What If: I were to design a WoWS type of game

[Wolfswetpaws]

4 minutes ago, ArIskandir said:

the question then is, would sales justify the development?

Well...

Quote

As of October 2019, all The Sims games combined generated lifetime sales of more than US$5 billion.^[23]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sims

The other game that occurs to me for comparision purposes is known as "Second Life", if I recall correctly.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Life
 

[ArIskandir]

9 minutes ago, Frostbow said:

Will you remove Detonation in your WoWS-type game, @ArIskandir?

Understanding detonations as a Critical Hit, I'm not opposed to the idea of having a small section of your ship causing a catastrophic detonation (think of a headshot). What I don't like is having Detonations as a RNG tax that can be avoided by using a consumable you could buy. 

Edited June 8 by ArIskandir

[Frostbow]

4 minutes ago, ArIskandir said:

What I don't like is having Detonations as a RNG tax that can be avoided by using a consumable you could buy.

I agree. 

[I_cant_Swim_]

So there are no signal flags at all in your game that change the properties of your ship?

[Wolfswetpaws]

The real life Hood was sunk from one projectile that happened to hit a vulnerable location.

I figure that modeling ships, properly, and ordnance, properly, will eventually produce the result of a ship being destroyed by one carefully aimed or lucky hit.

Will it happen every time?  Perhaps not.
Will players who can aim well enough score those kinds of hits more consistently than other players?  Possibly, I reckon.

[ArIskandir]

30 minutes ago, I_cant_Swim_ said:

So there are no signal flags at all in your game that change the properties of your ship?

Signal Flags are performance enhancers you can buy, that's a hard no for me. The issue is somewhat camouflaged by the possibility of acquiring a reasonable amount of them for free, but I'm still not fully comfortable with the idea. I think all the property 'tweaks' needed can be achieved by way of modules or crew skill. 

[ArIskandir]

34 minutes ago, Wolfswetpaws said:

The real life Hood was sunk from one projectile that happened to hit a vulnerable location.

I figure that modeling ships, properly, and ordnance, properly, will eventually produce the result of a ship being destroyed by one carefully aimed or lucky hit.

Will it happen every time?  Perhaps not.
Will players who can aim well enough score those kinds of hits more consistently than other players?  Possibly, I reckon.

The biggest problem with the current detonation model is it isn't fairly and equally applied and can be negated with a consumable you can buy. Imo, the current module HP system does not interacts fairly with the HE blast radius mechanic, small more compact ships (DDs in particular) are greatly disfavored.

[Admiral_Karasu]

@Wolfswetpaws Well.. did you spot any islands?

[Wolfswetpaws]

56 minutes ago, Admiral_Karasu said:

@Wolfswetpaws Well.. did you spot any islands?

I didn't watch the video for more than a handful of seconds.

[Wolfswetpaws]

58 minutes ago, ArIskandir said:

The biggest problem with the current detonation model is it isn't fairly and equally applied and can be negated with a consumable you can buy. Imo, the current module HP system does not interacts fairly with the HE blast radius mechanic, small more compact ships (DDs in particular) are greatly disfavored.

Bigger explosion from a more powerful warhead.
Of course stuff is going to be affected.

Theoretically DD's could self-destruct by not getting enough distance from their own depth-charges before they explode.

 

[Admiral_Karasu]

It seems @ArIskandir has jotted down the core of what WoWS should have been and added a number of extra features.

A few ideas:

There could be an option to expand on the skill system by introducing crew roles like Chief gunnery officer, Chief Engineer etc. Additionally, there could be a 'Familiarize yourself with your command' option where you'd have a full access to any of the ships you use and be able to go through, if not the entire deck plans, but at least the most important sections of the ship, mostly just for fun as you wouldn't be necessarily using those. Unless the game were complex enough to allow you to manually control any of the stations while all the others would default to automatic control.

There would need to be a Naval Academy, for tutorials, 'lecture's, plus potentially other means of learning the game within the game client itself.

Additionally, the game client would have to be robust enough so it could also fit and display all mission related information without the rather stupid need in WoWS to spend an hour or so going through various articles spread around a website clicking buttons here and there.

[Aethervox]

What would be my ideal design of a WoWS type naval game? I would have a 'clone' of WoWS, as follows;

#1) I would include motorized warships from 1880(?) to have more of the earlier warships in this game. 1890 may have been a better baseline date to start with than what WoWS used. 

#2) Since, (virtually) all naval battles from 1900 were fought on the open seas (or ocean), the Ocean map should be used a lot more than it is (is it even used now? 😒). As to all the versions of 'island archipelago' that is in WoWS, well, simplify them by getting rid of most of the islands &, certainly, remove the ability to radar through islands.

#3) Immediately return RTS CVs & immediately dump the reworked CV Abominations (also, ignore all the CV whiners). CVs were part of 20th century naval battles.

#4) As to Subs, sure, have them but only with realistic parameters, hence, have them mostly where they belong, in a convoy operation mode. Add Corvettes to that.

#5) Return the earlier Captain skills table & expand that with some additional skills.

#6) Return to the earlier AA regime which worked well design & playwise.

#7) Do we see a connection here? Between #3, #5 & #6? We should.

#8) Get rid of any ship that was built after 1945. Keep those ships for a post-WW2 naval game.

#9) Get rid of false gimmicks, especially, something as rediculous as a 'battle heal' (aka: a fantasy 'cleric' heal). The repair party ability &/or fire prevention expert (as a real 'thing') is bad enough.

#10) I would want a naval game where the Guns (all of them) had historically accurate parameters (certainly, not the fake parameters obviously used by Wedgie).

#11) (Lucky 11) The only great thing WoWS has, imo, are their beautiful renderings of the ships themselves. This, I would retain.

#12) (not last nor the least) Actual real naval fleet tactics (not the barf farce Wedgie forces onto the game).

#13) Camoes & Flags. Versions of real camoflages only (or the often used plain colour hulls). Dump most of the flags, especially, the barf fantasy ones. Signal (letter & number) flags should be used historically (teach the idiots what they were used for & why).

#14) (trivial, but germaine) Use proper naval terminology for groups of ships. 'Fleet' for a clan. 'Squadron' for a division.

[ArIskandir]

2 hours ago, Wolfswetpaws said:

Bigger explosion from a more powerful warhead.
Of course stuff is going to be affected.

Theoretically DD's could self-destruct by not getting enough distance from their own depth-charges before they explode.

 

For me, the problem is the resultt of the various mechanics interacting present a problem for smaller ships. The RNG factor on module HP could lead to situations where your ship is basically rigged to explode on contact, add the arbitrary HE splash radius and it starts feeling like a designed 'screw you' mechanic. I would limit Magazine hits (thus detonations chance) to direct hits that penetrate its armor protection. That would be fairer to all ship types while still retaining some realism flavor as a DD magazine is less protected and vulnerable to a wider range of calibers.

[ArIskandir]

2 hours ago, Admiral_Karasu said:

There could be an option to expand on the skill system by introducing crew roles like Chief gunnery officer, Chief Engineer etc.

Yes, there's a lot of room to improve on crew, veterancy and skills. I may pitch some ideas on a follow up post, feel free to add your own 🙂

 

2 hours ago, Admiral_Karasu said:

Additionally, there could be a 'Familiarize yourself with your command' option where you'd have a full access to any of the ships you use and be able to go through, if not the entire deck plans, but at least the most important sections of the ship, mostly just for fun as you wouldn't be necessarily using those.

This is a very cool idea, and the best part is most of the resources and models already exist in game. It shouldn't take much disk space to add something like this feature.

2 hours ago, Admiral_Karasu said:

Additionally, the game client would have to be robust enough so it could also fit and display all mission related information without the rather stupid need in WoWS to spend an hour or so going through various articles spread around a website clicking buttons here and there.

Honestly, I feel the current state of affairs is by design. Some sort of information maskirovka so you are never fully aware of what's going on unless you are deeply engaged with the game, even then you'll live on the fear of missing something. Take it with some tinfoil but I find all the murkyness acting as FOMO reinforcement... from a design perspective there's no real need to have it all being so convoluted, in fact it is something you would't desire unless your goal lies somewhere else.

[Wolfswetpaws]

18 minutes ago, Aethervox said:

What would be my ideal design of a WoWS type naval game? I would have a 'clone' of WoWS, as follows;

#1) I would include motorized warships from 1880(?) to have more of the earlier warships in this game. 1890 may have been a better baseline date to start with than what WoWS used. 

#2) Since, (virtually) all naval battles from 1900 were fought on the open seas (or ocean), the Ocean map should be used a lot more than it is (is it even used now? 😒). As to all the versions of 'island archipelago' that is in WoWS, well, simplify them by getting rid of most of the islands &, certainly, remove the ability to radar through islands.

#3) Immediately return RTS CVs & immediately dump the reworked CV Abominations (also, ignore all the CV whiners). CVs were part of 20th century naval battles.

#4) As to Subs, sure, have them but only with realistic parameters, hence, have them mostly where they belong, in a convoy operation mode. Add Corvettes to that.

#5) Return the earlier Captain skills table & expand that with some additional skills.

#6) Return to the earlier AA regime which worked well design & playwise.

#7) Do we see a connection here? Between #3, #5 & #6? We should.

#8) Get rid of any ship that was built after 1945. Keep those ships for a post-WW2 naval game.

#9) Get rid of false gimmicks, especially, something as rediculous as a 'battle heal' (aka: a fantasy 'cleric' heal). The repair party ability &/or fire prevention expert (as a real 'thing') is bad enough.

#10) I would want a naval game where the Guns (all of them) had historically accurate parameters (certainly, not the fake parameters obviously used by Wedgie).

#11) (Lucky 11) The only great thing WoWS has, imo, are their beautiful renderings of the ships themselves. This, I would retain.

#12) (not last nor the least) Actual real naval fleet tactics (not the barf farce Wedgie forces onto the game).

#13) Camoes & Flags. Versions of real camoflages only (or the often used plain colour hulls). Dump most of the flags, especially, the barf fantasy ones. Signal (letter & number) flags should be used historically (teach the idiots what they were used for & why).

#14) (trivial, but germaine) Use proper naval terminology for groups of ships. 'Fleet' for a clan. 'Squadron' for a division.

Dialing-up the "realism" to nearly "simulation" levels, eh?  🙂 

I can support the notion of the ocean map being utilized more often.
Though, I take this opportunity to point out that many naval clashes happened near or around islands or continents.
But, sure, open ocean engagements more frequently happening does sound worthwhile.

As you stated, changing the CV/AA/RTS-versus-Rework equations is an inter-related endeavor.  I'm guessing that's worth its own topic.  🙂 

If WW-II continued, or perhaps didn't happen as it did in the history books, then ship features and newer ships might have been built?
Food for thought, at this point.  And brainstorming with "everything on the table" and consideration of every idea seems appropriate at this juncture.  🙂 

I figure that WOWs is using their time/distance warping to make the game more playable.
Certainly, several ships could shoot farther in-real-life than their in-game limitations in kilometers.
Restoring gun performance to "real life" parameters may also require bigger maps.
I'm not opposed to that.  I'm just thinking about the ripple-effects of one change here leading to another change there, and etc. & etc.  🙂 
Ships would appear smaller, too.  Since WOWs artificially enlarges ships for easier viewing by players.

Camouflages & Flags?
I'll split the two for sake of discussion.
~ I do enjoy my anime' collaboration content and there are plenty of non-anime camouflages that I think are aesthetically pleasing (for me).
So, I'm not quite as willing to give those up.
But, a "viewing menu" option (as we have now) would allow players to view/not-view the camouflage schemes and cosmetics that clash with their preferences.  🙂 
~ Signal Flags I'm more willing to hear ideas about and I feel that I am more flexible about their purpose(s).  So, I'm not making any judgements right now.

Terminology usage/changes are negotiable, as far as I am concerned.
Example:
A player can belong to a Clan.
A player controls the ships in their own Fleet.
A player may sortie their ship as part of a squadron with other players.
A player still has no control or "right of command" over other players and their ships (without the revocable permission/consent of said other players).

Further discussion welcome, as far as I am concerned.  🙂 
 

[Wolfswetpaws]

18 minutes ago, ArIskandir said:

For me, the problem is the resultt of the various mechanics interacting present a problem for smaller ships. The RNG factor on module HP could lead to situations where your ship is basically rigged to explode on contact, add the arbitrary HE splash radius and it starts feeling like a designed 'screw you' mechanic. I would limit Magazine hits (thus detonations chance) to direct hits that penetrate its armor protection. That would be fairer to all ship types while still retaining some realism flavor as a DD magazine is less protected and vulnerable to a wider range of calibers.

Understandable sentiment(s).
Your concerns might be addressed with a re-calibration of the projectiles and other ordnance, though?
If explosions are made "more real" or at "simulation" levels of modeling, then the effects upon the hulls of ships and the fuselages of planes could be tested and re-evaluated?
 

[Wolfswetpaws]

 @ArIskandir, as I mentioned earlier, the Hood went down with one shot.  But, there are other historic examples of ships surviving multiple hits and making incredible efforts to get "home" to be repaired or at least put the crews ashore.
So... a spectrum of possible results?
The more we model according to "reality" the more that the "incredible stories of survival" have a chance of happening as much as the "one shot, one sinking" stories have of happening as in-game results?

[Ferdinand_Max]

Keep in mind that system shouldn't be too complex, or else you may end up with War Thunder Naval 2.0.

Not a good idea.

[Wolfswetpaws]

2 hours ago, Ferdinand_Max said:

Keep in mind that system shouldn't be too complex, or else you may end up with War Thunder Naval 2.0.

Not a good idea.

Could you elaborate?
I haven't played the game you mention.

[Ferdinand_Max]

38 minutes ago, Wolfswetpaws said:

Could you elaborate?
I haven't played the game you mention.

I have played only a few battles and... well, let's just say that they went for too much realism.

Compared to the World of Warships, War Thunder Naval:

• was far slower paced as distances and sizes were not compressed - ships actually moved realistically
• attempted to simulate realistic aiming and damage models - ships had subsystems that could be damaged and there was no HP bar

What this ended up doing however is making the game far slower paced and kinda boring. And to make matters worse, they also introduced aircraft. I never got to battleships there, but I played destroyers, and single aircraft could sink you with a single bomb.

EDIT: More detailed explanation by Mountbatten here:

Edited June 9 by Ferdinand_Max