FC Forums

Inspiration does not mean copy. I could write a fantasy book and say I got inspiration from Ender's Game.

Taranis is delta shaped, and there was that German super fighter, and a Northrop prototype, but B2 is the only one that is actively used to use a full delta body. Actually the B2 was based on a Northrop prototype, which was likely based on the Ho 229, which may have been based on upon a French glider, the name of which I forgot.

But I would like to do a double delta, those look good.

ACH0225 wrote:Inspiration does not mean copy. I could write a fantasy book and say I got inspiration from Ender's Game.

Yes, if your main character was named Ender and rose up to command Earth's armada and defeat an alien race. That's the only way that analogy would be valid here in comparison to what you did.

Not really. I never presented it horizontally, and it wouldn't have had the stealth angles. Simply because it is the same general shape doesn't mean it is the same. The B2 also has a very different back shape, along with no turret. These are fairly large differences, their only similarities being that they are delta shaped and bombers

Sort of like this. Kangaroos are mammals and walk on 2 legs. Humans are mammals and walk on 2 legs. Humans must be descended from kangaroos!

The biggest difference is that the B2 looks cool whereas yours looks terrible. Based on that alone, yes, they are different craft.

Petty insults will really get you nowhere. Suppose you could revise it then. What would you change?

You act as if I'm going out of my way to insult you. Don't flatter yourself - I'm just pointing out facts here. I've already provided an example of a ship that did what you're trying to do right.

Actually, in a little less than half your posts in response to my post, you have called my design awful, ugly, or agreed with my being chased out of the Ships Thread. As for the picture of the bomber you posted, it is vaguely bland and has no defining features. It is shaped like a vague-triangle, but it would be better described as a mildly sloped line. It possesses no defining characteristics, nothing that makes the player think it is interesting. In a single word, it is boring.

Oh, would you rather I said it was 'beautiful' and 'elegant'? 'Well-designed', perhaps? I'd be lying if I said it wasn't the ugliest thing I've seen on this forum, and that's not how I roll.

Also, that critique is rich coming from the maker of a triangle with a bunch of components stuck on it. 'no defining features', indeed.

Tiel, while his drawing may not be the pinnacle of artisic style, there was no need to get rude.

Tiel wrote:I'm starting to see why you got chased out of the ships subforum.

Was unecessary. Unless you've got constructive criticism, I'd reccomend saying nothing whatsoever.

The triangle is the defining feature, around which the ship is designed. As for honesty, it's appreciated, but some of it felt very directed to me, instead of my bomber.

Simple designs tend to work best, but a triangle with just a few bits and bobs is kinda..boring.

Needs moar future! Try applying some wierd organic look or something. Maybe add claws?
/lolwut

In all seriousness, just a geometric shape with bobs in = the definition of many spaceships.

Commander Error wrote:Tiel, while his drawing may not be the pinnacle of artisic style, there was no need to get rude.

Tiel wrote:I'm starting to see why you got chased out of the ships subforum.

Was unecessary. Unless you've got constructive criticism, I'd reccomend saying nothing whatsoever.

I would attempt to justify that statement and point out I'd already noted it was just proof of concept, but frankly I could care less what you or anyone else thinks at this point in time. The rules prohibit flaming. Calling a design ugly is something I see in the ships subforum every day.

ACH0225 wrote:The triangle is the defining feature, around which the ship is designed. As for honesty, it's appreciated, but some of it felt very directed to me, instead of my bomber.

The triangle is also the defining feature of an Imperial Star Destroyer, but those don't look nearly as bland and unappealing as what you have there.

That's probably because the Star Destroyer is a space ship, while this is a bomber.

Tiel wrote:
Calling a design ugly is something I see in the ships subforum every day.

Nobody calls anything ugly, they just say what needs to be done to make it less ugly, calling something ugly, is not helpful, saying why it is ugly is.


But claws... Those actually work on fighters, though so far my attempts didn't work as the ships I put them on were not designed to have them.