Asymmetrical Ship Sets

[capnq]

Star Control 1 is the game with 4 factions - blue, green, red and grey

The original Star Control had two sides with seven races each, with each race having a single ship design and special ability. IIRC, the four colors were used on the star map to show Alliance control, uncolonized, Hierarchy control, and unexplored, respectively.

From a physics standpoint, symmetry give you a more predictable center of gravity, which makes it easier to control the direction of acceleration under thrust.

[Pax]

Originally posted by Taera:
Star Control 1 is the game with 4 factions - blue, green, red and grey, everyone with the same types but very different ships and abilities, right?

It shouldnt be too difficult to mod, their ships are rather simple.

Nope.

Star Control 1 has TWO factions. The Ur-Quan and their Hierarchyof BAttle Thralls ... and the Alliance of Free Stars.

On the Hierarchy side, hoping I don't miss a few, were (SC1) the Ur-Quan, VUX, Mycon, Androsynth, Umgah, Ilwrath, and Spathi. SC2 added the Thraddash, and introduced the Ur-Quan's "sibling" secies, the Kor-Ah.

On the Alliance side were the Humans, Chenjesu, Shofixti (samurai squirrels in space! lol!), Yehat, Mrnhrm, Ariloulaleelay (a.k.a. Arilou), and the Syreen. SC2 added, in the New Alliance of Free Stars, the Chmrr (combined Chenjesu and Mrnhrm), Zoq-Fot-Pik, Supox, Utwig, the Yehat's own splintered "sibling" race, the Pkunk, the Slylandro, and the Orz.

Neutrals in SC2, were the Melnorme traders, and ... damn, I can't remember, the slave-trading bastards in their "Mauler" flying-cannon ships ... whatever their names were.

SC3 introduced a few other races; I forget most of them.

...

The trick is, each race had it's own, single, sole ship design. Each had (usually) two abilities, the main weapon, and some special ability.

For example, the Arilou "flying saucer" affair had a VERY-short-range, rapid-reload laser, that auto-aimed towards the enemy. Their special ability was to teleport (randomly) aroudn the battlefield, a useful escape trick after making a (dangerous) strafing run on the enemy.

Meanwhile, the Vux had slow, barge-in-space, klingon-lookalike warships with a hugely powerful, mid-range laser out the front. Their SPECIAL ability made them combat worthy -- little "limpet" missiles, that slowed the enemy down if they hit (and clung, ofc).

So, each race would need to have their own set of technologies to be properly done in SE4 style, mod-wise.

Shipset-wise ... each race had only a single ship, and, they weren't always of the same "size" (the Arilou SKiff and Shofixti Scout would both likely be Escort of at best Frigate sized vessels, for example). however, a certain style MIGHT be extractable from those basic images, if a talented shipset designer was motivated to assay the attempt. 8)

[Pax]

[quote]Originally posted by capnq:

From a physics standpoint, symmetry give you a more predictable center of gravity, which makes it easier to control the direction of acceleration under thrust.

With centerline engines, perhaps.

But ... look at the Illea ship. You have a core, roughly-symmetrical ship. On the far side (form our viewpoint) you have, close to the core, an obviously large,massive assembly, probably the main weapons array.

On the NEAR side, you haveonly what appears to be a small communications array -- but note it is flung well out from the core hull. This preserves (somewhat) the center of gravity of the ship, relative to the production of thrust.

It doesn't matter the SHAPE of the ship, it matters the distribution of MASS, when it comes to *propulsive* symmetry.

[Arkcon]

Originally posted by DirectorTsaarx:
Once they made his face perfectly symmetrical, he really was a decent-looking guy. So, natural selection should tend towards symmetry. Perfect symmetry isn't going to happen, but many people come pretty close. Barring major accidents, of course.

It is so bizzare to hear you say that. When I took high school psychology the teacher told us that asymmetry was preferable. A perfectly symmetrical face would just look wrong. People would dislike it and not know why. But if it improved Lyle Lovett , well I gotta remember that one to use for my wedding photos.

That teacher also tried to convince us that striving for perfect symmetry was a sign of a sick mind. If an adult still drew a stick figure house symmetrically -- perfect square, triange roof, flanked by two equal trees, chiminey and sun in the center -- you had to look out, they are likly to crack under pressure.

He actually taught this method and other tricks to people who wanted to avoid the draft in the '50's. And presumably it worked (or the other tricks did, or everyone just got lucky)

[ October 01, 2002, 03:57: Message edited by: Arkcon ]

[dumbluck]

Pax: Manuevering thrust calculations would be a [explicative deleted] on a severely asymetrical ship. I think...

[LazarusLong42]

Dumbluck: I would contend otherwise. A standard set of manuevering thrusters is three sets of four: yaw, roll, pitch. As long as each member of a given set is placed symmetrically with respect to an axis passing through the center of gravity of the ship, the calculations become trivial.

And on top of that, you have the computer to do all the heavy math lifting for you anyway

[geoschmo]

Correct. Asymetry is purely a visual thing. For any ship design to be sound from an engineering poitn of view it HAS to be "balanced" around a center of gravity and the thrust has to be applied either centerline to that or balanced on all sides of that centerline or you get rotation instead of directional thrust.

Balance is not an option, it has to be balanced. But being balaced does not mean it has to be visually symetrical.

Geoschmo