Search the Community

Plain text if you need to translate or more clear type:

Since we cannot create own scenarios we have to improvise a bit. Hope people find this little design challenge interesting to participate in. Might be interesting to see what kind of designs we come up when it needs to face multiple challenges. Setting of the scenario (very hypothetical): Russo-Japanese war, July 1904 As part of Weltpolitik policy and deep racial prejudices against Asians, Kaiser Wilhelm II, who had encouraged Tsar Nicholas II towards the expansion in East, become worried whether Russian would succeed in their war with Japanese. War itself, according to Wilhelm II, was also an opportunity to drive further a wedge between Britain (ally, although a passive one, of Japan) and Russia, convincing the later to join the alliance with German Empire. As an attempt to give the Nicolas II a practical support in the ongoing war and also convince Russia that Germany is a reliable partner, Kaiser decides to send one his newest armored cruisers, lunched year ago in 1903, under captain Stresser to aid Russian naval force. Japanese are well aware of the approaching German cruiser and plan an ambush, planning on using a destroyer to lure the heavy cruiser in waiting trap consisting of part of Admiral Togo's fleet in Yellow Sea. However, the destroyer fails to find the german cruiser and instead the german cruiser chances upon a Japanese pre-drednought battleship and two armored cruisers, both part of Japanese 1894 purchase from Britain shipyards. Convinced on the superiority of his crew, officers and ship instead of disengaging Captain Stresser orders fire. Unbeknown to both sides the battle interacts the path of 4 Japanese torpedo boats. The task: Post your heavy cruiser design, with ship details section visible, according to the limitations outlined in this post. Limitations: 1902 CA design (heavy cruiser, I am setting design year 1902 since the ship was launched in 1903) Range must be set to very long Max cost : 5,300,000 $ You will be fighting two battles 1: vs 1 BB and 2x CL of 1894 (battle distance 5000 meters) 2: vs 4 TB of 1903 design (battle distance 4000 meters). In other words ship must be somewhat multi functional and able to face different kind of enemies.

One of the things I'm becoming concerned about as I play the game and read the forum is what the end product is going to play like. It's my belief that the best works, work best because there is a strong vision behind them; informing every part of the design process. Ultimately I suppose, I think that the algorithm is just as good a way of expressing one's individual understanding of the world and communicating that to other people, as other things that lead to art! Stay with me. Personally, what exited me about UGG, was the fact that there was very little micromanagement. I'm old now and I just can't keep up with an opponent who can always win because they have 'super fast processing power' (I have lots of experience, but I express it slowly). I prefer a game that, if it's at a strategic level, is just that and gives me time to make decisions that I can trust my forces to carry out (more or less reliably). Conversely at a tactical level, I'd like to be able to make almost all of the decisions. I want to be either General or Lieutenant, but not both at the same time. I guess what I'm saying is that I'd like the strategic elements of this game to be discrete from the tactical; if we're going to have a supply train, I really don't want to see it or have to deal with it on the battlefield. My worry about this process (the forum and debates), is that the pressure to please everyone might push the developers towards something that loses sight of the story they were originally trying to tell. Of course I might be quite wrong about what I perceive this to have been, in which case... I'll just go on enjoying myself ;-)