Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Recommended Posts

Ive bought things up along these lines for a while but I think ive finally got a actual concise idea of how it could be done, instead of what.
 I have way to much to say here so ill get to the point and leave it until after. However- this isnt purely deleting the current one.  This is more of a expansion on it.  I havent really ironed out either ideas, they arent intended to be mutually exclusive though.

A. Hull changes.

Originally, the ship design was supposed to be on length based sections of hull.  That never happened, due to worries it would be confusing.  I can fully see this being a problem, so I do understand why.  

While it would have to vary thanks to hull, and some probably wouldnt allow it at all- this is still based off the current hull system.  Take, for example, this Dreadnought II hull. 


It looks like you could cut the casemates deck right off, right?  The idea is based around that- start subdividing the ship.  


(sorry for the crudeness)

As seen above, you have X decks with Y sections.  Based off this, section 1-8 of deck 2 has been removed on this hull, and is empty.  Section 9 was somewhat thinned.  This gives it the stepped down aft deck.  But what if I dont want that?  Well, you add back in sections 1-8, and make them casemates.    Or you make the width of section 9 the same as the deck below, so its a pure cutoff, like on a italian modern BB. 

 Each section could also be customized- while mainly making it thinner then the blow deck, you could also have something like the weird IJN hangars on the Yamatos stern, or just a normal one.  If its a deck step down, you could add the barbette creeping out, floatplane doors, etc.  Or put casemates there, as previously said.

Due to the hull composition each ship would need to have different amounts of decks and sections, but I think this gets the point across.  (Forgot to mention, the 1st deck probably shouldnt be customizable without the sliders)

The problems here I see are for extremely long bows or vertically short hulls- like the british 1940 BB.  Its definitely better for some hulls then others.


B. Superstructure designer.

This would be entirely optional, and basically a integrated modding tool.  Instead of allowing people to mod in a superstructure or something, make it so you build it yourself within the game, so the majority of players dont always have to rely on people to make the "perfect" superstructure for them. (However, these should be publishable to workshop/easily transferable between players.)

Take all the main or secondary towers in the game, slice them up into little chunks like the conning tower, bridge, rangefinder, etc etc, Put them all in a uniform scale.  And then the player could assemble a superstructure using all the prefabs, which could vary from small details to huge sections. (Maybe even preexisting towers, but I understand if the devs arent willing to do that.)   You can then add mounting point locations for turrets and funnels.

Stats wise- I would presume that the deck footprint should determine a "stat capacity", and then you can divide up the percentages of bonuses you want the super structure to give you.  Tonnage is dependent on both deck space and functional points.  

Another issue is hitboxes- while they shouldnt directly affect the design process, clipping of parts should very much be allowed when designing, there should definitely be some way to keep it reasonable and not have a 20" gun sitting in the middle of the bridge.  I dont know exactly how that could be addressed.

When youve done a superstructure you like, you could put it on a ship of your choosing- perhaps a automated scale system for size and stats for each specific hull, (probably best) or you choose what hulls it can be put on and scaling is your responsibility.

In the campaign, as tech unlocks towers,  It should probably just have a hard block so stats dont go past a certain point until a certain tech is reached

And of course, as said before, they should be postable on the steam workshop.



Thats about it for both.  

Clearly, both of these are focused on visuals rather then mechanics.  Im mostly a form over function player, but I do believe that the capabilities section of ship design is fine.  While I would rather see it take a shift to tradeoffs instead of pure upgrades (the new shell system is a perfect example of what id like to see in the future) Its functional enough and doesnt need significant changes.  These both are intended to be based within the ship designer as it stands and are not supposed to require one another (though id love for that).

As I stated in the original comment on the improvement thread, Im under the impression that the devs dont want this game to be a total history lesson, and I do really want players to be able to establish their own hallmark design features.   The game doesnt allow that- you can establish design doctrines, but not visual ones. 

Without a lot more design freedom, like these, the game will always feel like something is missing.  No matter how many new hulls or towers you add, its really just time spent trying to reach a unobtainable goal.

If the devs give us more design freedom, and make it a absolute paradise for all types of modders, I firmly believe this will be the best game in the genre, hands down.

Anyways, as is probably clear by now. I like to talk.  Feel free to discuss anything below.


Edited by slightlytreasonous
  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I too want more options for making ships. I also suggest a new "structures" tab to permit installing other buildings segments onto the hull, capable of intersecting with other structures like towers and barbettes in certain cases. Implemented fully in conjunction with your ideas, we could completely customise ships.


You have my full support, mate,

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

  • 3 months later...

Support the idea, especially more flexibility for superstructures. The ships look too similar right now sadly 


I made the proposal before - I think the best way to achieve it is indeed to break up the superstructure into multiple parts which can be combined to different looks 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Create New...