Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Recommended Posts

So, to go short, there are, besides many others, 2 problems with the current gun system:

1 Barrel and turret proportions are frequently inconsistent and unrealistic

2 It only allows for most common callibers. Uncommon callibers like 12,6 inch are not available.

 

But as I chatted with @Aphelionmarauder
on his UAD server LEND he suggested an idea. What about a slider (or armor options like thing) that allows for custom gun calliber? The system would work like this (also the foundations for a gun designer)

Instead of using preset models, the game would automatically generate same design but diferently sized (yet visually proportional in lenght, inner width, and others) cannon barrels (just properly and proportinally scaling, widening and stretching a preset model will do, as long as the result is proportionally the same [if cannon has 150mm, then it should look 1,5x wider than a 100 mm, and 2xthinner than a 300mm]). The measuring scale would be consistent for ALL factions. No more brittish quad 508 mm cannon being smaller than german tripple 508. When the cannons got too big for a specific design, eg you cant just scale up a 20 cm barrel to get a 50 cm, use other presets for scaling.

Turrets would work a little diferent, but also on thresholds. Guns bettwen a certain threshold (half inch bigger and half inch smaller than current callibers) would just slightly scale the barrel as said above and the turret would remain the exact same size and design. However, overshooting or undershooting that scale would slightly scale up or down that same turret. Guns with 123 mm and 122mm dont need a full new turret for them.

 

Now, spec wise, im no naval expert (there are people here that know naval combat better than i know 1+1 = 2), but for tonnage and range requirements you could maybe use averages of pre-established models to have create the specs of these ships. Egg If 12inch has 1000 mm pen at 3 km, and 13 inch 1500, then 12,5 inch should have a pen of 1250 mm. Same could apply to tonnage, range, and other parameters. 

 

The devs dont need to craft every single cannon size and calliber known to man. All they need to do is the presets and overall tables and give the right tools to the computer to create the finicky details in visual and technical aspects.

 

Also, here is a interesting table of parameters (unknown how accurate it is) that compares diferent guns and armors. Check it out.

http://www.navweaps.com/index_nathan/Penetration_index.php

 

This post was written in a phone, so I might have not been very clear about this. If you have doubts or constructive criticism feel free to tell me in the comments.

Edited by Stormnet
  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

If this helps streamlines the process then im all for it really. Then the 3D artists don't have to waste too much time making loads of different models and also allows them to focus on certain models that take a lot of time to do properly as gun barrels don't take much time to make and also should make the game run smoother as apposed to loads of different models.

coupled with mods of course.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Welp "procedural" approach is the only viable way for visualization of something freely adjustable.

But other question is, what is this for? All other current issues considered, how having random numbers in "caliber" will improve game's functioning?
I'd still say things like this are of very low priority.

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

If this helps streamlines the process then im all for it really. Then the 3D artists don't have to waste too much time making loads of different models and also allows them to focus on certain models that take a lot of time to do properly as gun barrels don't take much time to make and also should make the game run smoother as apposed to loads of different models.coupled with mods of course

This armor like slider (can be slided up or down or the values typed) is to fix the proportion issues found in current turrets, ease the devs work, and diversify ship designing. Also, this also lays the foundations for a turret designing feature.

 If the game gains the ability to independantly scale up turrets and cannons models without having them look unproportional, then swapping cannons and turret models is no longer that far away. Even thought I said having low calliber turrets acting as supporters for high calliber in the atandard parts was weird, having them in customized designs isnt. What if i get a double Hood like turret, add the 1940s british cannon and scale it up to 20inch? It might look funny, but this woulf massively increase the variety of ships, without the devs having to make every single model.

Sure, this will require quite some coding and testing to make sure designs are proportional and there arent any bugs, but killing 3-4 birds with one system seems like a bargain to me.

Also, dont blindly give all credit to me. While I came up with the details, it was the idea of 
@Aphelionmarauder

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Cpt.Hissy said:

Welp "procedural" approach is the only viable way for visualization of something freely adjustable.

But other question is, what is this for? All other current issues considered, how having random numbers in "caliber" will improve game's functioning?
I'd still say things like this are of very low priority.

I mean, its not top priority. Buthaving the compute generate and scale some models would reduce the work the devs need to create new models, could fix manny of the proportion problems, and add veriety to the game.

Just my opinion thought, and i apreciate your opinion on this.

Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Stormnet said:

I mean, its not top priority. Buthaving the compute generate and scale some models would reduce the work the devs need to create new models, could fix manny of the proportion problems, and add veriety to the game.

Just my opinion thought, and i apreciate your opinion on this.

You are absolutely right with model scaling, i'm on the same side.
I'm asking about caliber slider specifically.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just looking at this as a average dumb gamer this could save so much work in the long run. You guys talked about how high the priority was and though it's not high, I wouldn't call it low either. They'd have to get started on it pretty soon to keep from wasting time on programming each and every new gun. As far as what Hissy said about the odd calibers, the only things I can see is the historical guys can get closer to recreation of their favorite ships and the let me build what I want guys can really play around. I mean why not mount a 82mm on a DD instead of a 76mm. 😁

Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Cpt.Hissy said:

You are absolutely right with model scaling, i'm on the same side.
I'm asking about caliber slider specifically.

Yeah the calliber slider aint urgent at all. But it could create sorta of an ilusion of variety. While a 120mm and a 126mm can be pretty much identical spec wise, having a ship with diferent guns, even if by the milimiters, can create an idea of variety and make each ship more unique. Besides, some people just want unusual historical callibers, even if identical spec wise, just so they can recreate historical ships.

While it isnt urgent, this can fix a lot of problems and (virtually) add some extra content to the game.

Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Cpt.Hissy said:

Variety is very bad from "realism" point btw ^^
as you need separate ammo production and logistics for each of those fancy odd guns.

True, but there's also plenty of historical precedent for calibers that don't fit neatly into the 1" caliber increments that this game currently has. So a fleet could have some of these odd calibers as their guns, such as, for example, some 88mm or 274mm guns. Or even something like the British 7.5" gun, for example. And this concept would make setting such a fleet up quite a bit easier.

 

I will also add, though, that there's some amount of complexity in there as well, for 2 main reasons. First one is of course that guns got lighter and more powerful as time went by caliber-for-caliber. And of course, in terms of weight, the other thing to bear in mind is that it won't be directly proportional to caliber. Because the square-cube law is a massive bitch. It should still be eminently possible to calculate things, though, especially given how much data there is of historical guns.

Edited by Intrepid_Arty
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Intrepid_Arty said:

True, but there's also plenty of historical precedent for calibers that don't fit neatly into the 1" caliber increments that this game currently has. So a fleet could have some of these odd calibers as their guns, such as, for example, some 88mm or 274mm guns. Or even something like the British 7.5" gun, for example. And this concept would make setting such a fleet up quite a bit easier.

 

I will also add, though, that there's some amount of complexity in there as well, for 2 main reasons. First one is of course that guns got lighter and more powerful as time went by caliber-for-caliber. And of course, in terms of weight, the other thing to bear in mind is that it won't be directly proportional to caliber. Because the square-cube law is a massive bitch. It should still be eminently possible to calculate things, though, especially given how much data there is of historical guns.

Thanks for your arguments. I didnt think about that. So its not as easy, but still possible.

Link to post
Share on other sites

To code it into a game, it's actually relatively easy, i believe you can find ready code solutions for the basics. Hardest part would be figuring out correct scaling ratios for all stats.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
15 minutes ago, Cpt.Hissy said:

To code it into a game, it's actually relatively easy, i believe you can find ready code solutions for the basics. Hardest part would be figuring out correct scaling ratios for all stats.

Yeah, I also thought about how gun stats in real life dont scale up proportinally. But then I remenbered, since these exotic calliber guns will never be half inch bigger/smaller than current cannons, I dont think they will perform drastically diferent from the origimals, at least not enought for the diferences to be unproportional enought to make a noticeable diference.

To really think about a scaling system, a few graphics with the current callibers and some of their basic stats and how they scale up like range, reload, shell size, weight (single barrel) side armor pen (3 diferent ranges), per each "common" calliber would be nice Im not going to be on my computer for the next week, so I cant really search that properly.

Edited by Stormnet
Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Stormnet said:

But then I remenbered, since these exotic calliber guns will never be half inch bigger/smaller than current cannons, I dont think they will perform drastically diferent from the origimals

And this is why i was asking for a reason earlier.
Generally, adding more unnecessary stuff for the sake of it isn't beneficial for games. In best case it just creates bloat in menus.
Straight up destructive if it gets added instead of crucial stuff, and we do have it happening here for a while with all those fantasy yamatos and anime guns. (but to be fair, more hulls is more of modeller's work than programmers and they might do it just to keep modellers busy)

Edited by Cpt.Hissy
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, Cpt.Hissy said:

And this is why i was asking for a reason earlier.
Generally, adding more unnecessary stuff for the sake of it isn't beneficial for games. In best case it just creates bloat in menus.
Straight up destructive if it gets added instead of crucial stuff, and we do have it happening here for a while with all those fantasy yamatos and anime guns. (but to be fair, more hulls is more of modeller's work than programmers and they might do it just to keep modellers busy)

The reason Im suggesting this system isnt for the custom callibers alone. Also, as I said, this isnt urgent, and could perfectly come down the line with the designer overhaul.

1 Having the game correctly generating and scalling current models could ease a lot the team work, (as they now would only have to program the base models/features allowing them) and allow them to redirect human resources to other crutial fixes. Once achieved, coming up with new callibers becomes rather easy.

2 This would help fix/reduce the disproportion issues plaging the turrets and cannons, where a 500 mm cannon of one faction only apears 2/3 the size of a cannon belonging to another faction. The computer could be teached to generate correct or at least aproximate models.

3 As said above historical callibers could be.more easly introduced. While the majority of people want this game to simply role play naval designer, there are quite some players that want to build ships historically accurate that perform very similar to those that existed and whose specs are exacly as those on paper. As you can see in this list, there are plenty of historical callibers, especially french and german, that are unachievable with the current inch increases. Now, imagine how much work of the devs it would take to implement these callibers by hand, making sure their dimensions are right, and how much cloged the menu would become with the current turrets plus the new ones.

4 A small effect of this system is that it could give an idea of variety to ships. Even if in paper, these guns would perform very similar, the idea of something like a 36,6cm cannon on a ship and a 37,0 cm cannon on another, could make the players feel their ships are more unique. Almost like a very small yet personal touch.

 

I know its yout opinion, and thats fine. But I still think something like this could contribute to the game in the long run.

Edited by Stormnet
Link to post
Share on other sites

Eh, i know i shouldn't argue, there's no point. Sorry if i'm being too annoying here. Just being somewhat upset by observing how the game steers towards weird paths while completely avoiding problems that are ought to be fixed for years now, and then people coming and talking about realism and stuff... in tiny nearly meaningless details, but like not seeing the real problems.
Like here, i see your point about recreating real ships, but... Slightly different number is "caliber" field can't help those designs to perform any closer to real counterparts, when they still unable to perform like ships at all due to massive fundamental flaws (or i should say game-isation, as that's what it most likely is) in nearly all core mechanics.

 Now something useful.

When a gun of one nation is bigger or smaller than in another, this actually could be that same "variety" that you seek. Same caliber doesn't mean exactly identical gun. It may be shorter or longer, it can have thicker or thinner walls depending on construction method and metallurgy. Or it may be mounted deeper on the turret or closer to the front face, and said face can be moved back and forth as well. We could have such variations tied to technologies and nations (or some kind of researchable engineering strategies) and in that way available for adoption on player's choice.

Also what they definitely should do, is untie the turret size from the gun size. Currently it's one single turret for a given gun caliber, with varying number of barrels, but same size, which is... not realistic?
I'd suggest having turrets and guns as separate things in terms of research, design, and sizes. Ring diameter should be dependent not on gun caliber alone, but (caliber)*(number of barrels)/(gun spacing tech/stat/whatever), that could give the ability to build something like American triple guns, that had 3 barrels in a ring maybe even smaller than classical 2-gun mount, or to recreate Sharnhorst trick with possible refit.
That's another kind of "variety" that actually matters.

Maybe i'm boring old utility geek, but i always prefer my things to work properly first, and look good only as side effect, because properly working thing does look proper.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Cpt.Hissy said:

Eh, i know i shouldn't argue, there's no point. Sorry if i'm being too annoying here. Just being somewhat upset by observing how the game steers towards weird paths while completely avoiding problems that are ought to be fixed for years now, and then people coming and talking about realism and stuff... in tiny nearly meaningless details, but like not seeing the real problems.
Like here, i see your point about recreating real ships, but... Slightly different number is "caliber" field can't help those designs to perform any closer to real counterparts, when they still unable to perform like ships at all due to massive fundamental flaws (or i should say game-isation, as that's what it most likely is) in nearly all core mechanics.

 Now something useful.

When a gun of one nation is bigger or smaller than in another, this actually could be that same "variety" that you seek. Same caliber doesn't mean exactly identical gun. It may be shorter or longer, it can have thicker or thinner walls depending on construction method and metallurgy. Or it may be mounted deeper on the turret or closer to the front face, and said face can be moved back and forth as well. We could have such variations tied to technologies and nations (or some kind of researchable engineering strategies) and in that way available for adoption on player's choice.

Also what they definitely should do, is untie the turret size from the gun size. Currently it's one single turret for a given gun caliber, with varying number of barrels, but same size, which is... not realistic?
I'd suggest having turrets and guns as separate things in terms of research, design, and sizes. Ring diameter should be dependent not on gun caliber alone, but (caliber)*(number of barrels)/(gun spacing tech/stat/whatever), that could give the ability to build something like American triple guns, that had 3 barrels in a ring maybe even smaller than classical 2-gun mount, or to recreate Sharnhorst trick with possible refit.
That's another kind of "variety" that actually matters.

Maybe i'm boring old utility geek, but i always prefer my things to work properly first, and look good only as side effect, because properly working thing does look proper.

I think I have to concede this to you. Im running out of arguments to support my idea.

The reason I thought this was a good idea, was that one of my main anoyances with the game was with how ships look so similar. Many factions have the same style, design, and look no diferent besides the flag from others. Also proportions are frequently weird and cannons have completely diferent widths and thickness despite being same calliber. I had thought the barrel lenght could be solved with a slider that would change tonnage, accuracy, and other stats. I thought that adding and fixing and rescaling all this stuff manually would take a long time for the devs to do and thus cut back on needed content, so having the computer generate this stuff while being accurate on dimentions would be a great idea that would cut down time.

Im starting to think I was just too stuborn to admit my idea is flawed. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Stormnet said:

I think I have to concede this to you. Im running out of arguments to support my idea.

The reason I thought this was a good idea, was that one of my main anoyances with the game was with how ships look so similar. Many factions have the same style, design, and look no diferent besides the flag from others. Also proportions are frequently weird and cannons have completely diferent widths and thickness despite being same calliber. I had thought the barrel lenght could be solved with a slider that would change tonnage, accuracy, and other stats. I thought that adding and fixing and rescaling all this stuff manually would take a long time for the devs to do and thus cut back on needed content, so having the computer generate this stuff while being accurate on dimentions would be a great idea that would cut down time.

Im starting to think I was just too stuborn to admit my idea is flawed. 

The idea is fine, too be fair shiki did a pretty good take on his gun designer thread posted here: 

And i agree with pretty much most things if not all the things there.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
50 minutes ago, Cptbarney said:

The idea is fine, too be fair shiki did a pretty good take on his gun designer thread posted here: 

And i agree with pretty much most things if not all the things there.

Pretty awesome take imo. Its criminal for him to have only 50% more likes than me.

Forget my post. Shiki's post is much better in this regard.

Edited by Stormnet
  • Like 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...