Rival Admirals

[BobRoss0902]

The main website mentions something along the lines of AI having different personalities, I think this would be a great way to implement a sort of rival admirals system, perhaps you could have different traits for them, like lets say Japan gets Admiral Yamamoto, it could increase the likelyhood of them constructing battleships/edit their fleet composition to have more capital ships as well as certian bonuses that increase as the tonnage of the ship increases, like for example a 70k ton ship might get 2% off construction, while a 80k ton ship would get 3% off construction and so on until a maximum of 5% off.

I would want to be able to pick these sorts of bonuses for the player character, and have them randomised for the enemy. Perhaps we could add a system where if you are particularly effective with light cruisers the enemy would start to shift their thinking to use more light ships. It would also be cool if when fired from admirality you have to create a new character and have a temporary debuff to all things while the new admirality gets set up, this could make events like when in the Russo-Japanese war Admiral Makarov died due to being decapitated by a struck mine.

Your admiral could gain xp and certian events could radically change his thinking like lets say with how a Uboat pulled America into WW1, your admiral could get a negative trait of "Hates submarines" and this would decrease submarine construction time, and efficiancy, or if a friendly ship strikes one of your own countries mines could get a trait like "Cautious about mines" and it could decrease the amount of mines your country will lay.

But these negative traits could also be overcome, for example lets say with the "hates submarines" trait, if one of your submarines damages an enemy capital ship, or if they sink enough convoys it could be decreased to "dislikes submarines" which provides a moderate debuff to submarine efficiency and construction, and then if after that they sink an enemy capital ship, or even more convoys, the "dislikes submarines" trait could be removed entirely.

Personal ideas for traits

"Bragger" Makes enemy less likely to go to war as they think your fleet is more intimidating than it is, but it also adds to enemy espionage.

"Big ship builder"  "Small Ship Builder" all of them have similar traits to what I described earlier

"Hates submarines" "Loves submarines" as well as some things in between

"Raider" Creates more convoy attack missions, build Cruisers faster/cheaper (excluding BC)

"Decisive Battle" Creates more major fleet actions, and builds BB, and BC faster.

"Knife fighter" Increased secondary battery effectiveness, belt armor effectiveness increased mildly when you get closer

"Long Range" Increases long range attack effectiveness, decrease deck armor weight slightly

I think it would be really REALLY cool to see some RPG elements included, as well as a rival admiral system, please do tell if you guys have ideas for admiral traits.

Edited June 10, 2020 by BobRoss0902

[SiWi]

Frist off:

I read "River Admirals" first... that would be a very different topic.

 

2nd I would like to nitpick the example... was Admiral Yamamoto really a BB advocate? wasn't he more of a carrier guy? (which makes including someone like him ironic...)

 

Otherwise... I read a lot to like here. I mean I would like enemy fleets to have some sort of logic to them and not just be random. Otherwise it will feels as if 20 different navies, with wildly different philosophies, will fight you, even if its all suppose to be XY.

 

Edited June 10, 2020 by SiWi

[BobRoss0902]

27 minutes ago, SiWi said:

Frist off:

I read "River Admirals" first... that would be a very different topic.

 

2nd I would like to nitpick the example... was Admiral Yamamoto really a BB advocate? wasn't he more of a carrier guy? (which makes including someone like him ironic...)

 

Otherwise... I read a lot to like here. I mean I would like enemy fleets to have some sort of logic to them and not just be random. Otherwise it will feels as if 20 different navies, with wildly different philosophies, will fight you, even if its all suppose to be XY.

 

Yamamoto more so advocated for capital ships in general as he knew that Japan could not outproduce the U.S so they would have to make ships that could outclass them in every way. So he would get capital ship bonuses.

[SiWi]

1 minute ago, BobRoss0902 said:

Yamamoto more so advocated for capital ships in general as he knew that Japan could not outproduce the U.S so they would have to make ships that could outclass them in every way. So he would get capital ship bonuses.

aha.

Sorry, I can't help and feel that is BS.

I mean sure he was quality over quantity, but he had a quite clear focus on naval aviation.

A fitting bonus for him would be for CV and planes.

A BB bonus would just be a substitute. 

[BobRoss0902]

6 minutes ago, SiWi said:

aha.

Sorry, I can't help and feel that is BS.

I mean sure he was quality over quantity, but he had a quite clear focus on naval aviation.

A fitting bonus for him would be for CV and planes.

A BB bonus would just be a substitute. 

IDK I dont know much about Yamamoto but I personally would prefer traits to be weighted but random to improve replay value. I only really know that he was an incredibly smart man who predicted the length of Japanese victories almost to a T

For example as I've said in previous posts, Japan doesn't and probably wont ever be able to have the industry to outproduce the US, so they should have a bias towards higher quality ships no matter what.

Edited June 10, 2020 by BobRoss0902

[Cptbarney]

48 minutes ago, SiWi said:

aha.

Sorry, I can't help and feel that is BS.

I mean sure he was quality over quantity, but he had a quite clear focus on naval aviation.

A fitting bonus for him would be for CV and planes.

A BB bonus would just be a substitute. 

Well considering the fact that CV's aren't a given it makes far more sense to give him a bonus to what capital ship he is servering on or just capitals ships in-general until game labs annouces that we will be building and designing aircraft carriers for all the playable nations.

[SiWi]

42 minutes ago, Cptbarney said:

Well considering the fact that CV's aren't a given it makes far more sense to give him a bonus to what capital ship he is servering on or just capitals ships in-general until game labs annouces that we will be building and designing aircraft carriers for all the playable nations.

but doesn't this rather highlight why CV's in game would be important?

You want to play as Yamamoto, but doesn't give him what was actually his strong suit?

 

1 hour ago, BobRoss0902 said:

IDK I dont know much about Yamamoto but I personally would prefer traits to be weighted but random to improve replay value. I only really know that he was an incredibly smart man who predicted the length of Japanese victories almost to a T

then why did you wrote:

1 hour ago, BobRoss0902 said:

Yamamoto more so advocated for capital ships in general as he knew that Japan could not outproduce the U.S so they would have to make ships that could outclass them in every way. So he would get capital ship bonuses.

?

Anyway.

 

1 hour ago, BobRoss0902 said:

For example as I've said in previous posts, Japan doesn't and probably wont ever be able to have the industry to outproduce the US, so they should have a bias towards higher quality ships no matter what.

The problem with this is that it kinda robs the campaign of the sandbox character.

If Japan always does XY then playing against it is always the same.

 

Perhaps there could be 2 campaign modes? One where all feature are geared to a more historcial run (events, Ai ship designs ect.) and one where everything goes.

[Cptbarney]

Just now, SiWi said:

but doesn't this rather highlight why CV's in game would be important?

Not really, i want CV's, but just like in world of dankships i don't see how game labs would be able to balance them at all, unless you of course give an option to limit or out-right remove them similar to what rule the waves did.

Just now, SiWi said:

You want to play as Yamamoto, but doesn't give him what was actually his strong suit?

He planned pearl habour i think on nagato, and served on a light cruiser, but like i said if CV's aren't put into the game you may as well put him into the game as just a really good naval officer rather than the ships he used.

Too be honest it would be better if we focused on just generic admirals for now before having the more important lads jump into the fray.

[johnson smith]

i like CIV 6 leader personality 

[TAKTCOM]

7 hours ago, BobRoss0902 said:

The main website mentions something along the lines of AI having different personalities, I think this would be a great way to implement a sort of rival admirals system, perhaps you could have different traits for them, like lets say Japan gets Admiral Yamamoto...

Ah, this smell of Warships at the mornin... I think that the game needs traits to increase differences between countries, but these should not be traits of admirals, but of the countries themselves.This can be done quite interestingly if done well. A good example for this is another game with turn-based strategic map and real-time battles - TotalWar Warhammer 2. 

Each faction has its own unique features that really make sense play them all. Obviously, you can’t just copy-paste features from Warhammer 2 to UA:D but it shows that it is possible and works great. If devs want players to stay in your game for a long time, of course.

Sure, this requires some knowledge of the history and the navy. But even in this case, I came up with three concepts of national features for the UK, Japan and Russia, which will make the game completely unique to them. And these concepts do not require any special changes in the mechanics and complete processing game over RTW. I am sure that something similar can be done with all factions. If I don’t know anything about Spain, then surely there is someone who knows.     

 

 

[Shaftoe]

There also should be negative traits, like "stubborn", "stumped development", "drug addict", etc. So you may have to decide between mediocre, but all-good admiral, or an admiral with great trait, but with some trade-offs.

[WhoCares]

Considering the timespan we have, there might also be shifts in focus and philosophies, like what's the characteristics of a BC, trading armor or fire power for speed, and such things.

[SiWi]

1 hour ago, Cptbarney said:

Not really, i want CV's, but just like in world of dankships i don't see how game labs would be able to balance them at all, unless you of course give an option to limit or out-right remove them similar to what rule the waves did.

you lack of faith is disturbing.

seriously. late war technology had almost turned the tide between BB's and CV's again because radio guides AA fuses were killing planes left right and center.

Quote

He planned pearl habour i think on nagato, and served on a light cruiser, but like i said if CV's aren't put into the game you may as well put him into the game as just a really good naval officer rather than the ships he used.

Too be honest it would be better if we focused on just generic admirals for now before having the more important lads jump into the fray.

He was the captain of the Akagi (1928/1929 

October 1933, he leads the first carrier division.

later he because the head of naval aviation.

Yeah sorry but he was a big supporter for naval aviation and one of the reason that Japan had a strong CV arm and not just BB's.

Seriously. His whole carrier wouldn't exist ingame, without CV's.

If you don't do CV's, don't do him.

[Cptbarney]

@SiWi eitherway its not important, since this about generic admirals and their traits plus skills and not the more famous figures, no one knows if CV's will ever hit this game at all and if not then we won't be seeing yamamoto at all. nevermind anyone else associated with CV's.

Although as admirals they can still be put into the game. If games labs wants to.

 

[IronKaputt]

8 hours ago, Cptbarney said:

Not really, i want CV's, but just like in world of dankships i don't see how game labs would be able to balance them at all

South Dakota would like to have a word with you.

7 hours ago, SiWi said:

you lack of faith is disturbing.

seriously. late war technology had almost turned the tide between BB's and CV's again because radio guides AA fuses were killing planes left right and center

It's like people have Yamato syndrome of some kind, forgetting her outdated AA guns.

 

[SiWi]

3 hours ago, Cptbarney said:

@SiWi eitherway its not important, since this about generic admirals and their traits plus skills and not the more famous figures, no one knows if CV's will ever hit this game at all and if not then we won't be seeing yamamoto at all. nevermind anyone else associated with CV's.

Although as admirals they can still be put into the game. If games labs wants to.

 

its funny that you deiced what this thread is about given that the OP mentioned explicit Yamamoto.

is almost as if the history of modern naval combat is incomplete without CV's.

[Cptbarney]

37 minutes ago, SiWi said:

its funny that you deiced what this thread is about given that the OP mentioned explicit Yamamoto.

 

um no he didn't he used him as an example, litterally read his post.

 

17 hours ago, BobRoss0902 said:

I think this would be a great way to implement a sort of rival admirals system, perhaps you could have different traits for them, like lets say Japan gets Admiral Yamamoto,

Its obvious hes talking about yamamoto in terms of an example, you also don't seem to get that none of us have any idea whether CV's will be a thing or not in this game at all. And considering the name sake of this game i don't see anyway of CV's fitting into UA:D unless we start getting plane and AA mechanics beyond random chances and rng.

 

17 hours ago, BobRoss0902 said:

Your admiral could gain xp and certian events could radically change his thinking like lets say with how a Uboat pulled America into WW1, your admiral could get a negative trait of "Hates submarines" and this would decrease submarine construction time, and efficiancy, or if a friendly ship strikes one of your own countries mines could get a trait like "Cautious about mines" and it could decrease the amount of mines your country will lay.

Then he goes onto this, its obvious the topic at hand is about your and/or generic admirals that you will acquire (if we have such a system at all) if said system was in the game.

[SiWi]

"um no he didn't he used him as an example, litterally read his post"

"its obvious hes talking about yamamoto in terms of an example".

 

You know what.

If you have finish  the discussion with yourself whenever OP uses Yamamoto as example (spoiler warning, he does), you can come back to me.

 

 

Also it would be quite clear that if there are "generic" admirals then they also could/should be "none" generic, perhaps "legendary admirals". Like the one he literally names in the first paragraph.

Edited June 10, 2020 by SiWi

[IronKaputt]

11 hours ago, Shaftoe said:

There also should be negative traits, like "stubborn", "stumped development", "drug addict", etc. So you may have to decide between mediocre, but all-good admiral, or an admiral with great trait, but with some trade-offs.

Just to be sure — are we talking here about ship/fleet commanders or player "El Almirante" avatar?

[BobRoss0902]

On 6/10/2020 at 2:26 PM, SiWi said:

"um no he didn't he used him as an example, litterally read his post"

"its obvious hes talking about yamamoto in terms of an example".

 

You know what.

If you have finish  the discussion with yourself whenever OP uses Yamamoto as example (spoiler warning, he does), you can come back to me.

 

 

Also it would be quite clear that if there are "generic" admirals then they also could/should be "none" generic, perhaps "legendary admirals". Like the one he literally names in the first paragraph.

I really like the idea of having generic admirals as well as legendary admirals.