Monitors, Casemate ships, Coastal defense ships, Seagoing ships

[DougToss]

The game is in Alpha now. Which means that it is not feature complete. Why worry about workshop content when developer content is very much on the table? 

2 minutes ago, Marshall99 said:

This is a forum and we are here to discuss everything, I hope you can understand this. 

We're not actually. We are here to discuss "General feedback, Gameplay discussions, News and other topics about Ultimate Admiral: Dreadnoughts. "

Feedback is asking the devs to include new hulls, doing the research, finding documentation and illustrations. Saying "Oh well when they add Steam Workshop integration and mod tools we'll just do it ourselves" is less likely to lead to changes you want to see.

 

Edited June 11, 2020 by DougToss

[Marshall99]

16 minutes ago, DougToss said:

The game is in Alpha now. Which means that it is not feature complete. Why worry about workshop content when developer content is very much on the table? 

We're not actually. We are here to discuss "General feedback, Gameplay discussions, News and other topics about Ultimate Admiral: Dreadnoughts. "

Feedback is asking the devs to include new hulls, doing the research, finding documentation and illustrations. Saying "Oh well when they add Steam Workshop integration and mod tools we'll just do it ourselves" is less likely to lead to changes you want to see.

 

And this is not "other topic or gameplay discussion"? LOL   This topic about older ships. I thing this is not an off-topic. This is a naval topic about a naval game. 

Yes we are talking about hulls and ships in general. And what about your CV's? That will be in the far future or maybe will not implemented at all. Then why are you discuss them? 

Everybody has the right to discuss naval related things about this game.

You are not an admin who will tell us what to do and what not.

 

 

Edited June 11, 2020 by Marshall99

[DougToss]

20 minutes ago, Marshall99 said:

Everybody has the right to discuss naval related things about this game.

You are not an admin who will tell us what to do and what not.

I'm not your parents either, which is why I am surprised to run into "you can't tell me what to do!" 

I have never pretended I can, and I'm certainly not appealing to any real or imagined authority. It wouldn't even be constructive to do that if I were an admin.  I'm participating in a discussion by disagreeing with you. That's it, that's all. 

Not that it's particularly relevant, but I'm be consistent with aircraft carriers, submarines and ironclads. I don't want feature bloat, I want a tight focus, I want "tall" not "wide" design. I think many things can be abstracted, while core areas should be very granular in how they are simulated. 

Simulating submarines and aviation as granularly as surface naval combat would treble the workload, cost and time required for the product to be deliverable, so I oppose them. Expanding the time period before or after the one that the Devs have been working on and following a design document on for at least three years would do the same, so I oppose it. 

I want as good a product as possible delivered on budget and on schedule, and that is always a consideration when I enter these discussions, which means I often disagree with people who have different priorities, or less experience in project management. There's not any personal animosity to it, but we're all participating in the Alpha process, I want to lend as much a hand as possible, and that means staying on target.