1MajorKoenig
-
Posts
280 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
8
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Posts posted by 1MajorKoenig
-
-
3 hours ago, Cptbarney said:
Atm, campaign, designer, armour and AI are probs the most pressing issues. plus lack of a ship saver and library plus the lack of mid game and early game hulls too.
As mentioned above - armor and AI could use some tweaks but I would not consider them critical.
Current limitations on the ship designer are critical though
-
3
-
-
14 hours ago, Fishyfish said:
I resent that last comment.
😂
-
1
-
-
23 hours ago, Antean said:
TY, Madham82, for your reply. I did not see the part about designing for a Random Battle.
Well, if one can design a ship for a random battle & play it as a single ship then it would appear to me that one should be able to save this design. I mean, why make the player have to do the same thing over & over ( time sink wastage, imho) if a particular design is very usable (or desirable) over multiple battles? This just doesn't make that much sense to me.
Hi Antean - found you here 🙂
I think saving designs for customs battles is on the list - certainly a frequently requested feature.
I think the two big points this game needs though are the Campaign and a vastly enhanced and more flexible ship designer
The game has all the potential !
-
2 hours ago, ThatOneBounced said:
I disagree with the whole ribbon system. It just is, shall I say, a tone shift. What we have may not provide a efficient amount of information, I like that they are out of the way and do not attract the players attention. Its something that I can look at when in a lull. Ribbons are too distracting and make things seem a bit more lighthearted. Also seems like an unnecessary change to conform to similar games in the genre
Ribbons are nice to have at best.
We have far bigger fishes to fry!
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Cptbarney said:
I agree, fed up of broken half-arsed games. Its nice too see devs and companies actually take the time to polish their products as well, instead of the usual min-maxing for profits.
Well at some point they will need to collect some fresh money to keep the show running. Hope they have enough for now to not be forced to rush it in a half-ready state - with the known + expected consequences on reception.
Just in case it becomes an issue at some point it would be great to put up and discuss alternatives rather than pushing things out.
If my professional carreer showed one thing than it would be that there are always multiple ways to solve such things - if everyone is creative and wants to pull into the same direction
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Donluca95 said:
Actually they introduce something new the "SHIP REVERSE MOVEMENT" .
Do we need that?!
Do we want to make it a WOWS thingy with reverse paddling? What’s next - border hugging...? 🧐
Rather than these kind of features I would appreciate a solid and courageous improvement to the ship designer
-
4 hours ago, Nick Thomadis said:
Hello Admirals,
We would like to inform you about our next patch which will arrive soon.
In this update we offer crucial improvements on battle gameplay, especially regarding the formations and evasion system. This is a major improvement and we are happy that we handled it before paying full attention to the campaign.
We also introduce for the first time the ability to use the reverse engines of ships, an action that is very useful for evading torpedoes and maintaining formations. Please read below about all the improvements we are currently working on.===========
SHIP EVASION IMPROVEMENT
The auto-evasion system has been fully reworked and optimized. Ships under AI control will be much more effective in evading other ships or torpedoes. Especially, the ship-to-ship evasion system is now more advanced and is based on ship size and rank, following the standard military navigation rules of the Royal Navy:
Priority of Passage Rules
- Ship of higher tonnage has priority
- Ship with Captain of higher rank has priority
- For ships of the same rank and size, the ship on the starboard has priority.
The new system makes ships to keep formations with realistic and consistent maneuvers without doing unneeded circles.
SHIP REVERSE MOVEMENT
Ships are now able to use reverse engines. This is done automatically when ships have to auto-navigate for evading or keeping a formation. Additionally, the player can also use the reverse engines at his own will, by pressing the Shift-Key and clicking somewhere behind his ship. In that manner, the ship can turn harder to avoid, for example, a torpedo or another ship. Moving backwards at will is possible but you will realize it has no tactical benefit in most battle situations.AI OPTIMIZATION
AI will keep an effective firing distance according to battle situation. Destroyers will approach in more deadly ranges according to their torpedo armament. Lightly protected ships will desire to keep a safer distance. This was especially needed for AI battlecruisers which now they desire to fight inside their immunity zone more often, but not too far away and becoming ineffective.OTHER
- Auto Design Fixes: Some important bug fixes regarding the auto-design system make AI ships to never have empty barbettes or have very large unoccupied gaps on the deck.
- Partial Penetration Damage Increase: Shells that partially penetrate the armor will now make more damage. Small gun damage will be more significant against Battleships as a consequence, but still not comparable to the impact of big guns.
- Weapon info improvement: The average damage estimation of guns and torpedoes will be closer to actual battle numbers (previously the numbers were just not accurate showing x100 more damage). Additionally, penetration ranges can expand up to 35 km (previously they were limited to 25 km).
- Weight balances for armor, bulkheads, guns: The new balance of weights for integral parts of the ships allows for more realistic constraints. Auto-Design is also affected positively because it makes wiser choices for building more durable and effective ships.
- Tonnage Minimum Step for Design reduced: Minimum step was 50 tons and now it is 25 tons. This change not only helps the player to utilize tonnage more effectively for designing ships but also helps auto-design to use almost all free tonnage (previously it could leave several tonnes unused making AI designs weaker than the player’s on average).
- Minimum Speed for BB, CA and CL slightly increased: For BB and CA now the minimum speed is 16 knots (from 15) and for CL is 17 knots (from 16). This was needed for allowing more realistic designs of those ship types and to help AI to not build impractical, very slow ships.
- Minor penetration balance for 8-inch and 9-inch guns: Those guns have slightly more penetration at their extreme ranges.
- Initial playable missions increased: Initially the unlocked missions are nine (instead of five), to help players progress. (Note: The ironclad missions should be not so tough, due to the partial penetration damage increase).
- Various minor hull fixes.
===========
We might add a few more features until the release of the patch. For more information stay tuned in this thread until the release of
Alpha-10, estimated to arrive next week.Thank you for reading!
The Game-Labs Team
Firstly - great news!
However - Are there new hulls or a more flexible ship designer planned?
-
6
-
1 hour ago, Fishyfish said:
I would love to see that, I really would, but I'm convinced that we never will. I have no reason to believe that the ship construction elements of the game will get any serious change or overhaul, that is to say I'm pretty sure we're stuck with what we've got.
Which in turn would mean the devs need to either put in hundreds of modules or we are stuck with creating always the same design. And that would be defeating the purpose somehow
-
3
-
-
15 hours ago, Gangut said:
One feature I'd love to see is the ability to save a design and use it in sandbox mode, or globally. You could even save the design for the ai to use in say the sandbox to help limit the weird designs, but also roleplay purposes as who doesn't want to see a rematch of their favourite naval battles, or even what if battles?
Yes!
4 hours ago, Fishyfish said:Which nations don't have super battleship hulls yet? Bet you my fins that's what we'll get. A few more mildy interested academy missions, the run of the mill bug fixes and ui tweaks. I don't mean to be toooo sardonic but...
which one? I mean rather than making these look-alike hulls they should be better improving the configurability of the Ship Designer.
Imagine:
- set displacement
- set length to beam ratio
- set flush deck or not
- set freeboard
- select from a couple of bow and stern forms with individual pros and cons
- set speed (and resulting sHP)
- set machinery space based on sHP and selected propulsion technology
- set funnels based on machinery space
- set barbettes freely based on remaining space outside machinery space and not in areas they would not fit (directly on the bow and stern) - you can keep hardpoints in the background for the AI to design ships
- place broken down superstructure elements such as decks, bridge, etc.
- place mast with range finder as a separate module onto the bridge module and make it dependent on the range finder selected
- set directors for any gun type
Now this would give a whole lot of freedom - it is a simple write up nothing sophisticated but as an idea where I would like to see the ship designer go.
And as the AI design argument was brought up multiple times: yes you can leave the more strict stuff in the background for the AI to design, such as combined modules, hard points and such. Just give players more freedom please
-
4
-
-
2 hours ago, Cptbarney said:
Hopefully 1 and 3 so that the game is more fleshed out, i reckon we need another 2-3 alphas before we can properly do the campaign really.
Sounds reasonable
It would be interesting though how the team sees the next topics to tackle
-
1
-
-
Hi Captains,
What are we going to see in Alpha 10?
- a more flexible ship designer (suggestions are on the table)?
- Campaign?
-
Improved mechanics (armor, shooting, fleet control, etc.)?
-
On 11/23/2020 at 4:38 AM, Tankaxe said:
First I would like to preface that I understand that the previous modular design the devs developed were found to be to complex for the player and difficult for the AI to make a design out of. I also further understand that hard points are necessary because the AI will struggle building a decent ship without them.
Yet despite all of these consideration I find my self dissatisfied with the current status of the ship designer. I find myself making less of a ship completely born from as an original design to just "Montana with 18" guns!" or "Hood with 16" guns!" One of major gripes of this are the super structure designs being based mostly on existing ships while also not making ships original also come with severe limitations in regards to size, usability and aesthetic. The top of the line tower that comes with a barbette can't fit your 16" guns? You can go ahead and try the smaller tower that doesn't come with the barbette to fit it while losing out the accuracy and spotting bonus simply because the shape of the top of the line tower is unworkable. Try combining the best US top tower with out the equivalent rear tower that doesn't come out as a blocky mess.
I understand that testers here like the idea of building ships that were built historically and agree that tools should be available for player to do so. But for players who may want to build a French style US all forward battleship are prevented because only the French can use that hull have nothing to for them. Hulls completely dictate on what the player can or cannot do from the predread hulls where the only thing you change are the gun batteries and towers. To the mid/late game hulls that if you not going meme ship starts looking samey because of hardpoints.
The biggest limiting factor is the hardpoints system and as I prefaced its there specifically because the AI wont be able to handle ship designing without them. But they also massively restrict the player and forcing designs that look quite ugly look at. For an example trying to build on the super battleship hull as the US and putting the tower as back as possible to fit two turrets in the front will force me to put my rear turrets to the freaking stern of the ship creating a very displeasing empty space between the rear tower and the gun. Doesn't help that it is also the only place to fit a barbette at is shoved so far to the back. Finally some of the ships just hurt to look at and I can't look at them and go "yeah this totally seems like a design that would be considered historically" of course their are exceptions but the AI ain't winning any beauty contests.
We are the leader of our countries navies the player shouldn't be forced into a linear experience and the restriction of the ship designer prevents that. Anyways that's the end of my thoughts on the ship designer and again I completely understand that the way it is now are from discovered limitations with the AI and other factors. Thus I would like to open the thread to discuss about the ship designer but with the caveat we try to keep the topic 'realistic' designer ideas and not "I can make a BC with with a 40 torpedo broadside and 40kt top speed lololol"
I agree that this is a significant issue. A couple of thoughts:1) hard points - it is a simplistic system to avoid Nonsens designs by AI. BUT: you can leave them in the background and skip the usage of these for players (and replace them with stuff mentioned in 2) and 3) ...)
2) the hulls: currently the system Is far too limiting. I would suggest to add:
- length to beam ratio slider
- style elements to chose from such as bow and stern form, belt design (eg inclined, tapered, etc) and such to shape a new hull every time you build a ship!!!! Not just two/three hull options we can do right now 😞
- define machinery space to restrict placement of large caliber barbettes and guns and define where funnels can be placed
3) superstructure: I understand the devs can’t put in tons of structures but there is an easy way out: split up the module Into smaller ones. Therefore more combinations are viable. Such as:- bridge
- barbettes
- mast (!!!)
- funnel - more options, the current ones are small and look not convincing. Plus for placement See machinery space in 2)
I guess that would be it for a next iteration - what do you think @Nick Thomadis ...? 🙂
-
6
-
-
On 8/20/2020 at 8:30 AM, Tycondero said:
I like the idea, but one could argue that these aspects are already integrated in the hull chosen. Again, I am all for getting more flavour and diversity for the ships. I do think camouflage would be a bit more easy to introduce.
But more variety is exactly what I need. I signed into the game once the patch dropped and designed a French Battlecruiser. Launched a couple of salvos and that’s it for my experience with Alpha 9. Afterwards I tried it build be an Incomparable but the UK BC can’t use the big guns apparently.
I think some variety would certainly help here - adjust the hull form for example:
- length to beam ratio
- bow and stern form
- representation of engine and boiler rooms
Plus: some more granular superstructure options:
- separate bridge section
- separate mast
- more options to place funnels (link to machinery spaces)
- etc. etc. etc.
....
-
5
-
-
26 minutes ago, Cptbarney said:
Looks noice, you will get the hang of it. It can be a bit tedious since you need to do all the little details unless you want to skip most of them, and make sure to watch your poly count as well ORP jadwiga came out a whopping 750k polys lol.
Where can I find the poly count?
-
Hey Barney - I started skribbling a little on my own. It's probably not particular good but it's pretty fun and I may see where this will take me. Here is a super-dreadnought Hull I started doing:
-
2
-
-
2 hours ago, Fishyfish said:
How about a few spots for barbettes amidship as seen on such warships like the Bretagne Class Battleships and the Fuso Class just to name a few?
König 🙂
-
1
-
-
-
1
-
-
On 11/10/2020 at 9:04 PM, Cptbarney said:
Sorry lads been busy and had a lot of overtime to do this week and the last.
Regardless here some images of ORP warsaw who i managed to do some more stuff on over the weekend.
Enjoy! 'w'/
Hey Barnehey! Nice work dude - is this done in Blender I assume? Looks certainly great, especially the small details on the bridge and stuff!
Do you use uploaded images to get the dimensions right or are you modelling completely free-style?
What do you use as stating point for the hulls? Simple cube?
-
1
-
-
Nick was mentioning increased availability of equipment/hulls with the next update. If I got it right he was referring to make the existing equipment available for more occasions/nations?
I HOPE we see a “modernized” Dreadnought for the German Kaiser and Torpedoboat hulls past 1908!
-
4
-
-
11 hours ago, Fishyfish said:
Aurora Borealis? At this time of year, at this time of day, in this part of the country, localized entirely within your kitchen?
Yes!
May I see it?
No.
😂
Skiiinnnnnnnnerrrr!!!
-
3
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, Cptbarney said:
Thanks for pinging! Will most definitely sign in again and give these a try!
-
1
-
-
22 hours ago, Grandpa Canuck said:
I'm from Canada and we don't do Civil war well. So here is a Canadian approch:
Dear Devs: I'm sorry but a posting on an update is needed asap. If needed we can talk about it, lets all get together and do lunch. Keeping peace in this community is getting stressful but we live in hope all will end well. I'm sorry to have to bring all this to your attention, so please just let us know when to expect the update. If that's not too much trouble.
And don’t forget to apologize 😬
No seriously - I lived in Canada for a couple of years and it is an awesome place and fantastic people there!
-
Some positive vibes here from my side:
-
5
-
-
39 minutes ago, Bluishdoor76 said:
Something I do wish they would add, and no I'm not saying its important and should be added now, are more German superstructures for cruisers. I really wanna build a Königsberg styled ship or a Deutschland styled cruiser.
also,
El Salvador 1980-1992
And hulls!
I don’t like Atlantic Bows and I need a proper cruiser bow like the D-Land
-
3
-
First casemates: CSS Virginia
in General Discussions
Posted
And it depends on RNG - beat sometimes just with fires but sometimes it doesn’t get far