Not a member yet? Why not Sign up today
Create an account  

  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
v2.3.1.13 Stable

(2019-02-17, 06:11 PM)Cairo1 Wrote: @Afkjol

As a realistic builder i can say this. About a year a ago when updates were made to advanced cannons that changed Frag ammo I just about stopped playing the game. I am not alone in this. I know other Realistic builders who enjoy playing the campaign, but slugging through it in battleships destroyers and cruisers of old. Never using CRAM offensive lasers, or missiles other then as torpedoes. I played a campaign with a friend and we pushed to the Steel striders before the frag updates stoped us dead in our tracks. Some times battles would last hours with the lightning hoods as our Air defense systems were not potent enough to deal with them we innovated new Guns and adapted, but never used missiles lasers pacs or Crams against any enemy.

Frag was extremely useful. Especially for missiles since individual missiles are rather under-powered. It was over-powered when spammed but as I limited the amount of missiles I used... I understood that I was handicapping myself. After the frag nerf, it was horrible and their worth was questionable even when spammed. I kind of complained about this issue but I also understand why it had to happen. I'm not against that change, it makes sense, and with the new missile re-balance, it is fairly ok. Although I definitely have problems with the cost  but it can be worked around.

I too understand what you mean. But I don't think as a player who goes for style over function should have a right to complain their ship isn't functioning. It should be expected your vehicles will never be as effective as meta. The game was never intended to be realistic and I don't think that needs to be changed. In fact, that's the beauty of it all. We can make realistic replicas without the game ever intending it to do so.
And I have seen people make effective realistic looking ships. They have invisible shields, spam guns and laser defense. If you limit yourself to 25% of the assets provided by the game, its natural your ship will not perform well in campaign.
Realistic looking ships are able to perform well, just not realistic rate of fire or the like.

When you cater to the realistic community, its also going to hurt the general balance of the game. There's lasers and shields, not using them is a handicapped the player alone is responsible for. These systems are balanced in such a way its like a giant rock, paper, scissors. Ideally speaking at least, it is questionable if FtD have achieved that successfully. If a player ignore one area of this triangle, they will perform poorly. Its not something that we need to address. If you ignore one area, the player should make up for it by improving in the others. Making guns better, so players only need to use guns will only upset the triangle. Any game should give priority to game play over realism; except for simulators which FtD is not.

Being a realistic builder you should understand that some aspects of ships do indeed look the same, sometimes only a few parts in game look right. For those of us who never wanted to used mods the temptation to pick up things like After Cataclysm or APSA were great, but that would be too troublesome for us.

I don't understand. Some aspects will always look the same, that part I agree, however much like real life, there are aspects that stand out. The fact there are a few parts in the game that look right is exactly why you should use them and not mods. If they exist, use them, you don't need mods. That's why I never felt the temptation at all. I might have agreed a bit before, but with mimic blocks and spinblocks on spinblocks. If it is larger than a few meters, then it can be built. These two are great additions, and not only should satisfy realistic builders but also anyone that likes to decorate.
As for APSA, it's out right cheating IMO. You are buffing your stats to very high levels, its unbalanced but as its a mod, its single player only. So not going to complain about that.
Regarding the dakka vs boom. There's always CRAMs. If CRAM doesn't look good, isn't it easier to make alternative barrel styles? Simply put, I see no purpose for these guns. Performance wise, APS and CRAMs can fill them. Aesthetically, you can use mimic blocks and subconstructs to decorate.

If you want your ship to perform better, you should increase rate of fire, add more turrets, add more armor, and use invisible shields.
Invisible shields are self explanatory... they don't hurt the aesthetic. Heliblades, they can be inside the ship and are extremely powerful. I seen people hide LAMS in AA positions. You can have plenty of those since AA guns are everywhere on WW2 era warships.

APS are already potent weapon systems on its own against aircrafts, really don't understand any complaints regarding them. If you have no problems with frag, then you should have no problems using sabot, HEAT, HESH, EMP etc. Which all are pretty useful.

Also I see a lot of realistic ships people make have like 2m armor on battleships and gigantic empty hulls. IDK what you all are thinking, but my battleship have anywhere from 3m to 6m no problem. If you got space, fill it up. If your buoyancy is taking a hit, add heliblades and make it float(I don't do that though) 
It's not hard to make a ship look realistic while capable of doing campaign. It will never be as good as a true meta ship, but that's not required for campaign. It might not look perfectly realistic as a replica, but I haven't seen a 'realisitc ship' with that level of detail anyways even though it is fully within the capabilities of the game to do so.

TBH, you probably play way more campaign than I ever did so maybe I don't know anything.
[Image: fvn8BOX.gif] [Image: RFSgkaw.gif]

Is it just my derpiness or is there something i did'nt notice when poking with steam engine -> reduction gear -> propeller?

I think focussing on raw realism hurts the scope and waver of creative implementation possible in the game. Building realistic looking things is but a tiny aspect of what is possible in FtD. And I do not think that the overwhelming amount of other capabilities and mad brilliant designs should suffer for the sake of such specific builds.

To be frank, I do think that realism for realisms own sake is not a way to go. Ftd isn't about realism. It's a game designed so people can make the maddest of things to fight all kinds of over the top stuffs in a large overworld. It's a designers challenge with all the aspects of combat efficiency and favourable exchanges added in, and you're given free reign to build whatever you need, whatever you can imagine. It's perfectly possible of course for people to make real world ships, real world-alike ships, and all thinkable variations thereoff withins the scope of the game to rise up to the challenge. My jaw regularly hits the floor when I visit the realism tab when I'm on the discord - these are all very talented builders hard at work with a neatly focussed historical passion, and I'd hate to detract from them in this little plea.

But to try and shift the focus to such things, to what is essentially a niche (and a boringly conventional one at that) inside the scope of the possibilities of FtD and its virtual world, mostly feels like a disservice to all the rest it can do. Which is a far more significant percentage of what is on offer.

It's late, I'm tripping on melatonine. But felt like adding my two cents. I'm with AFJKLOL on this one. Adding more options for realistic builders is cool, they can use them, and they're very talented builders and hard workers with an invigorating attention to historical detail.
Holding the game by such standards, however, or trying to shift the premise of the game into more conventional waters only serves to decrease the scope of possibilities, the variations possible and thinkably and creatively implementable.

So Naval rifles ... for realism people, for realism tournaments, for certain builds in convenational battleship designs in the game and what have ye, counterable by shields and lams as a low ROF high impact new weapon type? ...maybe! Shifting the game to such a focus and away from the options we have now ... noppes. I feel that could only serve to a more narrow focus, and a degradation of the creative environment of the game.

After all, From the Depths can do so much more and far more cooler stuff that the real world can't. And the real world has a lot of limits the world of FtD does not. And I don't think we should be porting them over.
Imperium Age of Sail Campaign Custom Campaign Dev Idea -> Check it out here!

[Image: 88AAC0598B7E00385C41259D384B95EE9CCBB447]

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)