[Philoshopy] Why do we keep trying to build something pretty ?

[Zackey_TNT]

Why not have both? Effectiveness is just how good you are at building the internals of a ship, with any given shape, there's a good way and a bad way to build a ship. I think you can incorporate both without compromise on either, if you're particularly good.

 

[Zekester81]

I can't vote. There is no option for both. I always try to do both, emphasis on try. Alas, beauty is in the eye of the beholder, while effectiveness is a measurable thing.

 

[FlyingDebris]

Both. Anything else indicates you didnt try in at least one regard. A ship can be good at PvP all day, but if it isn't good looking while doing it then you're just a shitty engineer.

 

[ZektorSK]

Both. Anything else indicates you didnt try in at least one regard. A ship can be good at PvP all day, but if it isn't good looking while doing it then you're just a shitty engineer.

What ? So you are saying that, if Tiger Tank, from Nazi Germany would be ugly, that would mean it is shit ? Would that mean that entire Germany engineers are shits ?

 

[Lecic]

What ? So you are saying that, if Tiger Tank, from Nazi Germany would be ugly, that would mean it is shit ? Would that mean that entire Germany engineers are shits ?

Real life engineering has to sacrifice most aesthetics to work as effectively as possible. Starmade engineering does not.

 

[Broomsage]

A good functional design in real life is often beautiful by itself, I think clock work is beautiful, and it is only designed to serve a purpose. other examples include the inner workings of jet engines, humans, and also the tiger tank. ( the tank might be a bad example, as if there were anyone who would design a tank to be aesthetically pleasing it would be the the nazis )

The way starmade physics works currently, you can have a ship in any shape you like, so you should be able to do both.
Also, hi Zek!

 

[Dr. Whammy]

What ? So you are saying that, if Tiger Tank, from Nazi Germany would be ugly, that would mean it is shit ? Would that mean that entire Germany engineers are shits ?

Not necessarily, but here's some food for thought.

This is an example of a Nazi German WWII era tank that looks like crap, is slow as molasses, is comically overweight, has a short operational range, can't cross a bridge, sinks through almost any surface that isn't solid stone, originally had no machine guns for close combat and is basically a huge steel box; which makes it an easy target for incoming cannon fire.

Don't fight it ZektorSK. Join the "pretty" builders... Jooooiiiin uuuussss.

 

[Madman198237]

Really the Tiger was not meant to be nice-looking, it was meant to be intimidating and powerful.
That is successful engineering. It was powerful, and it scared the crap out of most allied tankers.

Hahaha, the Maus. Scary vehicle.

 

[Nauvran]

Really the Tiger was not meant to be nice-looking, it was meant to be intimidating and powerful.
That is successful engineering. It was powerful, and it scared the crap out of most allied tankers.

Hahaha, the Maus. Scary vehicle.

didnt those huge Nazi tanks have serious engine problems?

 

[Madman198237]

Yes, but mostly the King Tiger (Tiger II). The earlier German vehicles suffered from various mechanical problems relating to the complicated drive systems they used and the ever-present General Mud (One of Russia's two best generals, in fact).

 

[KiloZulu]

I dunno, I think that one of the new ships I've been working on might do okay against fleets of smaller ships. Each turret has the size, shielding, and firepower of a small capital ship and is entirely self-sustainable. It's kind of like I've docked a fleet of frigates onto their mother ship...

 

[ZektorSK]

Yes, but mostly the King Tiger (Tiger II). The earlier German vehicles suffered from various mechanical problems relating to the complicated drive systems they used and the ever-present General Mud (One of Russia's two best generals, in fact).

I think they added a steering wheel, I don't think that it is a mechanical problem

 

[Madman198237]

What does a steering wheel have to do with anything?

 

[ZektorSK]

What does a steering wheel have to do with anything?

Better control I guess ?

 

[sayerulz]

Oddly enough, the Maus was one of the few German tanks that DIDN'T have engine problems. The electric drive system was quite effective, and it even had a decent-ish speed when on a good surface. Also interestingly, on the subject of asthetics, Hitler himself demanded that the Maus be given a bigger gun, because the one in the original designs looked too small.

 

[Dr. Whammy]

Decent speed? Are you sure about that? 12mph max speed is far from a decent speed. It was less than half the speed of some of the heavy tank destroyers of that era..

Also, the larger 150mm gun had little to do with aesthetics and everything to do with the need for more dakka. ...Because... Nazis.

 

[Madman198237]

Yep. It's a 128mm (5-inch naval gun) main gun, yet next to several tons of Maus tank, it looks far too small. The coaxial on the Maus tank is a 75mm (The gun that was standard on most armored vehicles until after the end of the war), yet it looks like a machinegun. Hitler didn't like it, so he demanded a 150mm (6-inch) naval gun be used instead.

Form over function. Had Hitler not demanded so much from his weapons designers, many of Germany's almost-superweapons might have become realities. Instead, the Maus was cancelled after delays gave the Allies time to decimate the air forces that the Maus would've relied on for protection from the air (Moving at 8 mph is not safe for dodging aircraft), the Me 262 was too late to be produced and deployed in large numbers.

 

[TheWurm]

The legion eats big ships for breakfast . A single Titan can never match a fleet of well coordinated well built smaller ships.

I like to think that improved turret/weapon AI will swing this pendulum back towards the center. Shoot, proper behavior for non forward facing weapons could go a long way..

As for visual v functional, I enjoy the challenge of building efficient ships at least as much as making them pretty, probably more. But once it's built, the outside is the part I can show off, which is nice too. I suppose it comes down to pride for me, I can't quite bring myself to give either one up for the other's sake. I've only ever built cubes for testing, then immediately dismantled them, and I have the strangest inability to greeble my ships without first convincing myself there's a mechanical reason for that to be there. It's an odd form of psychosis, I think.

 

[sayerulz]

Decent speed? Are you sure about that? 12mph max speed is far from a decent speed. It was less than half the speed of some of the heavy tank destroyers of that era..

Also, the larger 150mm gun had little to do with aesthetics and everything to do with the need for more dakka. ...Because... Nazis.

Yes, it was half the speed of many heavy TDs, but on a vehicle with twice the weight, that's pretty good.

 

[Dr. Whammy]

Yes, it was half the speed of many heavy TDs, but on a vehicle with twice the weight, that's pretty good.

Kinda gives a whole new meaning to the line: "Come on! Step on it! I can get out and run faster than this!"