Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Work in progress: Dreadnoughts


Recommended Posts

15 hours ago, Norfolk nChance said:

@Andre Bolkonsky

 

 

“One of my favorite eras ever, can't wait to start building my dream fleet!”

 

 

 

Would love to see the USS Texas when next in Houston great looking ship.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NN_ThoXR9GQ

 

[WoWs] Legend advert

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sjx0YFyekt8

 

Stats breakdown and gameplay at 16:50 or so. Are the stats close in accuracy?

 

 

 

A Huge supporter of @admin and GLs hard core style but would say caution is needed regarding Aircraft and peripheral machines in the game. Read @Sir R. Calder of Southwick comment on aircraft at the time.

 

World of Warships [WoWs] creates the USS Texas beautifully in the game. However, gameplay I find very weak indeed (the entire game). Major floors occur regarding the use of Aircraft carriers and spotting as a whole. The threat of introducing Torpedo boats, submarines not destroyers received a major backlash.

 

Fleet mechanics is terrible on the Random game but better on a Campaign style mission which is Co-Op. When ready I’d like to hear a general game outline and a similar Me2 product. [WoWs] doesn’t do it justice in my opinion.

 

With @Nick Thomadis on side maybe the MMO style is not the way to go? But I’m no games developer...

 

 

 

Norfolk nChance [ELITE]

 

 

 

I don't think anyone would imagine combat aircraft, or carriers, could be included in a dreadnought based game. The introduction of combat aircraft is really the breaking point between the Dreadnought / Battleship Capital Ship dominated fleets and the Carrier Task Forces that RULE the oceans in World War II. 

Spotting aircraft, on the other hand, would be available to the TOP TIER fleet if you use WWI / Jutland as the ending point of this conflict. And aircraft wouldn't appear until the final fleets sail during the endgame. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 244
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

This is a topic for work in progress shots and stories about the game we have been tinkering with for the last 3-4 months These are very very early WIP on the images that are generated for the ship

Hello again, It has been quite long before we updated this thread with more information about our upcoming game. We would like to post two pictures showing our work in progress: "An armoured crui

re: Eternal wip  Captain who we quoted is trying to mislead you Naval action is not delayed and is still in development as we never promised any dates.  If you are in doubt  visit steam page and r

Posted Images

@Andre Bolkonsky

 

Makes sense, and assume not that reliable spotting targets either. With Jutland I’ve two questions...

Communications, how did this happen between fleet Dreadnaughts? Beatty and Jellicoe seem to have issues between command. Directing your own fleet was it still Flags, flashlight or Radio by then?

 

The German Torpedo Boats, were these light destroyers like the V-25? I assume real submarines came much later on towards the end of the war?

 

Norfolk

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Norfolk nChance said:

@Andre Bolkonsky

 

 

Makes sense, and assume not that reliable spotting targets either. With Jutland I’ve two questions...

 

Communications, how did this happen between fleet Dreadnaughts? Beatty and Jellicoe seem to have issues between command. Directing your own fleet was it still Flags, flashlight or Radio by then?

 

 

 

The German Torpedo Boats, were these light destroyers like the V-25? I assume real submarines came much later on towards the end of the war?

 

 

 

Norfolk

 

 

 

No. Germany had true diesel U-boats starting 1911. From the Fall of 1914 going forward, U-boats are sinking ships with self propelled torpedoes, and finishing them off with deck guns. Certainly, U-boat range and effectiveness progressed exponentially during the war with the combat experience provided. But submarines used as forward recon with wireless communications will be an issue during Jutland. 

Regarding communications, wireless radios are still in their infancy. They are generally reliable, but RDF (radio direction finders) is already in use. To use a wireless, from a sub that spots capital ships, is one thing. For the main battle fleet to use wireless communications will tip the fleet's position to the enemy when you begin transmitting that much chatter. Certainly, the technology is in its infancy, and will be nothing like the US picking up signals bouncing off the Japanese carrier fleet inbound for Pearl Harbor on December 5th; but it must be taken into account by the admiralty. Therefore, flags and signals are still the order of the day. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

During WW 1, the record for using submarines as scouts was generally poor.  A submarine sits low in the water and so has a short spotting range.  Once driven underwater by the inevitable escorts accompanying a battle fleet, the sub is essentially blind and immobile.  There were numerous technical limitations to radios of the day, and navigation was still more art than science, so your own position, let alone any spotted enemy, may be off by several tens of miles or more, unless so close to shore that an established landmark can be referenced.  As weapons to attack enemy fleet units, there were some successes on all sides, especially early in the war before anybody really understood the threat and limitations very well.  Subs were most useful in an anti-commerce raiding role, so they may be fairly abstracted in a dreadnought-focused game (RTW does a reasonable job of this IMO).

Radio communications in general were problematic as the equipment was fragile- it wasn't unusual for the vacuum tubes inside the radio to shatter upon firing of the ship's own guns, so flashing lights and flags were still used extensively as in Nelson's time.  Command and control was really a problem as the fleet sizes had grown, and with the increased weapon ranges and more dispersed deployments it was difficult-to-impossible for a commander to know what his own fleet was up to, let alone the enemy's.

Scouting aircraft were really still in an experimental stage.  The Germans deployed zeppelins as scouts, but they really didn't accomplish much during any of their major sorties.  The British had one seaplane carrier, the Engadine, at Jutland.  It managed to launch a scout plane, but due to radio difficulties none of its reports made it up the chain of command, and the plane was forced down due to mechanical failure after less than half an hour aloft.  So in game terms I think aircraft may be generally ignored, or handled on a fairly abstract basis- say the occasional (and vague) spotting report from shore-based scouts.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Mines on the other hand...both sides expended a lot of effort laying and sweeping mines, and they took a steady toll of ships and subs, as well as being effective "area denial" weapons.  While fleet engagements were rare, there were regular clashes between light forces deployed to lay and clear mines.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Andre Bolkonsky said:

The German Torpedo Boats, were these light destroyers like the V-25? I assume real submarines came much later on towards the end of the war?

The V-25 was a typical German DD of WW 1.  Actually, the Germans did call them torpedo boats, emphasized the torpedo armament over the guns in their designs.  British destroyers tended to be larger and equipped with more guns but fewer torpedoes.  Late war V&W class DD's were excellent all-around designs and many survived to serve in WW 2.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Fred Sanford said:

The V-25 was a typical German DD of WW 1.  Actually, the Germans did call them torpedo boats, emphasized the torpedo armament over the guns in their designs.  British destroyers tended to be larger and equipped with more guns but fewer torpedoes.  Late war V&W class DD's were excellent all-around designs and many survived to serve in WW 2.

Good answer, but the question belonged to Norfolk, not myself. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Fred Sanford said:

During WW 1, the record for using submarines as scouts was generally poor.  A submarine sits low in the water and so has a short spotting range.  Once driven underwater by the inevitable escorts accompanying a battle fleet, the sub is essentially blind and immobile.  There were numerous technical limitations to radios of the day, and navigation was still more art than science, so your own position, let alone any spotted enemy, may be off by several tens of miles or more, unless so close to shore that an established landmark can be referenced.  As weapons to attack enemy fleet units, there were some successes on all sides, especially early in the war before anybody really understood the threat and limitations very well.  Subs were most useful in an anti-commerce raiding role, so they may be fairly abstracted in a dreadnought-focused game (RTW does a reasonable job of this IMO).

Radio communications in general were problematic as the equipment was fragile- it wasn't unusual for the vacuum tubes inside the radio to shatter upon firing of the ship's own guns, so flashing lights and flags were still used extensively as in Nelson's time.  Command and control was really a problem as the fleet sizes had grown, and with the increased weapon ranges and more dispersed deployments it was difficult-to-impossible for a commander to know what his own fleet was up to, let alone the enemy's.

Scouting aircraft were really still in an experimental stage.  The Germans deployed zeppelins as scouts, but they really didn't accomplish much during any of their major sorties.  The British had one seaplane carrier, the Engadine, at Jutland.  It managed to launch a scout plane, but due to radio difficulties none of its reports made it up the chain of command, and the plane was forced down due to mechanical failure after less than half an hour aloft.  So in game terms I think aircraft may be generally ignored, or handled on a fairly abstract basis- say the occasional (and vague) spotting report from shore-based scouts.

Another major issue with communications at this time was visibility, Flag signals were notoriously difficult to read edge on, or in poor light conditions, coal fired ships were famous for being very smoky, and, when gunfire was included in the equation signal flags could be extremely hard to read. Signal lamps while a big improvement, could also be obscured by smoke especially at high speeds or, the huge clouds of cordite smoke when in action.

Oil fired ships improved the situation somewhat, smoke could vary according to how much oil was admitted to the furnaces, smoke screens were created by adding oil. often the first indications of oncoming shipping was smoke on the horizon, convoys, especially, were encouraged (even as late as WW II coal fired and merchant ships could reduce escort commanders to nervous wrecks)  to make the minimum amount of smoke possible.

Radio, still in it's infancy was still hit and miss, on big ships substantial distances could be reached, Titanic communicated with Olympic up until about half an hour before the end, the distance being about 500 miles, smaller ships lost contact at closer ranges around ten to fifteen minutes later as the signal faded. Heavy seas and weather conditions too could interfere, both HMS Norfolk and HMS Prince of Wales sent almost simultaneous signals to the Admiralty regarding the loss of HMS Hood, the Admiralty only received Norfolk's  message despite considerably improved radio equipment and the fact that Norfolk and Prince of Wales were in visual range of each other, indeed, the fires and Hood's explosion were clearly seen from Norfolk at around 15 miles with optics. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎8‎/‎22‎/‎2018 at 7:15 AM, Norfolk nChance said:

@Andre Bolkonsky

 

 

 

 

A Huge supporter of @admin and GLs hard core style but would say caution is needed regarding Aircraft and peripheral machines in the game. Read @Sir R. Calder of Southwick comment on aircraft at the time.

 

World of Warships [WoWs] creates the USS Texas beautifully in the game. However, gameplay I find very weak indeed (the entire game). Major floors occur regarding the use of Aircraft carriers and spotting as a whole. The threat of introducing Torpedo boats, submarines not destroyers received a major backlash.

 

Fleet mechanics is terrible on the Random game but better on a Campaign style mission which is Co-Op. When ready I’d like to hear a general game outline and a similar Me2 product. [WoWs] doesn’t do it justice in my opinion.

 

With @Nick Thomadis on side maybe the MMO style is not the way to go? But I’m no games developer...

 

 

 

Norfolk nChance [ELITE]

 

 

 

To me this looks to be a single player game first with an option for limited multiplayer (not MMO style), like UGG. I could be wrong but that's the way I read Nick's description.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

I am too following and have a query...

You’ve mention “funnel” placement and "hull shapes", could or would this be related to machinery placement? like opening up the hulls for placement. E.g. coal furnace’s, oil burners, engines, to spec horse power generation, speeds, turret turn rate etc, etc, etc… or totally aesthetic?

if a ship building RTS genre then maybe internal structures would be interesting and/or applicable to the genre, same for fuel, fuel capacity, etc oil tanks, coal bays.

Machinery layouts influence ship arrangements/armaments, funnels were practical (ha obviously), in-game practicality would make some sense too.

Edited by Guest
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/24/2018 at 12:27 PM, DeRuyter said:

To me this looks to be a single player game first with an option for limited multiplayer (not MMO style), like UGG. I could be wrong but that's the way I read Nick's description.

Knowing how Gettysburg and Civil War developed over time, I would say this is an excellent guess. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/10/2018 at 5:50 PM, BuckleUpBones said:

I am too following and have a query...

You’ve mention “funnel” placement and "hull shapes", could or would this be related to machinery placement? like opening up the hulls for placement. E.g. coal furnace’s, oil burners, engines, to spec horse power generation, speeds, turret turn rate etc, etc, etc… or totally aesthetic?

if a ship building RTS genre then maybe internal structures would be interesting and/or applicable to the genre, same for fuel, fuel capacity, etc oil tanks, coal bays.

Machinery layouts influence ship arrangements/armaments, funnels were practical (ha obviously), in-game practicality would make some sense too.

The internal configuration would be interesting, protection of the citadel and the ammunition / fuel storage areas being crucial. Where the boilers go, the stacks go; where the guns go, the ammunition goes. I can't wait to see how this is being modeled in the game. The naval rifles, ammunition lifts, and ammo compartments will be fun to site around the ship; and the differing gun calibers determine how many rifles a ship will hold. Secondary batteries, torpedo tubes, so many variables. 

Patience is a virtue. I am told. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I am late to this discussion and may have missed some posts.

 

There is currently a game series called "NWS Steam and Iron" from nwswargaming.net. "Rule the Waves"  is one of their games, a top down combat simulation where you run the navy of a nation (You can get sacked!) and fight fleet battles 1899 - 1925. Despite fairly basic UI and graphics the ability to choose whether you have historical ships supplied to you or to design from scratch all ships you use is awesome. There is a top down design format which allows you to place turrets, freehand draw superstructure. Decide on turret type/gun calibre, placement of turrets or barbettes etc. along with armour thicknesses to belt, deck, turrets extended deck etc etc all within design by class constraints and realistic weight limits.  Then of course you got to see them sink or swim in fleet battles using those ships.

 

It would be worthwhile the Dev's taking a look. There may even be some collaboration which may save development time. NWSwargaming.net 

 

Footnote: I'm not associated with the company or design team. I just own a copy and play their game from time to time.

 

 

Edited by Crankey
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

 

@Nick Thomadis

Just a quick update on [WoWs]. Their Halloween updates usually have something they’re testing that might be in the main line game later. Submarines, which they seem to have invested a lot of work in. Forget the looks that’s just for Halloween. Third axis added...

Official post...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O5Cgzarg0HI

Better commentary here...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0zehL1yTgGM

This is just an FYI

 

Norfolk

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

@DeRuyter

 

LOL no fella. I asked @Andre Bolkonsky about fleet mechanics (Jutland-ish) and did the German’s have submarines or really destroyer style Torpedo Boats like the V-25. They had subs...

[WoWs] has wonderful eye candy but the game fails in several ways. One was Carrier play and plane spotting for one. They the dev’s [Wg.n] promised never to intro Subs...

Why I posted the note was as fyi for Darth but for him to see the work input effort. They added a new axis, this in the Halloween rollout tests will probably mean its introduction within a year...

 

Norfolk nDasBoot

Link to post
Share on other sites

   It is, I think, also an tribute to those men of all nations who go to sea on boats, as a young man I maintained the Helos that hunted the boats with little or no thought of what those men had to endure, to those who sailed on, are sailing on, or will sail on  submarines I say Salute, they truly earn(ed) the respect they command for doing a difficult, highly dangerous job with skill and courage.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

WoWS has many good parts, but also many maddening points. 

In particular, the design that allows mass firing of torpedoes 'just because' and hiding, hoping they hit something. And this is encouraged. So gamey. 

I am looking forward to being able to field the entire fleet, from capital ships to escorts, as one coherent unit. 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Norfolk nChance said:

This weekend I will re-watch DasBoot while sitting in the shower with the lights off drunk and scare myself to death...

Mrs. nChance deserves a medal a times...

Which version? The 16hr one? You know a sequel is coming right?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...