Preacher
Swabbie
Banned
Folks:
You'll note that the Kiltathi ships flown in WC tend to be mostly symmetrical thru WC 1& 2; beginning w/ WC3, they change to asymmetrical. The "Victory Streak" provides the supposed reason why. It seems the asymmetrical, "guns bristling", clawlike appearance of most of 'em are due to Kilrathi's warlike worldview, and how making 'em that way has a supposedly psychological, intimidating effect on their enemies, given their somewhat "scary" appearance as such. This explanation was supposedly given by Hobbes. However, there's a continuity break here, 'cuz (as I pointed out), the ships of WC1 &2 ARE mostly symmetrical.... WHy the diff?--probably someone @ Origin didn't notice, or they simply decided it would be cooler to do it that way nonetheless.
Some have griped that the Terran ships are far too "aerodynamic-looking" for space craft, given that there's no need for such in space. There's two things to keep in mind here. First, you just know Terran designers are gonna bring the cultural bias with them to the design table. For "centuries" (supposedly, by then), man has HAD TO design ships w/ aerodynamic looks, because they were mostly limited to atmospheric flight, and good aerodynamics (Read: Lower coefficient of drag, or cD) was a necessity. By the time man would be producing enough "space" craft, we'd be just too "used to" looking at aerodynamic designs. And let's face it: Aerodynamically designed ships just plain LOOK COOLER than the alternative. Why wouldn't we bring that preference with us into the space age?... Two, several Terran fighters (in WC 3 & 4) are atmospheric-flight capable. This is even more so in the novels ("Fleet Action", "Freedom Flight"), I was surprised to find out. There you have it.
-Preacher
You'll note that the Kiltathi ships flown in WC tend to be mostly symmetrical thru WC 1& 2; beginning w/ WC3, they change to asymmetrical. The "Victory Streak" provides the supposed reason why. It seems the asymmetrical, "guns bristling", clawlike appearance of most of 'em are due to Kilrathi's warlike worldview, and how making 'em that way has a supposedly psychological, intimidating effect on their enemies, given their somewhat "scary" appearance as such. This explanation was supposedly given by Hobbes. However, there's a continuity break here, 'cuz (as I pointed out), the ships of WC1 &2 ARE mostly symmetrical.... WHy the diff?--probably someone @ Origin didn't notice, or they simply decided it would be cooler to do it that way nonetheless.
Some have griped that the Terran ships are far too "aerodynamic-looking" for space craft, given that there's no need for such in space. There's two things to keep in mind here. First, you just know Terran designers are gonna bring the cultural bias with them to the design table. For "centuries" (supposedly, by then), man has HAD TO design ships w/ aerodynamic looks, because they were mostly limited to atmospheric flight, and good aerodynamics (Read: Lower coefficient of drag, or cD) was a necessity. By the time man would be producing enough "space" craft, we'd be just too "used to" looking at aerodynamic designs. And let's face it: Aerodynamically designed ships just plain LOOK COOLER than the alternative. Why wouldn't we bring that preference with us into the space age?... Two, several Terran fighters (in WC 3 & 4) are atmospheric-flight capable. This is even more so in the novels ("Fleet Action", "Freedom Flight"), I was surprised to find out. There you have it.
-Preacher
