| Author |
Topic |
Kaelie Onren
Minmatar |
Posted - 2011.05.17 02:30:00 - [ 1]
I mean, besides the obvious reason, which is because the art director of the team though that it would give them a personality.
I mean, technically speaking, a lob-sided superstructure would put large amounts of stress on ships, as their engines would be providing thrust which are not evenly distributed over the mass, not to mention making moving a mass which center of gravity is not in the center is complicated and just not sound engineering.
Is there a in-universe explanation for this that can help me come to terms with it?
|
Sir Oliver Midwestshire
Amarr |
Posted - 2011.05.17 02:34:00 - [ 2]
It's a game. It's not suppose to make sense.
The saying goes, if it were realistic it wouldn't be fun.
The art director thought that the ships would have more personality as you said. That's all the explanation we all really need.
Caldari's asymmetric show they are a practical race and they removed everything that isn't necessary from their ships leaving asymmetric hulls with many antennae and other areas exposed.
Gallente's asymmetry show their freedom and the way their ships simply flow into the shape they want them to flow into. Just like how the Gallente democracy flows into what the people want.
Or something I dunno, just fly the ships if the answers here aren't good enough. |
Lidia Prince
Caldari |
Posted - 2011.05.17 03:19:00 - [ 3]
 Quote:
because the art director of the team though that it would give them a personality
This. That's the only explanation for things like Moa, Kitsune, Osprey or Falcon. The strange thing is... they actually look pretty good on paper. But not in 3D. Happily, CCP is slowly working on redesigning all the ships right now, so sooner or later we'll get decent-looking ships with proper asymmetry, not random bits all over the place. |
Alara IonStorm
Caldari |
Posted - 2011.05.17 03:19:00 - [ 4]
Our ships fly at between 1 and 10% the speed of a real Space Shuttle and have a 250km Maximum Lock Range, Bigger Ships are slower and take longer to lock targets, ships the size of cities are limited to 8 Guns, can't hit a target sitting still at beyond max range, ships with bigger engines are slower then ships with much smaller engines, space uses submarine physics ships have cargo holds bigger then the actual ship and a bunch more.
I don't know about you but when I weigh my annoyance about that against the fun of shooting Space Missiles at Spiky Pirate Robot Zombie Ships in Space...
Shooting Spiky Robot Space Zombie's win always.
|
Tobiaz
Spacerats
|
Posted - 2011.05.17 03:33:00 - [ 5]
Edited by: Tobiaz on 17/05/2011 03:40:17Aircraft carriers aren't symmetrical, are they? And with asymmetrical drives and no friction, why put extra effort in trying to make everything equal on both sides? Seems to me symmetry in space is a purely aesthetic function (though the new Scorpion is just kitsch). Originally by: Lidia Prince
Quote:
because the art director of the team though that it would give them a personality
This.
That's the only explanation for things like Moa, Kitsune, Osprey or Falcon. The strange thing is... they actually look pretty good on paper. But not in 3D. Happily, CCP is slowly working on redesigning all the ships right now, so sooner or later we'll get decent-looking ships with proper asymmetry, not random bits all over the place.
I disagree with the asymmetrical ships looking wrong. I agree with the stupid random bits. CCP should have taken a better look at Homeworld especially to what happens with 'random bits' when ships reach the size of office buildings and even bigger. |
Solhild |
Posted - 2011.05.17 03:33:00 - [ 6]
The distribution of mass within the structures could be symmetrical. There's some fluff somewhere about warp systems changing how a ship hooks into the fabric of space creating drag. T the corresponding submarine physics are created by warp systems. Also, perhaps engines don't provide thrust in the traditional sense - perhaps they simply vent excess heat/waste products generated from something internal that causes the ship to move against the fabric of space. The possibilities are endless  |
Barkaial Starfinder
Minmatar
The Kairos Syndicate
Transmission Lost |
Posted - 2011.05.17 04:40:00 - [ 7]
Space physics are messed up in EVE because ships use inertia stabillizer tecnology to keep crew alive inside.
If you would turn off all internal stabillizers, life in your ship would be no more in the momento you made a turn.
That is unless you fly it like a little girl..
Oh, and I just made it all up, don't search chronicles. |
Tippia
Caldari
Sunshine and Lollipops
|
Posted - 2011.05.17 06:10:00 - [ 8]
Originally by: Kaelie Onren
their engines would be providing thrust which are not evenly distributed over the mass
That entire depends on where and how that thrust is applied. You're also assuming that the mass is evenly distributed ovet the volume. Quote:
making moving a mass which center of gravity is not in the center is complicated and just not sound engineering.
We do this effortlessly today so it's not all that complicated, and at any rate, that's something competely different from asymmetrical designs. Take the space shuttle, for instance -- it's not symmetrical and it's working just fine... Oh, and just a note: it's not just Caldari and Gallente... there are no ships in EVE that are symmetrical. |
Opertone
Caldari
Deep Core Mining Inc.
|
Posted - 2011.05.17 07:00:00 - [ 9]
from physics point of view
the optimal shape is sphere, or gravity bound elliptic, space bodies tend to be spherical..
the perfect form is a point
thereby Dominix is the optimal design and all ships should be like dominix/vexor. Epic win.
Reasoning, ships built unsymmetrically, because primary PvP function is tracking and orbiting. Assymetry enhances tight orbits with frigates, assault cruisers etc...
Symmetrical design favours proper armor plate distribution, apocalypse abaddon, megathrone. There comes heavy mass and high inertia. Reliance on shields allows to bypass rigid hull design. Caldari ships are smaller lightweight and shield emittors/generators protect weird shape structure - caldari edges are functional, utilitarian. Sensors, array, e-war... it all sticks out.
Minimatar concept - go long and fit afterburner, go vertical for better target tracking, since vertical design leaves more room for turrets as compared to long-vehicle design. Turrets align better on vertical ship, but they are less speedy/maneuverable.
|
Opertone
Caldari
Deep Core Mining Inc.
|
Posted - 2011.05.17 19:16:00 - [ 10]
just to bump my intelligent explaination
provide yours |
stoicfaux
Gallente |
Posted - 2011.05.17 19:50:00 - [ 11]
1. Eve ships do not rely on Newtonian physics, so it's difficult to say what Eve ships "should" look like.
2. Eve's physics aren't well defined, and what is defined isn't internally consistent.
3. Artists suck at physics.
|
Hyperforce99
Gallente
The Scope
|
Posted - 2011.05.17 19:59:00 - [ 12]
Two words: Inertia stabilizers
Technology in eve can be used to manipulate all kinds of forces that limit current construction techniques. |
VE3DVY
Amarr |
Posted - 2011.05.17 20:06:00 - [ 13]
Philosophers also make poor physicists, so I have a follow-up question.
What would be the point of having a symmetrical ship in space? What would create drag? Solar winds? |
Opertone
Caldari
Deep Core Mining Inc.
|
Posted - 2011.05.17 20:18:00 - [ 14]
Edited by: Opertone on 17/05/2011 20:34:19Edited by: Opertone on 17/05/2011 20:30:54armor plating must be equally spread onto the ship, thus symmetry in the form of thick plates. spaceship scienceShips stretched on the long axis favour speed, simply put, turning and maneuvering, i.e. changing the acceleration is easier when your thrusters are at the back end. example vagabond, sleipnir, hurricane, thrasher - all very speedy. Vertical ships favour better turret location, turrets track far better when they are put tightly together, less recoil, the shape counterbalances itself - example munnin, naglfar. Asymmetric is practical when you sacrifice plating, minimize weight and cost of materials and let the equipment stick out from the main hull - example, moa. griffin, MoaGallente asymmetrical? Easy, close range, favours orbiting sideways, favours faster turning. Just like this one side assymetry or even this super PvP. More panzer with one side gun panzywhich ships exactly you want explanation for? TBH, they all suck - I am trying at being smart. |
Jennifer Starling
Imperial Navy Forum Patrol |
Posted - 2011.05.17 20:46:00 - [ 15]
Edited by: Jennifer Starling on 17/05/2011 20:47:23 Originally by: Kaelie Onren
I mean, besides the obvious reason, which is because the art director of the team though that it would give them a personality.
Is there a in-universe explanation for this that can help me come to terms with it?
No, it's just because CCP not only wanted EVE to be a cold and harsh but also ugly world. Yes I know there's some weird freaks around that like it .. they can't help it .. |
Traejun DiSanctis
Caldari |
Posted - 2011.05.17 20:47:00 - [ 16]
Asymmetry =/= off-center CoG
Just because the ship is not symmetrical down it's center line, does not mean that it's CoG is not centered. So long as mass is = on both "sides" of the ship, the CoG can be dead center.
As for thrust placing stress on the hull - again, as long as thrust is equalized on both sides of the CoG, then there is no additional stress.
PLUS - if there was uneven thrust on both sides of the CoG, the ship would just turn in circles.
Plus...EvE is space with what appear to be closed, liquid environment physics. Don't try to make sense of it. |
Opertone
Caldari
Deep Core Mining Inc.
|
Posted - 2011.05.17 20:52:00 - [ 17]
Originally by: Traejun DiSanctis
Asymmetry =/= off-center CoG
Just because the ship is not symmetrical down it's center line, does not mean that it's CoG is not centered. So long as mass is = on both "sides" of the ship, the CoG can be dead center.
As for thrust placing stress on the hull - again, as long as thrust is equalized on both sides of the CoG, then there is no additional stress.
PLUS - if there was uneven thrust on both sides of the CoG, the ship would just turn in circles.
Plus...EvE is space with what appear to be closed, liquid environment physics. Don't try to make sense of it.
perhaps they have some equipment/nozzles located to the side. |
Tippia
Caldari
Sunshine and Lollipops
|
Posted - 2011.05.17 21:19:00 - [ 18]
Originally by: Traejun DiSanctis
So long as mass is = on both all four "sides" of the ship, the CoG can be dead center.
…and here we have the common problem with all these threads on symmetry. We are used to thinking about symmetry in terms of left and right because we live smack dab in the middle of a reasonably strong gravity field and an atmosphere, which creates a whole slew of forces that make vertical symmetry less relevant and/or easily balanced. There's just one problem: these forces are not around in outer space. Vertical asymmetry would thus cause just as many problems as lateral asymmetry, but out of habit, people only ever worry about the latter. There are no symmetrical ships in EVE. Not a single one. People always bring up ships like the Moa or the Raven or Blackbird, when the Myrmidon or the Naglfar or the Megathron are just as lopsided. |
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE |
Posted - 2011.05.17 21:27:00 - [ 19]
To annoy people like you. |
Hyperforce99
Gallente
The Scope
|
Posted - 2011.05.19 08:12:00 - [ 20]
Edited by: Hyperforce99 on 19/05/2011 08:19:12I don't know what people seem to have against A-symmetrical ships. I think they can look quite good (of course that still depends on the design). I would love to see the heimdallur make it into the game for example, and that design is A-Symmetrical and flipping vertical as well  IMO I love to see some Caldari frigates become symmetrical. Gallente however seem to do A-symmetry very well. |
Sanche Tehkeli
Gallente
Bionesis Technologies
Electus Matari |
Posted - 2011.05.19 09:36:00 - [ 21]
The only appropriate answer to this question is : because of Falcon, of course.
What did you expect? |
Equus Toomp
Caldari |
Posted - 2011.05.19 10:29:00 - [ 22]
and of course COG doesn't even matter in space where there is no gravity.
There is also no atmosphere to offer any resistance or drag that would affect an asymetric design.
I was once told by a physics teacher that you could put an aeroplane in space with a rocket attached to the tip of just one wing and it would fly straight due to lack of drag etc.
Of course, whilst he did steer me towards a grade A in physics he also once stated he had pictures of pixies he saw dancing at the bottom of his garden..... |
Ketria Saine |
Posted - 2011.05.19 10:57:00 - [ 23]
Because they look cool.  |
Gillaboo |
Posted - 2011.05.19 11:01:00 - [ 24]
Fairly certain that brewery tours in Ireland and visits to Amsterdams hash bars were involved.... at the "creative planning" stage, of course.  |
Teh Scout |
Posted - 2011.05.19 11:06:00 - [ 25]
|
Ghoest |
Posted - 2011.05.19 11:07:00 - [ 26]
Have you ever looked at the Crow? |
Swynet
State War Academy
|
Posted - 2011.05.19 11:11:00 - [ 27]
Originally by: Kaelie Onren
I mean, besides the obvious reason, which is because the art director of the team though that it would give them a personality.
I mean, technically speaking, a lob-sided superstructure would put large amounts of stress on ships, as their engines would be providing thrust which are not evenly distributed over the mass, not to mention making moving a mass which center of gravity is not in the center is complicated and just not sound engineering.
Is there a in-universe explanation for this that can help me come to terms with it?
SPACE = symmetry doesn't matter unless those have to negate the atmosphere dynamics. Technically speaking OC. |
Gillaboo |
Posted - 2011.05.19 11:15:00 - [ 28]
Originally by: Equus Toomp
and of course COG doesn't even matter in space where there is no gravity.... he also once stated he had pictures of pixies he saw dancing at the bottom of his garden.....
Ah, sounds like another famous Berkeley grad...still dealing with the LSD flashbacks, still driving south to hang with the Grateful Dead every winter... and flogging a flawed understanding of zero-g physics to pay his rent. |
Akaria Cicero |
Posted - 2011.05.19 11:15:00 - [ 29]
I am impressed by the amount of OC this forum can deliver, despite being full of trolls. Bravo! |
Zey Nadar
Gallente
Unknown Soldiers
|
Posted - 2011.05.19 11:28:00 - [ 30]
Edited by: Zey Nadar on 19/05/2011 11:31:47Edited by: Zey Nadar on 19/05/2011 11:29:01 Originally by: Equus Toomp
and of course COG doesn't even matter in space where there is no gravity.
What the.. Yes, Im sure there is no force keeping planets orbiting suns et cetera.. In regards of ships its center of MASS, nublet. Technically having asymmetric ship doesn't pose that many problems, but its still bit of extra design work to balance the ships acceleration. Logically it makes little sense but it is not a big problem. You can just fit the thrust behind the ships center of mass even if its not in actual center of ship. |
All Channels
EVE General Discussion
