Nice. A well done texture can do a lot to make up for low poly numbers. I have a great deal of respect for modellers who can keep the mesh sparing and add details as possible with the texture, as opposed to creating a flat textured, all-details-in-the-mesh monstrosity. it is easy to throw polygons at something. Finding a good balance that still looks good is somewhat zen, and creating a good texture is very artistic work (and something I totally suck at).
If that ship is viewed as wireframe, it does look rather poor next to some of what we have, but taken as a whole it isn't bad. Wether it fits into VS is another question (it is a tad on the simplistic side), but I think it is obvious the finished product is nowhere near as bad as people were moaning about. Fazit: it's good to have some standards for admittance into VS. Have and use them. But don't be too dismissive of lower poly work.. The strength of Howie's models for example lies IMHO in the texturing.
Of course my commentary has been coloured by too much experience with impressively detailed meshes that never get textured
*********
FWIW, in privr, we try to limit bases to 10,000, and any ships with more than 4,000 polys get LOD meshes. Ideally any with more than 2,500, but I only have so much time (not a single ship has come with one, leaving it to me). Another reason to smile at Duality's ship: doesn't need 'em
Still looks like the
SWACS though
(the triangle on top of the SWACS rotates IIRC and when it points forwards, looks a lot like yours)