|
Post by yemo on Jun 11, 2019 15:01:09 GMT -6
And while we are on the ship designer topic:
Please show us the maintenance costs and ASW rating in the ship designer as well!
I want to know whether a new design is more cost effective for foreign stations or hunting subs, than the design currently in service.
Problem is that designs are, by definition, untested. No one knows how well it can fight submarines, or how difficult it is to clean and fuel until it actually goes into war. Yes, but I still want to know what I try to design it to be. How much do additional depth charges contribute for 30tons? And K-guns?
|
|
|
Post by alsadius on Jun 11, 2019 15:02:15 GMT -6
And while we are on the ship designer topic:
Please show us the maintenance costs and ASW rating in the ship designer as well!
I want to know whether a new design is more cost effective for foreign stations or hunting subs, than the design currently in service.
Problem is that designs are, by definition, untested. No one knows how well it can fight submarines, or how difficult it is to clean and fuel until it actually goes into war. Sure, but designers in 1900 couldn't tell you what the final tonnage of the ship was going to be either - designs coming in literally thousands of tons over-weight wasn't unheard of. And telling the cost to the nearest 0.002%(i.e., $1k on a $50M battleship) was even less likely.
|
|
|
Post by rob06waves2018 on Jun 11, 2019 15:16:03 GMT -6
Problem is that designs are, by definition, untested. No one knows how well it can fight submarines, or how difficult it is to clean and fuel until it actually goes into war. Yes, but I still want to know what I try to design it to be. How much do additional depth charges contribute for 30tons? And K-guns?
That would really ruin the reality of designing ships for me. I suppose, however, that a summary of the effects in the manual could be useful. As all these ASW features will incur a constant increase (+1 per k gun or whatever), that may be the best compromise.
|
|
|
Post by rob06waves2018 on Jun 11, 2019 15:19:38 GMT -6
Problem is that designs are, by definition, untested. No one knows how well it can fight submarines, or how difficult it is to clean and fuel until it actually goes into war. Sure, but designers in 1900 couldn't tell you what the final tonnage of the ship was going to be either - designs coming in literally thousands of tons over-weight wasn't unheard of. And telling the cost to the nearest 0.002%(i.e., $1k on a $50M battleship) was even less likely. I totally agree. I think there should be a much more dynamic design and commissioning system with cost overruns (or making it cheaper!), capability differences, or even a total rework halfway through. I'm picking my battles at the moment though as I imagine it would be quite a big job to code.
|
|
|
Post by alsadius on Jun 11, 2019 15:27:46 GMT -6
TBH, I think the current system of "It's a game, we'll just take off the veil" is better. There's random events to change costs and do small tweaks, and otherwise we can let the player not feel too frustrated.
|
|
|
Post by rob06waves2018 on Jun 11, 2019 15:28:38 GMT -6
TBH, I think the current system of "It's a game, we'll just take off the veil" is better. There's random events to change costs and do small tweaks, and otherwise we can let the player not feel too frustrated. Each to his own, I suppose!
|
|
|
Post by yemo on Jun 11, 2019 15:46:35 GMT -6
Yes, but I still want to know what I try to design it to be. How much do additional depth charges contribute for 30tons? And K-guns?
That would really ruin the reality of designing ships for me. I suppose, however, that a summary of the effects in the manual could be useful. As all these ASW features will incur a constant increase (+1 per k gun or whatever), that may be the best compromise. So you want to remove the speed the ship will be designed for and just allocate tonnage to the machinery? Or allocate space for accomodation and later find out that you were just 5 tons shy of "normal" accomodations and get the cramped flag? And why display the costs during the design? Anything could happen while designing and building. Just let it fluctuate as it does in reality.
Sorry, but in this specific case, your argument is not stringent. If I'm provided the exact constructions costs, I very well can get at least an estimate of the maintenance costs. And if it is a constant +1 for whatever ASW gear, there is no harm at all of displaying that during the design phase instead of hiding it in the manual/forum. Speed can be estimated.
williammiller : A wiki would probably go a long way to deal with many currently appearing questions on the forum. No need to fill it youself. The community will start and the team can clarify.
edit: I should reload a thread before commenting.
|
|
rorie
New Member
Posts: 5
|
Post by rorie on Jun 11, 2019 21:49:58 GMT -6
Saw this thread, might as well share what i created as soon as I got 6" DP guns.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 20, 2019 13:51:04 GMT -6
Problem is that designs are, by definition, untested. No one knows how well it can fight submarines, or how difficult it is to clean and fuel until it actually goes into war. Sure, but designers in 1900 couldn't tell you what the final tonnage of the ship was going to be either - designs coming in literally thousands of tons over-weight wasn't unheard of. And telling the cost to the nearest 0.002%(i.e., $1k on a $50M battleship) was even less likely. At least there may be an estimation of maintenance cost. For example if it is 900 or 1 300 per month...
|
|
|
Post by rimbecano on Jun 21, 2019 15:25:42 GMT -6
I totally agree. I think there should be a much more dynamic design and commissioning system with cost overruns (or making it cheaper!) AFAIK construction delays already cause overruns: I believe that you still pay the full per-month cost for a month where a delay event happens and no progress is made on the ship.
|
|
|
Post by alsadius on Jun 21, 2019 15:58:58 GMT -6
That's been my experience, yes.
|
|
|
Post by dorn on Jun 21, 2019 23:35:05 GMT -6
I totally agree. I think there should be a much more dynamic design and commissioning system with cost overruns (or making it cheaper!) AFAIK construction delays already cause overruns: I believe that you still pay the full per-month cost for a month where a delay event happens and no progress is made on the ship. You do not pay monthly costs if there is delay. May be you pay same amount as construction is halted, I did not calculate it.
|
|