I call you a liar because of your claim that this ship is not symmetrical. And it is perfectly symmetrical the the single cube. My original post don't suggest any orientation, it was your interpretation of what you want it to be. You call this ship asymmetrical, raging and insulting me how i "don't know symmetry", bla bla bla, base on that I call you a liar, which is true. Now you raging furthermore, that's only speaks about you, not me. Ship is symmetrical and you get caught on a lie. No amount of insults from your site is gonna change that, it will only show of who you are.
I found that one while searching the word "Seraphim" in the workshop. Fortunately, few results so far - it does bug me somewhat when the same ship-names get reused dozens of times over, and my current WIP SV aims to follow in the same "heavenly" aesthetic as the 'Spire. Plus, I really want to play with "floating wings," like the ships from Jupiter Ascending, or the HALO 5 "guardians" Because y'know, if Asymmetrical ships are a cardinal sin of engineering, space-magic floaty bits must rank somewhere around the second coming of the antichrist. Screw physics anyway.
Wait, but that is symmetrical? Or is this an example of floaty bits? And if that inspires you, an a-symmetrical design with floaty or non-directly-attached-blocks would be... holy crap. Extremely challenging! It is hard enough when they are attached! Forgive me, it is slightly hard to tell, is that a Seraphim tier 2 assault bot? I am interested in the results whether you do it symmetrically or a-symmetrically.
Yeah, the Guardian (and the examples of J-A ships I've seen) are symmetrical, I'm just using them as floaty-bit examples. I suspect when it's finished, this thing is going to end up looking like a strangely-elegant assembly of shattered glass.
I know I shouldn't feed trolls, but I'm in a mood today. I think whoever hired you, should probably review your work, cause your "advanced understanding of physics" is easily refuted by the brilliant engineers who work for NASA and have pulled off hundreds of successful missions over the last several decades. Exhibit A, the space shuttle. While the Shuttle possesses a mostly bi-lateral symmetry it is not a perfect symmetry, as shown above in the area underneath the main cabin. Furthermore, the shuttle possesses even more deviation from this bilateral symmetry in its internal components. The main design consideration from a bi-lateral symmetry stand point had almost nothing to do with zero/low gravity environments it would traverse in, and was almost entirely dictated by the needs of atmospheric performance upon re-entry. Furthermore, the shuttle was able to perform maneuvers in all vectors in zero/low gravity environments, and I would point out that it performed these maneuvers with asymmetry being present on many of those vectors. Note the shuttle is not symmetrical from the perspective of top and bottom, nor front and back. And yet it functioned just fine when it moved in any vector. Exhibit B The Voyager Deep Space Probe While the Voyager probe has a certain level of radial symmetry along 1 axis, it possesses a number of elements which break this symmetry along that same axis, and it is completely asymmetrical along just about any other axis you want to punch through it. The Voyager probe however was able to travel throughout our solar system, performing a number of turns and maneuvers as it made its journey, and kept its dished pointed back to earth for transmission/reception of valuable data and instructions. At no time was its lack of symmetry an impediment to the performance of its mission. I could keep going through the history of NASA space vehicles and just illuminate further the complete idiocy of your position, but I've got work to return to. But as a parting shot to fully demonstrate the ineptitude of your engineering prowess, and ability for logical thought... The problem with your line of thought is that a malfunction would be equally problematic for a perfectly symmetrical ship as well. Lets say we have a sphere, with thrusters in each of the 6 perpendicular vectors. If any one of those thrusters malfunction, that ship is in a world of hurt. It's not the symmetry or lack of it that is the problem. It is the presence of force and mass in various levels of equilibrium that is the problem. And any highschool student who paid half attention in basic physics should be able to grasp that. Which brings me to my final request. Please inform the rest of us what you've been working on that has required your "advanced understanding of physics", because I want to be absolutely sure I never ride, or rely on any vehicle or device you had any hand in engineering.
As the great Adam Savage of the Mythbusters once said: (As best as I can remember it) "Real Life makes for a crappy Special Effects Crew.", so imho Screw RL. For the Topic: I've begun work on my first ever Asymmetry CV... it already seems like it's gonna end up something that'll just get laughed at, but to be fair i'm starting small. If I try to go Grand my first go i'll just waste my own time & guarantee failure, so i'm goin baby steps instead.
Lift, you are hilarious. When I first saw this, I thought the pedestrians in the background were human/Terran. Then, upon closer inspection, I see ziraaxians, and, well; my Canada, how you've changed! This made my morning, thank you. I love that you do not want to feed the trolls. I appreciate you acknowleging that, but, if you(as in, any given person) are going to, THAT is how you do it; not only soundly refuting points, but also contributing inspiring images for this thread. Beautifully done sir! In addition, I really enjoy the juxtaposition between the avatar you choose for these forums and the one you have for steam. One is the dystopically friendly, the other is "I AM GOING TO RIP YOUR HEAD OFF." Also, welcome to the forums! Tyrax, you will not get laughed at. And if they do, I will get them banned from these forums. Please, do not be afraid to share. A side note for everone else: I do not think we have approached this point yet, but let us make sure this thread does not become a "Lets all tear into Cotoktoto" thread. It is immeasurably important to defend one's self, and as long as the insults and destructive thinking persists, this is all fine, but if we go beyond without thinking, we risk becoming the very thing we are attempting to refute or resist and think of as unpleasant.
I asked for and received permission from the rather awesomely talented Jenniphurr to post her newest hovercraft to this thread. To give you a very brief over-view, she is the one who produces all the zero-g ships and bases, and is monstrously capable. In addition to the design Kieve shared a page or two back, here are some other examples of her works: http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=692883190 http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=726570475 http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=758920263 (this ones ma favorite) The overall collection: http://steamcommunity.com/workshop/filedetails/?id=620454405 But! Without further adieu, her most recent hovercraft, the Gorman 2: http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=775113688
Many thanks. I already wasn't gonna be afraid to share... yet... but we'll see later, this encouragement may yet be needed. I love that Addage so much. ^_^ Edit: Got a bit more work done on my first ever Asymmetrical Vehicle... enough now to give ya'all a little Sneak Peek. Spoiler: Ya'all have permission to laugh at this... I seriously have no idea why I got the urge to do this...
Firstly, Hello all! OK. With the pleasantries out of the way, I'll just get down to business.... Symmetry/ A-Symmetry. I'm going to assume that we're talking about L/R A-symmetry, where the silhouette of an object is not identical either side of a plane that passes vertically from front to back through the object's centre. I'm not talking about COM because as far as symmetry is concerned it is largely irrelevant in that COM has no bearing on the center of the silhouette of the object. Symmetry and Physics. A perfectly L/R symmetrical vessel will have just as many problems as a L/R a-symmetrical vessel as far as propulsion failures are concerned since failures will likely create an a-symmetry. Therefore the argument against L/R a-symmetrical vessels being a nightmare with regard to failures is invalid. Symmetry and Art. Perfect symmetry is an ideal, most of nature is a-symmetric, human faces are L/R a-symmetric, the "uncanny valley" effect tends to suggest that perfect human faces are neither beautiful or natural. Whilst I strive to maintain L/R symmetry in my builds, a small ammount of a-symmetry has often helped rescue a failing build. Almost all of my builds are Top/Bottom a-symmetric, possibly I've been trained to see that as 'right', my favourite build however, is largely symmetric in two planes; L/R and T/B. Inferr what you will from that. With that said, sadly I have nothing to show as far as this thread is concerned, which renders this post irrelevant. I guess what I've really been trying to say is that symmetry/a-symmetry is largely subjective, I see no justification why either design philosophy is any more vaild than the other. Personally speaking, I prefer Tie bombers over the 'Falcon, but the a-symmetry of Slave-1 trumps all other examples in that universe. I have a special place for vessels like Nostromo and Sulaco, both of which show striking a-symmetries. I suspect, if I ever attempt a truly L/R a-symmetric vessel, that it will be a large one, because a-symmetry is less jarring on large structures (imo), and, well, I like to go big! TL;DR Haven't built any L/R a-symmetric vessels, when I do, it will be big. ooj
Welcome Ooji! And welcome to the Forums! Your post is definitely not irrelevant, and I am glad you shared this. While I primarily want this thread to be about the vessels and bases themselves, the discourse herein has proven to be very healthy and I think has inspired people - a broadening of perspectives. This includes myself because I had not thought of it as an ideal, more of what Freud describes as transference resulting from developmental forces or what Jung describes a projection, perhaps even evolutionary forces at play. We take what we have been taught, or what we know, or who we are, or even what we are absolutely sure is the correct way of thinking(what you refer to as "right") and then try to mold our environments around that. Adding the aspect of the perspective of symmetry as an ideal would further complicate things as idealists can sometimes be the bitterest of defenders. For anyone new to or ignorant of Ooji's work, it can be found here and is wondrously impressive: http://steamcommunity.com/workshop/filedetails/?id=769421515 I do hope you attempt something someday, but regardless of your approach, I look forward to seeing your future designs!
I ask for and received permission to post a most impressive blueprint from the workshop: This is Barcelona, by Savinwraith: http://steamcommunity.com/workshop/filedetails/?id=774632736 The posts here have been predominantly ships(and this makes sense) but this is a good example of how a-symmetry and non-euclidean thought can be applied to a base. As you can see, not only a-symmetric, but also artistic and simply magnificent while remaining functional. Few bases on the workshop match it for it's fluid combination of welcoming, chic, and original themes. Truly awesome.
Well you did title it asymmetrical vessels after all. But yeah, saw that one and immediately subbed/upvoted. Utterly gorgeous. I am a little envious, and definitely need to step up my game in the housing market. For now, here's a teaser of that weird... thing I've been attempting, floaty-bits and all. The paint scheme is proving somewhat troublesome, owing to the way the blocks connect (angles never behave the way I want them to), but it has all the critical components to be functional. Still to come: more wingly bits on the left, a sizeable gun assembly on the right. And lots more thrusters, because hardened steel is heavy, and I want this baby to fly.
That's the hope! I have been honored to find that the better part of a hundred people a day view this thread, so hopefully I can not only give a-symmetrical designs a boost, but also the individual designers a boost for all their designs. When I first saw this, I did one of those *head rear back slightly* motions. That is going to be one HELL of a ship! I am eager to see it! And, so we are clear, your game is already very amazing. No need to step anything up, just keep building on your designs with each ship. You will be one of those people who, when they release a design, will provoke people into thinking, "Oh $&%#, Kieve just published something new! I gotta go see it!"
Tyrax Asymm "Barney" is done! As an experiment i'm trying sticking the Screenies onto the Workshop Page for the Creation instead of in this Post. Do ya'all like this more or less then me sticking the Screenies in the Post in a Spoiler? Also, Slam, ya might not wanna look at this Creation or it might make ya puke. & a certain other person might not wanna look at this Creation or it might make that person's Brain Asplode.
That is one well-armed space potato. Yay for asymmetry! No real preference, for me. When I'm at home, everything loads up nice and quick. Trying to browse at work, these forums are sluggish like you wouldn't believe - pics or no pics - and Workshop isn't much better.
