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 74
  • 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

Unfortunately none of this will happen. Both of those lists of ideas would greatly improve the game and wouldnt be that hard to understand for new players if there are proper tooltips. But I have a fe

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 7
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 3
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 3
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 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey maybe some of the thoughts laid out here will get implemented now that they've got someone dedicated to just the ship designer. 

Yeah how the heck did they go from that to what we got. Sad.

Also I don't know if someone was referring to me about wanting a warthunder clone but I've only mentioned that game in regards to the xray mode for armor.  WoWs has it too and its honestly cool. And potentially useful here if we have better control over armor schemes. Immunity zone calculations should be done and shown off honestly. Simple thing, RTW does it, and it'd be very useful. I know we can do it in our head but it'd be nice to just have it shown off on the right among the other stats. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...
On 1/21/2021 at 8:37 PM, Jatzi said:

Hey maybe some of the thoughts laid out here will get implemented now that they've got someone dedicated to just the ship designer. 

I was hoping the same but we did hear nothing on plans for the designer apart form the info that someone will now work on it.

 

I think it would be great to understand the team’s view on this key piece of the game. 
 

Have been playing a bit more / some of the community scenarios lately and have been enjoying myself. However I can’t help myself seeing what this game could become if the designer gets some solid improvements 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I too would very much like to know what they're planning. Though I would expect whoever they hired will need a bit of time to get up to speed on the current state of the designer and then try and figure out what can be changed and improved.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I will say what I offered in another thread as far as the ai goes.

Just give us another button on the initial custom battle designer screen for restricting ai designs.

Could that be an option where instead of the devs trying to balance the ai builds, they give us the choice of forcing a restricted ai build instead?

In theory, this sounds simple, but I'm sure its not, and yet, but creating a simple toggle switch to basically control most aspects of ai building may be complicated; but easier on the devs in some respects knowing that the ai designs would be slaved to a toggle switch.

Just offering my thoughts, hope it helps.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I really hope the designer gets a great overhaul.

 

I bought the game a few days ago, and I love the idea and I am enjoying it a lot...

 

...BUT the designer, the soul of the game, is already starting to become... insufficient to me. There are lots of limitations and issues...

 

I think it would be great to have more flexibility overall, and be able to work on ships more in depth and with more freedom.

Some people on this thread say that they would rather get campaign over ship designer, I don’t understand this.

The main selling point of this game is being able to design your own ships! That’s what makes it special and why most people come here. THEN, we can get a campaign.

Edited by SPANISH_AVENGER
  • Like 8
Link to post
Share on other sites

Ye its vital that UA:DS designer re done essentially, otherwise we just get another war of the seas which isnt bad per se, but isnt what i paid for initially, im sure nick knows this and they are doing what they can, but the designer is the first major and core mechanic you engage with before any other mechanic.

Because of this its important that it is fleshed out better so not only is campaign better, but so is the game overall.

Not too mention it will be important for modding since then me and other 3D moddlers can then add in a ton of models for peeps to mess around with and interact with creating some truely bizzare, gorgeous and interesting ship designs.

The campaign is important, but i would say that the Designer comes near to the top along with mods and custom battles. With campaign, pre-battle editors and also a proper tactical map that has the edge of a table on the outside (to give it a admirals prespective sort of).

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Cptbarney said:

Ye its vital that UA:DS designer re done essentially, otherwise we just get another war of the seas which isnt bad per se, but isnt what i paid for initially, im sure nick knows this and they are doing what they can, but the designer is the first major and core mechanic you engage with before any other mechanic.

I agree with that it is THE selling point of the game. Designing different, interesting or even absurd ships and take them to the campaign is what this game should be about. And I also agree that the team would probably know that as well. However the fact they have not mentioned a single word beyond the fact they have one programmer on it makes me suspicious. 
 

It would be good if Nick could share their plan on this matter once they have made up their mind about how far they want to go. You know - to manage the expectations a little 

  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
On 2/24/2021 at 2:58 AM, Nick Thomadis said:

1. Currently each hull shape has some initial unique characteristics which affect several design aspects. If a hull has high freeboard, it is wide etc., it is represented in game stats in various ways. We will make beam/draught configurable soon, to allow more flexibility on those design choices.
2. You can check in-game when we offer the patch and we talk then.
3. 7 inch turreted guns are available to make Warrior/Minotaur type cruisers of the 1900s. SMS Scharnhorst, which is a model on our list to add, had 5.9-inch casemate guns, but nevertheless, we will see how we can improve the system and allow more casemate flexibility.

I am really happy to read this!

 

We are moving guuuuyyyys!!!!

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DeadlyWalrus said:

Yeah, I really hope these new designer features work out and they can keep moving in this direction.

True - I am happy they are ready to expand the designer though. And I think it is exactly the right way: add some additional features which will make a huge difference (the basis is good)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 months later...

The fact that something pre-WW1, CITADELS is missing from this game is a travesty.

Warship Gunner 2, a game from the early 2000's about crab lasers, VLS nukes and drill-ships simulated belt length.

Yet this one cannot! What gives? Simply weigh the belt from the last turret to the front turret. Compact designs being less weight as in reality.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
On 5/21/2021 at 7:04 PM, ThatZenoGuy said:

The fact that something pre-WW1, CITADELS is missing from this game is a travesty.

Warship Gunner 2, a game from the early 2000's about crab lasers, VLS nukes and drill-ships simulated belt length.

Yet this one cannot! What gives? Simply weigh the belt from the last turret to the front turret. Compact designs being less weight as in reality.

Watch your language please and say what you want to say in a polite way. This forum is meant to be used by intellectual and respecting people. The ship designer is not final and will have a more detailed Citadel and more options in next updates.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nick, dude. He didn't use profanity. He didn't insult anyone's character. He did nothing wrong.

 

People have gotten a bit heated recently on the forum, but unless there are insults and abuse, people have a right to be critical. I certainly don't expect you to take every suggestion or criticism and give over to it. Follow your vision, keep making a great game, and don't take it to heart. When people get invested in a project, sometimes feelings can run high. I hope you'll take the good suggestions and improve the game, while maintaining the vision you had when you started the project. We're on your side, here.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Nick Thomadis said:

Watch your language please and say what you want to say in a polite way. This forum is meant to be used by intellectual and respecting people. The ship designer is not final and will have a more detailed Citadel and more options in next updates.

Good to see that you keep expanding this key feature.

Out of curiosity: you mentioned beam/drought configurability - is that still on the plans?

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, 1MajorKoenig said:

Good to see that you keep expanding this key feature.

Out of curiosity: you mentioned beam/drought configurability - is that still on the plans?

 

 

Yes, we will do this.

  • Like 5
  • 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...