Review of Demo and imporvement suggestions |
For starters I liked the demo. The music is nice, the graphical look satisfactory and the gameply is there.
Now on to what to improve:
1. Adding scout ship and miner as auto-assemble ship types.
2. I've noticed that the ships files have limited fire axes. I find this interesting but so far I've seen, all weapon have a full field of fire.
It should be possible to have fixed mounts (can fire only forward but has greater damage and range). I think there should be 3 types:
1. 180° mount - can fire everywhere except rear
2. 360° mount - full field of fire but requires more space
3. Fixed - can fire only forward
Light fighters should have only forward fixed ones.
3. Possibiltiy to use a different model for medium fihgters and bombers.
4. Possibility for a ship to fire on multipe targets?
5. Optimize the engine.
It's really sad that it slows down on my rig (1 carrer, 20 fighters and 10 frigates were dunking it out), and I run Oblivion and Dark Messiah of M&M without ny problems.
And lastly, a purely subjective issue - Battleship as a designation trumps a Dreadnought - both in meaning and historical reference.
And lastly, take a look at Maset of Orion 2 and 3 for some inspiration (I liked the ground battles in MOO3 - very tactical, realistic but simple and not time-consuming)
Multiple Targets
DN's vs BB's.
Yes, the only game I know of that made a DN smaller than a BB was Star Fleet Battles.
The British launched HMS Dreadnought in 1906 as an answer to existing battleships, intended to be the 'last word in battleships', and she definitely was, for that era.
Her "all-big-gun" main battery of ten twelve-inch guns, steam turbine powerplant and 21-knot maximum speed so thoroughly eclipsed earlier types that subsequent battleships were commonly known as "dreadnoughts", and the previous ones disparaged as "pre-dreadnoughts".
So Dreadnought really means 'Super-Battleship', a ship faster and harder hitting than a traditional battleship.
After World War I, people stopped referring to modern battleships as Dreadnoughts, though, since everybody was now building them, and the designation was dropped, although I think a case could be made for the Japanese battleship Yamato class in WW II, which was bigger and more heavily armed than any other battleship class in World War II.
---
All that is done before the naked stars is remembered
battleships
The British launched HMS Dreadnought in 1906 as an answer to existing battleships, intended to be the 'last word in battleships', and she definitely was, for that era.
Her "all-big-gun" main battery of ten twelve-inch guns, steam turbine powerplant and 21-knot maximum speed so thoroughly eclipsed earlier types that subsequent battleships were commonly known as "dreadnoughts", and the previous ones disparaged as "pre-dreadnoughts".
So Dreadnought really means 'Super-Battleship', a ship faster and harder hitting than a traditional battleship.
After World War I, people stopped referring to modern battleships as Dreadnoughts, though, since everybody was now building them, and the designation was dropped, although I think a case could be made for the Japanese battleship Yamato class in WW II, which was bigger and more heavily armed than any other battleship class in World War II.
Yes, the Iowa nad the Yamato outclassed everything in size and power by far. The Bismarck and Prince of Wales are realyl a lot smaller than them. The Iowa is almost as big as an carrier.
Interesting to note that alltough the Yamato has bigger guns and thicker armor on paper, Iowa was a lot better. With 35knts, HUGE number of AAF guns, extreemly accurate fire control and modern shells that rivaled Yamatos guns in range and power..and the armor was of better quality too.
The HMS Dreadnought was in fact also a battleship, only bigegr and better. To me, the term Dreadnought allways invokes a sci-fi warship basicly built around a huge cannon (or mulitple forward fixed weaponry). Something powerfull, but more vulnerable than a BB.
I could be wrong...
I could be wrong but what i got from that was it was specific targets ont he enemy ship, which would be cool if I am right. I'm probably wrong though.
______________________________________________________________
Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum
Sometimes I get this urge to conquer large parts of Europe.
ha ha ha.
Yes, I've often seen that, victors writing the history books, I mean.
I would suggest that the Iowa and Yamato were far more evenly matched than you boast, and that pitted against each other in a one-on-one duel, victory would go to the one with the luckiest hits.
---
All that is done before the naked stars is remembered
I think the Iowa would have
I think the Iowa would have won. If you look at the development of modern military technology since the late 1700s the edge goes to targeting and fire control. Being able to locate the enemy and then hit when you shoot carries the day. the Yamoto and Musashi were not retrofitted with Radar (Type 22) until October of 1943. The Type 22 was not designed for gunnery control and provided only moderate performance. the Iowa's equipment was better and the crews had more training / experience. With her speed the Iowa could have kept the Yamoto at long range and used her superior fire control to great effect. Think Quantum Engines, Solar Sail III and Religeous Talisman. Too bad we'll never know for sure.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dreadnought
Says here that traditional sci-fi usage places dreadnoughts above battleships...
I would like to see mounts affecting field of fire as well...
~~~
Mr. Flibble says...
Game over, boys!