Cptbarney

Wanted too see some moar old boags.

Same im holding out for it as well lol.

Not only that, it will drastically increase replayability, customisability and also give the game some more major selling points over its competitors and could make itself into a market leader, and might even innovate this area of gaming too. Plus, the ability to have perma ships. That can be taken into any game mode and shared with other players will be very nice. Especially if there was a particular ship or ship type that you loved for it's antics and performance in-general.

I hope we get this years April fools 'w'

Yeah it's a very good post. Not sure what the devs think. But if possible i hope they take shiki's ideas into consideration and if they can be done that would be great too.

The idea is fine, too be fair shiki did a pretty good take on his gun designer thread posted here: And i agree with pretty much most things if not all the things there.

In short, Ship designs aren't the only thing that offers replayability. Especially since if that was the case then we would be better off just having a sandbox mode really, the purpose of fixed designs is not only to allow players to add in their own designs (either using built-in assets and/or their own 3D models) but also so that the AI doesn't end up gimping itself due to poor choices it will make inevitably. That and it hinders the designer since it's tied to that mechanic as well, meaning if it was reduced, removed (By choice or permanently) it should negate seeing ships with highly questionable loadouts and components, but somehow still being sea worthy. It also helps speed up testing (since we can have more consistent results and even design ships towards tests and getting more reliable results from it helping the devs out in the future). I don't mind the randomness nor the AI making auto ships if it has nothing better to choose or nothing at all to choose within a certain weight, length, armament, tech bracket. But as time goes on and we see more and more modules being put in, i would like the feature for players to start designing for fixed ships that the AI can use and set to use those only, as a higher priority, in leu of ship class or set off entirely so not only can players choose whether they want the AI to make its own ships or not. But also, means less tweaking from the devs to sort out the auto-builder and focus elsewhere (such as the AI itself). Regardless if the devs can make a modular ship building system work in combination with the auto-designer, then thats great. If not, then i guess the above would be a good solution, since then we can have more creative freedom and also should make mod support for models easier (since they will probs need to update the designer each time and modders would need to do the same to keep in check). Another solution to help with stagnation would be to have a online shipyard, in which you can select from hundreds, thousands of ship designs and these being rated out of 10 (to filter out, poorly designed and meme ships) along with many filters to help choose exactly what you want. Since with a ship library, that many players can upload too means we can choose from loads of ship types, means the devs can just focus on making parts as placeholders or generics for all nations and the AI to use. But also, allow us to design ships with a huge amount of freedom as well (for example splitting the superstructure up into 3-5 pieces and swapping those out for other bits, and allowing for interchangeable gun barrels and toggle whether smaller secondaries are armoured, semi-armoured or bare.) If those, things legitimately can't work then thats fine, and i hope we see a greater sense of replayability in other areas of the game. Age of empires and Total war are 2 good examples of how you can have lots of replayability with the same units over and over again (hell AOE2 was kept alive for 14 years and got 2 remasters and a semi-rework as well).

I agree, while l don't mind the concept itself if the AI has nothing to choose from or not many good designs to pick and therefore has to make something that is fine in of itself. Regardless i would prefer a system where the player and devs, can make and submit Ship designs and components ranging from misc like fencing, searchlights, crates etc, too casemates (both the hatches and the guns themselves), turrets, guns, hulls, towers, funnels, shafts etc. That way not only do you get the devs, who can just clap out designs quicker as they don't need to fiddle with the AI to make sure it is capable of making something like it at somepoint through loads of testing. Also this will allow players like myself to add in my own designs or designs and modules that are heavily requested, but can't be addressed by the dev's due to a large workload and/or close deadlines. Plus allows us to pave the way for mod support as well. So in short, players and the devs make designs and then submit them into a ship library, per nation, per class, per maybe even weight class, gun size etc as well if we want to get very precise with what the AI can and will pick in-general. This also means it will create ships that fit the nation more rather than a random assortment of parts that look, interesting ultimately break immersion when see the ship in-question. Even if the AI can't be shunted, i still think the above would be a very nice addition especially for custom battles as that would add a huge amount of replayability (And also allow me to finally set up AI tournaments with the forumites on here and discordians on the server too).

If this helps streamlines the process then im all for it really. Then the 3D artists don't have to waste too much time making loads of different models and also allows them to focus on certain models that take a lot of time to do properly as gun barrels don't take much time to make and also should make the game run smoother as apposed to loads of different models. coupled with mods of course.

wat

This thread is a bit of an oof really. Imagine calling gamers stingy, because they won't frisbee their wallet at their monitors ok. I get they need monies, but it makes much more sense if they released expansion like DLC's rather than releasing tiny things that should of been in the game in the first place. Like the first two points you made for example. Either way if they don't provide a good enough product (which judging from progress and communication recently i seriously doubt this will be the case) i will move on to the next thing, if they do ill drop extra monies not exactly hard. And im pretty sure the devs themselves as people understand this as well. I intend to support the game since i like it and has huge potential.

Regarding the DLC part, 1 and 2 should be in the base game regardless. And if they are going to do catapult aircraft they might as well just add that into the game as well. CV's are probs the only thing i agree with, but i would rather they pair that up with new missions, extra ship hulls, and a campaign expansion as well turning it into an expansion. Ideally i would rather see that as part of the base game, but since its dreadnoughts i guess its fine as an expansional DLC. Big no to any minor DLC's that should just be in the game from the get go. But yeah i agree with most of the suggestions non-dlc wise, although should be careful with nerfs to hydro and sonar, i think for smaller vessels they should get a better bonus due to less noisey engines or certain engines providing less of a nerf (since both are effected by noise).

Strange to see some of them with such pointed bows, didn't think they had ships like that always assumed they were smoothly curved for the most part.

Very, very nice. Would love to see these in the game would add much more variety at the start of the game and allow us some cool and interesting fights in custom battles.

The ability to design ships, in any way you see fit and then see those ships fight against other designs, something that very few naval games do and would be a major selling point as there are very few people who don't like to customise things. Also the systems aren't that complex (probs more tedious to do than anything else) and the devs are figuring out how to improve optimisation of modular hulls and modules due to added moving parts, so that we could potentially use the system in the future (if they figure it out or deem it worth while of course). Also its not like they can't just do a RTW's and have the AI use pre-builts (Either by devs or by the players) while players have the ability (although limited to whatever system we have currently) to customise their ships as they see fit. It seems like peeps have forgotten about what the devs said in the Q&A vid, its obvious they are gunning for the campaign and other core mechanics first, but at some point they should revise the ship designer. Ironically enough, making things more realistic would also have to factor in more complex systems so that's a redundant point to begin with. Either way im pretty sure the devs will want to implement their hull system as they did waste time on it and few devs unless faced with absolutely no choice will bin such a mechanic regardless as the time and money spent would of been a colossal waste. Also Shiki has already outlined how the gun designer could work really, its not like these can't be changed and/or implemented at a later date regardless.

Most likely just placeholders, and im guessing this game like RTW's will focus on alt-history rather a historic playthrough, unless it gives us the option like Hearts of iron. So anything goes really, Radar 2 might just be an improved search radar. You had a pulse radar system in 1934 and a metric wavelength system, plus the type 281 as well along with the rus 1 and 2 systems and the seetkat too. All these before 1940 or during 1940. Too be honest, i dont think it matters a whole lot. As long we dont see early missiles or very advanced radars systems or maybe the computer assisted firing systems it should be fine. Unless the game goes past 1940 to 1945 or even 1950.

Or even gun practice like poor miss texas (1885), would give the game a lot more depth as well to the ships you make and use. Hell even probs start a thread on here for 'famous' or 'infamous shipfus in the future lol.

I find the objectives mostly easy to understand, but very very limited atm. It's kill all/Kill the ship or maybe damage the ship to a certain percentage of structure and catch the ship, depending on the mission at hand. For custom battles its only kill all and nothing else. There's also little lee way in terms of allowing players too win via domination or crippling the enemy fleet. I guess its too, also the lack of specifics as the above poster pointed out means we don't know if DD's the same as killing a BB (As these ships would have a different impact on the fleet, the enemies morale and their nations prestige). Although they are placeholders atm, im sure the devs will improve them at somepoint.

Yeah and also because i want moar old boags as well. HMS devastation would be excellent to have as i consider her the prototype to the pre-dreads and other ships after her, like overall mother of ships from then till now. Also yes would love starting around 1870-1875 as this would give us a longer period with pre-dreads and ironclads, although we will need quite a few ships for it too be more fulfilling as well. Surprised i didnt mention her myself really.

Would be very interesting to add as well.

Yeah, @Nick ThomadisWhen you get the time (In no rush to do this), if you can take a peek and see what you think. If its not happening this year, then i guess we could see these in the next one or other patches. Cheers!

There gud jokes, cus they work when they shouldn't and they look dumb, but interesting. Too be fair i would say they are memes which is better than a joke.

Better jokes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_monitor_Vitse-admiral_Popov https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_monitor_Novgorod

Very sexy, if Nick has time at all. Hope he could add maybe 1-2 of these maybe 3 will be nice too see more older boags put into the game.

UPDATE AT BOTTOM OF POST: Hoi lads. With April fools rapidly approaching i was wondering what the community would like too see ship-wise for the event (Assuming there will be one). I figure it would be a good excuse to add in some of the more unusual ships that existed and potentially see them in game. Going off the theme of the previous fools event i decided to focus on ships from 1870-1905. The ships i want too see are the following: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Texas_(1892) USS Texas. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colossus-class_ironclad Colossus https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Inflexible_(1876) Inflexible. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ottoman_ironclad_Asar-i_Tevfik Would be a very unique ship. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Re_Umberto-class_ironclad Very good looker. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SMS_Arminius Again a very unusual ship https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaiser-class_ironclad Armoured frigate lol. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italia-class_ironclad goodin. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_ironclad_Redoutable The first all steel ship, historically important https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SMS_Kronprinz_Erzherzog_Rudolf Very unusual ship again. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brazilian_battleship_Riachuelo Historically important. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARA_Almirante_Brown_(1880) why not lol. Feel free to post what you like too see in this event or future fool events and if it isn't coming this year, then we can use these suggestions for the next or maybe future patches as well. Even if they don't add them into the campaign, playing with them in customs and academy would be fine for me too be honest. Have a noice day! 'w'/ EDIT: Some grammar checks and extra info. 02/12/2021: So since, the devs have announced they will focus more on pre-dreads and similar, i thought it would make sense to update this thread and simply allow people to use this as a place to talk about ships between 1860-1922, of all classes (yes even cv's and soobs). Cheers.