EVE Search - Ship design

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Ship design

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
Herzog Wolfhammer Sigma Special Tactics Group 3890	Posted - 2013.12.26 04:03:00 - [31] - Quote oOReikaOo Michiko wrote: Why? I know this isn't LoL and the developers probably never answer questions... but wtf... For example the atron http://l.yimg.com/ck/image/A1175/1175328/300_1175328.jpg just why? This is a myr from the top view.. honestly this is what i think an atron should look like http://imgur.com/uuxH1rF What is wrong with symmetry or aesthetics in space? Is there a reason the ship designers though to make every one of their ships with some form of random protrusion? I just dont understand it. Here's a little clue as to understanding ship design in Eve: Look at the sensor types. Magnetometric, radar, lidar, gravimetric.... look at what these systems are and what race uses them, and you will see the ship design around that. Someone at CCP really did their homework.
Logan Revelore Minimal Solutions Aurora Irae 16	Posted - 2013.12.26 04:20:00 - [32] - Quote Jint Hikaru wrote: Why do you believe it's nessecary to have symmetrical ships in space? One would at first think it isn't necessary, but a symmetrical distribution of matter in relation to the thrust points is highly desirable in order to get the correct thrust direction, otherwise you have to compensate for the differential mass acceleration. (ie. without compensation the ship will tumble)
Shadow Lord77 Shadow Industries I 366	Posted - 2013.12.26 05:02:00 - [33] - Quote Because Iceland.
Logical 101 Agony Unleashed Agony Empire 57	Posted - 2013.12.26 05:14:00 - [34] - Quote Logan Revelore wrote: symmetrical distribution of matter in relation to the thrust points is highly desirable in order to get the correct thrust direction I am not aware of any instance in which an EVE ship would require atmospheric or sustained gravity related directional compensation. The only requirement for basic sustained directional compensation in the vacuum of space would be thrust point placement and comparative strength. /science As for asymmetry and flight design, I kinda like EVE's weirder ships. They remind me of the old Blohm und Voss Bv 141, which I really enjoy, because it looks crazy.
Elian Troller Primary Support Service Legion of xXDEATHXx 3	Posted - 2013.12.26 05:26:00 - [35] - Quote Try flying Amarr. 80% of their ships are quite symmetric.
Felicity Love Nighthawk Exploration 1110	Posted - 2013.12.26 05:31:00 - [36] - Quote ... hopes maybe there will be another ship design contest... Working as intended; suck it up, Princess.
Chirjo Durruti Snotra RDEM PLLC Haven. 0	Posted - 2013.12.26 06:38:00 - [37] - Quote Hra Neuvosto wrote: Every ship should be a sphere. Every ship should be a homogeneous sphere. To OP: Some ship hulls used throughout New Eden can be quite offensive if you you're not accustomed to asymmetric shapes. It's like experiencing your first song from The Dillinger Escape Plan or Converge after listening only to popular music all the time. If your mind is intrigued by things it does not understand right away, you will stay and learn to understand. I fly some ships that i found ugly at first (e.g. Dominix). But you have to understand: these things protect you from harm when you're in space. Learn to respect them. Fortunately, Eve is quite a strategic and (important in this case) tactical oriented MMO. If you're like me, you will spend most of your time in space zoomed out and in tactical mode anyway. Your ship will then be nothing more than a perfectly symmetrical dot. HOWTO: No More Tears (solo) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BdA4ciUrH-k If you can get me a better crew than THIS: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yPrtQ9AdoM0 convo me.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops 18044	Posted - 2013.12.26 11:44:00 - [38] - Quote Chris Winter wrote: The 747 is symmetric left to right. Your other examples have two planes of symmetry, which isn't what people are asking for. That's kind of the point: there is no left or right, nor is there any up and down. The 747 counts as symmetrical because there is a right way up in a gravity well and because its functionality relies on asymmetry on the up-down axis. What people should be asking for is the two-plane symmetry, and the fact that they're not means that what they're asking for doesn't really make sense. If you want to go with the thrust vector argument, that two-planar symmetry becomes even more important (but then again, since not even our spaceships today are symmetrical, it's obviously very easy to compensate for). GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0.
Raven O'Russ Liza idi na... 1	Posted - 2013.12.26 11:52:00 - [39] - Quote Well, I see that it is a bit "slowpoke" type of message to be seen by a topic starter, but I'd like to say there are quite many ships with the onboard symmetry. (My favourite Maelstrom surely is one of them, anyway ) Count almost every capital, BS, BC, ORE ships, industrial, shuttle and destroyer hulls, also add all 4 t3 cruiser and unique pirate hulls. The champions of non-symmetric and bizarre designs are gallente, second to none. Well, gallenteans even made a totally symmetric dominix to look strange just because they wanted to. (but the talos and algos are a pleasure to observe) Here is a "But" incoming. There are people who like their non-symmetric ships in New Eden. They really exist. Unbelievable, but they do. Tastes differ. And both we and the devs have to take notice of their likings, I believe. (Oh, may be the devs themselves are one of these?) Another point of view is from people who put the efficiency in front of their list of needs, those will fly any ship, even if it looks like a ball or some UFO until it annihilates everything in its way. Sad but true. I hope the OP will never become one of those, otherwise he/she will find oneself inside a nightmare of some sort which will frighten npc and make them suicide or warp out because of just being within its aura of awful design My single wish is that may be one day (at least during next decade) we will face a moa design which I will not want to jettison and shoot at immediately after seeing it in my hangar by an accident. Just like they made the stabber hull to look awesome. End of the line. Fly safe.
Barrogh Habalu Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire 658	Posted - 2013.12.26 11:54:00 - [40] - Quote I believe that complete symmetry is creepy even when it comes to things like ship designs. That said, Atron is rather fugly.
Jamwara DelCalicoe Ashley 93	Posted - 2013.12.26 11:56:00 - [41] - Quote not sure why i read all of those posts but i did ... interceptors look a lot better since bubble immunity http://www.devilswarrior.info/killboard/?a=home
Pohbis Neo T.E.C.H. 374	Posted - 2013.12.26 11:56:00 - [42] - Quote Mara Rinn wrote: Symmetrical is boring and ugly: Rokh Oh no you didn't !
Jamwara DelCalicoe Ashley 93	Posted - 2013.12.26 12:27:00 - [43] - Quote Chirjo Durruti wrote: Hra Neuvosto wrote: Every ship should be a sphere. Every ship should be a homogeneous sphere. To OP: Some ship hulls used throughout New Eden can be quite offensive if you you're not accustomed to asymmetric shapes. It's like experiencing your first song from The Dillinger Escape Plan or Converge after listening only to popular music all the time. If your mind is intrigued by things it does not understand right away, you will stay and learn to understand. I fly some ships that i found ugly at first (e.g. Dominix). But you have to understand: these things protect you from harm when you're in space. Learn to respect them. Fortunately, Eve is quite a strategic and (important in this case) tactical oriented MMO. If you're like me, you will spend most of your time in space zoomed out and in tactical mode anyway. Your ship will then be nothing more than a perfectly symmetrical dot. +1 for Converge reference http://www.devilswarrior.info/killboard/?a=home
Logan Revelore Minimal Solutions Aurora Irae 16	Posted - 2013.12.26 13:11:00 - [44] - Quote In a future expansion they should allow ship building from base modules, sorta like the T3 cruisers, but much more comprehensive, such as everything is designed by the player.
Raven O'Russ Liza idi na... 1	Posted - 2013.12.26 13:25:00 - [45] - Quote Logan Revelore wrote: In a future expansion they should allow ship building from base modules, sorta like the T3 cruisers, but much more comprehensive, such as everything is designed by the player. Now you should start to imagine the amount of troubles, bugs, modelling and texturing, different other work and also time required for balancing your dream. When you finish, may be this will be implemented already.
Arresy Barres PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 29	Posted - 2013.12.26 13:55:00 - [46] - Quote Atron is the cutest thing in space, aww man, it's like hamsters, little cute and cuddly. Just look at it. So sweet.
Reaver Glitterstim Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore 697	Posted - 2013.12.26 19:43:00 - [47] - Quote A picture of a full-scale Atron next to a small model Merlin. It's clear which ship design is more beautiful. I kinda like the Atron, while it's definitely ugly, it has a certain appeal. But a good portion of the assymetry on EVE ships seems to have no real purpose other than making it look like the engineers on either side of the hangar weren't communicating with each other. One begins to wonder if the Raven was supposed to be two different ships that were mistakenly attached together--though there is a certain elegance from its single weird under-wing spiked-ray. And we have to suppose that the Aeon was being designed on land and an earthquake sunk the right side of the hangar. All in all, I like some assymetry, but I think it should not be a default. The best-looking ships in my opinion tend to be basically symmetrical with an even center of balance, with their assymetry being made of smaller parts that don't need to be reproduced on the other side, and which look like they belong there. Excellent examples of good assymetry: the spinning radar dish on the Scorpion the side crew cabin on the Navitas the side crew cabin on the Heron NOT the side crew cabin on the Blackbird the box-parts on the sides of the Tempest NOT the way the top part and bottom part weren't attached right Fit a warfare link to your tech 1 battlecruiser. Train Wing Commander. Get in the Squad Commander or Wing Commander position. Your fleets will be superior to everyone else's. (had this sig BEFORE Odyssey BC rebalance) And bring back the missile Inquisitor!!
Nariya Kentaya Always Negative 783	Posted - 2013.12.26 21:01:00 - [48] - Quote Elian Troller wrote: Try flying Amarr. 80% of their ships are quite symmetric. except 90% of those "symmetrical ships" end up with some dumbass pod or bar sticking out of their side for no apparent reason other than CCP has some horrid phobia of symmetry
Recnac Lunar Saloon 3	Posted - 2013.12.26 23:07:00 - [49] - Quote Stop worry about the fashion of the ships. Looks of the ship does not impact the performance.
Reaver Glitterstim Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore 697	Posted - 2013.12.27 00:28:00 - [50] - Quote Recnac wrote: Stop worry about the fashion of the ships. Looks of the ship does not impact the performance. I beg to differ. The only reason a Moa can fly is because it is so ugly it repels the ground. Fit a warfare link to your tech 1 battlecruiser. Train Wing Commander. Get in the Squad Commander or Wing Commander position. Your fleets will be superior to everyone else's. (had this sig BEFORE Odyssey BC rebalance) And bring back the missile Inquisitor!!

CCP Falcon 5229	Posted - 2013.12.27 09:18:00 - [51] - Quote oOReikaOo Michiko wrote: Why? I know this isn't LoL and the developers probably never answer questions... but wtf... For example the atron http://l.yimg.com/ck/image/A1175/1175328/300_1175328.jpg just why? This is a myr from the top view.. honestly this is what i think an atron should look like http://imgur.com/uuxH1rF What is wrong with symmetry or aesthetics in space? Is there a reason the ship designers though to make every one of their ships with some form of random protrusion? I just dont understand it. You thin an Atron should look like a Myrmidon... are you mad??!! I know our artists are a bit nuts, but that's just crazy... CCP Falcon -á \|\| -á EVE Community Manager -á \|\| -á EVE Illuminati @CCP_Falcon -á \|\| -á-á@EVE_LiveEvents

Harvey James The Sengoku Legacy 623	Posted - 2013.12.27 09:38:00 - [52] - Quote more symmetry, proportional and dynamic looking ships are needed in this game too many wonky box shaped ships going around things like the crow's left wonky wing is annoying .... Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name.. remove drone assist mechanic. Nerf web strength ..... module tiercide FTW role based instead of tiers please.
Teinyhr A Club for Reputable Gentlemen 343	Posted - 2013.12.27 12:26:00 - [53] - Quote The reason was that some Dev hated symmetric ship designs. He or she has since been fired or quit the job since most new ships have been symmetrical ar at least nearly, and redesigns of old ships have followed this rule. And obviously making random looking ships was a way to distinguish the game from other spaceship games in the early days.
Mr Doctor Sex Machineguns 79	Posted - 2013.12.27 12:55:00 - [54] - Quote Constant symmetry is boring. Granted it mostly looks nicer but nicer isnt always better, diversity is. In a spaceship where aerodynamics arent a premium there would probably be hardly any symmetry anyway, builds would be functional..... and I quite like the Atron, its ugly but in a meaty way and looks like it could really punch you with its big popeye arm.
Ramona McCandless The McCandless Clan Turing Tested 1880	Posted - 2013.12.27 13:02:00 - [55] - Quote There are a good balance of designs in EvE. If you don't like the look of what you are flying, you are free to reskill. I wont flying hideous Gallente snot-balls, but I respect the right of those who do to have different tastes to me. In short, if you fly for looks, train for what you like, not what you dont. * Vote MTU For CSM * "They feel the need to cover their ears and eyes in horror at your very presence." --áPontianak Sythaeryn Non omnis moriar
Barrogh Habalu Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire 706	Posted - 2013.12.27 13:38:00 - [56] - Quote Ramona McCandless wrote: There are a good balance of designs in EvE. If you don't like the look of what you are flying, you are free to reskill. I wont flying hideous Gallente snot-balls, but I respect the right of those who do to have different tastes to me. In short, if you fly for looks, train for what you like, not what you dont. Dat almost existential horror of fleet doctrines...
Ramona McCandless The McCandless Clan Turing Tested 1882	Posted - 2013.12.27 13:41:00 - [57] - Quote Barrogh Habalu wrote: Dat What? * Vote MTU For CSM * "They feel the need to cover their ears and eyes in horror at your very presence." --áPontianak Sythaeryn Non omnis moriar
Raven O'Russ Liza idi na... 1	Posted - 2013.12.27 13:54:00 - [58] - Quote "Dat" = that is, possibly. About fleets, i believe capsuleers are free to join the fleet or not, unless their corporations are not in state of war or something like that. Also, i am certainly sure there doesn't exist a great armada of moas. If you find one - please, send me a screenshot. As far as i know, fleets are divided by a) size, b) defence type, c) goal. And we have several available ships for any of this occasions. My opinion is that if (for example) someone doesn't like the look of gallente interceptor - so be it, there are amarr ceptors over there, being used just the same way. Feel free to tell me where I am wrong, since my latest activity is just shooting red crosses.
Ramona McCandless The McCandless Clan Turing Tested 1885	Posted - 2013.12.27 13:57:00 - [59] - Quote Raven O'Russ wrote: "Dat" = that is, possibly. About fleets, i believe capsuleers are free to join the fleet or not, unless their corporations are not in state of war or something like that. Also, i am certainly sure there doesn't exist a great armada of moas. If you find one - please, send me a screenshot. As far as i know, fleets are divided by a) size, b) defence type, c) goal. And we have several available ships for any of this occasions. My opinion is that if (for example) someone doesn't like the look of gallente interceptor - so be it, there are amarr ceptors over there, being used just the same way. Feel free to tell me where I am wrong, since my latest activity is just shooting red crosses. I dont think you are wrong as such, but if I was in a fleet for doing stuff and srs bsnss Id be damned sure to ignore the look of whatever I was given to fly and think of the mission. I didnt cry when Chirrba supplied us all with Ospreys to help him, though its a hideous monstrosity of a hoover-ship But when I have choice, I fly in a style that suits me Preferrably Ashimmu shaped. * Vote MTU For CSM * "They feel the need to cover their ears and eyes in horror at your very presence." --áPontianak Sythaeryn Omnis nomiom nom nom nomi
Ambassador Crane Hellhound Productions 98	Posted - 2013.12.27 15:25:00 - [60] - Quote Mara Rinn wrote: Symmetrical is boring and ugly: Fenrir I cannot believe anyone would hate on our beloved Jawa ship!

Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: 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.