Really not so great, actually really bad

[DougToss]

3 hours ago, Commander Reed said:

Would probably work better if you had to build the hull yourself.

There’s a really cool upcoming game you should check out!

Oh…

[Commander Reed]

35 minutes ago, DougToss said:

There’s a really cool upcoming game you should check out!

Oh…

Exactly. Where is this devs?

[DougToss]

55 minutes ago, Commander Reed said:

Exactly. Where is this devs?

If I remember, the issue was the AI was unable to use it well. Of course, since the AI is unable to use the current, stripped down version well either, I’ll say again that a lot of time, effort and bugs could have been spared by having the AI use templates while the player freely designs - exactly how RTW solved this problem.

[T_the_ferret]

11 hours ago, DougToss said:

If I remember, the issue was the AI was unable to use it well. Of course, since the AI is unable to use the current, stripped down version well either, I’ll say again that a lot of time, effort and bugs could have been spared by having the AI use templates while the player freely designs - exactly how RTW solved this problem.

I totally approve of this as it would have basically solved the problem where we don't have enough hulls since we could have just made them ourselves. Furthermore, if we could share those hulls through a code of sort that'd be even better as i'm sure many people would take it upon themselves to build those hulls and share them in the community

[SonicB]

On 11/15/2021 at 10:39 PM, DougToss said:

There’s a really cool upcoming game you should check out!

Oh…

Looks like a great game - I'd pay $50 for that!

[Danvanthevacuumman]

Exactly, i only cared because it was adding snadboxxy gameplay with realism. But it might turn to a warthunder world of warships real time strategy.

[Danvanthevacuumman]

On 11/16/2021 at 12:12 AM, DougToss said:

If I remember, the issue was the AI was unable to use it well. Of course, since the AI is unable to use the current, stripped down version well either, I’ll say again that a lot of time, effort and bugs could have been spared by having the AI use templates while the player freely designs - exactly how RTW solved this problem.

Yes so why dont they do it like god damn

[brucesim2003]

On 11/16/2021 at 1:12 PM, DougToss said:

If I remember, the issue was the AI was unable to use it well.

So no different than the current situation.

[Steeltrap]

I posted quite some time ago (I seem to say that a lot, LOL) about how the issue of relying on someone in the dev team to punch out hulls is poor design.

It's a single point dependency for a start, but the other issue is, as was mentioned, exactly WHY some hull gets x% resistance (that makes it more damage absorbent BEYOND issues such as compartmentalisation and armour, for example, which seems pretty arbitrary and pants) and other such characteristics is entirely hidden.

Far better to go back a layer and make available whatever inputs CREATE a hull.

I want a certain beam:length ratio? Fine. I want to prioritise speed? OK, but I'm going to produce a hull that emphasises both size for certain propulsion plant requirements and also hydrodynamic efficiency over compactness with extra weight available for things like, oh, armour.

Perhaps the problem is the need to render these hulls in a form the game can handle. I'd have thought that could be addressed through 'prefabrication', which would be amusingly appropriate given Henry Kaiser and the Liberty ships. Hell, the Germans took to building a gazillion subs through shipping prefab segments of hulls from here and there to assemble them.

I think deciding to do all that sort of stuff out of the reach of players BEFORE a hull is released, rather than working on whatever is required to produce a hull with certain characteristics the player can request, is a poor choice. I've thought that for a long time, and said so often enough.

If we don't think we've enough pre-dreadnoughts, it wouldn't be a problem IF the system I'm suggesting were developed AND the pre-fab hull bits etc had been put in place because then people could simply churn them out via the 'hull development' step.

Could even have it 'redline/stop' you from pushing characteristics beyond levels your tech can't do.

"Cannot create a hull of 20,000t or more able to reach 30 knots: insufficient engine power per ton tech available" or something.

Be REALLY fun if working on hulls could take longer IF you chose to test them, which would give a greater chance of getting close to the parameters you specified. For anyone who's done smithing in "Mount & Blade: Bannerlord", you'd recognise the general idea. For any who haven't played it, when you try smithing a design, you won't always get exactly what's planned depending on your skill level vs the difficulty of the object, and you end up with a weapon that might be better in some ways while worse in others, or just generally worse by a few points across several factors.

We KNOW that happened with ships surprisingly often. Some reached and exceeded their design speeds etc, others never managed it. Some proved better at sea keeping than one might expect, which meant their performance was less affected by adverse weather; HMS Vanguard is often used as an example of that as her handling of weather allowed her to keep pace with the few knots faster USS Iowa class BBs in anything other than relative calm.

Want those certain characteristics for a hull? Get better tech, and we'll even tell you where you're lacking. Now THAT could be fun, with clear pursuit of tech because you have certain plans you can't achieve without them.

Anyway, we've banged on about all sorts of mechanics for a few years, thrown all sorts of constructive criticisms and ideas, questioned some fairly crucial core mechanics, and so on. What did it achieve?

I'll leave that for you to answer for yourselves. I largely stopped getting into discussions quite a long time ago. I've not even bothered with the latest update or two as they did nothing about the things I consider prevent the game from being satisfying for me (emphasis on that qualifier).

I volunteered to moderate a long time ago, and was happy to restrict that only to certain, mechanics/fact sorts of threads.

Offered to curate pulling together issues and suggestions from the main ones, too.

Also offered to go through ALL their text material, be it intro paragraphs that show while we wait for things to load, or pop-ups that explain things. The whole lot; just give me a word doc or whatever and I'd do it.

Those aren't all of the things I've offered in the past few years.

Again, I don't expect them to take me up on things. It appears they don't particularly WANT our help, other than largely to produce data that I believe is sent to them (unless you turn it off), but I may be mistaken. We've seen some of their attitude displayed more recently, and it's not flattering (of them). In some respects uncomfortable reminiscent of WarGaming and WoWS, which apparently might make some people happy I suppose.

I'll pop in for a half hour's amusement now and again, possibly PM a few people to ask how things are or to comment on various posts, but that's about the extent of my participation now and likely forever. There's no return in taking the time to lay things out in considerable detail with sources etc because it would seem it's not wanted.

That's fine. I certainly don't expect them simply to roll over because we say so, although I think it IS unfortunate they seem to listen to all sorts of clamouring for frankly trivial things - hello 20" guns, or badly implemented flash fires (I pointed out the flaws in the implementation during testing before its general release, to no effect) -  while remaining entirely silent on really crucial stuff such as the issue of damage con generally, and wonder zombie-creating bulkheads in particular.

Clearly they will develop it as they wish without much reference to us, with all that entails. The things to which they DO seem to listen are almost always things that push the game away from more accurate representation of naval tech of these times, which I must confess I find both peculiar and disappointing given their claimed intentions.

I can check ever month or so while spending my time on more rewarding endeavours. Win/win, LOL.

Cheers all

Edited November 18, 2021 by Steeltrap

[DougToss]

You know I didn’t think about it in terms of historical determinism, but it’s an interesting philosophical point that even if the player runs the Japanese Navy entirely differently from 1890 on, by the 1930’s, Japanese ships will always be stealthy because of those hull characteristics.

So even if you wanted a navy to slug it out at close range, the hulls you’re given preclude that, or at least aren’t the best hulls for what you want to do.

 

@Steeltrap, you’d understand the tech far better than me, but Automation is able to port player designed cars into BeamNG where they have fully deformable soft body physics, and detailed driving models etc. Might be worth a look for how to port designs into a complex physics image and damage model.

Edited November 18, 2021 by DougToss

[o Barão]

On 11/17/2021 at 11:39 AM, SonicB said:

Looks like a great game - I'd pay $50 for that!

Well i am glad they ditch that system for the current one. What we have now is so much better compared to that one.

Edited November 18, 2021 by o Barão

[brucesim2003]

23 hours ago, o Barão said:

Well i am glad they ditch that system for the current one. What we have now is so much better compared to that one.

Sarcasm detector going full blast! At least I hope that's what I detected.

[o Barão]

1 hour ago, brucesim2003 said:

Sarcasm detector going full blast! At least I hope that's what I detected.

No sarcasm, i am telling the truth.

Most players like to complain about changes without trying to see if it was for the better or not. Is an natural behavior thing for many people. Most people feel uncomfortable with changes so instead in trying to see if was for the better or not is just simple easier to say that didn't like it. This situation is a perfect example.

 

In details.

Watch the video again, looks cool right? What is the great downside in that system? If you noticed the middle hull modules are being swapped or added new ones to make the ship longer or vice versa. Well here is the big problem with that system:

- Doesn't matter how big or small your ship is , your hull modules in the middle , they always have the same beam.

- You don't have the ship hull curve lines, instead what we have there is the bow and stern modules that dictate the ship beam and all of them follow the same dimensions. Those hull resemble a lot like huge oil tankers or mega cargo ships from late XX century to the current days. Or like bathtub toys for children

 

In the new system, that problem is solved with a simple solution. The ship tonnage will tell you how long or small your ship will be and the ship hull will have that progression hull curve for all the ship lenght making much more realistic hulls.

A big improvement.

Edited November 19, 2021 by o Barão

[madham82]

NavalArt proves it can be done. Just wish it had the complexity and realism of UA:D. 

[Cpt.Hissy]

1 hour ago, o Barão said:

- Doesn't matter how big or small your ship is , your hull modules in the middle , they always have the same beam.

- You don't have the ship hull curve lines, instead what we have there is the bow and stern modules that dictate the ship beam and all of them follow the same dimensions. Those hull resemble a lot like huge oil tankers or mega cargo ships from late XX century to the current days. Or like bathtub toys for children

 

In the new system, that problem is solved with a simple solution. The ship tonnage will tell you how long or small your ship will be and the ship hull will have that progression hull curve for all the ship lenght making much more realistic hulls.

A big improvement.

Hmm except current system literally uses these exact models, with all their drawbacks, and only combines them automatically in dev's pre-configured order instead of allowing you to do it, diminishing already barely existing customisation?

Have you even played the game?

[ColonelHenry]

2 hours ago, o Barão said:

No sarcasm, i am telling the truth.

Most players like to complain about changes without trying to see if it was for the better or not. Is an natural behavior thing for many people. Most people feel uncomfortable with changes so instead in trying to see if was for the better or not is just simple easier to say that didn't like it. This situation is a perfect example.

 

In details.

Watch the video again, looks cool right? What is the great downside in that system? If you noticed the middle hull modules are being swapped or added new ones to make the ship longer or vice versa. Well here is the big problem with that system:

- Doesn't matter how big or small your ship is , your hull modules in the middle , they always have the same beam.

- You don't have the ship hull curve lines, instead what we have there is the bow and stern modules that dictate the ship beam and all of them follow the same dimensions. Those hull resemble a lot like huge oil tankers or mega cargo ships from late XX century to the current days. Or like bathtub toys for children

 

In the new system, that problem is solved with a simple solution. The ship tonnage will tell you how long or small your ship will be and the ship hull will have that progression hull curve for all the ship lenght making much more realistic hulls.

A big improvement.

Full of lies and bullshit. Takes less than 1 minute to disprove by simply by going to the steam store page and compare the model on marketing material and the in game model. Same model. Ohhh but do tell us otherwise so we can expose you as the the liar you are.

[o Barão]

 

1 hour ago, Cpt.Hissy said:

 

 

1 hour ago, madham82 said:

NavalArt proves it can be done. Just wish it had the complexity and realism of UA:D. 

To be fair, i don't own naval art game. i only watched some youtube videos from Historical gamer if i am not mistaken.

 

But from what i saw there is a big cost to have the NA freedom in designing ships.

Where UAD process is: design your ship, go to battle.

NA process is: torture the player for hours to design something then go to battle. And if you need to change anything, then torture the player a little more.

 

Well some players like that kind of freedom/torture but not all of us.

Edited November 19, 2021 by o Barão

[o Barão]

5 minutes ago, ColonelHenry said:

Full of lies and bullshit. Takes less than 1 minute to disprove by simply by going to the steam store page and compare the model on marketing material and the in game model. Same model. Ohhh but do tell us otherwise so we can expose you as the the liar you are.

 I love how easy is for you to insult anyone that doens't think the same way you do. Notice how everyone was here discussing like grow up people until you show up.

Aren't you supposed to return only next year when we have the campaign finished? Don't worry someone will call you when that moment arrives. Until then have nice life.

[ColonelHenry]

6 minutes ago, o Barão said:

 I love how easy is for you to insult anyone that doens't think the same way you do. Notice how everyone was here discussing like grow up people until you show up.

Aren't you supposed to return only next year when we have the campaign finished? Don't worry someone will call you when that moment arrives. Until then have nice life.

Or, maybe don't lie to people faces. You might think lying to people faces everyday is normal to you but to many people it is an insult. So maybe don't go around insult people, take your own advice. And since I paid for my game, I can stay as long as I want so maybe you can shove that up your pie hole.

Edited November 19, 2021 by ColonelHenry

[DougToss]

Wouldn’t it be possible to have hull form settings or sliders, so you can place your sections and then the meshes will be deformed to get the lines you want? 
 

X-Plane and Simple Planes do this with wings and fuselages.

[o Barão]

14 minutes ago, ColonelHenry said:

Or, maybe don't lie to people faces. You might think lying to people faces everyday is normal to you but to many people it is an insult. So maybe don't go around insult people, take your own advice. And since I paid for my game, I can stay as long as I want so maybe you can shove that up your pie hole.

 

So let's think for a moment. You can use more than two brain cells at the same time don't you?

A. You paid for the game. fair enough.

B. Is clear that you are not liking the how the game is develop is going . Again fair enough , people are different , with different opinions.

So because A+B you got C. A complete stupid attitude towards other members in the community that think different just because they are not you and they don't think like you.

 

You understand the A+B doesn't justify you behave like a complete moron in the foruns right? Or maybe your life is so sad that you don't have anything more important to do? A job, a wife kids, maybe other games? Think a little for a moment. Or maybe you have an attitude issue towards every issue or people that you don't like and see every day. i suspect the latter is the truth. But try to undesrtand, that we , the rest of this community also paid for the game, but is not our fault that your parents forgot to give a proper education and to teach you how to behave. Maybe one day you will understand how stupid is your behavior. Maybe yes or not, i really don't care. but think a little for a moment and see if is positive is your contribution here.

Edited November 19, 2021 by o Barão

[ColonelHenry]

4 minutes ago, o Barão said:

 

So let's think for a moment. You can use more than two brain cells at the same time don't you?

A. You paid for the game. fair enough.

B. Is clear that you are not liking the how the game is develop is going . Again fair enough , people are different , with different opinions.

So because A+B you got C. A complete stupid attitude towards other members in the community that think different just because they are not you and they don't think like you.

 

You understand the A+B doesn't justify you behave like a complete moron in the foruns right? Or maybe your life is so sad that you don't have anything more important to do? A job, a wife kids, maybe other games? Think a little for a moment. Or maybe you have an attitude issue towards every issue or people that you don't like and see every day. i suspect the latter is the truth. But try to undesrtand, that we , the rest of this community also paid for the game, but is not our fault that your parents forgot to give a proper education and to teach you how to behave. Maybe one day you will understand how stupid is your behavior. Maybe yes or not, i really don't care. but think a little for a moment and see if is positive is your contribution here.

Oh... Where is that do not insult people advice go? Ah down the toilet. And yes, I call you out for your bullshit because it is nothing but bullshit. Every time you open your mouth, it is either factually wrong which why I called you a liar, or you simply saying that because it looks good, other people criticism should be ignored.

You cannot prove me wrong that you are a lying piece of shit so you go for my family. El classico. Maybe if your entire family had some shame to themselves, they wouldn't have raised a pathological liar such as yourself.


Same models = different models. Funny.

[madham82]

1 hour ago, o Barão said:

To be fair, i don't own naval art game. i only watched some youtube videos from Historical gamer if i am not mistaken.

But from what i saw there is a big cost to have the NA freedom in designing ships.

Where UAD process is: design your ship, go to battle.

NA process is: torture the player for hours to design something then go to battle. And if you need to change anything, then torture the player a little more.

Well some players like that kind of freedom/torture but not all of us.

Valid points indeed. I already spent sometimes 30 mins or more in UA:D designing, NA style would make it a real chore. But there are quite a lot of premade ships (for 1 guy) and with Workshop which has tons of ships too, it could be done well. 

Right now NA is even more simplistic than WoWS. That's not a good thing. I've really have no desire to spend all that time designing a ship from the keel up, to watch AA guns sink it. I will be keeping my eyes on it as it matures. The potential is there, just not enough yet. 

[madham82]

2 hours ago, DougToss said:

Wouldn’t it be possible to have hull form settings or sliders, so you can place your sections and then the meshes will be deformed to get the lines you want? 
 

X-Plane and Simple Planes do this with wings and fuselages.

Nick has acknowledged this ask and said they would look into after the campaign (if I remember). That would go a long way to making some unique ships. 

Edited November 19, 2021 by madham82

[Danvanthevacuumman]

Maybe this game will just flop as a arcady gane and flop as a semi or full realism game