|
Post by akosjaccik on Sept 27, 2020 14:19:22 GMT -6
Well, that will come to a screeching halt for a bit, I'm afraid. I do not like to hog "the top of section" with non-AAR-related stuff (often times this is why I tie my responses to updates), but I felt like I'll have to give a bit of a status report. My PC was and still is having issues. After some troubleshooting attempts ended up in vain, I've backed up most of my data and decided to format the drive and reinstall Windows both as another troubleshooting attempt and also for cleaning up the computer before perhaps I'd need to send it to the service. Now, I already switched Win distributions on the same exact computer once and RtW did not like that the slightest, so in order to be extra careful, I wanted to migrate my activation to the same exact computer before I did anything with even simply just the software. Turns out I can't do that, because according to the manual, I need to enter the new site code to the old installation, which of course, I can't do. Oh well, it's... - The same exact computer, with the same exact parts and...
- ...actually the same exact Windows-distribution, down to the product key, so...
What could go wrong?
The only thing that can, of course. Now, I could send the magic e-mail, but what would be the point if, should the problem(s) persist, I'd need to send the PC away and perhaps even replace parts only to ask for the codes yet again, and for physically the same exact PC the fourth time I believe by then.
So, the project now goes into a hiatus. I have to say, right at this moment I'm very salty and disappointed about the situation, more about the unnecessary, unworthy fuss than losing the ability to play the game itself.
Have a better day, and also have a half-finished battlecruiser as a cliffhanger, Lord knows when will we reach to this point:
|
|
|
Post by garrisonchisholm on Sept 27, 2020 17:59:27 GMT -6
...I can't "like" this, as I don't like it. :\ I really hope things work out, and if there's anything I can do please let me know.
|
|
|
Post by williammiller on Sept 27, 2020 21:39:22 GMT -6
Hello akosjaccik - it is no bother at all for me to reactivate your game whenever/however you need it...I check the forums several times a day, and all you need is just to PM me with your codes and I would be happy to activate the game for you as you need it, no questions asked.
FYI, so you have a idea of how and why the DRM works as it does: the game license key is stored in Windows on your hard drive - so if you delete your Windows installation the license will be lost. When you re-install Windows the system generates a different unique internal ID for the system (IIRC it is an encrypted string) and thus will not be the same ID as before (even if its the same copy of Windows OS with the same serial code). The ID being different means the same activation code would simply not work anymore, so even copying it over would not be a workable solution.
|
|
|
Post by akosjaccik on Sept 29, 2020 11:24:44 GMT -6
Thank you for your help! The great takeaway from the issue is that I thought the system is tied to the hardware ( due to the original discussions), and hence what I'm experiencing is an abnormal functioning and should I ask codes four times in a year without any references (forgot to even screenshot my old codes for deactivation) it will come off as something shady as hell. I guess my correspondence with NWS will be much more frequent than I originally thought. It's not ideal, but at least I am now aware of it and it's clear that it's WaI. Cheers!
|
|
|
Post by plattfuss on Oct 1, 2020 9:07:53 GMT -6
Maybe it might be a bit overbearing and also a bit out of the line of this thread´s content -
but I am just unable to keep a certain idea to myself:
Wouldn´t it be most promising to find a way to some form of cooperation between akosjaccik and williammiller / NWS studios?
If it would be achievable to integrate some of those devastating impressive graphic elements akosjaccik is able to generate into the game, Rule the waves would become even more of a smashing hit, I guess.
|
|
|
Post by akosjaccik on Oct 1, 2020 15:42:35 GMT -6
Fredrik asked for one of the side view armor diagrams to help illustrate RtW's notations for armored areas in the current manual. Should they find anything else valuable or interesting for their work that's already here or on the sorry excuse of a webpage, I see no reason why I should not let them to do with the drawings/renderings whatever they please. If NWS requires something specific not yet seen here but would like me to take a stab at it, I may or may not be able to do that depending on the time at my hands and the complexity of the issue, but as I was glad to assist in the past, I'm open to it still (...once I have the decent rig between my hands again - currently on my notebook). Although I'm not sure how the game itself could make use of these stuff, perhaps the manual more so.
|
|
|
Post by janxol on Oct 2, 2020 1:32:57 GMT -6
Looking forward to the continuation. Regarding the DRM, it appears to be tied BOTH to hardware and windows. I had to reactivate after switching several components in my PC (motherboard, RAM, CPU), but I was still using the same hard drive, with same old copy of windows (not reinstalled). Still had to reactivate.
|
|
|
Post by thefleetofoceans on Nov 11, 2020 12:51:07 GMT -6
Hopefully I&I will return along with the Dragons Roar. Both of these RP's are sorely missed.
|
|
|
Post by faustzwei on Dec 26, 2020 5:38:26 GMT -6
Just no not let this sink to the bottom of the forum, I'd also like to plead for a continuation!
This AAR inspired to me try modeling ships in Blender in a similar fashion as you, akosjaccik, and through this process I thoroughly realized how hard it is to strike the proper balance between a boring, detail-lacking ship and not finishing a model because one gets lost in too much detailing... a balance where your models are spot on! I even now own a book on German naval guns as modelling references because I liked your gun (esp. the silver one on last update post on your homepage) and turret models so much - though I again still have to learn what details are important, and which can be omitted for the sake of a clean, mid-realistic shape.
Can I ask, how did you develop the hull forms of the battleships? There are line drawings in Wikipedia, but low res, and getting the primary hull shape right was always the hardest for me... Would it maybe possible that you re-upload garrisonchisholm's Admiral-Wir-Class? It gives me a 404 error, however I'd really like to study your approach to get the forms right.
Anyway, thanks for the work on this AAR far - if it should continue I will for sure be watching again!
Merry Christmas and stay healthy!
|
|
|
Post by akosjaccik on Jan 13, 2021 12:30:48 GMT -6
Hiya all! No promises ( <- "good" preamble, I admit), but I am hoping that I'll be able to carry on with the game starting from late january / early february. What will happen later is unclear, but I'm hardly the only one who is having turbulent times at the moment - however I do have my data, tools and wish to continue. I am seriously humbled by your interest by the way, and I wish all of you a joyous and successful new year! Hope isn't the worst thing to start off with. faustzwei : I am glad to hear and hope you find it fun! Your question cuts directly into meat, since arguably I struggle the most with the hull shape myself. A larger part of the issue is that I am not familiar with Blender - however, if you can catch Enioch either here or on the Discord, he's currently working on tabletop models of historical ships using Blender and his hull shapes - though he requires and thus makes waterline models - are visibly more convincing than I am able to make them. However, to answer your question as best as I can myself: I use parametric softwares, formerly Inventor and Solid Edge v20, currently SE2020, these are intended for mechanical design. Although this pairs up decently well with the capabilites of an FDM printer, free surfaces are problematic and sculpting is pretty much not possible. Theoretically, probably the best tool I have available is sweeping material through pre-defined cross sections in the space. On paper, this could create the ideal shape. Excuse my Paint-job (pun semi-intended): The lesser issue is that I've found it to be hard to modify once and IF this sort of geometry is successfully generated, and time-consuming to shape up. The larger issue is that due to the software I can only use a very limited amount of driving curves, and even then it handles very finnicky unless the cross sections are similar to each other (so for example have the same exact number of edges - this means that bulges or armor plates on the hull are very problematic to impossible to create in one single step), and quite often results in the generation of non-manifold bodies. This is why I turned back to the basics of additive modeling and just hacking away with body primitives, and although iirc the Admiral Wir was done in the "proper" fashion by linking together different cross-sections, now I don't risk dumping hours and hours into that method for a 1:1000 model that may or may not work in the end. Other simplifications are also present on my models; some of them are due to time-saving, some are there due to the technology. For example, the "portholes" are "drilled" along parallel axes (unlike the proper way i.e. with the local normalvector of the surface) on each side since it makes virtually no difference on the printed model. Other oddities and inconsistencies are again sometimes there for the sake of simplicity or due to technological reasons (such as too thick rudder or propeller shafts, or that prop. blades never reach below the lowest point of the keel). Although I began to work with rendered images in mind as well a while ago, I still feel that for my technological capabilities the models are already too detailed, however for "eye candy" they are lacking a lot in elegance and grounded nature. For example, the simplified hull-sketching I use is a-o-kay-ish for capital ships and their roughly U-shaped hulls, but less so for destroyers. Then again, in 1:1000 I find the "chonkier" hull to be a bit more "fun" in terms of detail and substance. I've uploaded the work-in-progress BC here (click the image): My free webhosting service probably nuked Adm. Wir's file - I'm not particularly surprised, I've already ran out of the entire, massive 250 Megabytes... not that I have much right to complain about something free.
|
|
|
Post by pastur on Jan 14, 2021 0:01:42 GMT -6
I check this thread at least once a week to see if you've had the chance to update, you bring so much color into the game! Here's hoping you find the time to go on!
|
|
|
Post by thefleetofoceans on Jan 14, 2021 3:28:00 GMT -6
Oh yes, it's all coming back together..
|
|
|
Post by akosjaccik on Jan 31, 2021 17:38:07 GMT -6
As it's getting late in GMT+1 land, gentlemen, without further ado!
April, 1908
As the influx of money revitalized the Evidenzbureau, their monthly reports are getting more and more helpful - and also require more and more paperwork. If their informations are to be believed, Germany is still in the process of the implementation of central firing (the armored cruiser Freya is currently undergoing a refit related to it), and Sapalyov's Engineering Committe in Russia is hard at work with the calculations and modeling of the effects of three concentrated volumes of mass placed alongside the ship's centerline, including just about everything from the issues of dynamic structural loads to the issues of magazine temperatures. This will likely result in the deep familiarity of a vast array of various configurations of three centerline turrets. We, on the other hand, will need to take that particular issue one step further. The exact means of that is, however, highly confidential as of yet. Not so much the Witkowitz Mines and Iron Works' improved annealing method, which is as of now out on the market for anyone who is willing to pay for a more reliable method for getting rid of residual stress in the material.
May, 1908
Relicts of a bygone era. The old ironclads are now serving as barracks- and repair ships in Pola. (Historical photograph: Pola, ~1900)
June, 1908
The summer happened to introduce itself accompanied by an economic downturn. No wonder that the Ganz-Danubius shipyard lobbied for more orders, however the suppliers are already struggling to keep up with the demand, which results in delays in the constructions as is - besides, we expect the number of the planned destroyers to be satisfactory. Germany, as many others, was also affected by the economic situation, forcing them to halt their battlecruiser-construction. Despite this, the french have increased their naval budget, and commissioned their armored cruiser Latouche-Tréville. Speaking of armored cruisers, Russia commissioned Rurik, and the USA finished rebuilding Pittsburgh. ...probably not something the crews of the Donau and Sankt Georg were eager to hear.
July, 1908
MN destroyers Bélier and Escopette hounding the venerable 'Saint George' not far off of Tramariglio. Cordial relations on paper notwithstanding, the french government is, much like a jealous lover, quick to make it's "rightful claim" on Sardinia clear and visible.
Moreover, the italians are reportedly started manufacturing steam turbines domestically, although with any luck, the Littorio - whose keel just got laid down - perhaps does not utilize turbine propulsion just yet. We are lagging more and more behind with the "cruiser-hunter" capital ship concept, yes, but we are trying to avoid the italian issue of jumping the gun with vital pieces of technologies still missing. One of such was the documentation detailing the layout of superimposed turrets, which we managed to buy from the United States, capitalizing on our good business relations tracing back to as far as 1901:
As far as we are aware of it, the idea still only exists on paper, and as such, there is a fair amount of criticism directed at it which are mostly aimed at questions of stability, weight and redundancy. And yet, combined with our triple turrets, we could implement unparalelled forward-facing firepower into our next capital ship design, should we choose to risk it - and as the world is sinking deeper and deeper into the "dreadnought"-craze, perhaps it's less of a matter of choice that it might seem at first glance.
August, 1908
Parsons' High-Pressure Ahead Marine Turbine. The manufacturing technology of for example turbine blades proves to be an entirely new kind of challenge.
The Škoda Works are however, with some exaggeration, delivering more results than we have the means to utilize. Looking at the raw data concerning Krupp's 28cm/40 MRK rifles - and taking into account that at the time those were our best naval ordnance - it's borderline a miracle that we've managed to achieve anything at all back in the war with gunfire, really. Škoda now updated the caliber with it's own Model 1908, which is hopeful news even if there are currently no plans to equip or refit any ships with the new guns.
September, 1908
It seems that the invisible hand of the economy finally straightens things out. Not that it seems to be fixing the delays plagueing the destroyer program, but still. Rather three months of delays than a boiler blowing up at sea.
October, 1908
Lord knows why, but the end of the year always feels to be the busy season. The first cadets of the Gunnery-, and the Torpedo Schools graduated, earning their badges with hard work, all the while there is still an ongoing debate in the background about wether this is the optimal way to spend these funds. Regardless, they are wise to keep their expertise up-to-date, as the combat environment seems to change faster than ever, with the kind of hunters nevers seen before prowling the seas. For example this one, which we know about thanks to our agents:
The question is - how do we respond now that we are finally capable of domestic turbine manufacturing, meaning that we've managed to overcome most of the major obstacles by now? The answer, although once again heavily debated over, was in the works for a while by now.
Based on the experiences gained in the war, the emerging "cruiser-hunter" concept began to slowly crystalize itself in a 30.000-ton plan once the first semi-reliable news started to come in about the foreign battlecruiser constructions. There was a rarely-seen agreement about the intended main armament of the "Schlachtkreuzer 30kt" plan: our best, largest rifles, and no less than 9 of those. The newest, improved 30,5cm Škoda L/45 guns should suffice for the role in the sense that they can be actually expected to reliably defeat the enemy armor plates located over vital areas (a feat that was arguably beyond our reach well until the commission of the Kaiser-class battleships), and going for anything smaller or (given the triple turrets) less would be a massive sacrifice that would not be beneficial enough in other areas. In short: the main guns' arrangement is set in stone, moreover it is the most confidential point of the drafts.
Just about everything else is, however, hotly debated, starting with the armor. For now it seems very likely that the 'SK 30kt' will inherit the Kaiser-class' (yet untested) layout, with an all-around waterline protection of roughly 20 centimeters of face hardened Krupp-plates. This is a notable step backwards from even the Kaisers, but the italian war showed that even if the machinery space remains intact, the waterline hits piercing the fore/aft sections alone can slow down the vessel potentially mortally, as it almost happened right in the first major engagement of 1905. Thus, although of course we can't reasonably expect the new class to just "not encounter" enemy battleships, we are pushing to give the design pretty much an all-around immunity against every cruiser-grade ordnance. The ship could be either a battleship OR a battlecruiser, but according to the calculations, absolutely not both. We do have battleships. Not modern ones and arguably only two of those on top of that, but battlehsips. The 30.000-ton project, a dedicated Schlachtkreuzer, is aimed to give the fleet a capability that it completely lacks as of currently: bringing the best available firepower on a high-speed platform. ...or just having access to a high-speed platform of any sorts, really.
The currently available data may not be entirely correct. The battlecruiser plan is taken into account with 27kts.
The issue with the engines is simple: speed is expensive in terms of weight, even with our new turbines, and especially now that the Archduke's proposal of last year - now commonly referred to as the "Open Gates Doctrine" despite the unofficial nature on paper - gained a significant foothold, so small range is out of the question. With two sets of direct-drive turbines and forty-two Yarrow boilers (utilizing similar oil spraying mechanism to increase burn rate as it was first introduced on the new destroyers currently under construction), an estimated ~90.000 horsepower could in theory propel the ship forward at ~28 knots of speed. This is in fact so fast that a well-founded argument can be made that the necessary machinery weight is too excessive, and if not the armament, the armor at least could be improved perhaps instead of putting every eggs in the basket of speed. Now, although as always, the armor could indeed be improved, it may not be the case to an extent where it would make a difference against a capital ship - besides, looking at the international trends, the speed requirement may be more reasonable than it seems at first glance. Still, although the design process has already begun, this is still not a rigid decision. The projected expenses of just the design and testing phase in the initial 4-6 months will be around 6,5 million Crowns. The first area in which the new ship type will be on a new level is clearly the financial one.
November, 1908
Barely did we finish equipping the Kaisers with the ASW-nets, Škoda made it sure to force us back to the drawing board as quickly as the engineering bureau will be open for the next stage of inputs:
The very first estimations seem to imply that it would be possible to trade a knot of speed for the new 32cm L/45 rifles. This would effectively mean at least one extra inch of defeatable armor at any range, a projectile with almost 40% more weight and marginally worse rate of fire than what we could expect from the improved 30,5cm L/45. To put it this way, this could pay dividence in the unfortunate case of stumbling into an enemy battleship - the armour would not be adequate of course, but the offensive power could potentially be on par with-, or even overshadow a fair number of dreadnought-type battleships currently in construction.
Armor piercing capabilities of the 30,5cm and 32cm L/45 guns as of 1908
|
|
|
Post by akosjaccik on Jan 31, 2021 17:40:12 GMT -6
For a bit more clarity and fun, as an addendum, allow me to briefly explain the process behind the new capital ship. The first step is rather simple: play the game, design a ship when I feel the need and find the opportunity, and do not look up anything. I find this important so as to retain the designs and - in broader terms - the campaign as genuinely my own. Once I'm done with the ship in-game, in this case I tried to find a close real-life contemporary example which is similar in dimensions and capability to some extent. In this case I've subjectively found that we could perhaps say that - should the ship(s) actually be built in the game - the A-H battlecruiser plan roughly resembles the Lion-class. Lastly, I tried to "A-H-ize" the design by finding the most proper material I can regarding the battlecruisers, and finally comb these data and vague ideas together.
The K.u.K. Kriegsmarine at first did not care about battlecruisers, Montecuccoli stated in 1911 that they are only valuable for navies which "control vast oceans". Then, however, the war happened with all it's lessons about the tactical opportunities for a fast squadron, and from late 1915 the MTK started to deliver design studies of battlecruisers first derived from the Ersats Monarch-class battleships (utilizing the same 35cm/45 K14 guns), then post-Jutland the emphasis was put on speed and more and more on caliber. These were, however, planned more for a post-war Empire; the 1918-20 budget draft very optimistically asked for 4 battleships (32000t/28kts) and 4 battlecruisers (35000t/35kts), "armed with the heaviest armament possible", on some drafts going as far as calculating with 42cm main armament. In a way, my "design requisites" in the AAR were unconsciously though, yet eerily similar to how the Austro-Hungarian Navy thought in its last breathing moments ("1.) grab biggest gun, 2.) make it go fast, 3.) with the remaining tonnage apply a distributed armor scheme, especially all-around on the waterline"). Herr Fisher would be proud.
The issue is that these drafts are still almost from 10 years later than where my game is currently standing. This is why I opted for HMS Lion's perhaps more era-appropriate hull form or this is why for example I did not add an auxiliary rudder onto the 'SK30kt', but otherwise "dressed up" my Rule the Waves file with the austro-hungarian battlecruiser drafts so to speak in terms of general idea and small nuances. For now, I'll close this with some completely random uuh... wallpapers, yes! These are wallpapers. Not at all just pointless renders!
|
|
spacenerd4
Full Member
Appreciating our feline friends
Posts: 164
|
Post by spacenerd4 on Feb 1, 2021 6:57:00 GMT -6
Those are amazing! What programs do you use?
|
|