These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Ship design

First post
Author
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#21 - 2013-12-26 00:55:49 UTC
Marius Evo wrote:
I love the asymmetric shape. I believe it shows a great insight to large scale navy vessel design. I would imagine that very-important-internet-spaceship construction would be very similar to building say an air craft carrier. Form follows function.

But then again. What is symmetric? A car? No! A car has a drivers side and a passenger side.

I find it more odd that the eve spaceships appear to be designed for atmospheric flight and and at some point should deal with gravity. My point is, they have an up and down side. If there is no gravity in space why design ships that have a deck and a bottom.


If it's the future, and stuff like artificially generated gravity is possible, this is just practical. Humans are used to an up-and-down orientation, so having a layout with a top and bottom makes more sense, so long as an artificial gravity system is present. Anything else would be much more cumbersome and unnecessarily difficult to navigate.

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104

Tetsuo Tsukaya
Perkone
Caldari State
#22 - 2013-12-26 01:06:13 UTC
To be honest my real problem here is that you don't realize that the Atron looks awesome. You should feel bad.


If you want symmetry train into Amarr. Done.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#23 - 2013-12-26 01:12:04 UTC
Remiel Pollard wrote:
If it's the future, and stuff like artificially generated gravity is possible, this is just practical. Humans are used to an up-and-down orientation, so having a layout with a top and bottom makes more sense, so long as an artificial gravity system is present. Anything else would be much more cumbersome and unnecessarily difficult to navigate.

That just means that there's even less need for a common up and down, since it's completely arbitrary and available as yet another option for space optimization.

Anyway, Marius' point is correct: there are no symmetrical ships in EVE just like there are very few symmetrical vehicles on Earth. Hell, not even our spaceships today are symmetrical, because it actually just causes problems. For instance, this is not a symmetrical design — in fact, it's entire ability to function relies on asymmetry. this and this is how it would look if it were symmetric.
Bel Tika
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#24 - 2013-12-26 01:18:39 UTC
i have more a problem with the gun/missile mounts than the actual ships an then it just an annoyance
Savnire Jacitu
Abysmal Gentlemen
#25 - 2013-12-26 01:23:46 UTC
Next thing you know you'll start complaining about how the megathron in asymmetrical.

And at that point we'll have to flay you alive.

Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#26 - 2013-12-26 01:26:06 UTC
There is gravity in space. It's just a lot less typically and when something is in orbit it's in freefall, so you don't notice the gravity.
Also EVE ships can do low orbit bombardment of planets meaning they might be interacting with the very top of the atmosphere if they go slightly wrong, and certainly are interacting with the planetary gravity.
Logical 101
PowerCow Farm
#27 - 2013-12-26 01:26:50 UTC
oOReikaOo Michiko wrote:
I just dont understand it.

Think harder.

I know, I know, it makes your head hurt, but just do it.
Chris Winter
Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse
The Curatores Veritatis Auxiliary
#28 - 2013-12-26 03:20:04 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Remiel Pollard wrote:
If it's the future, and stuff like artificially generated gravity is possible, this is just practical. Humans are used to an up-and-down orientation, so having a layout with a top and bottom makes more sense, so long as an artificial gravity system is present. Anything else would be much more cumbersome and unnecessarily difficult to navigate.

That just means that there's even less need for a common up and down, since it's completely arbitrary and available as yet another option for space optimization.

Anyway, Marius' point is correct: there are no symmetrical ships in EVE just like there are very few symmetrical vehicles on Earth. Hell, not even our spaceships today are symmetrical, because it actually just causes problems. For instance, this is not a symmetrical design — in fact, it's entire ability to function relies on asymmetry. this and this is how it would look if it were symmetric.

The 747 is symmetric left to right. Your other examples have two planes of symmetry, which isn't what people are asking for.

Symmetry in space isn't necessary, sure, but in order to have a ship that doesn't spin wildly out of control the thrust vector needs to pass through the center of mass. For a lot of ships this doesn't seem to be the case assuming uniform density.
Benny Ohu
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#29 - 2013-12-26 03:30:31 UTC
Hra Neuvosto wrote:
Every ship should be a sphere.

the cube is far better-looking

the sphere doesn't make any sense, because,
Nariya Kentaya
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#30 - 2013-12-26 04:00:22 UTC
ShahFluffers wrote:
Basically what Jint said.

The DEVs wanted to do something "different" because they didn't feel the need to make anything symmetrical.

from a scale of perfect symmetry to complete random construction though, it should go

perfect amarr > caldari > gallente > minmatar

the extremes ebing amarr and their narcissism, and minmatar and the fact that it is almost literally scraps from ships blown up in the last fight welded back together with some prayer and tape.
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
#31 - 2013-12-26 04:03:32 UTC
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.

Bring back DEEEEP Space!

Logan Revelore
Symbiotic Systems
#32 - 2013-12-26 04:20:03 UTC
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
#33 - 2013-12-26 05:02:41 UTC
Because Iceland.
Logical 101
PowerCow Farm
#34 - 2013-12-26 05:14:41 UTC
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
24th Imperial Crusade
Amarr Empire
#35 - 2013-12-26 05:26:00 UTC
Try flying Amarr.
80% of their ships are quite symmetric.
Felicity Love
Doomheim
#36 - 2013-12-26 05:31:26 UTC
... hopes maybe there will be another ship design contest... Idea

"EVE is dying." -- The Four Forum Trolls of the Apocalypse.   ( Pick four, any four. They all smell.  )

Chirjo Durruti
Doomheim
#37 - 2013-12-26 06:38:32 UTC
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
#38 - 2013-12-26 11:44:39 UTC
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).
Raven O'Russ
The King's Retribution
#39 - 2013-12-26 11:52:42 UTC
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 Blink )

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. Shocked (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 Lol

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
#40 - 2013-12-26 11:54:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Barrogh Habalu
I believe that complete symmetry is creepy even when it comes to things like ship designs.
That said, Atron is rather fugly.

Raven O'Russ wrote:
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 Lol

The mystery behind Nightmare being good* at PvE has been solved.

* - terms and conditions apply.