Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[writeru]

Im asking because there is probably a limit to how small or big ships can be in the game before affecting the gameplay in detrimental ways.

The Fighters, are they are, are already very small when zoomed out. If they were even smaller it could be a problem. The same way capitals are already big, making them even bigger (bigger than ridiculous big modded super dreadnought) could probably be detrimental too, not even talking about game balance, only visual performace, etc.


So, lore wise, are all the ships as big as they are in the lore, or they are slightly distorted because for gameplay purposes?


I ask specially because of the fighters and capitals. I feel like some fighters are too big compared to some destroyer carriers, and capitals lore wise sound more imponent than they already are.

[Schwartz]

I think the fighters may be slightly upsized because they are on a plane "above" the rest of the ships. You see them flying downward as they go to the carrier for repairs, etc. But all the others should be true to size in relation to one another.

Look at the Onslaught compared to the average-size fighter and remember it has a crew minimum of 750 and a maximum of 1500. Plus the thickest armor plating in the sector. If all entities were true to size, that would make for living conditions worse than on a submarine.

There's concept art for a Hound being unloaded and I think it has humans in it. Definitely bigger than a couple of fighters front-to-back.

[David]

Hope this doesn't disappoint, but they're scaled to work on a computer screen. Making the game work as a game is the top priority when it comes to the visual design. Worldbuilding comes second.

[Vanshilar]

I really really hope the various objects aren't actually to scale, because man I'd hate to be in one of those fighters when some of those missiles and projectiles fly by...

[Deshara]

the kite is an atmospheric shuttle with a crew size of 2. Compared to, say, a Paragon or an Onslaught which can have crew capacity in the thousands, the Kite should be as small as the command shuttle, if not smaller. It definitely shouldn't be about the same size as a cerberus or lasher which have minimum crew size 10x as large. It seems like it shouldn't be impossible to total up each ship's cargo holds, crew capacity, fuel capacity, OP, multiply it by its fuel per lightyear (on the understanding that smaller/lighter = more fuel efficient), then line each ship up on a graph based on that number to get an idea of relative ship size

[KDR_11k]

A probe has a whole derelict fleet in its hold. Probes are launched by the dozen by survey ships which are launched by motherships. Yet the mothership isn't that much larger than the largest derelicts in combat. So no, they're definitely not to scale.

[Pratapon51]

It gets even worse with space stations. A star fortress can house and supply an entire planetary garrison complete with battleships, but is only somewhat bigger than a few capitals stapled together.

[Deshara]

It gets even worse with space stations. A star fortress can house and supply an entire planetary garrison complete with battleships, but is only somewhat bigger than a few capitals stapled together.

well, you're blowing it up & it doesnt reduce the population, so I always assume that the station you fight on a station-market isnt the actual station itself but the defensive platform & the parts of the station with the people in it are above or below that & the game just doesnt show it bc it isnt 3d

[Pratapon51]

That could be, but they do make a pretty big boom...

[KDR_11k]

It gets even worse with space stations. A star fortress can house and supply an entire planetary garrison complete with battleships, but is only somewhat bigger than a few capitals stapled together.

well, you're blowing it up & it doesnt reduce the population, so I always assume that the station you fight on a station-market isnt the actual station itself but the defensive platform & the parts of the station with the people in it are above or below that & the game just doesnt show it bc it isnt 3d

Also it doesn't scramble any defense ships when you engage it so it's likely that the thing you fight doesn't contain the actual docks.

[LoneWolf]

The size of the ships are totally abstracted and iconized on purpose for gameplay reasons, I believe the best/most believable "Media/Literature" on the sizes between combat ships and fighters would be Legends of the Galactic Heroes, capitals were around 1km a piece and fighters would be several tens of meters large, they would look tiny compared to capitals. Carriers were also able to launch hundreds of fighters potentially.

[Linnis]

Hope this doesn't disappoint, but they're scaled to work on a computer screen. Making the game work as a game is the top priority when it comes to the visual design. Worldbuilding comes second.

Bigger ships are heavier so they sink deeper in space, appearing smaller. Duh

[Ranakastrasz]

Maybe not deeper, but taller. The visuals are a 2d top down of a 3d reality, so a hound is significantly shallower/shorter/thinner than a onslaught.

[Schwartz]

Linnis getting all Einstein up in this.

I think the "regular" ships from frigates to capitals should be roughly to size. Outliers may exist in stations, motherships, fighters etc. Sizes at least don't feel too far out of whack. I didn't know about those motherships having garrisons of these other things in 'em, probably because I notoriously skip a lot of text. 

[LoneWolf]

I just found another thing, when fighters dock back  at their carrier you can even see their size warp down into tiny size as they disappear into the carrier bay.