Favourite Ship Bridge / Cockpit?

[Thomas2052]

Hi all,

Just curious as to what ships people enjoy spending their time in most, mainly for aesthetic reasons although I imagine travel speed / weapon load out play a big part.

It took a while to dawn on me that this can be played best as an rts, so often I am standing on one of my own ships while it is piloted, looking at the map and inventories, so like a nice bridge to be standing in.

Do far, the Katana seems to be the one I end up back in the most - large space, good view, fast travel speed and decent weapons, plus if the crew are in the navigation seat, the pilot issues orders to them, which is a nice touch.

Am keen to get my hands on one of the XL paranid ships for their very expansive bridges too.

Anyone have any particular favourites or recommendations?

[flywlyx]

The Astrid docked on the flagship Asgard.

[Omni-Orb]

I think all ships have a unique charm. I prefer the ones with a broad open view as a combat pilot.

[GCU Grey Area]

Phoenix - much clearer view of what's going on than any of the other destroyers: https://www.dropbox.com/s/f4ck4etgba3fj ... 1.jpg?dl=0

[LughC]

Falx docked ontop of a Tokyo

[ggttcc2]

My favourite currently is split XL.
I also think split cockpits in general have much better details than terran ones. They seems cheaped out when making the latter.

[Thomas2052]

Phoenix - much clearer view of what's going on than any of the other destroyers: https://www.dropbox.com/s/f4ck4etgba3fj ... 1.jpg?dl=0

I got a scale plate one once and really did quite like it. Just found the void on the external model annoying. The even larger one on the carrier [condor?] looks good too.

My favourite currently is split XL.
I also think split cockpits in general have much better details than terran ones. They seems cheaped out when making the latter.

Probably an unpopular opinion here - but I can't stand the split ships - rusty triangles. Rusty triangles everywhere. And probably tetanus. Which is a real shame as I like carrier tactics the most and that split carrier is glorious. Except for the pipes in the bridge.

Am I right in saying there is only one copy paste terran l and xl Bridge for Osaka, Asgard, Tokyo etc.?

[linolafett]

Am I right in saying there is only one copy paste terran l and xl Bridge for Osaka, Asgard, Tokyo etc.?

There are two bridges for the Terrans. One XL, one L one. The room layout is pretty different in both.

[Thomas2052]

Am I right in saying there is only one copy paste terran l and xl Bridge for Osaka, Asgard, Tokyo etc.?

There are two bridges for the Terrans. One XL, one L one. The room layout is pretty different in both.

You're indeed right. Don't know how I missed that. This will complicate the choice of Flagship.

[dtpsprt]

........................

My favourite currently is split XL.
I also think split cockpits in general have much better details than terran ones. They seems cheaped out when making the latter.

Probably an unpopular opinion here - but I can't stand the split ships - rusty triangles. Rusty triangles everywhere. And probably tetanus. Which is a real shame as I like carrier tactics the most and that split carrier is glorious. Except for the pipes in the bridge.

Am I right in saying there is only one copy paste terran l and xl Bridge for Osaka, Asgard, Tokyo etc.?

Split ships are made for war... The triangles you complain about and their whole outside is what will deflect and minimize the damage of all beams and even projectiles thrown at them. Aesthetically I vastly prefer Paranid ships but Split design is well thought of. The assymetric Terran and ToA ships simply can not exist in RL and I totally detest.

[Alan Phipps]

"The assymetric Terran and ToA ships simply can not exist in RL"

Why? They are purely space-faring so no need for aerodynamics, sleek lines, nor even balance. As long as the thrust/torque, inertia and turning stresses are all accounted for in the thrust vector control computing, you can bolt anything together in whatever practical layout you want. Pirate and scavenger faction ship designs would always tend to be strictly utilitarian, have few cosmetic parts and look as if designed by loose committee and afterthoughts.

[Rei Ayanami]

The assymetric Terran and ToA ships simply can not exist in RL and I totally detest.

What about real life aircraft carriers? They are asymmetric ships.
If you google image search "asymmetric aircraft" you have plenty of examples that it's even possible for aircraft (both airplanes and helicopters).

Not to mention, in space there is no/barely any resistance, so it's possible to have asymmetry without big problems.
In fact, many of our satellites and space probes are asymmetric.

[ubuntufreakdragon]

I like the paranid XL bridge.
I dislike the CoH and ToA XL Bridges for the long path to the control console.

[dtpsprt]

"The assymetric Terran and ToA ships simply can not exist in RL"

Why? They are purely space-faring so no need for aerodynamics, sleek lines, nor even balance. As long as the thrust/torque, inertia and turning stresses are all accounted for in the thrust vector control computing, you can bolt anything together in whatever practical layout you want. Pirate and scavenger faction ship designs would always tend to be strictly utilitarian, have few cosmetic parts and look as if designed by loose committee and afterthoughts.

That's exactly it. Inertia!!! If the assymmetric portion of anything is not aligned to the vector of the motion, the difference of mass will create at best uncontrollable spinning and at worst it will tear everything appart. The harder the thrust the bigger this effect is.

[dtpsprt]

The assymetric Terran and ToA ships simply can not exist in RL and I totally detest.

What about real life aircraft carriers? They are asymmetric ships.
If you google image search "asymmetric aircraft" you have plenty of examples that it's even possible for aircraft (both airplanes and helicopters).

Not to mention, in space there is no/barely any resistance, so it's possible to have asymmetry without big problems.
In fact, many of our satellites and space probes are asymmetric.

Air craft carries may seem assymmetric but where it counts, the part of them that is submerged and faces the biggest resistance, they are quite symmetric. As for air or vacuum for that matter vehicles see my answer rto Allan Phipps. They can not fly with their assymmetric side vertical to the motion direction, mass equilibrium must be kept or we should exhume Sir Isaak Newton's bones from their grave and burry them again in the courtyard of a mental hospital!!!

[jlehtone]

I dislike the CoH and ToA XL Bridges for the long path to the control console.

Indeed. Then again I fly Dragon Raider, where the path is short and straight.

[Omni-Orb]

The assymetric Terran and ToA ships simply can not exist in RL and I totally detest.

Sounds like your combat focus is to destroy asymmetry, a worthy goal.

[GCU Grey Area]

Indeed. Then again I fly Dragon Raider, where the path is short and straight.

Good point. When flying a Dragon Raider I also found the close proximity of the pilot's seat to the airlock a very handy feature, particularly given the frequency with which I needed to head outside with a welding laser to patch up all the holes...

[dtpsprt]

Indeed. Then again I fly Dragon Raider, where the path is short and straight.

Good point. When flying a Dragon Raider I also found the close proximity of the pilot's seat to the airlock a very handy feature, particularly given the frequency with which I needed to head outside with a welding laser to patch up all the holes...

Even though I do not use Dragon Raiders there is merit in minimising the shift time between the player and NPC pilot. That is for those of us that do like "personal" combat opposed to other players that are more "managerial" focused.

[mr.WHO]

Personally, I like Tokyo bridge the best, coz you have a nice view for hangar operations + overal style and layout of Terran bridge is nice.