+- Discovery Gaming Community (https://discoverygc.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Discovery Development (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=7)
+--- Forum: Discovery Developers Forum (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=183)
+---- Forum: Discovery Unofficial Development (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=389)
+----- Forum: Discovery Mod Content Submissions (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=33)
+----- Thread: New Coalition Shipline (/showthread.php?tid=41368)
New Coalition Shipline - Unseelie - 06-26-2010
' Wrote:The new ones aren't supposed to look sexy, they're supposed to look functional.Have you looked at your genitalia recently?
There's nothing there but form following function.
New Coalition Shipline - bluntpencil2001 - 06-26-2010
' Wrote:Have you looked at your genitalia recently?
There's nothing there but form following function.
I don't find penises sexy. Nor do I find these spaceships sexy.
New Coalition Shipline - Unseelie - 06-26-2010
I find Jinx's ships sexy. I also consider them fragile. What does that say?
Oh, it says I like girls. How about that..But I'd go on to argue that sex in general isn't sexy, but it is functional. So perhaps we've got the whole wrong idea about what looking sexy means.
New Coalition Shipline - bluntpencil2001 - 06-26-2010
So the ships look like combat spacecraft. Which is what they are. And a cock looks like a cock.
Hooray.
New Coalition Shipline - Aphil - 06-26-2010
' Wrote:So the ships look like combat spacecraft. Which is what they are. And a cock looks like a cock.
Hooray.
This man has discovered the truth. I approve.
Also, Coalition ships arn't -MEANT- to be pretty. Just because the current ones happen to look good it doesn't mean we designed them with looks in mind.
New Coalition Shipline - Witch Hunter - 06-26-2010
' Wrote:I find Jinx's ships sexy. I also consider them fragile. What does that say?
And, by extension, because Jinx's ships all look like penises, you also find penises sexy.
I support you Coalition folk. You'll finally have replacements for those old, buggy things you were flying. And the new ships do look very, very functional.
New Coalition Shipline - tansytansey - 06-26-2010
' Wrote:So all I have to do is agree with you and you'll like me?! WOW WHAT A DEAL! Hah! Laughable.Maybe I should have agreed more with Mjolnir, then maybe more of my ships would be in 4.86 :lol:
' Wrote:The new ones aren't supposed to look sexy, they're supposed to look functional.Each to their own. I happen to find Rheinland fighters very sexy.
New Coalition Shipline - Jinx - 06-26-2010
generally speaking...
the look of a ship is mostly the concern of those that fly them - and to a minor ( yes, still to a minor account ) of those that have to look at them ( enemies )
now - the balance of ships is reversed. - the balance is equally a concern of those that fly them and those that fight them. - while one side can provide experience fighting WITH them - the other side can provide experience fighting against them - and only both sides together can create a REAL picture about balance.
now - the look of a ship is like i wrote not too much of other ppls concern - but when the shape suggests a dramatic change - and we assume that the previous balance was applied to the ( supposedly ) worse shape ( from a pvp point of view ) - ppl can comment on it.
there are two kinds of cooperation in a mod. - one is to sneakily include something based on a one sided point of view - the other is to apply the utmost transparency, discuss things on equal levels - and achieve an agreement ( balance ).
to some ships in disco - the first method applies, to others the second, - needless to say, the second version is fairer.
what i find a little sad is that - still.... no faction WANTED to have bad ships for RP sake, - everyone almost always seeks to get the best deal in terms of stats, shape etc. ( excluding factions that were not included in the decision making process of what they get of course )
for that - i do find it important when such concerns about balance are also given in a dev thread ( i have no idea why someone wrote it wasn t appreciated ) - after all... where else can the public write down their concerns about a ship.
to achieve fairness - one must review a ship from as many points of view as possible. - that especially includes the view of those that fight it - and to a minor part the view of those that may fight it. otherwise, we d get a spiral of stats - where each new custom ship became better and better, cause each faction seeks out a little advantage over the enemy.
New Coalition Shipline - Shryke - 06-26-2010
' Wrote:what i find a little sad is that - still.... no faction WANTED to have bad ships for RP sake, - everyone almost always seeks to get the best deal in terms of stats, shape etc. ( excluding factions that were not included in the decision making process of what they get of course )Of course they don't because that makes logical sense. No faction would keep subpar ships and technology if they knew it was inferior. From a strict RP point of view, factions with crap equipment would attempt to get rid of this obstacle in any way they can. You can't say that it is good RP to have bad equipment and do nothing about it. That's just you dictating what good RP should be.
Quote:for that - i do find it important when such concerns about balance are also given in a dev thread ( i have no idea why someone wrote it wasn t appreciated ) - after all... where else can the public write down their concerns about a ship.
to achieve fairness - one must review a ship from as many points of view as possible. - that especially includes the view of those that fight it - and to a minor part the view of those that may fight it. otherwise, we d get a spiral of stats - where each new custom ship became better and better, cause each faction seeks out a little advantage over the enemy.
Oh, does this mean the Kusari Destroyer is going to be looked at, since you know, its getting a lot of negative feedback from its main enemy?
Nice speech, but a bit hypocritical to only apply it to this shipline. Oh and for the 50th time, this is just about the models, not about the balancing.
New Coalition Shipline - Doom - 06-26-2010
what i find amusing is that people who know a thing a two about modeling said that these models from modeling point of view are not very good....and that is ignored in almost entire thread, or some points are made how they look better in game....
Well, let me be blunt....they don't look better, its that sou simply don't see the flaws...you don't see most details of any ship, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't be made properly...
Other, thing i find amusing is that who ever modeled them didn't took a bit of time to try and and fix errors on models. I am not speaking of ships shape, size or color....i speak of terrible mesh, faulty positioning, many hidden, unnecessary faces, stretched textures etc....
Not every model that i have built (or any other modeler for that matter) is perfect for pvp, or even good looking. Most of them (my ships) can be labeled as boring...but as far as texturing, clean mesh and other things that model requires they are up to the standards of this mod. (though few deserve update now that i became more experienced)
Now if we simply MUST replace old coalition ships, i am all for it...i don't want to see faction suffer because of buggy model. Point is that these new models are not better then old one...in many points they are worst...some say old models have terrible textures....these new ones are not any better, in fact old textures are applied correctly but are low in resolution, these new ones are badly applied...
I am confident that any of our more experienced modelers can make better models with in the day...
So...point of advice to any faction in need of ship models....find someone who can model, texture and finally fix errors found in later tests....
Also, be glad that Frozen is in charge of models....i wouldn't be so kind to include these into the mod....but that just me, and i am a bastard...