Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

>>> Custom Battles - Planning its Development <<<


Recommended Posts

A players suggestion guide for Custom Battles development.    

Essential:

  • Scenario saves.
  • Designing all ships (including enemies).*

General:

  • Save ship library, for cross scenario deployment, blueprints.
  • Transports ship designing.
  • Command player transports.
  • Set fleet locations and directions.**
  • Set AI retreat level.
  • Set submarine threat level (for each side).
  • Set weather conditions.
  • Multiple nations, with options to choose/set allies/enemy (also could be good for AI/auto designing based on nation selection).
  • Select the AI designer logic and priority weighting (e.g. Firepower, amour speed). by @SonicB.

 Other Options:

  • Treaty limits, selectable for both player and AI.
  • Auxiliary cruisers (included in this category is ships without main guns).
  • Set win conditions, %70 sunk, all BBs sunk etc. 
  • The ability to continue the battle after the win condition has been meet.
  • Set day/night. 
  • Ironclads (all and any other gimmick additions).
  • Coastal maps, shore bombardment.
  • Mod support.
  • Steam workshop support, blueprints, scenarios.  

 

* If not possible to design every single ship, then what would be warranted is a cap for slots, at least 10 (0-9) designable slots, per side, 'of any class' so we can design a few different BBs, some different CLs etc. etc. etc. I’ve noticed CCs mostly uses Custom Battles for their video’s and I think it’s because scenario building can be varied across such a wide canvas, 1890-1939, TBs-BBs, it gives them the ability to keep producing different content. Add in 10 designable slots per side and all savable, would turn Custom Battles into a long term repeatable content producing asset.

** Could be as simple as setting locations as north/east/south/west, direction north/east/south/west, for both enemy and your fleet. Coastal maps would work better with such settings. These settings could be used to setup a chase, intercept or charge scenarios (along with setting retreat level etc.).

Summary:
When development is issued for Custom Battles we want to ‘maximize’ its ‘development allocation’ and so therefore everyone feel free to post and debate your ideas to build a collective guide for developers and help guide Custom Battles future.

 

Edited by Skeksis
  • Like 9
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Pirates and rebels maybe.

Maybe a scenario uploader so others can look at other peeps scenarios and play them out, would help youtubers out alot as well.

Oh and troop and civilian boat designers or placers, so we can have beach assualts (without the assualt lol) and civillian and cargo convoys too.

For weather conditions you could set how severe it can be and how frequent it changes, plus changes to accuracy, visibility etc.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
Quote
  • Select the AI designer logic and priority weighting (e.g. Firepower, amour speed)

At the moment you can only change the year to produce some sort of restricted result, expanding auto-build with more options would be a very good feature.   

Edited by Skeksis
Link to post
Share on other sites

Being able to build a library of ships would be very beneficial.  The idea is that I can create a battle between the ships I have designed, and put in a library,  without having to design ships for each battle.  

This idea segues into a library of historical ships.  It might be interesting, and fun, to see the Nagato fight the Bismarck, or have a fleet action of  Germany versus Japan in each WWI and WWII.  (Think:  The Germans did not have to give up the Marshall Islands after WWI and needed to defend them during WWII.)

I really want to see the HMS Dreadnought against a late WWII Baltimore class CA.  The ships had similar displacement.  

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, Hardlec said:

library of ships would be very beneficial

And for example, we would only need to build one Bismarck and deploy it multiple times, such a library would be a real time saver. 

Edited by Skeksis
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

I spent hours designing two ships yesterday thinking they were to be saved. But alas this pollywog to the game was mistaken. In custom battles of course no designs save. If it were possible to save designs, then pick my own designs for all the ships on my side I could basically do a 'very roughly simulated campaign' myself. 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/23/2020 at 9:45 PM, Skeksis said:

An update guide for the new team regrading Custom Battles development.    

Essential:

  • Scenario saves (see note).
  • Designing all ships (including enemies).*

General:

  • Cargo ship designing.
  • Coastal maps.
  • Set fleet locations and directions.**
  • Set AI retreat level.
  • Set submarine threat level (for each side).
  • Set weather conditions.
  • Multiple nations, with options to choose/set allies/enemy.
  • Select the AI designer logic and priority weighting (e.g. Firepower, amour speed). by @SonicB.

 Other Options:

  • Save ship library, for cross scenario deployment.
  • Ironclads.
  • Auxiliary cruisers.
  • The ability to continue the battle after the win condition has been meet.

 

* If not possible to design every single ship, then what would be warranted is a cap for slots, at least 10 (0-9) designable slots, per side, 'of any class' so we can design a few different BBs, some different CLs etc. etc. etc. I’ve noticed CCs mostly uses Custom Battles for their video’s and I think it’s because scenario building can be varied across such a wide canvas, 1890-1939, TBs-BBs, it gives them the ability to keep producing different content. Add in 10 designable slots per side and all saveable, would turn Custom Battles into a long term repeatable content producing asset.

** Could be as simple as setting locations as north/east/south/west, direction north/east/south/west, for both enemy and your fleet. Coastal maps would work better with such settings. These settings could be used to setup a chase, intercept or charge scenarios (along with setting retreat level etc.).

Note:

 

Summary:
When development is issued for Custom Battles we want to ‘maximize’ its ‘development allocation’ and so therefore everyone feel free to post and debate your ideas to build a collective guide for developers and help guide Custom Battles future.

 

SO GOOD İDEA

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Content source for Custom Battles.

Historical:

  • Reproducing historical ships, not just the Hood and Bismarck or any of the scripted academy missions but all the other ships of history itself.
  • Battle re-enactments, another huge source of content.

The campaign might not have the opportunities to reproduce historical ships, players would most likely play to the campaign instead, this pushes the historical content back onto Custom Battles and the historical volume is huge. UAD scenario editor has an historical accuracies potential that would rival any other game editor.   

Non-historical:

  • Build the fantastical.
  • Building the best fleets of selected criteria (most popular CC choice).
  • What if nation X vs nation Y scenarios.

Like historical it's unlikely you would build too many fantastical designs in the campaign, mostly campaign practical. Players would want to build whatever they can and the volume here is as large as one's imagination.

Testing & designing:

  • Before committing to ship designs and squandering campaign resources, building test designs would be a prudent step for players.
  • Testing game mechanics, figuring out what works and what doesn't (very important alpha and beta tool). 
  • Running campaign battle simulations.

 

Custom Battles can be the ‘equal’ to the campaign if not more, regarding game content. All these freedoms of designing whatever you can gives Custom Battles its value and its content volume/source.   

Edited by Skeksis
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, a library would be helpful. Then I could save the 15, 18, and 21 gun designs I come up with. Not to mention the 40+ torpedo broadside cruiser...And other designs I've seen on youtube.

While I appreciate the historical. My thought it is, its been done and dusted, documented 3 ways from Sunday. Let's look at alternative designs to possibly give the historical a run for the money effectively speaking.

Yes, I support custom battles having far more custom to them than simply ships in the long run.

Landform usage: Solomon Islands and Guadalcanal areas. Possibly a sliver of the Philippines and also a landmass depicting Tsuchima strait as well.

All likely added down the road of course.

And I actually disagree with the designing enemies all the time. Perhaps the option to use a battle template for fleet composition from a corresponding battle to the landmass chosen. Or a series of check boxes perhaps on type of allowed hulls or something similar to where the spirit of the enemy fleet is determined by the options  you picked before the ship design phase.

Edited by Adm.Hawklyn
Added more
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/3/2020 at 5:15 PM, Adm.Hawklyn said:

And I actually disagree with the designing enemies all the time

In all of UAD history you are the very first to counter all designable ships. I see your point though, It would be like playing chess on your own, once you've make a move then you would go around and sit in the other chair to be the opponent, a hard way to play the game wouldn't you say.

I suspect most players would leave it up to the AI to create the enemy anyway (or a treaty limit if implemented).

HOWEVER, and that's a big however!...

For historical re-creations players must be able to build every single ship including the enemy, there's simply no other way around it, no other way to re-create history accurately, hence its essential tag. IMO historical re-creation is very marketable (and lots of players here love historical!!!) and thus the vindication for all designable development.

Edited by Skeksis
  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Adm.Hawklyn said:

And I actually disagree with the designing enemies all the time.

I think no one here asking to disable randomizer - we want more options not less.

4 hours ago, Skeksis said:

In all of UAD history you are the very first to counter all designable ships.

I recall at least one another protector of "Surprise me" button. As if someone gonna take it away.

  • Like 2
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...