Wakelessrex
-
Posts
64 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Posts posted by Wakelessrex
-
-
On 6/26/2021 at 10:02 PM, ThatZenoGuy said:
Bring the bulge.
Hell yea!
-
yay! at least the fusos Pagoda was added along with her hull.
Though you cannot currently make the Kongo from the Fusos hull in game as the secondary hull layer goes to far back to the stern. Though something akin to the Nagato is then achievable.
However with minor modification you could change the current fuso hull so that you can achieve a much more authentic kongo class. I really hope this becomes a reality
Thank you for the added pagoda tower as is, hopefully more interesting developments for japan to come.-
2
-
-
based on latest patches I believe that bulges may be incorporated into new hulls, at best. Which is a start, such as the new yamato hull that seemingly has some bulge. I hope more of this is added.
-
Hey Darth!
Thank you for finally adding in Pagoda type Super structures! Very much appreciated and one step closer to my favorite class the Kongo!
However you only added in the hull suitable for the Fuso class, that hull is very close to the Kongos with one major caveat in game which is the second layer of the hull (which contains the casemates) sits to far back on the version in game.
Would it be possible to add in a modified version where this second layer is sitting forward more and thus allows for the turret configuration of the Kongo class and more resemble her silhouette. I dont expect youll get much clout for it but I would personally be very thankful.
Great patch, thank you.-
1
-
-
Are you guys still taking on recruits?
-
4 hours ago, pandakraut said:
Fairly sure it's possible, someone managed it in the UG:G game. None of the active modders have gone in that direction though.
do you have a link to that?
-
Is this possible?
Specifically would it be possible to create new Zouve Sprites from existing sprites and link them to the "Zouve" Trait in game? -
Any new additions on this front?
-
On 4/14/2020 at 3:32 AM, Cptbarney said:
yes pls so we can have the thicc herself.
Miss california! 'w'
Hell yea!
-
1
-
-
I backed or bought the game when it first was announced and I see now that it is on steam, how or when do we get our steam keys for the game?
-
-
On 10/19/2019 at 7:59 PM, Accipiter said:
i want to point out something important to the dev team here: please do not confuse torpedo defence system and torpedo bulge, they are not the same thing:
the current "torpedo protection" options we have in game reference to the internal empty buffer compartiments and holding bulkheads within the hull. this is just the internal "torpedo defence system" mot reasonably modern dreadnought had that from the get go.
then the big external "torpedo bulge" that is talked about in this topic is something even more: it's basically a bolt-on extra hull section that is added during modernisation, that stacks OVER the already existing internal "torpedo defence system. (see picture at the end with Nagato class's armor if you have trouble visualizing what i mean)
because of this, adding a torpedo bulge, in addition to improving torpedo protection (obviously), have 2 additional effects that the internal torpedo defence system doesnt have:-it give the hull extra displacement limit: simply by putting more compartiments under water, you get more floatability. in their modernized 1930/WW2 configurations many of those old dreadnoughts safely achieved displacements that were now far in excess of their original hull limits. they achieved this thanks to the extra floatation added from the bulges. Fuso class for exemple went from 29000 tonnes to 35000 tonnes just thanks to them!
-it deteriorates top speed and fuel efficiency: by altering the shape of the hull, increasing water drag and reducing streamlining. note however, that in practice this effect was often more than compensated by engine and machinery upgrades also received during the modernisation, so the old modernised dreadnoughts generally ended up faster after the modernisation. but still, talking about the bulges alone, yes, they do deteriorate speed.
seeing from this, i think there is a decent case in my opinion that bulges should be represented by their individual option in the game:
-they give even more torpedo damage and flooding reduction (probably need to rebalance the effects of the internal torpedo protection, so that having both internal protection + bulge doesnt make you too resistant to torpedoes)
-they actually give you bonus hull displacement limit
-they reduce speed and increase a bit fuel consumption
-they add A LOT of build time and build cost.
if you plan to have rebuilding/modernisation of old ships during the campaign, could be perfect to have them as a modernisation option rather than something you build on the ships initially (?)
now of course haing them be visually represented on the models whould be a nice touch and i whould love that as well. but i think at the very least in terms of stats and ship design they shouldnt be lumped together with the internal torpedo defence system as they are not the same.
picture for illustration: here is Nagato class's armor (modified from wikipedia),
in green: the torpedo defence system, this is build-in to the ship as designed, and was always there. the current "torpedo protection system" options we have in game are only this.
in purple: the torpedo bulge you can clearly see that this is essentially an extra section of hull added later. this also alters hull shape and increase the max possible displacement. this is currently not modelled at all in the game, and really should be.
Good points, I meant to come back to this topic with more information and my own attempt at stating out torpedos defences. However I never really got the time and had other projects.
Torpedo defences did come in many different forms in fact one of the first was "torpedo nets" I was going to recommend that these actually be at least a module you can buy for ships. They are primarily a feature of dreadnought ships and of that era so they have more reason to be in the game than perhaps any other. For those who dont know the "ribbing" along the hulls of most dreadnoughts is actually the upturned and stowed arms that the nets hang off of.
Aside from this many of the modern (ww2) torpedo defence systems while still technically "bulges" perhaps fit more into internal design. The American fast battleship hulls for instance were sleek and designed such that there was no bulge but rather an internal system for countering torpedo damage.
Anyway I really sincerely hope we get both bulges and of course my favorite ship hull the Kongo with her sexy pagoda tower
-
1
-
-
8 hours ago, Nick Thomadis said:
It is possible, because we continuously add new base models and towers, but we cannot promise when, since we have more important modelling priorities for covering the most important ship visuals of the era. We will try.
Thank you for your response, this makes me cautiously optimistic.
I would like to point out though that the Kongo class having been built in 1911 is a much more iconic ship of the "Dreadnought" era even with Pagoda than say the Yamato, Bismarck, or Iowa. Though I understand, as those are the most popular BB's why they were included right now.
Though I will say that the Kongo class and a few others specifically are I think a very good possible addition because they are a class that will basically be purchasable early game and that can make it feasibly all the way to late game as they did historically through refits.
Actually I realize I havent read anywhere or dont recall that the campaign will allow for ships refits or reconstructions but I sincerely hope that it does. I wold think thats pretty much a necessary feature especially for a campaign covering decades.
And finally heres some sexy shots of the class herself over her career.
Very sexy.-
3
-
-
1 hour ago, RedParadize said:
If I had to do it myself. I would split superstructure and tower. Looking at the mesh they seem to be already two part merged. That what would be left would be to figure out a way to restrict what tower can go over each structure. The modeling part would be pretty easy (I use to teach modeling) As for the rest I do not know.
As a fellow modeler I think its more about the coding to get that working in the editor than it is the models (which they already pretty much have done)
But I think Darth would be more appropriate to answer that question than not, just my own experience with games tells me we're to late in the process for a change of that kind see as the system mostly works and is a success. Perhaps im wrong. Either way, more Pagodas please. -
I agree more variety is better, very much so. However we also have to be realistic, I very much doubt at this point in development that Darth will go back, or really could go back and completely change all the towers to be modular. It would take too much development away from creating new towers etc. For good or bad most of the major features in the game are at this point in development pretty set id say.
I really hope we get both the Kongo Tower AND the specific Hull with the torpedo bulge though. Despite me thinking it unlikely at this point. -
Thats true, there are few late game options right now. However the kongos pagoda though having it till the end of its career in WW2 was actually not a late war addition. It was added to the class in 1931 during her first reconstruction.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kongō-class_battlecruiser#/media/File:Kongo_after_reconstruction.jpg
So while people will see it as a "late game" tower it actually is also an early game tower getting more bang for your buck from the developers too.-
2
-
-
I really hope we get more Bridge types of the japanese Pagoda style, my all time favorite ship was the Kongo Class and you cant totally emulate her in game for a few reasons. Even though as a legacy ship she makes more sense than say the bismarck or Yamato for a game named after the dreadnought. Anyway really hoping for me of these style of towers please. Also some nice bulges in future hulls would be amazing ;)
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d4/Haruna_1934.jpg
https://forum.game-labs.net/topic/31924-my-case-for-the-bulge-torpedos/-
6
-
-
13 hours ago, Niomedes said:
Can you contextualise esch of the pictures please, I.e. when and where they were taken, as well as which ships are being shown ? That would make it easier to cross reference this.
Sure, I can do that when I get a second.
1 hour ago, Pedroig said:Two ways of looking at this:
1. Since 80%+ of the bulge is below the waterline, expending assets (and processing power) on something that is unseen and can be simulated with simple math, seems not very efficient use of developer assets.
2. That 20% above the waterline sure does make a distinctive difference in the lines of the hull.
I'd agree with having the torpedo protection scheme result in an above waterline add-on, which scales with the hull of the ship. Have one "look" per level of protection, and get rid of current hull designs which have already incorporated them into the look. The math is the math however, and it is easier to model waterline models than full hull models, so what is unseen, should not be modeled or seen graphically.
Bulges could and should be very low poly geometric shapes, youre talking about models that should be a far lower drain on a system than single turrets would even be. The ones I created in very short time are fairly low poly and you could go even lower than that.
We already have full models also, below the waterline that is. Just no bulges with the exception of the Yamato (which had minimal external bulge anyway)
But really where there is room for saving imo is the majority of old designs that are refitted for post ww1 era. Unless you just ignore bulges, which I would say is bad. Youre going to have multiple hulls for the same ship. Which seems inefficient and also because there is a choice of bulges in the editor a break in immersion.
I do hope they make it in in one way or another. If they are ignored so many mid to late designs will be basically unreproduceable.
-
3 hours ago, Ninja said:
Torpedo bulges are already in, they just aren't visually showny yet. I assume at some point they will be added as an aesthetic later one.
Not a bad write up about bulges though and might of been a good one for the Shipyard discussion board.
In general and to be clear, I agree the visuals will be nice eventually but my understanding from what I can see is that the mechanics for this from a simulation perspective are already in.
Probably explains why torpedos at the moment are so underwhelming, probably needs tweaking...
The Yamato hull currently has a bulge, its the only hull type however. I already asked about bulges in the shipyard, Nick said its unlikely but perhaps after release. I dont think thats a likely addition post release. I advocate for their inclusion now.
Especially as attachable as that will cut the requisite hull number down drastically.
-
16 minutes ago, Illusive Tabby said:
I'm pretty sure I tried most/all of the towers. None of them allowed the tower, funnel 3, and the P/Q turrets. I'm much more interested in recreating historical warships as opposed to the near-fantasy we have here.... But I absolutely LOVE that we can create our own warships.
Same, I love that I can make designs but I will probably end up trying to make a lot of historical ones because I love them so much.
-
"Reserved"
For torpedo defence gameplay mechanics -
“My case for the bulge”
The absence of torpedo bulges has the strong possibility of sinking Ultimate Admirals Dreadnoughts otherwise historically accurate experience. The main purpose of the torpedo bulge throughout both world wars was to mitigate the damage of a torpedo strike. At this they achieved mixed results but, they were a very important feature of many ships overall defense. Most of the time a torpedo bulge was just an added layer of external armour below the waterline of a ship; no bulge was adequate on its own. It was important that all bulges work in conjunction with bulkheads to maintain the best possible defense. I believe in theory it would be a very achievable goal to implement them in before release. If torpedo bulges are not added, we stand to lose, not only an integral part of the damage model but also a great loss in diversity and realism in aesthetics. If it is therefore not a huge drain on resources to do so I advocate heavily for their implementation. I intend to argue this case here and provide what I think may work as a solution to our battle of the Bulge.
The importance of the aesthetic or the visuals should not be discarded. Who doesn’t love a good bulge? Although it may appear to be on the surface an unimportant feature it does in facet effect many zones of interaction. Perhaps most importantly is the damage model, currently torpedo bulges seem to only apply an abstraction of their intended purpose on a ship without affecting the visual narrative of that abstraction. This has a significant impact on immersion and realism. If ships had bulges in reality, those ships could not be accurately duplicated in game. It was one of the most prevalent features of prewar battleships that were refitted to serve in the second world war. We would lose a significant amount of Iconic battleship hulls or worse in my opinion simplify them to the point of unrecognition.
As for implementation of the in-game assets I suggest this, a simple few types of generic bulges set up in a similar manner to the hulls, that is to say extendable with displacement. These would then correlate to different bulge types or implemented into game mechanics as the developers see fit. I have included several Pictorial examples of this concept.
A lack of bulge would be devastating. There can be no accurate hulls for so many class’s including, New York, Pennsylvania, Littorio, Kongo, Fuso, Nagato, Queen Elizabeth, Revenge, New Mexico, Nevada, Colorado, Tennessee, Ise, etc. These vessels not only represent the pinnacle of their nations navies but are also the most recognizable designs that players will expect to see accurately and realistically rendered in the game. These Iconic designs would not be reproduceable, the possibilities of new designs featuring hulls that never saw them would be extinguished. This ship feature, aside from being practical, is also a great way to provide a huge increase in design capabilities for relatively low labor.
In conclusion I think adding torpedo bulges will add considerably to gameplay, immersion, design potential, variety, realism, and aesthetic. For a small amount of effort, a great contribution can made towards making Ultimate Admiral Dreadnoughts an even more rewarding experience for fans of naval warfare simulation.
I do some 3d modeling for mods and my own 3d printing, I was able to model quickly a few Generic Bulge types that may offer some idea to the developers I have also included those models.
Here you could either section out parts of the bulge much like how the hulls currently work based on displacement or elongate the bulge horizontally to the displacement size, as the bulge does not need to cover the entire hull this should be achievable.
Here is an in game representation of what it might look like on the BC 3 hull I believe.
Various images of Torpedo bulges in all their glory.
Most older Battleships that saw participated in WW2 saw a few refits and modernizations, almost all had torpedo bulges added at some point. here the new York Class before and after modernization.
Again the New York before her bulge Refit.
Link to Models:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/l1gl05nantywjbm/Torp Bulges.rar?dl=0
References:
http://www.navweaps.com/index_tech/tech-047.php
http://combinedfleet.com/kaigun.htm
http://www.combinedfleet.com/b_underw.htm
http://www.navsource.org/archives/01/34a.htm
extensive use of Wikipedia to find refits and dates. Most pre war BBs that were in service during WW2 had bulges. These will be hulls that start in game without bulges and without the need to make entirely new hulls it would be preferential to make attachable bulges.
-
7
-
2
-
-
Pretty close id say, maybe do one of the more built up rear towers?
http://www.modelshipgallery.com/gallery/bb/hms/Invincible-350-ra/index.htm -
41 minutes ago, Maachlan said:
18 inch guns super firing over 8 inch guns must knock the little ones out of alignment every time they fire.
Pretty sure thats the least of this ships worries when it fires XD
More Pagoda Towers coming?
in General Discussions
Posted
This is a good point