FC Forums

So, as I said in my re-re-re-introduction to the community, I've started a major project that I have the investment, interest, and will power to complete over the course of the next several months. This project will be hosted on Prototype's server when it's ready, but in the meantime I'm building one of the small ships in the fleet on single player. I've been trying to do some recruitment on PMC to little success- I'll remedy that eventually. I do have a plan, but it's kind of complicated. I'll be using this as a thread for the project so I can update it regularly and get advice as much as possible.
So tl;dp (too long, didn't post), here's the current ship (praying the pictures will work):


Here's the basic plan for it (it's an atmospheric landing craft with the capabilities of a submarine and land-crawler):


Here it is (still a WIP, obviously):
Here is a plan of the colony ship (which is a lot larger):
This plan is not done- it is still missing the wing sections and I've only drawn the detailing on half the ship (the ship will have a symmetrical body)


So, the design is influenced by the design aesthetic of MLP and some of the wonderful European cities and classical decor that I've been visiting recently (Palace of Versailles in space, anyone?)

Questions, queries, doubtful comments?

HE LIVES!

Again. Welcome back.

My opinion is (as usual when it comes to your builds) that those designs are a lot of talk about nothing so to say ... They are nicely detailed and a lot of work was put into them but they lack an end shape, they are a lot of fancy parts put together that dont quite add up, as a result we merely admire the level of detail on those parts and move on. You need to add a more definite shape to your ships.

^ on that note, I think you fell into the same trap as the Nostromo. Greebling and detailing to define a ship's geometry and shape really leaves it... formless. I think part of the reason ISDs are so popular is because they manage to mix both a definite shape and a good level of detail; maybe try for something like that.

This is the basic form of the colony ship. It actually sticks quite close to this shape, too. I do understand where you're coming from, especially with some of my smaller/older builds (definitely with the ICESS, which was made entirely from detail). But I do have the right to defend myself, which is why I did this quick mock-up in Photoshop to prove that it does have a strong form, and the detail is extra. This ship will have a lot more and larger "blank space" than some of my other builds, while still having enough detail when necessary. I hope. I actually don't like to sound big-headed, and it is nice that you're honest with me about my work. I always wondered why I could build like some of the other builders here, and now I know why. Thanks!

Well in general making something that looks like alien genitals is not a good idea. Its not just mashing a few shapes together, you gotta keep the whole picture in mind and progress towards it. It doesn’t have to be complicated either, my Hyperion is made up of the simplest shapes possible its about making em synergize. Think what your ship needs, an engine ? A bridge ? A main weapon ? A fighter bay ? A comm array ? Making shapes that can host those things make your design feel more natural. Heres your alien genitals btw:

Iv121 wrote:Well in general making something that looks like alien genitals is not a good idea.

I'm so glad I'm not the only one who saw that instantly.

They could be more blatant genitals
The landing craft doesn't seem too bad for an end form, according to the plan it should look like a huge bird at the end. The colony ship on the other hand... I'm not sure what shape it is.

Also Iv are those genitals or a torture device? I'm genuinely confused and that mildly terrifies me.

Something that's intrigued me for a while is that the most successful sci fi ship designs, while not blatantly phallic, often follow the general outline of the genitalia






It seems we have a fondness for backswept engines/components and symmetry.

Indeed. Not ure if Galactica is phallic, per se, but it is common.

Freud was right?

Well if you gonna call anything that has stuff on its sides "genitals" you might have trouble mating in the future O.o . No srsly if teh battlestar was genitals it has its freaking balls in the middle of teh freaking thing ! And they’re not even balls to begin with, there we definitely got balls and a freaking triple *.

I'm not saying they're genitalia, just pointing out almost every spaceship in recent memory follows the same overall configuration that parallels that of the peener.



If you took one of the sideswept pods and put one or both at the front, it'd disrupt the entire design. It would look weird. But why? I'm speculating maybe it's a subconscious thing that promotes this kind of silhouette.

I've been here for 4 days and you already have me drawing * in paint

Y'know, we humans do have a tendency to make things in the shape of penises.
I think all of humanity is of problem mit papa und *.

You do realize they deliberately told the Curiosity rover to drive a course that would leave tracks in the shape of a *.
The first human art on a foreign planet was a *.