit and ignoring his real point...
While there is indeed no atmosphere in space (beyond trace gases, anyway), inertia still exists, and will royally **** up anything that isn't at least vaguely centered along the axis of movement. It's possible to compensate for something like that with extra thrusters firing at different strengths, but why make your life in space even more difficult?
TL;DR: Aerodynamics don't apply. Inertia does.
|
Derelicht
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 11:17:00 -
[24]
Originally by: AterraX
This is EvE...not hello-kitty, pimp my pixels.
Caldari ships are the only ships looking anything like real spaceships.
|
AterraX
Caldari
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 11:52:00 -
[25]
Edited by: AterraX on 21/06/2010 11:53:13
Edited by: AterraX on 21/06/2010 11:52:02
Originally by: Shayna Brellis
Originally by: AterraX
The only reason for the Apollo craft to be shaped like that is because it has to exit and enter our atmosphere.
Again, in space there is no atmosphere...so the only ships in EvE that resemable TRUE spacecrafts (that dosn't land on planets with an atmosphere) are the caldari.
You keep focusing on the 'aerodynamic' bit and ignoring his real point...
While there is indeed no atmosphere in space (beyond trace gases, anyway), inertia still exists, and will royally **** up anything that isn't at least vaguely centered along the axis of movement. It's possible to compensate for something like that with extra thrusters firing at different strengths, but why make your life in space even more difficult?
TL;DR: Aerodynamics don't apply. Inertia does.
Yeah, these have really had issues:
Voyager 1
Voyager 2
And lets not forget about Mir
Spaceship != planes...and you vastly exaggerate the inertia problem...
Again the only ships ingame that resemble anything like real spacecratfs...are the caldari ones.
Originally by: Derelicht
Originally by: AterraX
This is EvE...not hello-kitty, pimp my pixels.
Caldari ships are the only ships looking anything like real spaceships.
I see your ..and raise you
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Fact of EVE forums: They will always come an anounomys alt-toon and question someones character... |
Vhan Jarrah
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 12:28:00 -
[26]
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.
|
Shayna Brellis
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 12:42:00 -
[27]
Originally by: AterraX
Yeah, these have really had issues:
Voyager 1
Voyager 2
Neither of which uses much in the way of active propulsion. And what they do have is in a nicely centered position.
Quote:
And lets not forget about Mir
Again, you are comparing apples (station 'anchored' in orbit with minimal attitude-thruster capabilities) to oranges (powered spaceflight).
Quote:
Again the only ships ingame that resemble anything like real spacecratfs...are the caldari ones.
Again, no.
If you want resemblance to current designs...that'd be minmatar, with all those exposed structural elements. If you want the most physically sensible design...well, the closest thing would probably be the Avatar, of all things. Almost radial symmetry, centered propulsion, and the front 'shield' is a feature of several potential designs for real-life interstellar craft as well.
|
AterraX
Caldari
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 12:43:00 -
[28]
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"?
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Fact of EVE forums: They will always come an anounomys alt-toon and question someones character... |
Shayna Brellis
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 12:53:00 -
[29]
*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.
|
AterraX
Caldari
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 12:59:00 -
[30]
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
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Fact of EVE forums: They will always come an anounomys alt-toon and question someones character... |
|
|
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!
|
|
|
3point 14159265
|
Posted - 2011.03.09 11:55:00 -
[61]
I only have one thing to say, WHO CARES. asymmetrical or symmetrical, rustbuckets, giant pieces of flying poop, and flying battering rams, they fly and you can shoot stuff with them..and stuff goes boom thats all that matters
|
Thomy Greenish
|
Posted - 2011.03.09 12:31:00 -
[62]
Edited by: Thomy Greenish on 09/03/2011 12:37:31
Gallente stay close to this!
http://rpggamer.org/uploaded_images/Picture025-1.jpg
Need a customization system for hulls colors or put some tags. (like corp tag)
|
Aman Christoph
|
Posted - 2011.03.14 14:33:00 -
[63]
I would like to point out that Caldari ships, their dreadnought, carrier, suppercarrier, titan, the battlecruisers, the rokh, new scorpion, caracal, kestrel, and merlin are beautiful ships. Why are you whinning about Caldari ships? Atleast you do not have to fly a duck tape, salvage, rust generated, flying sc****heap. If anyone should be complaining the Minmatar race should be. Last time I checked I like looking like a crap boat and then pwning people! Maybe redesign the Raven and Moa but that is about all I would say needs to be done to the race.
As per the fact that the Caldari have the most spaceship looking spaceships... Yes I would agree with that. They are simple in design, the ones I named, and the most logical once we find a reliable way of motion when it comes to space tavel. I would be affraid to fly an Amarr ship in space becuase my gold would get scratched, Gallente ships......... and well I am ok with Minmatar ships as they do not have to worry about getting beat up as per the fact they look like s***. If we are going to actually take a look into spaceship designs that could work look at battlestar galactica or Stargate. Even spore =P
That is my thoughts!
|
leich
Amarr
bish bash bosh
|
Posted - 2011.03.22 11:16:00 -
[64]
Drake is the most disgusting looking ship in game.
It's a mattress for F***ks sake,
|
Slumbering Hawk
Minmatar
Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2011.03.23 19:54:00 -
[65]
you can turn your own caldari ship into your private amarr chapel with some music
just an easy suggestion which can already be done.
for minmatar look it would be ducttape stuck onto your monitor
and galente you just place 5 similar looking optical mouses next to your keyboard. (just lift one up to let it shoot its lazors for extra damage)
|
Tyme Xandr
Gallente
Dark Circle Enforcement
|
Posted - 2011.03.30 19:51:00 -
[66]
Drake has even thrusters: Drake Thrusters
Ferox even thrusters: Ferox
Harpy has even thrusters: Harpy
Rokh has even thrusters: Rokh
Raven has even thrusters with one additional small one on bulk side: Raven
Caracal even thrusters: Caracal
Osprey even thruster layout: Osprey
That dude saying that Caldari ships thrusters arent centered or applicable for flying needs to learn some astro phsyics.
[≡v≡] |
Lamthara Lachesis
Amarr
NeoCorteX Industry
Shadow of xXDEATHXx
|
Posted - 2011.04.01 11:00:00 -
[67]
Originally by: AterraX
Edited by: AterraX on 21/06/2010 06:13:11
Or the best example, the only craft we buildt to transport humans between worlds.
please stop posting minmatar design... 
thanks!
|
Otsune Usoko
|
Posted - 2011.04.19 23:26:00 -
[68]
Chimera is an amazing looking ship but it is not a fighting ship. first time i saw it thought it was a badass fight ship. it's a shame they do not retouch some of the ships design indeed.
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page] |