Oh the pain. I feel every bit of that. And similar equations have kept me from properly joining the TWAT club until now.
Hi Mimo, the Diastar with its oval/egg shaped case dates back to 1962, which is well in advance of the 1970s Omega Flightmasters and some of the other funky 70's Omega cases. Omega is definitely better known, so I think lots of people associate that case shape with 70's Omegas, but Rado was there first...so maybe Omega did a Rado Diastar "homage." Case shape is a personal thing. Its not necessarily my favorite shape, but if going with a Rado, its really their signature piece, so that might be something for Kid to consider. I think if I were getting a Rado it would most likely be a Diastar, runner up would be something ceramic...although after seeing some of the fractured ceramic watches from other companies maybe I'd stick with the Diastar.
Its not the off center display that bothers me, and I don't think off center displays are gimmicky. Also, I don't give Lange or GO a pass just because the cost more or are more prestigious. I find the dial layouts of those far more attractive...but that's subjective. Aside from buying a watch from a pen maker (I probably wouldn't buy a suit from a ketchup maker) what really bothers me are subdials and how they are attached. It just looks too fussy and over stylized. I' don't think its gimmicky, I just don't care for it. However, if it really calls to you and the price is right ...go for it. You are the only one that has to be happy with it.
Why don't you show us some things you like, at any price range, then it's easier to gauge your taste before making suggestions. At the price range, there are plenty of solid automatic watches from established makers, using generic movements but each with their own style. Give us a clue as to what kind of look you have in mind.
Once again, thank you for the education. But it's still ugly even if it's authentic. :)