Large Ship Contest

Creations, construction techniques, and news from the world of plastic toys

Moderators: Dr. X, ikensall, fredde

Do you plan on entering?

Yes!
16
67%
NO:(
8
33%
 
Total votes : 24

Postby Warhead » Sat Aug 15, 2009 1:43 am

I can see what your saying Stubby with regards to the practical side of Lego builders wanting to call their ships by what they do but I think you have way oversimplified matters. Yes, ship class is fuzzy, but it is not THAT fuzzy. You follow that idea and we then have people calling a construct with a bucket seat, a large gun and an engine a cruiser and other such nonsense. Then, as we have now there will be a confusion of ships with grand classes that IMO makes them laughable. People can look this stuff up if they are interested, it's not hard. You wont except ignorance from members any other day of the week on other matters so why champion this one?

Dilanski, yes Lego scale isn't true scale but I very much doubt that the reference for ship class I suggested follows true scale either. It was more a general guide to help builders distinguished the different classes correctly. Which if I recall is exactly what people asked for.

If you don't have enough Lego to build grandly, get more. It's that simple, it's not fair, it's a bit cold but well that's life. To build less and name it grandly is a joke. IMO. (And don't troop out the lame excuse of "I'm only whatever age" 'cause I had the same amount of lego as I do today when I was about 12 or 13 and I did it myself, not from parents buying stuff but with my own money that I earned doing stuff).
Image
User avatar
Warhead
kaka pants
 
Posts: 7298
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2009 2:07 pm
Location: I'm Momnipresent.

Postby Warhead » Sat Aug 15, 2009 3:23 am

http://homepage.mac.com/cheethorne/Pall ... lasses.htm

Found this, it may or may not help. It goes some way to combine Stubby's capability by class idea and what I have learned about space ship class from the fictional genre and historical naval reference (I couldn't find a shorter/better way to say that). It isn't perfect but it may just do to give you an idea of ship classification.
Image
User avatar
Warhead
kaka pants
 
Posts: 7298
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2009 2:07 pm
Location: I'm Momnipresent.

Postby dilanski » Sat Aug 15, 2009 3:44 am

My point was theres only one or two builders in the WORLD that can build large scale ship that hold minifigs.
Almond Status: ACTIVATED
User avatar
dilanski
Now with added tractor fetish
 
Posts: 1827
Joined: Sun Jan 18, 2009 6:41 am
Location: United Kingdom of Great Britain & FUCK THE DUP

Postby stubby » Sat Aug 15, 2009 3:58 am

Warhead wrote:You wont except ignorance from members any other day of the week on other matters so why champion this one?

By policy, I'm happy to let people be wrong, up to and until the point that somebody who's wrong starts telling other people that they're wrong.   Then they annoy me enough that I feel the need to post.  (see also: IVhorseman's claims about gunpowder in vacuum.)

Assigning sizes to ship classes is a contrivance of the games industry; they have no reflection in reality.  There are periods of history where the cruisers were bigger than any battleship (particularly in the case of Great Britain's Invincible-class cruisers); there are other periods where the battleships dwarf every other ship on the sea.  And I'm sure I can think of any number of fictional spacefleets where the destroyers are bigger than any modern sea battleship, or any spelljammer frigate.  Arbitrary size based classifications just break down completely in a game that crosses as many genres as BrikWars.  So why not use the words' actual meanings instead?

Assigning ship classifications with no regard to other countries' definition is what all navies do anyway, except when politics interfere; I'm trying to find an article about the cold war "cruiser gap" in the sixties, which was pretty funny in a stupid-politics way.  I guess you can find a blurb about it here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cruiser#Th ... ser_gap.22

Edit: Wait, never mind, here's a full article.  Not sure how I missed this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Sta ... sification
This gives a pretty good idea of how what is physically exactly the same ship can end up with all kinds of different classifications depending on the needs of the day.
User avatar
stubby
tl;dr: the rule of fudge is the entire rulebook
 
Posts: 4834
Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2007 8:31 pm

Postby Warhead » Sat Aug 15, 2009 4:30 am

Yes, we've been over fluid differences in ship class in another thread. I believe your own argument as I understand it actually supports mine. Yes, ships are classed on their intended job BUT this is tempered by their ability. You could name a one man fighter a battleship but it couldn't BE a battleship as it does not have the ability.

Surely when making the Brikwars rules you had to change some things in order for them to work without regards to realism but staying as true as possible to convention while doing so. Same thing here. Reality is sacrificed for order.

People can do as they wish with regards ship class. My words wont change that. I can only forward a suggestion and hope someone takes the time to have a look through the stuff and suit themselves. As things are now the naming convention for ship class is a nonsense that has and is causing confusion. I tried to help by giving a more constructed list.

Your right I did say Dalinski is wrong, probably because he does the same right back, good enough for him so good enough for me, all's fair.

But fine, I'm obviously wrong because you say so, so I shall back off rather than get banned for an opinion which I still hold to.
Image
User avatar
Warhead
kaka pants
 
Posts: 7298
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2009 2:07 pm
Location: I'm Momnipresent.

Postby Natalya » Sat Aug 15, 2009 11:31 am

I've never seen Rayhawk ban over something like this.
  ▲
▲ ▲

"Ya gotta remember, Soryu's a brutal thug, ain't got no finesse like Shinji."
User avatar
Natalya
I've trolled before.
 
Posts: 4407
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 10:57 pm
Location: Atlanta

Postby Warhead » Sat Aug 15, 2009 12:52 pm

There's always a first time. Besides I haven't mentioned my new theory on gravity yet...  :?  eh, I'll just get my coat.
Image
User avatar
Warhead
kaka pants
 
Posts: 7298
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2009 2:07 pm
Location: I'm Momnipresent.

Postby benkim123 » Sat Aug 15, 2009 12:57 pm

dilanski wrote:My point was theres only one or two builders in the WORLD that can build large scale ship that hold minifigs.


Yeah, and I'm Yao Ming.
Image
User avatar
benkim123
Dimmy
 
Posts: 696
Joined: Wed Mar 11, 2009 9:19 am
Location: Inside a Hammerhead Gunship

Postby Rayhawk » Sat Aug 15, 2009 4:23 pm

Warhead wrote:Your right I did say Dalinski is wrong, probably because he does the same right back, good enough for him so good enough for me, all's fair.

Nah I don't care about you and dilanski, it was Natalya that set me off.

I shouldn't post so late at night, because now I'm kicking myself for forgetting my favorite example: the police cruiser.  A police cruiser really is a cruiser in every functional respect, even though it's just a police car size-wise.

Warhead wrote:Yes, we've been over fluid differences in ship class in another thread. I believe your own argument as I understand it actually supports mine. Yes, ships are classed on their intended job BUT this is tempered by their ability. You could name a one man fighter a battleship but it couldn't BE a battleship as it does not have the ability.

Exactly! I'm very comfortable with objections based on ability.  Although I am compelled to point out that a fighter is a spacecraft, not a spaceship.*

* - note: Just kidding. Even I can't be that anal with a straight face.
User avatar
Rayhawk
Overlord
 
Posts: 870
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 8:02 pm
Location: BrikWars HQ, USA

Postby james+burgundy » Sat Aug 15, 2009 4:26 pm

You might try a few days of banning Nat? I got banned once and it has really helped er .. I think it has helped  :?
My Flickr
My YouTube
Indisputable rules of Brik Wars.
1.OTC Wins .. Always
2.There is NEVER to much blood and gore.
User avatar
james+burgundy
I tend to just pile the shit on myself
 
Posts: 2931
Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2007 8:34 pm

Postby Warhead » Sat Aug 15, 2009 4:50 pm

Hey, no problems, I'm just being my usual lovable Jack-Ass self. I can't help it. I think I have a tendancy to self destruct once in a while when I'm low on energy. Anyway, do you like my new Superbattleship? The HMS Delusions Of Grandeur :lol:

Image
Image
Image

Only joking in my usual manner.  :wink: Yeah ok, ok, it's a shuttle at best but just look at all the luverly guns!  :twisted:  Practically it can fly five yards and fire all guns once before depleting it's power core. Ah, well.

Police Cruiser is probably used to make it all scary and sexy sounding so people don't want to mess. Here we have the pursuit vehicle... we suck, I prefer cruiser too.
Image
User avatar
Warhead
kaka pants
 
Posts: 7298
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2009 2:07 pm
Location: I'm Momnipresent.

Postby dilanski » Sat Aug 15, 2009 7:26 pm

stubby wrote:
Warhead wrote:You wont except ignorance from members any other day of the week on other matters so why champion this one?

By policy, I'm happy to let people be wrong, up to and until the point that somebody who's wrong starts telling other people that they're wrong.   Then they annoy me enough that I feel the need to post.  (see also: IVhorseman's claims about gunpowder in vacuum.)

Assigning sizes to ship classes is a contrivance of the games industry; they have no reflection in reality.  There are periods of history where the cruisers were bigger than any battleship (particularly in the case of Great Britain's Invincible-class cruisers); there are other periods where the battleships dwarf every other ship on the sea.  And I'm sure I can think of any number of fictional spacefleets where the destroyers are bigger than any modern sea battleship

If your reffering to the Star destroyers from Star wars, you are somewhat UH mistaken. Star destroyers are a different class of ship altogether.

NatalyaAF wrote:
dilanski wrote:It even says on the instructions you bought off the internet its a Gundam.


Actually the instructions refer to it as a mecha or giant robot, or modular robot.  They never say Dungam.

Still misses out on at least half the AC criteria, also in your first post on it, the picture says, Gundam Teknoomegatron-prime........ Or something along those lines.
Almond Status: ACTIVATED
User avatar
dilanski
Now with added tractor fetish
 
Posts: 1827
Joined: Sun Jan 18, 2009 6:41 am
Location: United Kingdom of Great Britain & FUCK THE DUP

Postby Tuefish » Sat Aug 15, 2009 10:21 pm

Hey all, just out of curiosity; Would you be able to call a SHIP a battlecruiser if it has

    - Heavy SHIP-to-SHIP weapons
    - A good amount of coverage via point-defense systems
    - A small hanger
    - Both space torpedoes AND missiles
    - More than 100 studs in total length
    - Multiple decks
    - Light or medium armor
    -A minimum crew of 7
    -Housing for 30 minifigs
"If someone ever tries to kill you, you try to kill them right back." -Malcolm Reynolds
Image
TROLOLO
Tuefish
Dimmy
 
Posts: 582
Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2008 6:26 am
Location: The Emerald city

Postby stubby » Sat Aug 15, 2009 11:39 pm

dilanski wrote:If your reffering to the Star destroyers from Star wars, you are somewhat UH mistaken. Star destroyers are a different class.

If it were anyone else, I'd think they were making a joke, and a funny one.  But here I'm not sure, so I feel I have to clarify, just in case: no, I'm not an IDIOT.  

james+burgundy wrote:You might try a few days of banning Nat? I got banned once and it has really helped er .. I think it has helped  :?

What? No way, Natalya is cool.

Tuefish wrote:Hey all, just out of curiosity; Would you be able to call a SHIP a battlecruiser

Seems good enough, although a battlecruiser by nature has heavy armor, in order to go toe-to-toe with battleships.  With medium armor, I'd call it a regular, heavy, or missile cruiser, rather than a battlecruiser.

Now if it's meant for use as the capital ship at the head of a fleet, then it's going into light- or fast-battleship territory.
Last edited by stubby on Sun Aug 16, 2009 12:01 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
stubby
tl;dr: the rule of fudge is the entire rulebook
 
Posts: 4834
Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2007 8:31 pm

Postby Greenkey15 » Sat Aug 15, 2009 11:56 pm

Does the classificationamajigger thing really matter?  In BrikWars, the rules are bendable.  I'm not sure if this is a rule for anyone else, but it sure is a rule for me.  As long as you pay for something, that's what it counts as.  This includes the Size of the ship.  You can have a 10-inch long fighter, classify it as a size 50 battleship, make it Structure Level 5, give it 25" of Move, and enough weapons to knock a small moon off of it's course around it's home planet and it still pwns things as if it were actually as massive as said small moon.  Heck, you can use a flying Minifig for this purpose.  

If you aren't talking about BrikWars, then just make up your own fucking starship classification system! Could it possibly be that hard?
User avatar
Greenkey15
Cannon Fodder
 
Posts: 338
Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2008 10:01 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Bricks

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest