open All Channels
seplocked Ships and Modules
blankseplocked Dumbest looking and badly designed ships in all of Eve
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5]

Author Topic

Captain Muscles
Caldari
Vindictive Bastards
Posted - 2009.12.10 18:27:00 - [121]
 

I'll agree that the Moa is ugly, but I still kinda like it. It looks like a big bony hand floating through space. Awesome ship names naturally follow, such as "Hey you", "My finger points", and my favorite, the "Booger Hook" (Gila ofc.)

Athar Mu
Gallente
Federal Navy Academy
Posted - 2009.12.10 20:25:00 - [122]
 

Didn't read the whole thread but I remember reading that the original purpose for the Typhoon model was the Mimatar hauler and the Mamoth (I believe) was meant to be the tier one BS...but in some consultation early on with players they said it would be better the other way round.

Alistair Cononach
Amarr
The Legion of Spoon
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
Posted - 2009.12.10 22:01:00 - [123]
 

Honestly, most of the worst designs would be vastly improved with a bit of symmetry added, especially the Caldari designs. Moa, Raven, Scorp and the Osprey would all be pretty cool actually if thay had symmetry.

The one design flaw in EVE is the stubborn love of pointless asymmetry for it's own sake. Human nature, genaerally, is drawn to balance, equilibrium and symmetry. It's hardwired in to our brains. Going the anti-symmetry route can be fun in small doeses, but the Caldari especially are all but ruined aethetically by it's utter lack of balance.

Zycorax II
Tau Online Explorator Corp
Posted - 2009.12.10 22:47:00 - [124]
 

I fail to see how anyone can think there's uglier looking ships than the Maller hull.

Derek Sigres
Posted - 2009.12.10 22:52:00 - [125]
 

Edited by: Derek Sigres on 10/12/2009 22:54:11
Originally by: Don Pellegrino
Quote:
Catalyst - Lol, if that were real, flying in circles would be all the rage.


And to other "it would fly in circle rants", there is no air in space.


So, without air there is no torque?

Of course, the argument has no basis anyway. The truth of the matter is, we don't actually know how much force any given engine produces, nor do we know what the center of mass is. Without these pieces of information, we have no way of knowing if the placement makes any sense or not.

Of course, when did physics really have anything to do with Eve?

Hyey
Posted - 2009.12.11 05:44:00 - [126]
 

Originally by: fuxinos
I think there are only 2 ships in Eve, that actualy look like ships.

Chimera and Naglfar.

To everyone who say Caldari ships look functional...Laughing

Seriously, since when is a ship that trys to resemble an animal, functional?

Chimera and Nag are they only ships that dont resemble a animal in any way and are pretty much the only ones looking like being built for a purpose rather then to resemble whatever.


I dunno if we're looking at the same Raven but it looks pretty functional from this end.

Jerid Verges
Gallente
The Scope
Posted - 2009.12.11 06:09:00 - [127]
 

In order of ugliest.

Griffin
Imicus
Dominix
Thantanos
Osprey
Iteron
Erebus
Navitas
Mega Navi Issue

Some really good looking ships

Rokh
Apocalypse
Myrmidon
Megathron
Hyperion
Nyx
Leviathan


Selina Sora
Posted - 2009.12.11 10:28:00 - [128]
 

Originally by: Derek Sigres
Edited by: Derek Sigres on 10/12/2009 22:54:11
Originally by: Don Pellegrino
Quote:
Catalyst - Lol, if that were real, flying in circles would be all the rage.


And to other "it would fly in circle rants", there is no air in space.


So, without air there is no torque?

Of course, the argument has no basis anyway. The truth of the matter is, we don't actually know how much force any given engine produces, nor do we know what the center of mass is. Without these pieces of information, we have no way of knowing if the placement makes any sense or not.

Of course, when did physics really have anything to do with Eve?


Agreed. Here's an example...

I'm in the US Navy and let's take a look at some of our ships... Yes, most are symetrical as expected, but for this example, let's look at an aircraft carrier. At a glance, they look like they should tip over onto their starboard side as the narrow hull and large island superstructure which weighs a good few thousand tons is situated over the water on the starboard side. Sooo, if the weight of the the material used in the ship was proportional to the actual size/location each piece, then indeed, it would tip over. The fact is, heavier equipment is located on the port side of the ship to offset the "misshapen", yet functional design.

For those who claim that ships in EVE would simply spin in a circle, look at that example... perhaps those ships have more weight located in the smaller sections near the engines and considerably lighter equipment on the long portions with no, or smaller engines...

just a thought...

Shana Matika
Posted - 2009.12.11 14:02:00 - [129]
 

I can understand most ships some name here and I can understand (and in some cases I do) those who like many of the asymmetrical ships.

But here is one that noone likes:

Imicus/Helios

The most ugliest ship in the universe. Thank good you can cloak the helios, but the imicus has no excuse.

Oh and that guy who named the orca: Are you serious? This ship look like a ship that can transport a lot of stuff (several cargo bays adjusted to the main hull) and looks in fact pretty awesome. It's just too small, like most ships builded from capital parts.

Skex Relbore
Gallente
Red Federation
RvB - RED Federation
Posted - 2009.12.11 15:07:00 - [130]
 

Originally by: Selina Sora


Agreed. Here's an example...

I'm in the US Navy and let's take a look at some of our ships... Yes, most are symetrical as expected, but for this example, let's look at an aircraft carrier. At a glance, they look like they should tip over onto their starboard side as the narrow hull and large island superstructure which weighs a good few thousand tons is situated over the water on the starboard side. Sooo, if the weight of the the material used in the ship was proportional to the actual size/location each piece, then indeed, it would tip over. The fact is, heavier equipment is located on the port side of the ship to offset the "misshapen", yet functional design.

For those who claim that ships in EVE would simply spin in a circle, look at that example... perhaps those ships have more weight located in the smaller sections near the engines and considerably lighter equipment on the long portions with no, or smaller engines...

just a thought...


An Aircraft carrier is one of those exceptions that proves the rule. The reason an aircraft carrier isn't symmetrical is that it's functionality requires it.
To accomidate aircraft landing it needs an unobstructed runway with clear approaches from both directions. So the control tower has to be placed on one side or the other. The control tower being a requirement the rest of the ship is designed around these two requirements.

That's why every aircraft carrier looks basically the same. It's a case of form following function.

You will not however see an asymmetric battleship rolling about nor submarine or any other type of warship hell you won't even see many civilian ships that are asymmetrical. Since nothing necesitates an asymmetric design in those cases the engineer would be foolish to build in additional complication into them by not making them symmetrical.

In EVE the decision to throw symmetry out the window was a misquided one IMO. Imagine just how cool the Raven would look if it had the long wings on both sides? As it is it looks like it was cobbled together from left over bits of several different ships welded more or less randomly together.

Not that it stops me from playing and no matter how much crap people talk about my turd the only way you can have my Domi is if you shoot it out from under me then I'll just go buy another ugly or not.

Bomberlocks
Minmatar
CTRL-Q
Posted - 2009.12.11 15:34:00 - [131]
 

^ Apart from which, an aircraft carrier most definitely IS symmetrical where it matters, i.e. in the water.

The problem with the asymmetrical ship designs in eve is that some of them simply could NOT fly in a straight line if Eve had anything to with physics instead of some designer's particular fancy. And I'm not talking about the one's you think that would, rather about ships like the caracal, whose engines are mounted so high that it would be physically impossible for it to fly in a straight line.

No, the real problem with the asymmetry in Eve ships is simply one of aesthetics, or taste. I have nothing against a BIT of asymmetry. The Tempest and Typhoon are both slightly asymmetrical but are both somewhat appealing. The Raven and Scorp needn't be totally asymmetrical like the Caracal, but it would be nice if the were a BIT more visually balanced.

Talking about visual balance and realistic physics: Why do Minnie ships rust in space????

w1ndstrike
Legio Geminatus
Gentlemen's Agreement
Posted - 2009.12.11 16:07:00 - [132]
 

worst:

moa
imicus
Aeon (half a bestower as said earlier)


personal best:
punisher hull vesels
Prophecy hull vessels
Ashimmu
Legion setups using liquid crystal magnifier subsystems and either the dissolution sequencer or the tactical targeting one. (the others look like stunted mushrooms or a roach)

Xtover
Suicide Kings
Posted - 2009.12.11 16:07:00 - [133]
 

Edited by: Xtover on 11/12/2009 16:08:21
Originally by: Selina Sora
which weighs a good few thousand tons is situated over the water on the starboard side. Sooo, if the weight of the the material used in the ship was proportional to the actual size/location each piece, then indeed, it would tip over. The fact is, heavier equipment is located on the port side of the ship to offset the "misshapen", yet functional design.

For those who claim that ships in EVE would simply spin in a circle, look at that example... perhaps those ships have more weight located in the smaller sections near the engines and considerably lighter equipment on the long portions with no, or smaller engines...

just a thought...


Do not confuse WEIGHT with MASS. There's a huge difference.

Jack Icegaard
The Omega Project
Posted - 2009.12.11 16:32:00 - [134]
 

Originally by: Skex Relbore


Perhaps (though the way the physics in EVE works that's questionable) but there is innertia and mass which in many ways makes symmetry even more important..

..In space where there is no air symmetry is perhaps even more important since you have to balance your thrust to keep that mass moving in the direction you want it to go and unlike in an atmosphere you can't use control surfaces to adjust for any imbalances.


I disagree. Using thrust vectoring on a spacecraft should be much more efficient compared to control surfaces on a aircraft, boat.

Gravity and drag exerts major forces on any aircraft or boat compared to available thrust. The advantage of the symmetric design is obvious here. An aircraft have to deal with turbulence, windshear, icing etc where asymmetric designs means an unnecessary complication. Boats have to deal with waves (wind) and to stay reasonably level is essential which implies a center of mass that is low and to the middle.

These are non-issues for spaceships. We have to assume that they can adjust thrust and vector on their engines so having future asymmetrical spaceship-designs to travel in any direction you want seem rather simple and straightforward.

Quote:
An Aircraft carrier is one of those exceptions that proves the rule. The reason an aircraft carrier isn't symmetrical is that it's functionality requires it.


requirements for spaceships are probably a lot different compared to now days ships and aircrafts etc. Im inclined to think that all your horse hockey is just an elaborate way to say that you prefer symmetrical designs because you think they are prettier.



ApollyN
The Money Shot Inc.
Posted - 2009.12.11 18:12:00 - [135]
 

Ugly:
Imicus
Burst
Vexor Hull - boring
Brutix hull - Just too short for its depth, looks weird
Maller - Again, kinda boring

Awesome:
Naglfar - its freakin vertical
Rifter Hull - Always looks awesome, even better Wolf/Jag
Nidhoggur/Hel - Best looking carriers/moms in game, they look awesome
Cyclone Hull - Sweet
Typhoon - Sapce Dustbin of Doom
Thorax - Its phallic but it looks cool

Xtover
Suicide Kings
Posted - 2009.12.11 19:30:00 - [136]
 

I like the look of the Maller, the front reminds me of crusader-type helms

http://izlin.free.fr/eve/ships/maller.jpg


helm 1


It's long, and has that slit. It has an inquisition/cardinal/etc type feel.




Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5]

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only