Art Style Guide for Pioneer - brainstorming

[FluffyFreak]

@nozmajner
Would it help if we gathered images from around the web that adhere closely to what each of us likes or thinks of for Pioneer?
In effect if we each try to make a quick n' dirty moodboard showing, literally, what each part is themed/styled in our minds eye?

Then we can go through them and say yes or not to aspects of them.

[TheBob]

I'd quite like to customise each planet a lot more (This needs major... no, total rewrite), add things to find like ship crash sites from earlier waves of exploration/expansion, alien artifacts (I'm getting my damned Orbital in somehow!), failed (human) colonies.

's cooking. Give me a few weeks/months. Now that I can spawn landable ships, there's some real use for all this planetary surface... well, I'm not so sure if I'll have any use for your orbital. I prefer Alien Artifacts that can be stowed in the cargo hold... :lol:
On the other hand it could be dumped in a random far off system and you can get clues to its location from alien ruins. Wait, I know that from somewhere. Darn, I'm thinking starflight again.

Anyways, my few cents to ship design, re realism/abstraction scale.

There's five major considerations you have to take into account when laying down your design plan for ships in a scifi setting:

1. Does space, hyperspace, Warp etc have properties that benefits a certain shape? (effects of answering this question with yes can be well seen in Star Trek for example).
2. Do ships need significant amounts of propellant/other fuel? (This is answered with no in most settings, because everyone seems to think tanks are uncool).
3. Is there artifical gravity? (completely changes layout of the ship: Usually artificial gravity is chosen to give Spaceships a more familiar look, that is with decks aligned parallel to the major thrust axis, instead of perpendicular to it)
4. Does the ship have to obey thermodynamics (answered no in all but the very hardest settings. Even the movie version of 2001 opted for no for the rule of cool, because people get rather confused by all the necessary radiators)?
5. Does the ship need maneuvering thrusters or can it change direction like an airplane? (This was answered with yes in many more modern SF shows, but before the 90ies and B5 it usually was no).

Looking at the current pioneer designs, the answers to these questions go:
1. No
2. No
3. Yes
4. No
5. Yes

This is very much in line with the Frontier/FFE, but more importantly, it is also in line with the design decisions taken by two of the most popular SF TV-shows, BSG and B5. People are familiar with this state of affairs.
Answering any of these questions differently would require a redesign of the current ships (the Deneb, at least, should become a tailsitter if there's no artifical gravity. The Mola would seem predestined for tailsitting anyways...), or a re-classification (making any ship without large fuel tanks a short range craft if for example question 2 would be answered with "yes").

But then, there's again the example of B5: B5 answered a partial No on point 3, but only for one faction. This is a nice thing to keep in mind: Some small faction might not have access to artifical gravity and therefore require a more realistic decks layout perpendicular to the thrust axis, or have less advanced engine technology and need larger propellant tanks, etc.
I would not suggest to tinker with the answer to question 4 (thermodynamics), though: If you don't respect them, it's best not to mention them. Most people don't know what they're for anyways. And if you have only one ship riding in with big giant radiators, you'll have a really tough time explaining why exactly everyone else doesn't need 'em. Best to just shut up and pretend thermodynamics don't exist.

Whatever you do, don't forget the consequences of question 1: It means that you're not bound to any kind of form. For example, I totally loved the turtle, because it just looked different from anything else and didn't stick to the conventions. Imagine what an such an advanced spacefairing civilisation could do with spaceships. We're still finding new designs for cars, and we're very, very limited by the fact that form must follow function. In a scenario like we have here, this is much less the case. Designers would go absolutely crazy. I think we should have a few of those crazy designs.

[bszlrd]

@Fluffyfreak: Yes, that would be nice, but I'm afraid that might be very chaotic in a forum thread quickly. Some kind of image board would be better. I will start a thread about it and we will see if it's usable in forum format.

It might be a good idea to have a separate art board anyway, to reduce clutter in the forum, especially when this ramps up.

@TheBob: My take on those:
1: I would say no. But function should define the form at least on a basic level. Also there should be room for some stylistic choices. (Again Mola and Pumpkinseed, curved form, but not really aerodynamic. Also, curved forms could mean more rigid structure - think of bones, you can't really find any straight on. Arcs can improve overall structure.)
2: Somewhat. I'd say, less deltaV with the current fuel amounts.
3: Certainly NO. Atmo capable ships would have more aircraft like layout, space only ones would be more like skyscrapers.
4: Somewhat: I think there should be some radiator surfaces (see the fins on Mola and Pumpkinseed for example), but let's assume some kind of unspecified breakthrough in cooling efficiency, akin to current super efficient and powerful engines. Those are a possibility for detail that has function, so there's less need for detail for the sake of detail (which we should avoid as much as possible)
5: Yes and No. I think there should be maneuvering thrusters, but for some cases those might be replaced with torque wheels, so the ship needs thrusters only for lateral movement.

[TheBob]

3: Certainly NO. Atmo capable ships would have more aircraft like layout, space only ones would be more like skyscrapers.

If they spend 95% of their time in space, most of it under thrust, and are capable of powered deorbiting? it's a stretch... Also, without some form of gravity control you couldn't have the kind of acceleration we're having on some ships. Would leave a nice red slur in the seat...

let's assume some kind of unspecified breakthrough in cooling efficiency

The problem isn't the cooling efficiency, the problem is the limits of blackbody radiation (the theoretical maximum rate at which you can get rid of heat in a vacuum). The only two variables you have here are surface area and temperature. raising the first has a rather strong impact on visual design, raising the second usually leads to questions about what those fins are made of, and how it is manufactured (I imagine it as quite difficult to work with a material that stays solid on the surface of the sun...). I guess some visual cues are no problem, but it would be rather disturbing if we'd couple it with ships that come with large radiators.

[robn]

I imagine it as quite difficult to work with a material that stays solid on the surface of the sun

You can assume that stars will be rather more deadly than they are right now. I'd expect you to be melting long before you got near, regardless of what your ship is made of.

I guess some visual cues are no problem, but it would be rather disturbing if we'd couple it with ships that come with large radiators.

Its probably ok to give a nod to the problem (so "visual cues") and then not worry too much about it. If realism would make for a crappy game, then make something up!

(Its kind of similar to what we did with fuel - water is abundant and cheap but not free, so using it as fuel requires a little bit of thought, but not micromanagement. But how exactly is water turned into motion? Not sure, not important, handwave it away).

[TheBob]

You can assume that stars will be rather more deadly than they are right now. I'd expect you to be melting long before you got near, regardless of what your ship is made of.

I actually wasn't refering to that, rather to the fact that such small radiators as the Mola's would have to run nearly at that temperature to get rid of all the heat... But it's nice to know that the stars will get more of an unconvienience. Will require some further modifications to the Autopilot, though.

Its probably ok to give a nod to the problem (so "visual cues") and then not worry too much about it. If realism would make for a crappy game, then make something up!

That's pretty much what I'm saying. The art is to not give it too much of a nod, lest you have to make up too much stuff.

Though for the thermodynamics problem, I'd probably go with a hyper-efficient shielding field in the engine that puts its heat-efficiency somewhere very close to 100% (meaning, pracitcally all heat goes out with the exhaust, improving performance and not heating up the engine in the process. Niven used something like that to boost his engine performance). Problem is, such a field would also be very good as a laser defense. Then again, if we stop classifying the guns as lasers (which has already happened in all but name, as far as I can gather) and make them into some form of projectile weapons a "perfect mirror" (which you'd practically need for the heat shielding of the engine) wouldn't be any use as a defensive shield. Indeed, the existance of such a field could very well explain why laser weapons are not used in the setting. This sounds like it starts to make some sense...
It would not quite match with more dangerous stars, though... :(

Its kind of similar to what we did with fuel - water is abundant and cheap but not free, so using it as fuel requires a little bit of thought, but not micromanagement. But how exactly is water turned into motion? Not sure, not important, handwave it away

Actually, water was a mainstay as fuel (and propellant) in 70s through 80s fusion drives, and was used by many authors including Clarke, so we should be fairly good with that.

[NeuralKernel]

The Thermal Managemenet issue can be largely sidestepped as an Artistic Issue (unless the artist specifically wishes to incorporate it) through in game use of droplet radiators.
http://www.buildtheenterprise.org/the-l ... t-radiator
One of the potentially related in game technologies I'm not completely comfortable with (in terms of technical description) are Shields. What are they?

[TheBob]

The Thermal Managemenet issue can be largely sidestepped as an Artistic Issue (unless the artist specifically wishes to incorporate it) through in game use of droplet radiators.

Extremely useless in a vessel that maneuvers a lot... or you're expelling the droplets without recovering, which means you're droping mass. Lots of it. Better to handwave an invisible solution, really (I went through the math for that enterprise once, by the way. It's horribly misguided...)

[NeuralKernel]

Well, if a vessel is manuvering rapidly then it also implies they would be dropping mass by virtue of throwing it out a rocket nozzle. If a Thermal Rocket is used for strong accelleration then it is inherently also an evaporative cooling system, taking care of it's own and probably some extra waste heat.
A high specific impusle Plasma rocket would run hotter and need additional cooling, but would also produce thrust gentle enough to make maintenance of the droplet radiators simpler. It would mean another kind of consumable, but I don't think that having extra coolant on board a ship expecting trouble is unreasonable...
It's why I still think Hydrogen should be the primary remass for most ships. Hydrogen gives better Specific Impulse for a given energy than any other element while water is more useful as high thrust remass, shielding and coolant.
All old material from me... just tossing it into the ring.

[FluffyFreak]

For ship design I go with handwavium and rule-of-cool.