Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Yeah, I like the smooth look too, but I'd love to know if there's a performance impact. It seems those (inverse) pyramid adds more mass for one.
Not sure about the drag but I get a feeling that drag is calculated by the general general shape (bounds of final model) than each block.
If you press F3 (I think) you can see the debug stuff, it shows encompassing boxes for buoyancy which (forward face of it) could also be what is used for calculating drag. Wish there was a way to know for sure.
1, Portholes are much easier to install and make look ascetically pleasing. Installing a 1x1 or 2x2 porthole on a section with 4-long wedge pieces will require the porthole to not be flush with the side.
2, Creating a bow with complex curvature (such as that of the Titanic, a project I am working on now), is made much easier when using 'blocky' bows.
3, Creating a ship's bow that requires a wedge longer than 4x1 means blocks will be necessary anyways. There can be some ascetic gains by using a consistent design method (all blocky) instead of an inconsistent design method (smooth fore half of bow, blocky aft half of bow).