Not to steal the spotlight and leave other people ''tied' up

Ares · Post by **Ares** » Fri Jun 17, 2005 8:57 pm

6700, poly's in QUADS and counting.... Also smoothed once.....
I figured i'd make a non warship military ship. It's a explorer, like all the topheavy thingys in another unnamed show with big glowing blue and red engines....

Post by **hurleybird** » Fri Jun 17, 2005 11:32 pm

Nice!

Umm, which side is the front?

Post by **chuck_starchaser** » Sat Jun 18, 2005 12:57 am

That's exactly what space stations should look like, IMO. I think artificial gravity is a pipe dream that will never be realized, same as time-travel. The only way to assure ourselves of justifiable gravity within stations is to have rotating parts. Kudos!

charlieg · Post by **charlieg** » Sat Jun 18, 2005 2:47 am

That looks excellent. Now all we need is to start organizing it...

Race?
Ship name?
Texture?

[I'm refering to meshes being lost in forum, not artistic neglect.]

Good ship!

theguyfromsaturn · Post by **theguyfromsaturn** » Sat Jun 18, 2005 3:03 am

And not only do you have wheels to create artificial gravity, but you have two of them too. That's very nice because by having them turn in opposite directions they cancel each other's moment so the axis of the ship remains stable.

Ares · Post by **Ares** » Sat Jun 18, 2005 3:21 am

Like i said, it's supposed to be a exploration/research ship, i'd figure it would be confed, and there might be a few other races with them from confed loaning them out to generate some $$$.
The end with the 'nostrils' is the front.
It's loadout is unimpressive by combat ship standards, but it would be well suited for S&E(search and exploration).
4 Turrets, top and bottom.
1 Large scale cutting laser. (Usefull for cutting through asteroids, or other required objects)
2 Large missle (probe) launchers, probably holding between 10-20 torps a piece, and dosens of other various probes.
Shielding MAY be above average, however hull strength will not be impressive.
Sensors will be the best of any large confed ship.... By a longshot i would think.
I still need to add a sensor array to the mesh, although i haven't quite figured out WERE or what it should look like.
The 'nostrils' in front are reconfigurable emitter/collectors. (yes it's kinda ripped from ST but i figured on a science ship it would be quite usefull, don't worry they won't glow blue)
On bottom is a small full flight bay, carrying a very limited supply of ships, mostly science craft, a couple of scroendenger scouts (say 6), and 2 or 4 other slightly larger defensive ships, i'm sure they would need them every so often.

The 'rings' are done intentionally, cuz i figured artificial gravity fields might be kinda unwanted on a ship like this, plus i'm sure some activist group would have a problem with (artificial) gravity fields, so those would be limited to non-rotating sections.

Shark · Post by **Shark** » Sat Jun 18, 2005 4:33 am

Where are the handlebars?

Halleck · Post by **Halleck** » Sat Jun 18, 2005 7:19 am

Cool. Reminds me a bit of the slylandro probe from star control 2.

Post by **chuck_starchaser** » Sat Jun 18, 2005 8:38 am

I still need to add a sensor array to the mesh, although i haven't quite figured out WERE or what it should look like.

I'd say spherical (synthetic aperture). And maybe 4 of them on a non-co-planar arrangement, some distance apart of each other, for them to be able to function together as a long-wave synthetic aperture array.

Post by **jackS** » Sat Jun 18, 2005 6:42 pm

chuck_starchaser wrote:I think artificial gravity is a pipe dream that will never be realized, same as time-travel.

I'm in general agreement that artificial gravity generation is quite unlikely in RL (although personally I'd see it as more likely than time travel).

However, in VS, artificial gravity falls out as a consequence of some of the other technologies. The economic practicality of pervasive anti-gravity technologies (for humanity), however, would have been limited to the last couple of centuries, being phased in at different rates throughout differing regions of human space. It would not, therefore, be entirely anachronistic to see centrifuge style habitation areas. They would merely not be considered modern constructions.

Many such vessels would still be present in the Forsaken fleets.

Post by **chuck_starchaser** » Sun Jun 19, 2005 1:53 am

Hmm... But NOT having artificial gravity would be pretty cool. I made a model of a space elevator end station, when I first joined the VS forum, with rotating hotels... maybe I'll boot back in windows, find it and post it; --never did back then as I didn't have server space. I was thinking of eventually having 3D interiors, so one would float through tubes to the wheel hub interior, where there'd be air-locks. Past the air-locks, there'd be fire-station type colums one would slide down to the outer ring floors.

RE.: Shape and location of radars: I've changed my opinion: Yes, I'd have four or more spherical synthetic apertures as I said, but there's one problem with synthetic aperture radars, they are quite visible to passive radar from any direction. Parabolic antennas are not omnidirectional, but they are highly focused. I think an exploration vessel intent on stealth should have both, spherical and "dish" type radars of various sizes.

Ares · Post by **Ares** » Sun Jun 19, 2005 8:44 am

jackS wrote: It would not, therefore, be entirely anachronistic to see centrifuge style habitation areas. They would merely not be considered modern constructions.

Many such vessels would still be present in the Forsaken fleets.

I'm in disagreement, rotating habitation areas probably wouldn't dissapear entirely, i would thing it would still be a efficent idea... Just more frequently found in larger structures, space stations and the like. For a science ship it might also be quite usefull to be able to replicate gravity without any electronic fields, wich could interfere with numerous experements. That way the ship is able to do BOTH. immitate regular gravity and use artificial were needed.

This is however not a forsaken ship.

Updates:

I was gonna add a comm array too, but i've already messed with the smooth shape enough and didn't wanna add to much in the way of 'greebles' to a nice smooth shape.
The new sections you see added are sensor/radar-pods similar to the doppler radar domes you see here and there, this way it gets some protection without all that sensitive equipment being exposed.
I also added a additional engine, and tweaked the mesh a tad to lower the poly count a lil. This is no lightweight though, it will probably weigh in at just under 16,000 triangles, as i am currently over 7K quads...

Shark · Post by **Shark** » Mon Jun 20, 2005 12:23 am

I like how the engines protrude. Maybe add twice as many to the bottom (since the bottom seems to have more mass), giving the backe end a triangular shape.
Definately add some comms arrays! Maybe flatten/smoothen them and have them stick straight out the front (like in HW2).
Also, I think the ship is a bit too smooth. But, who knows. If you keep at it the smooth shape could look real good (especially with those pods sticking out the middle).
One more thing, I think you should "flatten" the rings (maybe make them ovoid in cross-section) along one of the axes. Or, tear-drop shaped.

Some spherical radar nubs would look good too.

You could also make the very tips of the hull frame paraboloid (like the nose of an old bomber) instead of flared and add protective plating (e.g. fenders) around the rings.

Ares · Post by **Ares** » Mon Jun 20, 2005 1:21 am

Shark wrote:I like how the engines protrude. Maybe add twice as many to the bottom (since the bottom seems to have more mass), giving the backe end a triangular shape.
Definately add some comms arrays! Maybe flatten/smoothen them and have them stick straight out the front (like in HW2).
Also, I think the ship is a bit too smooth. But, who knows. If you keep at it the smooth shape could look real good (especially with those pods sticking out the middle).
One more thing, I think you should "flatten" the rings (maybe make them ovoid in cross-section) along one of the axes. Or, tear-drop shaped.

Some spherical radar nubs would look good too.

You could also make the very tips of the hull frame paraboloid (like the nose of an old bomber) instead of flared and add protective plating (e.g. fenders) around the rings.

There are more engines on the bottom, i fixed the first pic so this shows....
See, i don't wanna mess with the shape much more, i already added those pods, but i think they add to it...
I can't see any purpose to 'flattening' the rings, and making them ovoid would make no sense cuz they rotate. What does this look like Star Trek?

Those 'pods' in the middle are radar nubs, i figure 2 radar dishes in each and a multitude of other sensor equipment between.

I might add some protective plating to the front to guard it from debris but bear in mind, this is NOT a warship, so massive ammounts of armor isn't nessecary....

Post by **chuck_starchaser** » Mon Jun 20, 2005 4:37 am

Ares, the rings need more polys, IMO; like double the wedgies. If you're almost overbudget, maybe the place to save polys would be the ring hubs, like making them flat. There'd be another advantage to doing so: If this ship relies partly on stealth, a rotating wheel hub with spokes could intermittently occlude stars on the other side, from some perspective, and make it visible. If I was designing a ship like that in real life

I would definitely place covers on them.

Halleck · Post by **Halleck** » Mon Jun 20, 2005 5:09 am

Let's wait to see the thing textured before we comment on the polycount. I think it will look fine.

Shark · Post by **Shark** » Mon Jun 20, 2005 5:45 am

Ares wrote:I can't see any purpose to 'flattening' the rings, and making them ovoid would make no sense cuz they rotate. What does this look like Star Trek?

I meant the cross-section of the tubular portions of the ring, with the major-axis of the ellipse perpendicular to the radial arms.

Ares wrote: Those 'pods' in the middle are radar nubs, i figure 2 radar dishes in each and a multitude of other sensor equipment between.

Oh, I thought they were fuel.

Ares · Post by **Ares** » Mon Jun 20, 2005 11:43 am

chuck_starchaser wrote:Ares, the rings need more polys, IMO; like double the wedgies. If you're almost overbudget, maybe the place to save polys would be the ring hubs, like making them flat. There'd be another advantage to doing so: If this ship relies partly on stealth, a rotating wheel hub with spokes could intermittently occlude stars on the other side, from some perspective, and make it visible. If I was designing a ship like that in real life I would definitely place covers on them.

Um, does anyone even READ my posts? Were did i once say this is a stealth ship? I belive i've said that this is a science ship in at least 4/5's of my posts in this topic.
THIS IS NOT A WARSHIP AND ITS NOT A STEALTH SHIP.
Maybe someone will be able to see that....

I don't understand this forum, someone goes and makes a ship with like 200 polygons and says, i made this in 5 minutes. And everyone says, 'It rocks!' but i go and make a ship thats actually decent quality and everybody can find something wrong with it? I'll tell you what if i bother doing another ship, i'll be sure not to put any effort into it.

Post by **chuck_starchaser** » Mon Jun 20, 2005 11:55 am

Well, maybe I got confused, as there has been discussion of stealth stuff in several threads lately.
Besides, you are slightly contradicting yourself: If this is NOT a worship then what does it rely on for defense, if not stealth?
And when someone made a ship with 200 polygons everybody laughed; what you say is a total lie.
Your excessive and totally unjustified rudeness is felt, noted, and will be remembered.

Halleck · Post by **Halleck** » Mon Jun 20, 2005 12:18 pm

Uhh, It's a science vessel. I think it relies mainly on escort craft for self-defense.

Post by **zaydana** » Mon Jun 20, 2005 12:47 pm

from what I seen ares has always pushed this one as a science/"non-warefare" ship... so meh. Just thought i'd say that. Although, you are right in saying that everybody laughed at the 200 poly ship...

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Mon Jun 20, 2005 6:13 pm

I like it! Original design and nice quality. Those rotating rings will look cool in-game

Ares · Post by **Ares** » Mon Jun 20, 2005 11:46 pm

chuck_starchaser wrote:Well, maybe I got confused, as there has been discussion of stealth stuff in several threads lately.
Besides, you are slightly contradicting yourself: If this is NOT a worship then what does it rely on for defense, if not stealth?
And when someone made a ship with 200 polygons everybody laughed; what you say is a total lie.
Your excessive and totally unjustified rudeness is felt, noted, and will be remembered.

Well, i may have gone overboard, i just got quite annoyed when it seemed like everyone could find something wrong with my ship, and most of the posts in that other topic that i read seemed quite fond of it, ( but i haven't checked it lately anyway so i really shouldn't talk, (56K has been very uncorporative on message boards lately) there have been other low-poly ships too that people seemed quite fond of, but i dunno, ignore my angry ramblings...

The ship isn't underprotected, it's just not a ship you'd choose to take into a big battle, since theres a war going on in VS i'll probably up the # of turrets from 4 to 8 possibly 10, combat wise when done it should be able to hold it's own against a clydesdale for a while to put it into perspective, though with less weapons shields and armor, it would loose, despite being nearly twice as long as one, and nearly 3 times as wide. Physicly it's a BIG ship, but it won't be slow, weight will be in the neiborhood of 25% more than the clydesdale (much less armor and weapons to weigh it down) max speed will probably be set much higher than you'd expect in the neiborhood of 750-1000, to be able to travel around faster but exceleration will be lethargic as with most ships this size yaw pitch and roll, may be better if i decide to add manuvering thrusters in front like i've been toying with the idea of. Once i put it in the game i wanna see if a SKILLED pilot could get it through a low density asteroid filed RELATIVLY unscathed.

Post by **chuck_starchaser** » Tue Jun 21, 2005 12:14 am

My confusion about stealth probably had something to do with your cloaking post. I really can't see how my suggestion of doubling polys could be taken as "criticism"; if I were you I'd take that as a compliment. Anyhow, you'll probably take my next statement as "criticism" too, but so be it: A ship with large rotating parts would take forever to maneuver off the plane of rotation of the wheels (okay rotating in the same plane) due to gyroscopic effects. That's okay, in the case of your ship, given that it will have a lot of turrets plus escort. Just saying this in case you were planning to put any kind of forward facing guns on it; --they'd be utterly useless.
(Hmm... I wonder if the VS engine's physics model gyroscopic effects...)

Ares · Post by **Ares** » Tue Jun 21, 2005 1:10 am

chuck_starchaser wrote:My confusion about stealth probably had something to do with your cloaking post. I really can't see how my suggestion of doubling polys could be taken as "criticism"; if I were you I'd take that as a compliment. Anyhow, you'll probably take my next statement as "criticism" too, but so be it: A ship with large rotating parts would take forever to maneuver off the plane of rotation of the wheels (okay rotating in the same plane) due to gyroscopic effects. That's okay, in the case of your ship, given that it will have a lot of turrets plus escort. Just saying this in case you were planning to put any kind of forward facing guns on it; --they'd be utterly useless.

I think when there smoothed they look fine, if i think it needs much more i'll add that at a later point.
I did not take gyroscopic effects into consideration, looks like i'll have to add manuvering jets to compensate......

Maybe i should switch from rotating rings to a more conventional setup, it seems like there might be alot more drawbacks then i first designed it for....

Vega Strike Forums

Not to steal the spotlight and leave other people ''tied' up

Not to steal the spotlight and leave other people ''tied' up

Very Nice