HusariuS

Honestly speaking it would be just better to make "Ultimate Admiral Cold War" focusing on 1945+ ship designs rather than implementing missiles to a game about gun fights between warships leave alone Planes, Carriers and AAA. And to be fair even if they would decide to go with your idea, according to current state of the game it would be few years before that would happen and I've been playing UAD since Alpha 2 or 3 and I must say the core of the game didn't change that much if at all, and that was 2 Years ago I think? So missiles right now are not even low priority, it's a dream that may never come true.

3. And steam workshop compability in the future to allow players to also use other players templates.

1. Standard Design Templates for AI to base their ships upon - I'm sorry Nick but you can't deny that AI is... poor at designing ships and so far there has been very little improvement since the start of the game. 2. Player Templates usable by the AI - Just as above (obviously we can choose which template AI can use or base it's ship upon)

Waiting...

I don't know what you are talking about... on one occasion it just took me around twelve different ship designs to finish a mission. It's perfectly fine I'm telling you.

I just hope the campaign will be similar to the campaign in "Pacific Storm" although preferably turn-based system.

Hold up. I never said it's a problem and as well I never said it's a issue. I simply asked dev why isn't it a thing... In terms of funnels and towers, most of them are already assigned to certain hulls unless there was a update at some point which allows Hood tower to be placed on idk Yamato hull but as far as I know right now we don't have such possibility. In fact, we don't even know if we could do that in Campaign and most likely we won't unless we gonna "buy" it from other nation which also brings a question if it would be even possible. But right now as I said most towers and funnels are assigned to certain hulls so there is no need to give them "historical" names like "Hood Tower I" etc. Maybe in the future we would be able to use for example Bismarck guns on Yamato hull but right now we can't. And on the other side what's the problem with it? As I said before you could choose between "historic" names for historic hulls, turrets etc or "generic" ones like Modernized Dreadnought IV and so on. In term of "identification"... ...well don't take this as a offense but this statement in current state of the game is kinda useless. As you know right now the only thing we can do with the "hull shape" is either make it longer or shorter and that's it. We literally have no real control over the hull shape. This is why giving historic hulls could make things better since players won't need to search for that certain "hull shape", especially if in the future we will gain more control over the hull shape. And there is no point in saying "if they don't care" since if they don't care you could as well name the hulls: "One, Two, Three, ... , ... Ten. Eleven" and so on and it wouldn't matter to them anyway since "they don't care". But then again ask yourself how many of them wouldn't care? How many people would want to recreate ships? How many people would want to only use hull but use slightly different tower, funnel or turrets? (if possible in future) How many people would want to only use tower or funnel or turrets from certain historic ships? (if possible in future) Then again I will repeat myself: I do not see the lack of it as a problem or issue. I simply asked the devs why isn't it a thing.

You completely don't understand my point. My whole idea was to make finding certain >>Historical<< hulls much easier. First: Why should I remember that hull for example "Modern Battleship III" is Bismarck hull when I can simply have a option to change names to"historical" ones where "Modern Battleship III" would be named "Bismarck-hull". Second: About the names for the hulls that didn't even exist I'm simply gonna copy-paste my sentence: So basically. if the hull is fictional or modified from historical one then yes, such naming as "Modern Battleship III" is understandable. Third: If you so much would prefer seing names like "Modern Battleship III" for both historical and non-historical, what's the problem with adding option to change the names to your own preference? Since we can already set the preference which units you want to use then I doubt there is any problem with that. Same applies to the turrets.

I'm more talking here about finding the hull you want to use. Sooner or later we will have as many hulls for one nation as we have now in total for all nations, and let's say you want to create new Heavy Cruiser based on Baltimore-class CA, I think it would be much easier or rather more "pleasant" to find it by the name of which ship the hull is based on rather than trying to remember that Baltimore hull is called "Modern Heavy Cruiser III" especially if you don't play certain nations too often for one reason or another. Basically just as @Cptbarney said above. Besides you can always add a option to show "historical" names.

@Nick Thomadis Actually I don't think anybody ever asked about this but why hulls are called "Modernized Dreadnought II, Modern Battleship III" etc. ? While I understand if it's about hulls that are more or less fictional, but why the one's that are actually recreating historical ships are also called like that? Why can't you just name them "Fuso-1930 hull" or something like that?

Oh, will that Deutschland-class pocket battleship will have same torpedo launchers models or will it have only the ones available in the game?

While I appreciate that you are trying to improve AI in terms of creating ships... unfortunately this developement is going nowhere. You make one thing to improve AI and somehow it keeps finding new way to evolve backwards. I already proposed this with few people IIRC but I'm gonna do it again. You should basically make "Creative Mode" or "Sandbox Mode" or whatever you want to name it where players are creating and saving templates of various ships for various nations in various timelines which they can use in custom battles/campaign as well as AI, players can also choose which design AI can use for certain nations/timeline. Since you want to release the game on steam, players could use steam workshop to download templates created by other players. AI also should be able to modify the template in case it is not fully able to copy the template or to improve it, for example: Template A is using Radar II but the AI has only access to Radar I, in this case AI will use Radar I and replace it as fast as possible when it will unlock access to Radar II. or Template B is using Mark 2 127mm secondary guns but the AI just got access to Mark 3 127mm guns, in this case the AI will modify the template and rearm the ship with Mark 3 to keep up with the advancing technology. Adding such ability or rather option for the AI would eliminate the problem of AI making ships which are breaking laws of psychics or having unlogical designs. I'm aware it's not a easy job to do it, but from what I saw so far it is definitely easier than making AI capable of creating ships with effective, necessary, logical and not breaking laws of psychics choices. But whatever your decision will be, keep up the good work

The AI is evolving... ...backwards xD EDIT: I'm not a expert but I'm pretty sure this design is breaking the law of physics