EVE Search - More symmetrical ships please

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

More symmetrical ships please

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
Strikeclone	Posted - 2005.12.08 17:56:00 - [61] Originally by: Clytamnestra Airplanes need to be symmetrical for the sake of aerodynamics. In space, there's very little air, so ships don't need to be built for aerodynamics, lessening the restrictions of symmetry. In engineering, when you don't need a thing, there is usually a better solution which doesn't involve the thing you don't need - hence asymmetrical ships. On the other hand, for pure aestethics, I agree in part, some ships do look pretty ugly. You will find that unless there is complete equality of thrust vs weight you will tear apart your ship in space, many of the ships in Eve if real would have such unbalances of thrust they would spin in circles at a minimum and be completely uncontrolable or they would tear themselves apart. Symetry in space is a function of thust application. Symetry in atmosphere is a funtion of aerodynamics. Im sure someone can explain what im getting at better than me but hopefully you get my meaning. Strikeclone "Peace through the procurement and application of superior firepower" http://executiveaction.proboards79.com/
Razin	Posted - 2005.12.08 18:05:00 - [62] Originally by: Sobeseki Pawi Anyone remember the de Havilland Comet? Those werent even asymmetrical and they had massive structural integrity problems. The de Havilland Comet's structural problem was it's square windows. I agree with the rest of your post.
Raindrop	Posted - 2005.12.08 18:27:00 - [63] Luckily an Iteron is symetrical. It should be able to do planet hopping. If tilted backwards 80degrees or so for it's stubby wings to have an effect. Or are those docking guidance stumps? Imagine the sight of an Iteron V with all it's engine ports flaring constantly tilted back to have the maximum in braking power in the air to be able to decent. Would require a special landing surface tilted back enough to allow it to land. Or it would have to cut out it's engines while a few meter from the ground. Now that has to hurt! I dream of movies showing ships docking in detail, launching in detail. etc. Raindrop 100% Carebear and loving it. Collector of junk and leftovers. NPC and low end minerals trader. Hauler.

Oveur	Posted - 2005.12.08 18:40:00 - [64] Originally by: Tony Fats Any chance of talking the art department into coming out with more symmetrical ships? Caldari look like boomerangs, amarr look like floating blobs of golden schit, gallente look like plastic vibrators, and minnie look they are held together with chewing gum. Merlin look pretty sweet. Executioner/Crusader look hot. Rifty looks pretty good. I mean let's take the Raven for example. It looks ALLLMOST majestic. So close but so far away. Why the heck did they make one wing shorter than the other? It went from majestic raven to dodo bird. Let's look at Prophecy. %99 of it looks like a majestic Eagle. Then you get to the oversize beak, make the whole thing look like you're driving a turkey. Please, can we get some more symmetrical stuff without the deformed wing hanging off the side? Nope And the flogging of this poor horse needs to stop. Senior Producer EVE Online

Sakira LeCastantas	Posted - 2005.12.08 18:48:00 - [65] Lol, symmetric = evil, if they were symmetric everything would die No but seriously, i think they are awesome, but thats just me i guess _____________________________________________________
Arges	Posted - 2005.12.08 18:53:00 - [66] Edited by: Arges on 08/12/2005 18:55:42 Edited by: Arges on 08/12/2005 18:54:48 Edited by: Arges on 08/12/2005 18:54:09 I totaly agree with the OP on this one. The reason I chose the Minmatars is that they have the least asymmetrical ships (rifter, vigil, probe, rupture, all the indies...). Let's get real here. This is a video game and as it has been mentioned in another post in another thread, the movement mecahnics are a lot closer to underwater dynamics than real space dynamics. Ships don't need thrusters to spin around, they just turn in those big beautifull arcs instead of just turning on the spot and shooting while moving backwards with the momentum. This means that the look has absolutely no effect on how the ship will react or move in the game. What doest it change then? Esthetics. Pure esthetics. Now, as we all know, beauty is in the eye of the beholder so I won't say that the asymmetrical ships are fugly and that the symmetrical one are teh roxorz (whatever that means) but I do appreciate symmetrical ships more thant the others, just like I'd rather look at a painting from Raphael than one from Pollock. A few more symmetrical ships would be nice but I think there is enough different looks to please pretty much everyone. Oh and for all the "anarchists" and "anti-conformists" out there who get all panicky and reactionist because someone mentions symmetry.... please, don't bring that crap into a, so far, intelligent and constructive thread. You don't wear ties? Good on ya. I'm all for that. No need to cry "fascist" because someone likes structured looks. Now if you got something to say about the pros and cons of symmetry and asymmetry, I'll be glad to read it. Edit: spelling _____________________________________________________________________________ I single-handedly stopped a drone infestation and all I got was this lousy sig...
Sobeseki Pawi	Posted - 2005.12.08 19:11:00 - [67] Originally by: Razin Originally by: Sobeseki Pawi Anyone remember the de Havilland Comet? Those werent even asymmetrical and they had massive structural integrity problems. The de Havilland Comet's structural problem was it's square windows. I agree with the rest of your post. Specifically the ones on or near the boarding 'doors'. But my point was that if such a small thing can rip apart a Comet, a Tempest should be doing the Tango. ~Sobe Originally by: TomB Originally by: Darpz Originally by: Sobeseki Pawi CCP will nerf this probably, but hey, worth a try so your saying I should of kept my mouth shut? Yup.
Hllaxiu	Posted - 2005.12.08 19:23:00 - [68] Originally by: Avon Originally by: Rychek Originally by: Azuriel Talloth Symmetry is the crutch of the unimaginative. When I look at a leaf I see symmetry. When I look at a flower I see symmetry. When I look at ants, and birds, and bears, and humans I see symmetry. More crutchless, imaginative gods please! Then you aren't looking close enough. True symmetry is very, very rare in nature. Perfect mathematical symmetry, no, but biologists say that many animals have bilateral symmetry (bilateria). Starfish and some other animals have radial symmetry, others such as jellyfish have no symmetry. Aesthetics is an entirely different matter from symmetry though...
Arges	Posted - 2005.12.08 19:49:00 - [69] Originally by: Hllaxiu Aesthetics is an entirely different matter from symmetry though...[/quote Normaly I would agree with you but in the issue at hand, they are very closely related. Like I was saying, the true discussion behind this thread is not one of dynamics but esthetics. Some people think that symmetry is more pleasing to the eye were as some others think that asymmetry is better. Mechanics and dynamics have nothing to do with this. Like the OP was saying about the Raven... Fonctionnal? Yes. Massive? Yes. Majestic? Hmmm, I guess. Beautiful? Dodo bird... _____________________________________________________________________________ I single-handedly stopped a drone infestation and all I got was this lousy sig...
ELaine Doi	Posted - 2005.12.08 20:52:00 - [70] I think the irregularity is quite funky meself
Spy4Hire	Posted - 2005.12.08 21:30:00 - [71] Originally by: Alexi Borizkova Tweaking designs of existing ships would be a main focus of my character if such were available... The sig shows it all. Yes, that is truly a deadly looking monster - I would be happy to undock a beast like that. Currently the raven and scorpion are absolute embarassments to starship design everywhere. As are most gallente smaller than BC, and pretty much every Min thing out there except Rifter & Rupture (yeah, Rup & Bellicose are ugly as sin, but they have balance and symmetry of design - no enines at wonky angles that would throw a ship into a flat spin every time they were turned on - like a stabber).
Riffix	Posted - 2005.12.08 23:03:00 - [72] 2 words: Millennium Falcon "Lead, follow, or get the #@$@#$ out of the way"
rib0s mum	Posted - 2005.12.08 23:57:00 - [73] Originally by: Azuriel Talloth Symmetry is the crutch of the unimaginative. just like your corp name
Tokka Konnair	Posted - 2005.12.09 00:04:00 - [74] Originally by: Oveur Nope And the flogging of this poor horse needs to stop. hurray!!! thank you for the exact answer i wanted!! __________________________________________
Karx Galaxus	Posted - 2005.12.09 01:04:00 - [75] I belive that asymmetrical ships are alot more creative than the more standard cookie-cutter kinds of ships. Ships like the bb or incursus make this game unique, and makes it feel like you arent watching some star trek episode on your pc. Sure symmetrical ships are cool too, but I think the creativity in designs is what helps make this game unique, sorry for beating on the horse's corpse until its intestines splatter out. ------------------------------------------------ Cowards die many times before their deaths, the valliant only taste death but once.
Wrayeth	Posted - 2005.12.09 01:24:00 - [76] Personally, I don't mind the asymmetric look in most instances - on some ships, it adds to the appeal (makes them look more menacing - function over form, purely designed to kill, etc.). What does bug me, however, is the misplacement of thrusters on many of the models. Unbalanced thrust on ships like the moa should have it flying off diagonally, for instance. -Wrayeth Go away.
MWEI	Posted - 2005.12.09 01:38:00 - [77] There are nice asymetric, such as the raven and then theres the ugly asymetric, like the moa True, symmetrical ships wont be very original and imaginative, but at least make sure asymetry dosnt look like its deformed.
Mr Adequate	Posted - 2005.12.09 02:53:00 - [78] Good example of asymmetry = Coercer. Bad example of asymmetry = Pretty much all Caldari stuff. (I'm sorry to be so generalistic, but I'm not too well versed in Caldari ship names. I've looked at all their models but) I like asymmetry to a point. But having 2 completely different ship designs for each left and right hemisphere look ridiculous, and keep me out of a lot of ship models, purely for aesthetics. Sorry Oveur, flogging the dead horse because it needs to be done. I am quite tolerant when it comes to accepting unconventional design (I am Minmatar), but seriously, some of your 3D artists need to take a long hard look at themselves in the mirror. If it were up to me, I'd have asked for a redraw (however subtle) of about 70% of all asymmetrical ships designed thus far. My 2c, fwiw.
Atma Darkwolf	Posted - 2005.12.09 06:20:00 - [79] Originally by: Oveur Nope And the flogging of this poor horse needs to stop. it is VERY discouraging when u get a response from the dev's like this.. this is a all out: 'Don't like it, get the F**K away from our game, we don't WANT your money.' Ttry to maybe be a bit more diplomatic and maybe even 'give' a little. U do NOT need to force your ugly designs down our throat forever..eventualy we will get bored with the game, and while eve has so much to offer, eventualy the pain it causes to my eyes from looking at all your retarded designs will cause me to cancel my account. That will take a year or two though... but it could happen sooner, and with many people, who DO want to 'enjoy' the ship they fly. Everyone wants to 'like' what they control. Why else are there many player made models/skins which replace existing designs for each ship model? Try to give a little dev team.. don't respond like that.. VERY bad for customer relations. U can give to BOTH sides of the argument and not lose ANY ground.
Avon	Posted - 2005.12.09 08:52:00 - [80] Originally by: Atma Darkwolf Originally by: Oveur Nope And the flogging of this poor horse needs to stop. it is VERY discouraging when u get a response from the dev's like this.. this is a all out: 'Don't like it, get the F**K away from our game, we don't WANT your money.' Ttry to maybe be a bit more diplomatic and maybe even 'give' a little. U do NOT need to force your ugly designs down our throat forever..eventualy we will get bored with the game, and while eve has so much to offer, eventualy the pain it causes to my eyes from looking at all your retarded designs will cause me to cancel my account. That will take a year or two though... but it could happen sooner, and with many people, who DO want to 'enjoy' the ship they fly. Everyone wants to 'like' what they control. Why else are there many player made models/skins which replace existing designs for each ship model? Try to give a little dev team.. don't respond like that.. VERY bad for customer relations. U can give to BOTH sides of the argument and not lose ANY ground. Well, personally I am glad that CCP are sticking to their guns on this. We don't need to see them pandering to a few mindless nuggets who wouldn't know art if it podded them at a gate. Eve ship designs are, on the whole, fantastic. Asymmetric designs are one of the coolest things in Eve, and I for one would hate to lose them. So yeah, if you don't like it, take your money elsewhere. Buh-Bye. ______________________________________________ The Battleships is not and should not be a solo pwnmobile - Oveur
Mr Adequate	Posted - 2005.12.09 09:28:00 - [81] Is this asymmetrical enough for you, Avon?
Facechanger2	Posted - 2005.12.09 09:34:00 - [82] Originally by: Mr Adequate Is this asymmetrical enough for you, Avon? Damn his filthy tie, it ruins the symmetry. Anyway, the devs can new make ships however they want - I've got my megathron, the sexiest beast in the game and she's all the symmetry I need. Can't say I'd rate her too much if she had one leg shorter than the other :)
Avon	Posted - 2005.12.09 09:37:00 - [83] Originally by: Facechanger2 Originally by: Mr Adequate Is this asymmetrical enough for you, Avon? Damn his filthy tie, it ruins the symmetry. Anyway, the devs can new make ships however they want - I've got my megathron, the sexiest beast in the game and she's all the symmetry I need. Can't say I'd rate her too much if she had one leg shorter than the other :) The Megathron is asymmetrical though. ______________________________________________ The Battleships is not and should not be a solo pwnmobile - Oveur
Avon	Posted - 2005.12.09 09:38:00 - [84] Originally by: Mr Adequate Is this asymmetrical enough for you, Avon? ] Hope you get banned tbh. ______________________________________________ The Battleships is not and should not be a solo pwnmobile - Oveur
Facechanger2	Posted - 2005.12.09 09:42:00 - [85] Originally by: Avon The Megathron is asymmetrical though. No, it's perfectly symmetrical along its length.
Redblade	Posted - 2005.12.09 09:52:00 - [86] Originally by: Facechanger2 Edited by: Facechanger2 on 09/12/2005 09:49:10 Originally by: Avon The Megathron is asymmetrical though. Sure, but the majority of her is symmetrical. That's like saying that the Raven is symetrical... if u disregard the right wing...
Dragothmar	Posted - 2005.12.09 09:53:00 - [87] Originally by: Avon Then you aren't looking close enough. True symmetry is very, very rare in nature. True, but then again several psychological studies on people, chimps and several other animals have shown that symmetry is a primary factor determining a prospective mate's attractiveness and even the appeal of objects! True symmetry is, of course, impossibly rare in nature however correlative symmetry is as common as hell. Try measuring the angular offset from one branch of a tree to another all the way up the tree. Usually the offset is a constant on average and (if I remember correctly) has something to do with Avogadro's number. Now do that with the Moa... A bit more sensible symmetry would be nice imo - but then some people might wind up trying to hump their Raven Wesside? Nah, NOOOORTHSIIIIHEEEEEED in da house!
Avon	Posted - 2005.12.09 09:55:00 - [88] Originally by: Dragothmar True, but then again several psychological studies on people, chimps and several other animals have shown that symmetry is a primary factor determining a prospective mate's attractiveness and even the appeal of objects! Here you have in your hand they key to the reason why asymmetrical ships are good, and yet you failed to unlock the door. Step up and have another go. ______________________________________________ The Battleships is not and should not be a solo pwnmobile - Oveur
Facechanger2	Posted - 2005.12.09 10:00:00 - [89] Originally by: Redblade Originally by: Facechanger2 Edited by: Facechanger2 on 09/12/2005 09:49:10 Originally by: Avon The Megathron is asymmetrical though. Sure, but the majority of her is symmetrical. That's like saying that the Raven is symetrical... if u disregard the right wing... The raven is a total mess, its like the remants of a game of Kerplunk. There's no way that ship would ever look symmetrical, even if you chopped it in two and stuck one half to a mirror :P Seriously though, the mega has like a cylinder on one side of it thats making it asymmetrical, and the cylinder isn't large or obtrusive of the rest of the ship's look. Remove that cylinder and it's symmetrical.
Piotr Anatolev	Posted - 2005.12.09 10:08:00 - [90] Originally by: Avon Originally by: Facechanger2 Originally by: Mr Adequate Is this asymmetrical enough for you, Avon? Damn his filthy tie, it ruins the symmetry. Anyway, the devs can new make ships however they want - I've got my megathron, the sexiest beast in the game and she's all the symmetry I need. Can't say I'd rate her too much if she had one leg shorter than the other :) The Megathron is asymmetrical though. Whats with the pugnacious and irritable attitude you always show in your replies? Guess a little more diplomacy on the forums would keep other hotheads at bay if you toned down your need to flatten them

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.