The Great Design Change!

[Trev-MUN]

Yeah, this as probably been argued over to death (and it already seems to have been discussed to a point on the Carrier Landing thread), but I wanted to hear what you guys think of it in full -

How does one explain the extreme jump in design of vehicles on both sides of the war, from WC 1 and 2 to WC 3 and onward?

One aspect is of course the hull of the ships - the Confederation's ships go from being reminiscent of modern fighter craft to flying bricks. It can be said that the entire reason for the change is due to the necessity of low polygons, but that doesn't quite explain it; observe the Kilrathi ships, and the fairly complex looks they manage to pull off. The Arrow is kind of like that, too - it's almost like the lovechild of a WC3 and WC1/2 era fighter.

Modelers have had to make do with less (Arwing from Star Fox, anyone?), so I don't see why Confed couldn't have retained the "fighter jet" look of their fighters at the very least.

(I might have to try modeling a Hornet with the same polys as a WC3 fighter and see if it can be pulled off...)

But that's not the only thing. The other is the dramatic change in color scheme. I can best describe the Confederation in WC1 and WC2 as "green and white," but all of a sudden, in WC3, it's... sort of a whitish blue.

So, yeah - for me, the change in design is far too sudden and happens on every front. You can also say the same for Confed's uniforms, and the interior of ships.

The Kilrathi's change has been less drastic, except where starships are concerned. Their fighters retained a bit of complexity and the same color scheme of brown and red... but all of a sudden, their culture's preference for asymetrical shapes kicked in. Why did it happen all of a sudden? They've already been a spacefaring race for quite some time, enough to make sophisticated ship hulls - surely they've had plenty of time to introduce their cultural asthetics.

So... How can you explain the change?

 

[Bandit LOAF]

It's almost like they went from EGA-downconvertable graphics to live action video.

 

[Viper61]

That wasn't a fun answer

In all honesty, in my opinion there wasn't a sudden change in design philosophies. Of WC1 craft, you have the Hornet and Rapier that seem to be actual aircraft-as-we-know-them designs, but the Raptor and the Scim seem to have more in common with their WC2 multiple "control surface" counterparts and the WC3 blocky ships. Then around WC2 you have the Rapier, Sabre and Morningstar that again resemble "aircraft as we know them" designs, and the Epee, Ferret, and Wraith with a mulitple "control surface" (missile with wings look) reminiscent of the Raptor. We are then introduced to heavier, blockier concepts with the Broadsword (which universe wise has been around since WC1) and Crossbow. Now enter WC3 and we have "aircraft-looking" Hellcats and Arrows (and for all intents and purposes, the Excal), a blocky heavy ship in the Thud, and a missile with wings in the Longbow. I'd say that the design scheme has pretty much stayed about the same throughout WC, as LOAF said, we just have better graphics for seeing them .
As for the Kilrathi symmetric/assymetric issue, I'm not sure. I don't think I've formed a founded, good enough opinion on that.
The paint schemes seem to be in a changing state in WC2. The Morningstar, Ferret, Wraith and Crossbow all resemble the grey, Blue and Red color scheme that Confed seems to be going for. WC2 is 3-4 years prior to WC3 so its not a big leap of faith to think they might have gotten the entire fleet color scheme changed before the BoT .

C-ya

 

[Bandit LOAF]

Look at aircraft during World War II - after a point, they stopped bothering to paint them green... so with the high degree of attrition, you quickly ended up with an entirely silver {army} air force.

 

[psych]

I think you can say that the ship designers all had different opinions on how to make the vessels. When WC1-2 came out in 1990-1991, no other space sim like that quality had come out so there really wasn't any standard. Just make the ship and start from there.

WC3-4 had Chris Douglas who said that he deliberately based it on 20th century aircraft.

WCP, I don't know who designed it (that Mead guy?), but as you can tell it looked way radical and more "science fiction" then the contemporaries from 3-4.

 

[Bandit LOAF]

Chris (Douglas) also worked on WCP. Syd Mead was hired to develop the Nephilim - and he ended up designing a grand total of *two* of their ships.

 

[Eder]

WC3-4 had Chris Douglas who said that he deliberately based it on 20th century aircraft.

Now *that* was the move of a true master. It is evident that the Longbow, Banshee and Thunderbolt look more like 20th century aircraft than the Rapier, Sabre and Morningstar.

 

[Bandit LOAF]

The Arrow looks kind of like an arrow.

There, I said it. I can't *un*-say it.

 

[psych]

Now *that* was the move of a true master. It is evident that the Longbow, Banshee and Thunderbolt look more like 20th century aircraft than the Rapier, Sabre and Morningstar.

Of course, the Bearcat, Excalibur, Hellcat, and Arrow offsets this

 

[overmortal]

Also take into consideration that not all of these aircraft are designed by the same companies (in-universe). And, even within these companies, I'm sure different crews designed different ships, depending on the ship's purpose.

 

[Trev-MUN]

I Shall Add More Logs To The Fire.

It's almost like they went from EGA-downconvertable graphics to live action video.

Hey, just because a game series makes a transition from EGA to live action video, or from 2-D to 3-D, doesn't mean that a radical change in design is necessary. There's several franchises which have not done drastic overhauls like the jump from WC2 to WC3.

We are then introduced to heavier, blockier concepts with the Broadsword (which universe wise has been around since WC1) and Crossbow.

Yeah, those ships are kind of pudgy, but nothing like any of the WC3+ ships. They are more rounded, and their fins are paper thin (more on this in a moment).

The paint schemes seem to be in a changing state in WC2. The Morningstar, Ferret, Wraith and Crossbow all resemble the grey, Blue and Red color scheme that Confed seems to be going for. WC2 is 3-4 years prior to WC3 so its not a big leap of faith to think they might have gotten the entire fleet color scheme changed before the BoT

About WC2, you're right, a lot of the fighters dropped green as a color in their painting scheme, but all of the capital ships (as far as I can recall) retained it.

In real life, I recall something about the Navy repainting all of their aircraft to more camoflagued colors, stopping the tradition of fighters and other aircraft having colorful rudders based on ship and squadron.

Could have something to do alongside Loafy's statement about a "silver airforce," but I don't see how people can grow tired of painting aircraft. I'll have to look into that, concerning WWII fighters...

WCP, I don't know who designed it (that Mead guy?), but as you can tell it looked way radical and more "science fiction" then the contemporaries from 3-4.

I dunno, they didn't seem too radical from the WC3/4 era ships. It looked more like a proper evolution in ship design, rather than what you see in between WC2 and 3.

After all, the Vampire and Banshee do have similar styles to them...



Now what I was mentioning about the paper thin fins... Compare a ship like the Morningstar to the Excalibur. Even though the Excalibur does have an element of "modern fighter" built into its design, it's still blocky - not low poly, but blocky. Chunky. Thick. Its surfaces have got to be at least five feet thick on any one side - the Hellcat is like this too - hell, every Confed fighter in WC3, and the Border Worlds ships in WC4, have this "chunky" look, as do the Confed WCP ships. The Arrow is an exception - its pysique is slim and slender - not just in its fins, but in its body. (Did I mention the Arrow is my favorite WC3+ era ship? <3 ) Sexy little ship.

None of the pre-WC3 era ships, not even bombers like the Crossbow or Broadsword, share that kind of thick-everywhere build, and that's ultimately what makes the post WC3 fighters look so different from the pre WC3 ones. If the Hellcat and Excalbiur had thinner wings and fins though, they'd look more like an evolution of the fighters before them.

Can anyone see what I'm getting at here, or am I still just a raving lunatic?

EDIT: Just clairified a few statements.

 

[SabreAce]

Could have something to do alongside Loafy's statement about a "silver airforce," but I don't see how people can grow tired of painting aircraft. I'll have to look into that, concerning WWII fighters...

They (meaning the US Army Air Force) stopped camoflauging their aircraft as they gained air superiority over Germany. Removing the paint saved weight, increased the range, and was one less thing for the ground crews to deal with. Relating it to WC, by the time of WC3, Confed's on the losing side, so why waste time painting ships green when you can just send them to the front as is?

Now what I was mentioning about the paper thin fins... Compare a ship like the Morningstar to the Excalibur. Even though the Excalibur does have an element of "modern fighter" built into its design, it's still blocky - not low poly, but blocky. Chunky. Thick. Its surfaces have got to be at least five feet thick on any one side - the Hellcat is like this too - hell, every Confed fighter in WC3, and the Border Worlds ships in WC4, have this "chunky" look, as do the Confed WCP ships. The Arrow is an exception - its pysique is slim and slender - not just in its fins, but in its body. (Did I mention the Arrow is my favorite WC3+ era ship? <3 ) Sexy little ship.

In-universe reasoning is similar to the paint explanation: Blocky, modular ships like a Hellcat are easier to produce than something like a Morningstar. Furthermore, the Excal has more space inside for the various weapons, as well as the cloaking device.
Real-life reasoning is that keeping the fighter components thicker minimized the number of polys, which meant computers of the time were less likely to slow down, even if the engine could handle something thinner/more detailed.

None of the pre-WC3 era ships, not even bombers like the Crossbow or Broadsword, share that kind of thick-everywhere build, and that's ultimately what makes the post WC3 fighters look so different from the pre WC3 ones. If the Hellcat and Excalbiur had thinner wings and fins though, they'd look more like an evolution of the fighters before them.

Along with the easier to produce explanation, all WC3 ships are aside from the Excalibur and Thunderbolt are from pre-WC1 times. As such, they're structures are probably less complicated than the WC1/2 fighters. Odds are Confed kept a similar structure with the T-Bolt/Excal, as well as the WCP generation, because it was found it worked just fine, and didn't require as much time for production as, say, a Sabre or Morningstar.