ACTA SF Ship appearance discussion

[Da Boss]

There is a very interesting discussion going on on the ADB forum at the moment regarding the appearance of SFU ships, if like me you have been vocal about what you would or would not like to see in future delveopments it might be worth looking or even expressing a view.

thread changed to:

http://www.starfleetgames.com/discus/messages/27411/29943.html?1330707690

 

[H]

i'm too scared, the adb forums seem a bit too "serious" for my liking, people get all shirty at the mention of extending a weapon mount a milimetre and stuff ;-)
I'll say this for them though, theyare bloody proud of the game.

 

[Da Boss]

i'm too scared, the adb forums seem a bit too "serious" for my liking, people get all shirty at the mention of extending a weapon mount a milimetre and stuff ;-)
I'll say this for them though, theyare bloody proud of the game.

So far they have been very polite when I have posted there - firm in their views but polite.

So far I would agree with everything Matt has just posted................and which seems to reflect alot of views expressed over here in the past..........

 

[McKickaha]

i'm too scared, the adb forums seem a bit too "serious" for my liking, people get all shirty at the mention of extending a weapon mount a milimetre and stuff ;-)
I'll say this for them though, theyare bloody proud of the game.

So far they have been very polite when I have posted there - firm in their views but polite.

So far I would agree with everything Matt has just posted................and which seems to reflect alot of views expressed over here in the past..........

Just caught up DB, and I also whole heartedly agree with Matt's latest comments.

Very well said indeed.

 

[tomrommel1]

agree fully too

 

[H]

just read it, well said Matt, imagine if these guys were in charge of ford, we'd all still be in the model T, just in a diffent scale!

I don't get why they state we want ships that all look totally different, so one looks like a dogs leg, the other a rabbits ear and the third a collander, we ALL want standard design philosophies runnig through a fleet, but that doesn't mean every ship should be the same, with some wing etchings, or another engine bolted on. what is the time span of sfu? 200 years? compare a sopwith camel, with a spitfire, with a mosquito, meteer, ligthing, jaguar, harrier, tornado, typhoon. thats what, 80 years of development, not one of them looks like the other, certainly no example of a typhoon 2k being an upscaled spitfire with some extra wing detail, it's called deign evolution, and specialisation of roles. if they want to use naval shipping, ok, if you pick all ships built in a 5 year period they look similar, expand that and you compare the Graff spee with a type 45... same philosophy, ie monohull, upper superstructure, but they look very different.

 

[Ben2]

I do agree with Matts points.

The issue with fleets like the Lyrans is that they are visually dull and composed of pretty simple shapes. You don't have to have a huge jump from the existing hull form to something attractive that benefits from the scale increase and provides extra detail for the painter and modeller.

When it comes to the Andromedans, the saucer style links all the ships, but do you need all that flat surface, or can something interesting be done with it?

 

[Totenkopf]

That was well written by Matt, but I puked a little when he said "we want to be more like Ford"...I suppose it works for the purpose of his analogy, but personally I'd choose a manufacturer who is actually profitable and doesn't make shiat cars.

 

[Cyporiean]

I'd just like to throw my vote in for 'similar but different' ship designs, and agreement with what Matthew has stated.

To add another example more related to gaming..

25 Years ago, this was what a Space Marine looked like:
http://images.dakkadakka.com/gallery/2008/11/29/2542_md-Rogue%20Trader,%20Space%20Marines,%20Ultramarines,%20Warhammer%2040,000.jpg

And this is what one looks like today:
http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m1252454_99120101024_SMCombatsquadmain_873x627.jpg

The two models don't look alien to one another, just one has taken advantage of 25 years worth of skill improvements in designing, sculpting, and casting.

 

[Totenkopf]

Second link isn't working for me.

 

[Cyporiean]

Second link isn't working for me.

Changed it to a different link:
http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m1252454_99120101024_SMCombatsquadmain_873x627.jpg

 

[Jean]

About the guys on ADB's BBS. They will be polite or they will be in trouble. They know this. Being polite in that topic has not been a problem thus far and I do not anticipate that it will be.

Do feel free to post there. It may help people see what you want -- and there are folks who do think that you want radically different ships in each empire. If you choose to post on the BBS, remember that we ask you register with your real name. That aids in the politeness factor. We also try to not use "bad language" as it is a family board and we have had members as young as 13.

Jean
(Wearing her BBS admin/moderator hat)

 

[McKinstry]

That was well written by Matt, but I puked a little when he said "we want to be more like Ford"...I suppose it works for the purpose of his analogy, but personally I'd choose a manufacturer who is actually profitable and doesn't make shiat cars.

Neither here nor there but Ford is quite profitable, took no Federal money and is the only US car maker consistently in the top ten on most quality ratings.

The dumbest thing I've done in the last decade was not buying their stock

Other than that, I agree with Matt. There is no rational reason not to make the ships look better while maintaining the overall racial style.

 

[H]

About the guys on ADB's BBS. They will be polite or they will be in trouble. They know this. Being polite in that topic has not been a problem thus far and I do not anticipate that it will be.

Do feel free to post there. It may help people see what you want -- and there are folks who do think that you want radically different ships in each empire. If you choose to post on the BBS, remember that we ask you register with your real name. That aids in the politeness factor. We also try to not use "bad language" as it is a family board and we have had members as young as 13.

Jean
(Wearing her BBS admin/moderator hat)

but, but, but, I AM hiffano, for the gaming comunity... even peeps i played with for years don't know my real name lol.

Jean, can you explain to me why their is such resistance to change, we aren't asking for a complete distruction of SFU history, just some more ship variation. the fed fleet is "ok" and ships like the C8 and F5 look different enough but we have a whole raft of D's that all look similar, or just have a warp engine stuck on. now i LOVE the D6 design, but lets see it expanded
and I feel their is no hope for the Kzinti

 

[Captain Jonah]

Likewise but just go the GW site for a picture of the latest walking talking killing machine marine :lol:

I pretty much agree with the sentiment here. Ships should look different enough to tell at a glance what they are and which race they belong to.

It is a visual game after all so having nice ships to look at and identify is important.

SO as long as they remain true to the overall Race design and don't wander off into "Oh those Gorn saucers would look so much better with spikes all over them" land I'm happy.

Though I still want at least an attempt to explain why there are bits on ships. The Klingon’s have a standardised rear hull with warp engines and Impulse engines in set locations. Bigger, smaller, two, three or four warp engines, boom of no boom is should still look like it belongs to the Klingon family of ships.

I don't care how fancy they are, Gorn ships without saucers or over and under nacelles just are not Gorn anymore. :lol:

 

[McKinstry]

SO as long as they remain true to the overall Race design and don't wander off into "Oh those Gorn saucers would look so much better with spikes all over them" land :lol:

And skulz. They need lots and lots of skulz. :twisted:

 

[Captain Jonah]

SO as long as they remain true to the overall Race design and don't wander off into "Oh those Gorn saucers would look so much better with spikes all over them" land :lol:

And skulz. They need lots and lots of skulz. :twisted:

Be off with you.

Cursed Workshop players sneaking in here.

Be off I say or I'll set the lyrans on you

 

[MongooseMatt]

That was well written by Matt, but I puked a little when he said "we want to be more like Ford"...I suppose it works for the purpose of his analogy, but personally I'd choose a manufacturer who is actually profitable and doesn't make shiat cars.

Hmm, make it Jaguar of a few years ago then - the XJ and X-Type formed the family line, but the S-Type and XK were obviously from the same manufacturer.

 

[H]

That was well written by Matt, but I puked a little when he said "we want to be more like Ford"...I suppose it works for the purpose of his analogy, but personally I'd choose a manufacturer who is actually profitable and doesn't make shiat cars.

Hmm, make it Jaguar of a few years ago then - the XJ and X-Type formed the family line, but the S-Type and XK were obviously from the same manufacturer.

but owned by ford ;-)

how about VW, or Volvo (owned by ford once) Peugeot, all have defining features whilst having obviously different models for different purposes.

 

[Da Boss]

Klingon Ships

Matt wrote on the other forum:

Then a C8 with a redesigned bridge a greatly thickened boom. An F5 with no boom and sweptback wings. A new Klingon cruiser with split wings and engines on the top and bottom. Common design elements running all the way through them, but with clearly different models.

Some interesting ideas here - I don't suppose you could post some of the designs even if they were unused to show people want could of been /could be?