Fractal Softworks Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Starsector 0.97a is out! (02/02/24); New blog post: Simulator Enhancements (03/13/24)

Pages: 1 2 [3]

Author Topic: Odyssey looks quite unique  (Read 12782 times)

Deshara

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1578
  • Suggestion Writer
    • View Profile
Re: Odyssey looks quite unique
« Reply #30 on: May 02, 2017, 01:57:40 PM »

Odyssey's asymmetry doesn't make less sense than dominator's asymmetry... In 3D space almost always there'll be some side which isn't fully covered and/or one where you're at a disadvantage.

the dominator isn't asymmetrical... And anyway, the point of gun symmetry isn't to make sure your ship has 0 blindspots, it's to make sure than an enemy who's in front of you has no preferable way of getting to your blindspot. IE, if you're fighting a lasher there's no safer way to get behind it because it (should) have the same guns on the left as the right, whereas there's a safer side to a hound or an odyssey, and if the odyssey is fighting two enemies it can't choose which side they try to flank it on because it can get pincer'd
Logged
Quote from: Deshara
I cant be blamed for what I said 5 minutes ago. I was a different person back then

SCC

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 4112
    • View Profile
Re: Odyssey looks quite unique
« Reply #31 on: May 02, 2017, 02:03:34 PM »

I'd say that dominator can't point most of its gun at pretty big area behind it. Heck, it has problem with targets being even 45 degrees to any side. In 3D space it can attack only a ship and has non-existent area denial capabilities, which odyssey would have on the basis of being able to change target(s) quickly (turrets) and would be much more versatile.
As I said, I'm talking about 3D space. In SS it's different since there's only one plane and here having hardpoints or being asymmetrical can be a disadvantage.

Flying Birdy

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 165
    • View Profile
Re: Odyssey looks quite unique
« Reply #32 on: May 02, 2017, 04:16:58 PM »

Symmetry is also redundant as a craft requirement in space. Symmetry is important for flight craft due to the aerodynamic requirements. In space, those requirements do not exist. The important factors are more so targetting profile and weapon coverage.

If you look at the Odyssey, its weapon mounts are portruding from its long frame, and thus in a 3D plane would have excellent coverage as the ships body would not interfere with the firing arcs. Additionally, a long slender ship would need less rotational force to "rotate" the ship along its main axis in a 3D plane, thus allowing it to rotate and position its weaponry much more easily. This is as opposed something like the dominator or onslaught, where frontal heavy weaponry have very limited firing arcs and its wide diameter greatly increases in the force require to "rotate" the ship in a dogfight.

This above sort of design philosphy is one argued strongly for in "the expanse" sci-fi series. The author actually went into great detail with fans explaining why ships would look "more like office buildings".

From my perspective, ship design that "don't make sense" are ships that fire broadsides. In naval warfire it makes sense because the firing "arcs" and positioning is more or less on a 2D plane. In space, the ability for a ship to have portuding weapon mounts and that can fire in a 180 degree arc (the only areas where there is no coverage is the area "below" the weapon mount), makes fire concentration most significant towards the front as well as the rear, as opposed to the sides (since weapons on all "sides" of the ship can concentrate fire towards the front". Additionally, the ability for "spin" and "rotation" makes broadside fire much less important. What becomes more important is the targetting profile of a ship. A ship that fires broadsides have a wide profile relative to its target. A ship with a slender body allows it to have a small profile, while maintaining the same strong fire concentration. Thus the wide body of the dominator, makes a lot less sense compared to the long body of the oddysey.

That said, the oddysey does have one small thing that doesn't make sense. concentrated fire from all of the oddyseys main guns will create a larger profile than what is actually required of the ship.  But other than that, its actually a really scientific lay out of a battle cruiser.
Logged

Satirical

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 120
    • View Profile
Re: Odyssey looks quite unique
« Reply #33 on: May 02, 2017, 04:27:28 PM »

Guardian PD is a pretty nice pickup for this ship

Especially with 0.8
Logged

StarGibbon

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 334
    • View Profile
Re: Odyssey looks quite unique
« Reply #34 on: May 05, 2017, 01:51:03 AM »

This is a fascinating discussion. I'm sorry I came in late. It contains all the things I like--artistic design critique and practical design speculation.

I too am of the opinion that such an overtly asymmetrical design is highly implausible, especially if it was designed by a human mind. Not that there might not be minor asymmetrical elements that don't contribute appreciably to the object's mass, the way a naval vessel's bridge sometimes has an asymmetrical placement--but the gross morphology would have to be majority symmetrical.

1) Basic engineering challenges would force the design into symmetry for practical reasons, in order to evenly distribute structural stresses and more easily calculate engine placement.

2) Being mostly symmetrical ourselves, human beings think symmetrically--this would have psychological ramifications throughout the design, down to peoples ability to intuitively navigate the inner structure of the vessel.

In the case of a ship designed by a theoretical post-singularity AI, who can say what purpose a machine might have for designing such a vessel--but if it's designed for human use, it's probably going to be symmetrical.




That said, it's a fascinating artistic design, fun to look at, and we should just enjoy it. Trying to force these ships into practical design molds is a whole can of worms. None of them are particularly plausible.

 Practical designs are going to be far more ugly, because they would have to deal with the problem of artificial gravity. Extended weightlessness is one of the biggest threats to human health in space travel--our bodies aren't designed for it.  Magical artificial gravity the way its portrayed in most sci-fi media isn't a thing, nor is it particularly plausible, so most practical designs are going to involve spinning drums or habs on rotating spokes. Any design with a top/down orientation is highly suspect.  But who wants to see a bunch of flying paintcans?

« Last Edit: May 05, 2017, 01:56:51 AM by StarGibbon »
Logged

Philder

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 142
    • View Profile
Re: Odyssey looks quite unique
« Reply #35 on: May 05, 2017, 04:19:37 AM »

Symmetry is a luxury that many people irrationally desire. There is undoubtedly a good evolutionary reason for it, however we didn't evolve with modern (or sci-fi) technology as a concern, and like many of our evolutionary tendencies, it has become a little out of place. When you take a look at industrial machinery (vehicles and otherwise) you'll see how non-dominant symmetry is, being used only when necessary or as an inexpensive luxury.

Also, although many human minds enjoy symmetry, that doesn't mean we can only imagine symmetrical designs. And besides that, AI generated designs have already made an appearance in research and the results look quite alien, which brings to attention the comment on stresses and such. Consider this: Load bearing structures are designed around the machines they are housing, and the logistics of where machines are placed in an assembly are based on the intended job they're being employed for. There is some amount of interplay between it all but this is how engineering design is typically structured. Aesthetics are the last on the list of design considerations unless aesthetics is part of the job. And that's what symmetry without reason is.

Don't get me wrong, symmetry is very often a useful mechanic and a powerful mathematical tool. It just isn't everything, and by itself, "because symmetry!" isn't a valid argument.

Finally, I should add that the Odyssey is a 2d ship in a sci-fi video game, and as such does not need to fulfill stringent engineering design criteria to be a valid ship design. All I'm saying is that asymmetry is just as valid a 2d sci-fi video game ship design as symmetry.
Logged

StarGibbon

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 334
    • View Profile
Re: Odyssey looks quite unique
« Reply #36 on: May 05, 2017, 04:39:02 AM »

Symmetry is a luxury that many people irrationally desire.

Irrational?  No, there are practical engineering reasons for it. Machinery in a factory is designed for a repetitive task that has nothing to do with structural stresses or the ability to apply thrust without careening out of control.  Any vehicle is mostly symmetrical in  terms of propulsion and structure (4 wheels, evenly distributed weight, etc). It couldn't work otherwise.

In terms of aesthetic appeal, I agree with you. Symmetry becomes overly predictable and staid. In artistic compositions, it's used to evoke order, stability, balance--sometimes religious imagery. Asymmetrical compositions tend to be more dynamic and create energy.
« Last Edit: May 05, 2017, 04:48:49 AM by StarGibbon »
Logged

zaimoni

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 110
    • View Profile
Re: Odyssey looks quite unique
« Reply #37 on: May 05, 2017, 05:04:25 AM »

Practical designs are going to be far more ugly, because they would have to deal with the problem of artificial gravity. Extended weightlessness is one of the biggest threats to human health in space travel--our bodies aren't designed for it.  Magical artificial gravity the way its portrayed in most sci-fi media isn't a thing, nor is it particularly plausible, so most practical designs are going to involve spinning drums or habs on rotating spokes. Any design with a top/down orientation is highly suspect.  But who wants to see a bunch of flying paintcans?
Eh...stable antimatter storage is a Domain-era technology.  I would be unsurprised if the Gate system was implementing Krasnikov tubes, which are as equally plausible as soft science fiction artificial gravity.

(Google is your friend.  Be prepared for sloppy sketches if you try to read the mathematical modeling from Arxiv.org, rather than the plain English summaries).  It's not logically impossible, but you certainly don't want to pay the energy cost yourself for maintaining the required exotic boundaries yourself.
Logged

StarGibbon

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 334
    • View Profile
Re: Odyssey looks quite unique
« Reply #38 on: May 05, 2017, 05:17:16 AM »

Eh...stable antimatter storage is a Domain-era technology.  I would be unsurprised if the Gate system was implementing Krasnikov tubes, which are as equally plausible as soft science fiction artificial gravity.

(Google is your friend.  Be prepared for sloppy sketches if you try to read the mathematical modeling from Arxiv.org, rather than the plain English summaries).  It's not logically impossible, but you certainly don't want to pay the energy cost yourself for maintaining the required exotic boundaries yourself.

Soft sci-fi generally isn't concerned with being plausible, at least not as a priority. Any setting that uses FTL travel can just as easily handwave artificial gravity under any rationale they care to.

I wasn't making a case for practical designs--quite the opposite. I was just saying not to think too much about it, because once you do the whole thing comes apart.  The Odyssey is much more fun than any practical design would be, which is what I want out of a space opera game.
« Last Edit: May 05, 2017, 05:19:17 AM by StarGibbon »
Logged

Megas

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 12118
    • View Profile
Re: Odyssey looks quite unique
« Reply #39 on: May 05, 2017, 05:23:10 AM »

I like symmetry.

As for Odyssey, before, it was unique; now it has Legion to compete with.  With only one bay (and inferior energy weapons), it seems... lacking.
Logged

zaimoni

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 110
    • View Profile
Re: Odyssey looks quite unique
« Reply #40 on: May 05, 2017, 05:34:43 AM »

We're on the same wavelength.  I'm just saying that based on changes in what was known between 1980 and 1999, there's no longer a reason to think what the Rule of Cool requires, is logically impossible.

If you can engineer a traversable wormhole and lug one end light-years from another (yes, this has been explicitly modeled under some fairly major assumptions about spacetime structure, that haven't been ruled out yet), you already have artificial gravity; you needed it to make the wormhole in the first place.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3]