Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Recommended Posts

I mean a lot of the changes discussed here are reasonable. The ability to set the belt length was stated as unreasonable? How so? No one here is talking like deciding the length down to the last inch. Short, long, normal, high, low, flat, angled. That's simple stuff. A graphic representation of the armor layout would be very appreciated, something like WoWs and Warthunder's xray modes would be cool but anything at this point. RTW 2 does that sorta stuff for the belt; the exact same stuff. Normal, limited, extended are options for it as are inclined vs not inclined. Simple toggles in drop down menus. That is very much a realistic change and as others have said RTW 2 is this games direct competitor, really RTW 1 but RTW 2 is better so most ppl play that. This game has to at least match RTW's ship designer if it hopes to succeed.

@1MajorKoenig clearly put thought into making his changes kinda realistic. The ship is already broken up into sections for combat. Just present that breakdown in the ship designer and allow us to select which sections are for machinery. A simple click and the game stores that info for that class. Probably more complicated than that but it's far more simple than we would all likely like. 

  • Like 7
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 58
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Hi all! After leaving my feedback regarding the Ship Designer - in my opinion the most interesting and unique selling proposition of the game - in multiple threads I decided to write up a summary

Thanks for putting this all together and in order. Perhaps this will be noticed and taken into account? Just looked over my own posts on this question and they're such a mess. Can't resist adding

Valid question. @Nick Thomadis - are you able and allowed to give us your view on the ship designer and what you plan to achieve or even what direction you have in mind?

Posted Images

I am 100% in favor of expanding the designer to the level as displayed in the trailer prior to the public alpha. Furthermore, I still believe this can be easily done if designed right. Putting in different hull sections should not be much different from placing a superstructure, actually it is likely more simple as there are fewer variables. 

The thing the devs are clearly having issues with is AI and AI design. The more variables and with that degrees of freedom you introduce the more complex AI programming becomes. Especially considering the limited resources this indy developer faces, we cannot overreach our demands/expectations. Some of the wishes displayed in this thread are very likely to be out of reach for this project. Of course this saddens me a lot, but at some point we also have to start thinking what do we really really want? 

IMO, we should focus on getting a playable campaign done and making sure that we get more items to play with. Ideally an improved designer would get implemented before or during this process as well. However, ask yourself the question: what feature will add the most for gameplay? I am pretty sure most of you would reply the campaign and not designating engine spaces etc. 

Again, would I like to be able to have more freedom to design. Of course, I would, but also please look at the bigger picture. We need to get a campaign and the AI should be able to handle the variables the ship designer offers. It is a single player game after all.

Edited by Tycondero
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll keep repeating. Without proper designer, all that your beloved campaign is going to be is somewhere between a single use, boring mobile game and clown boat parade.
Having another set of "academy missions" but kinda tied together by backstory isn't going to improve a game about ship design where you can't design ships.

You're likely right about AI issues, bit it was suggested multiple times to supplement it with preset designs. That's what is done in RTW games and it works just fine there.

Edited by Cpt.Hissy
  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Cpt.Hissy said:

You're likely right about AI issues, bit it was suggested multiple times to supplement it with preset designs. That's what is done in RTW games and it works just fine there.

Maybe UAD should use only hand made designs then. That way the devs can spend more time to improve the game in other areas, such as implementing new features and the campaign/tactical AI. I am pretty sure that the community would be happy to make plenty of good designs to be added as a library for the AI to use. However, before this can be done the designer should need to be in its final state.

Edited by Tycondero
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Cpt.Hissy said:

I'll keep repeating. Without proper designer, all that your beloved campaign is going to be is somewhere between a single use, boring mobile game and clown boat parade.
Having another set of "academy missions" but kinda tied together by backstory isn't going to improve a game about ship design where you can't design ships.

You're likely right about AI issues, bit it was suggested multiple times to supplement it with preset designs. That's what is done in RTW games and it works just fine there.

If they're using a 'probability engine' to auto build then Dev's should stick with it, in the long run such a system would handle any situation and forever build variance.  

That variance equates to replayability, every game would produce different ships, every campaign different, every client should have different ships to show off to everybody.

IMO that's worth more than playing against the same old models over and over again.

I think with every iteration (updates to us) the auto designer will get better and better, in the end we will have an unique and a amazing game that plays differently each time.

Edited by Skeksis
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Skeksis said:

If they're using a 'probability engine' to auto build then Dev's should stick with it, in the long run such a system would handle any situation and forever build variance.  

That variance equates to replayability, every game would produce different ships, every campaign different, every client should have different ships to show off to everybody.

IMO that's worth more than playing against the same old models over and over again.

I think with every iteration (updates to us) the auto designer will get better and better, in the end we will have an unique and a amazing game that plays differently each time.

But if the AI repeatedly shown to not have the competence on building a ship then something needs to change. Imagine in campaign the AI builds a decently armored battleship with 14" guns and a 25kt speed then it decides a 29kt 6 16" battleship protected by a 7" belt that even your oldest battleship can pop. The AI is still all over the place but I admit its better now but a template system to prevent complete foolish design choice should be considered a valid alternative.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Skeksis said:

If they're using a 'probability engine' to auto build then Dev's should stick with it, in the long run such a system would handle any situation and forever build variance.  

That variance equates to replayability, every game would produce different ships, every campaign different, every client should have different ships to show off to everybody.

IMO that's worth more than playing against the same old models over and over again.

I think with every iteration (updates to us) the auto designer will get better and better, in the end we will have an unique and a amazing game that plays differently each time.

Fully agree on this, but, problem rises from different side.
I'm not saying they need to scrap and remake their entire game into war thunder clone or something (as some others apparently want), I already mentioned that i'm content with simplifications and RNG based systems.
But these must work, and currently they do not.

With designer being cropped down in order to be usable by (moronic) ai, we currently have a system that by itself simply isn't capable of above mentioned variety, no matter how good or bad your artificial or natural idiot is.
System that can produce about 3 working yet ugly ships and a dozen of clown boats (that still look the same and differ by couple of numbers at best) can not grant replayability.
Such system doesn't justify the effort of implementing it.

But a system that can produce only 3 good ships, but allows YOU to make as wide variety of counters to them as you can imagine - should work.
And if it could learn from YOU and task you to counter your own counters, or those of other players, it would make a good game even without campaigns. After all, no artificial intelligence can beat a nerd with tools.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Cpt.Hissy said:

I'm not saying they need to scrap and remake their entire game into war thunder clone or something (as some others apparently want), I already mentioned that i'm content with simplifications and RNG based systems.
But these must work, and currently they do not.

Up to alpha 8 was mostly fine from our point of view but for some reason there must have been a rewrite and as a WIP rewrite I say its not time to roll back the auto build yet.

And I like to think that they still want to create/develop new software, it must be a programmers prerogative, and with the new software comes a new fresh game and not a clone, it'll work. 
 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/15/2017 at 8:07 PM, admin said:

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 recognition books from the 3d ship designer, that will give players full control over the ship design and visualize it all in 3d. 

Player will be able to place main turrets, secondary turrets, casemate turrets, superstructures, masts, funnels, and decide on the shape of the hull, armor, barbette placement… All having historical constraints naturally limiting the players from creating strange and impossible monsters. All affecting ship performance in combat and movement.

If we are able to achieve even 50% of what we want this will be a revolution in battleship games. 

Hope you enjoy it. Sorry for lower quality of the recognition book drafts but we can't show the rest. 
RLA2ZJd.jpg

I found this very old post but I like the ambitions described here 

  • Thanks 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...