Battleships should be considered as mega building

User avatar
DreJaDe
Posts: 2382
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 10:19 pm

Battleships should be considered as mega building

Post by DreJaDe »

Size
If Maunsell forts are considered a mega building even with 1x1 dimensions.
Aircraft carriers (AC) also have 1x1 dimensions.

Strength
They are basically moving forts.

Not a factory
Maginot line is not a factory, maunsell forts are not a factory too.i don't think there's a problem in that regards.

Reasons
-They are way too powerful and can kill so much ships at a super fast rate.
-There are always more battleships than other type of ships unlike IRL.
-AC became too limited even though they still are weaker than BS even before AC became a mega building. (Instead, I think AC should be considered as normal factory)

Pros
-if this is done, ships like cruiser can be more available
-Destroyer can now do their jobs more easily.
-Players will have to contemplate in making either BS or AC.
-There can now be a proper representation of the population of ships cause currently, there are always more Battleships than all other type of ships besides Subs.

Repercussion
-Yamato would definitely dominate more as there can only be an equal amount of Battleships in this game. We now can't make more BS that can overwhelm Yamato.
-Players will have to contemplate in making either BS or AC.
Stratego (dev)
Site Admin
Posts: 15734
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2014 9:28 pm

Re: Battleships should be considered as mega building

Post by Stratego (dev) »

imho this is better handled with cost as you say it is spammed as they are the best - som maybe they are too cheap?
Jasondunkel
Posts: 553
Joined: Wed Oct 16, 2019 2:52 pm

Re: Battleships should be considered as mega building

Post by Jasondunkel »

Stratego (dev) wrote: Tue May 31, 2022 4:57 am imho this is better handled with cost as you say it is spammed as they are the best - som maybe they are too cheap?
I would welcome a limitation of battleships.

that this works in connection with the megabuldings, it seems to be the only way.

the costs of the battleships are quite high if we increase them even further, they might not be used at all.
or battleships that would actually already be available at the beginning of the war may only be available in industry level III if we make them more expensive.

as drejade beautifully worked out, the strategic element would improve. the user has to think more about building a mega building, an aircraft carrier or a battleship
Dahdee
Posts: 185
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2021 12:49 pm

Re: Battleships should be considered as mega building

Post by Dahdee »

Jasondunkel wrote: Tue May 31, 2022 7:46 am
Stratego (dev) wrote: Tue May 31, 2022 4:57 am imho this is better handled with cost as you say it is spammed as they are the best - som maybe they are too cheap?
as drejade beautifully worked out, the strategic element would improve. the user has to think more about building a mega building, an aircraft carrier or a battleship
I completely agree with this as well.
TntAttack
Posts: 335
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 5:49 am

Re: Battleships should be considered as mega building

Post by TntAttack »

As someone who has gone through a revolution of strategic naval development against Freddy involving battleships and carriers....

Your points are valid, but I am not entirely convinced. What about first gen battleships? Are those capped too? Perhaps the best compromise is second gen battleships are restricted and first gen battleships aren't.

I guess my view is that there so much player agency (freedom) of choice that is what makes this game special and restricting battleships as a mega unit although is fair, I am sure there are other ways of balancing battleships without restricting the number of mega buildings/carriers.

It makes sense that mega buildings and carriers are restricted because they generate value (units) but battleships dont.
Restricting battleships would take away from of the fun, and freedom of the player. (Big power unit goes pew pew)
Stratego (dev)
Site Admin
Posts: 15734
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2014 9:28 pm

Re: Battleships should be considered as mega building

Post by Stratego (dev) »

mega buildings and carriers are restricted because they generate value
i think i agree with TNT.
i an also say if we already have any other unit restricted this way (eg. "maunsel fort?" we could rethink that too, eg. that is like a concrete tower with some other naming, we could do similat trhings like we did on concrete artillery - but this is off topic here)
I am sure there are other ways of balancing battleships
sure we have:
- cost
- tweaking its stats
- limiting fatories that can build it (even we can make a new: a new building like big ship dock?)
- hiding behind some tech
- making it more vulnerable to some spcific attacks (that is realistic) eg. air bombings?
and so on.
User avatar
DreJaDe
Posts: 2382
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 10:19 pm

Re: Battleships should be considered as mega building

Post by DreJaDe »

There are things I don't understand with what @TntAttack said though.
Stratego (dev) wrote: Tue May 31, 2022 6:06 pm It makes sense that mega buildings and carriers are restricted because they generate value (units) but battleships dont.
How doesn't battleships generate value? All Battleships even if it's the first gens are literally more powerful than a mounsell fort? Or just any other mega building if. If this logic is sound then I could agree that maunsell fort shouldn't be considered as mega building. That's basically also what is currently the German flak 40 is.

As I also explained earlier, it also generate value by being a mobile mega building. But unlike stationary ones, this thing can move which makes it value from another standpoint an even more useful mega than literal mega building.

All BS are also far more cheap than real mega building which again adds so much value to it. Like what I said in my explanation, it's basically what you will use as a stable ship because it's just way too good.

Then there's like destroyer which are way too precious, like seriously, destroyer being precious doesn't make sense!!!

Unlike carriers also which currently, unless you could find more value, only then you would be able to sacrifice them because of their limitations. Which is actually why I could somewhat agree to what stratego is saying.
TntAttack wrote: Tue May 31, 2022 5:13 pm Perhaps the best compromise is second gen battleships are restricted and first gen battleships aren't.
What exactly do you mean by first gen and second gen? If you're talking about like the Fuso, or the Russian one then I could agree since more modern BS can make them look like paper.
TntAttack
Posts: 335
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 5:49 am

Re: Battleships should be considered as mega building

Post by TntAttack »

DreJaDe wrote: Tue May 31, 2022 7:39 pm There are things I don't understand with what @TntAttack said though.
Stratego (dev) wrote: Tue May 31, 2022 6:06 pm It makes sense that mega buildings and carriers are restricted because they generate value (units) but battleships dont.
How doesn't battleships generate value? All Battleships even if it's the first gens are literally more powerful than a mounsell fort? Or just any other mega building if. If this logic is sound then I could agree that maunsell fort shouldn't be considered as mega building. That's basically also what is currently the German flak 40 is.
First of all. Battleships are powerful, superior over all land units. It isn't almighty tho, it is vulnerable to enemy subs and naval bombers.

Besides, all fractions have battleships, (first gen, industry 1) whilst some like the Russians have their second gen at industry 1 as well which is unbalanced.

The mounsell fort is cheap all around megabuilding, however it's abilities fall short off other mega buildings. Perhaps a readjustment for this fort is required.

What I mean as value, is strictly speaking turns. Production of units. Unless you can prove that your mobile battleship produces more value (via elimination) consistently comparable with AC or Mega buildings, then your point is valid.

But I find that battleships of the same gen cancels each other out, with subs, carriers and cruisers tipping the balance. This currently quite fine with me. Do you have a type of gameplay dynamic in mind?
DreJaDe wrote: Tue May 31, 2022 7:39 pm
TntAttack wrote: Tue May 31, 2022 5:13 pm Perhaps the best compromise is second gen battleships are restricted and first gen battleships aren't.
What exactly do you mean by first gen and second gen? If you're talking about like the Fuso, or the Russian one then I could agree since more modern BS can make them look like paper.
Nah, I am not familar with battleship classes and don't always remember the names. Just calling double turret battleships (sprite image) first gen and triple turret battleships second gen because the game only has two real battleship variants.


I quite liked stragetos idea of large harbour.
User avatar
DreJaDe
Posts: 2382
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 10:19 pm

Re: Battleships should be considered as mega building

Post by DreJaDe »

TntAttack wrote: Tue May 31, 2022 11:54 pm First of all. Battleships are powerful, superior over all land units. It isn't almighty tho, it is vulnerable to enemy subs and naval bombers.
Basically same as Mega, except that it can move fast. )Vulnerable from flamethrower and artillery with no real counter except other units.)
TntAttack wrote: Tue May 31, 2022 11:54 pm Nah, I am not familar with battleship classes and don't always remember the names. Just calling double turret battleships (sprite image) first gen and triple turret battleships second gen because the game only has two real battleship variants.
This is quite a problem then, since like the German one have opposite role where the 2nd gen have weaker
stats.
TntAttack wrote: Tue May 31, 2022 11:54 pm The mounsell fort is cheap all around megabuilding, however it's abilities fall short off other mega buildings. Perhaps a readjustment for this fort is required.
This is basically what I used as reasoning though im welcome with possible changes to this thing.
TntAttack wrote: Tue May 31, 2022 11:54 pm What I mean as value, is strictly speaking turns. Production of units. Unless you can prove that your mobile battleship produces more value (via elimination) consistently comparable with AC or Mega buildings, then your point is valid.

But I find that battleships of the same gen cancels each other out, with subs, carriers and cruisers tipping the balance. This currently quite fine with me. Do you have a type of gameplay dynamic in mind?
Currently, we are using battleships like they are rifleman or MG while we use Cruiser and destroyer like vehicles and tanks. Basically, if you look at it, that doesn't make sense and should be the opposite.

The staple units should be the destroyers and cruiser and not the battleships. BS should be key units and not staple units.

With how fragile the destroyer and cruiser are, they became the key units that can be used in special situations. While BS is the one who take the frontlines. With this suggestion, I imagined that battleships will not be used more as a key units while we have cruisers and destroyers being the ones who will now take the role of staples.

That's what I imagined with this suggestion.
TntAttack wrote: Tue May 31, 2022 11:54 pm I quite liked stragetos idea of large harbour.
This is just complicating things. Though in my opinion, I do want a harbor or a building that can hold many ships specifically for repairs THOUGH not as factory.
Stratego (dev)
Site Admin
Posts: 15734
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2014 9:28 pm

Re: Battleships should be considered as mega building

Post by Stratego (dev) »

the "mega" setting was designed to limit "FACTORY" buildings, so every new "mega" that is not factory is out of its basic role.

so battleship being mega should not be set by definition,
instead something else to make it balanced
-> IF we say it is not balanced !
-> but personally i dont think they are op, as they are way more costy than other ships, but naturally i can be wrong.

everyone: please turn back to the basic question: are battleships op?
Jasondunkel
Posts: 553
Joined: Wed Oct 16, 2019 2:52 pm

Re: Battleships should be considered as mega building

Post by Jasondunkel »

Stratego (dev) wrote: Wed Jun 01, 2022 5:02 am the "mega" setting was designed to limit "FACTORY" buildings, so every new "mega" that is not factory is out of its basic role.

so battleship being mega should not be set by definition,
instead something else to make it balanced
-> IF we say it is not balanced !
-> but personally i dont think they are op, as they are way more costy than other ships, but naturally i can be wrong.

everyone: please turn back to the basic question: are battleships op?
I would disagree with you here. It's not a question of battleships being OP, but the frequency of production in the game.
in relation to the war, for example, the us navy was something between 1:30-50
for us it's more the case that we have a ratio of battleships to other ships of 20:1 or higher in the course of the game
hence the call for limitations
User avatar
DreJaDe
Posts: 2382
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 10:19 pm

Re: Battleships should be considered as mega building

Post by DreJaDe »

Jasondunkel wrote: Wed Jun 01, 2022 9:05 am but personally i dont think they are op, as they are way more costy than other ships, but naturally i can be wrong
They are more costly but they are hardly "way more costly.

to make put some realistic input in this, lets try to compare prices.
Fletcher costs: $6mil
Lexington costs: $45mil
Iowa costs: $100mil

Costs in game
Fletcher Costs 5 turn
Lexington costs 12 turn
Iowa Costs 15 turn
Jasondunkel wrote: Wed Jun 01, 2022 9:05 am please turn back to the basic question: are battleships op?
This is a really hard question to answer. BS really stick to my mind since the start of the game. I'm so used to them that I think I am too biased in this more than others.

But to try to answer objectively, yes they are. My reasoning above already explain such.
Stratego (dev) wrote: Wed Jun 01, 2022 5:02 am the "mega" setting was designed to limit "FACTORY" buildings, so every new "mega" that is not factory is out of its basic role
TBH, I thought this would have been an easy suggestion cause there are already examples which I think you have agreed to be considered as "Mega". Eg. The French Mega and the British Maunsell Fort.

Maybe the next answer would be the cost? Though I'm also really afraid of increasing their cost.

The biggest question being "How much cost should they be increased?". TBH though, this is also a realistic solution (just look at the cost comparison above)
Stratego (dev)
Site Admin
Posts: 15734
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2014 9:28 pm

Re: Battleships should be considered as mega building

Post by Stratego (dev) »

if the ONLY problem is ingame amounts vs reality than i have 2 opinions about it
option 1: not really a big problem, this game should not model "everything", so no problem having more balttleships in game than in life
option 2: we can still tune cost - as IRL it would be more produced if that were cheaper but as you wrote cost was 15x bigger than a fletcher - so we can make bigger difference in in game cost to "model this" and this is the proper way to model not an "imaginary" (mega counter) limit that is only in game -> so we could increase battleship cost to even 20-25 turns so maybe less amount of battleships will be built by players, but this case maybe some buff needed to be in same "balance" (?)

also "French Mega" is not training anything? that is a bug than.
maunsel fort case we were forced to make them be mega as were spammed too much - but as we did on concrete artilleries we could have figured out some better way. maybe we should - so we can remove the "mega" restriction.
TntAttack
Posts: 335
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 5:49 am

Re: Battleships should be considered as mega building

Post by TntAttack »

I vote option 1 because I don't like the idea of having to spent 20-25 turns to build a battleship. And I don't agree with limiting player freedom to spam battleships.

Unless Drejade you have a better idea. Honestly we could probably dump torpedos on destroyers making them a threat to battleships but that would mess up a lot more stuff.
User avatar
DreJaDe
Posts: 2382
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 10:19 pm

Re: Battleships should be considered as mega building

Post by DreJaDe »

Maybe ill think of a new idea...

I honestly like the current one but for other ships?

I have thought of changing some things for Destroyers and Cruiser which is what's current now because I thought they were the one that is the problem but it honestly doesn't feel that they were the problem...

All really leads to the BS.

But I will agree on either increasing its cost or making it a mega (which seems out for now)
Laxus
Posts: 26
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2022 3:20 am

Re: Battleships should be considered as mega building

Post by Laxus »

I agree that currently naval battles are dominated by BS and that a way to decrease the number of BS is required. How about following the big shipyard suggestion and making the big shipyard into a mega? A player will be able to build only a small amount of big docks as AC are megas too so the number of BS will go down drastically.
User avatar
DreJaDe
Posts: 2382
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 10:19 pm

Re: Battleships should be considered as mega building

Post by DreJaDe »

Laxus wrote: Tue Jun 14, 2022 4:05 pm I agree that currently naval battles are dominated by BS and that a way to decrease the number of BS is required. How about following the big shipyard suggestion and making the big shipyard into a mega? A player will be able to build only a small amount of big docks as AC are megas too so the number of BS will go down drastically.
I can agree with this but I don't know about @Stratego (dev) unless big the big shipyard would be bigger than 1x1.
Stratego (dev)
Site Admin
Posts: 15734
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2014 9:28 pm

Re: Battleships should be considered as mega building

Post by Stratego (dev) »

maybe.

however my earlier suggestions i still like.
Laxus
Posts: 26
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2022 3:20 am

Re: Battleships should be considered as mega building

Post by Laxus »

I don't think that locking behind tech will work. After the tech is completed, it will become the same situation as right now. If the big dock doesn't count as mega, it will just result players in replacing their normal docks with this one after mid game. Increasing the cost can work but if BS require 20-25 turns to complete, that along with industry requirements for tier 2 BS will make it so that until the later part of mid game, no player will have a BS
TntAttack
Posts: 335
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 5:49 am

Re: Battleships should be considered as mega building

Post by TntAttack »

Laxus wrote: Wed Jun 15, 2022 8:38 am I don't think that locking behind tech will work. After the tech is completed, it will become the same situation as right now. If the big dock doesn't count as mega, it will just result players in replacing their normal docks with this one after mid game. Increasing the cost can work but if BS require 20-25 turns to complete, that along with industry requirements for tier 2 BS will make it so that until the later part of mid game, no player will have a BS
Well said. I'll wouldn't mind adding new docks but it's really a new logistical hoop we players have to bypass. Is it appropriate time now to consider adding a new currency to balance the game once and for all? (E.g. Cash)
User avatar
DreJaDe
Posts: 2382
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 10:19 pm

Re: Battleships should be considered as mega building

Post by DreJaDe »

Laxus wrote: Wed Jun 15, 2022 8:38 am I don't think that locking behind tech will work. After the tech is completed, it will become the same situation as right now. If the big dock doesn't count as mega, it will just result players in replacing their normal docks with this one after mid game. Increasing the cost can work but if BS require 20-25 turns to complete, that along with industry requirements for tier 2 BS will make it so that until the later part of mid game, no player will have a BS
I agree with the general idea.

Tech won't do anything but delay the inevitable

This can then make people prioritize other ships for normal factory limits.

One general problem is that most mega factory limit will now be focused on making them.
Another is to draw the actual factory needed for all faction and the size.

Making them costly
The problem does exist but I think we could easily balance this by making it so that ships are now available at the time they are started being constructed not after they are completed IRL. Makes much more sense actually.

I also like this idea...

Another idea is to combine this.... Not much preferable idea for now but can be a future update.
User avatar
DreJaDe
Posts: 2382
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 10:19 pm

Re: Battleships should be considered as mega building

Post by DreJaDe »

DreJaDe wrote: Wed Jun 15, 2022 9:07 am it appropriate time now to consider adding a new currency to balance the game once and for all? (E.g. Cash)
Everyone wanted a new form of currency but on all years I've been on this forum... That seems too unlikely.

I think making an oil rig or a gold mine that could produce oil/gold ships/truck are much more viable.
Laxus
Posts: 26
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2022 3:20 am

Re: Battleships should be considered as mega building

Post by Laxus »

DreJaDe wrote: Wed Jun 15, 2022 9:07 am One general problem is that most mega factory limit will now be focused on making them.
Another is to draw the actual factory needed for all faction and the size.
Yes players will have to find a balance between AC and big docks but imo that will add a more strategic component to the game.

The problem with new images required is certainly there.
TntAttack
Posts: 335
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 5:49 am

Re: Battleships should be considered as mega building

Post by TntAttack »

DreJaDe wrote: Wed Jun 15, 2022 9:10 am I think making an oil rig or a gold mine that could produce oil/gold ships/truck are much more viable.
That sounds like an interesting idea. However the dev doesn't want any more micromanagement, so I figured sticking with cash was the easiest and most convenient.
Stratego (dev)
Site Admin
Posts: 15734
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2014 9:28 pm

Re: Battleships should be considered as mega building

Post by Stratego (dev) »

what is this cash idea? sounds intertesting, please tell me an example.
Laxus
Posts: 26
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2022 3:20 am

Re: Battleships should be considered as mega building

Post by Laxus »

Stratego (dev) wrote: Wed Jun 15, 2022 6:20 pm what is this cash idea? sounds intertesting, please tell me an example.
Here is an idea.
All "costly" ships i.e BS and AC will require "cash" to start operating. Where will this cash come from? From an industry that produces oil/gold/cash trucks. Basically after being constructed BS and AC will have a "suspended(x)" status. Where x denotes the cash required. The trucks can reduce the value of x and after it becomes 0, the ship will become operational.

Because an additional factory will be required for BS (and maybe AC), players will now have to choose between more carriers or few BS.

Although the downside of this is that more micro-management will be required and it will take time to activate a ship far from your industry (this is realistic imo)
Stratego (dev)
Site Admin
Posts: 15734
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2014 9:28 pm

Re: Battleships should be considered as mega building

Post by Stratego (dev) »

this is too complicated.
i thought something like a BS cost is 10 turns + 5 money or something.
User avatar
DreJaDe
Posts: 2382
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 10:19 pm

Re: Battleships should be considered as mega building

Post by DreJaDe »

TntAttack wrote: Wed Jun 15, 2022 3:22 pm
DreJaDe wrote: Wed Jun 15, 2022 9:10 am I think making an oil rig or a gold mine that could produce oil/gold ships/truck are much more viable.
That sounds like an interesting idea. However the dev doesn't want any more micromanagement, so I figured sticking with cash was the easiest and most convenient.
All released AO has a version of this I believe.

And if it's in AOWW, it would definitely be much more easier than what most other AO has.
Laxus
Posts: 26
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2022 3:20 am

Re: Battleships should be considered as mega building

Post by Laxus »

Stratego (dev) wrote: Thu Jun 16, 2022 10:42 am this is too complicated.
i thought something like a BS cost is 10 turns + 5 money or something.
Well yes, but as far as I know the game doesn't have any currency besides time right? This is why i suggested the truck system where each truck will reprent 1 unit of money and after x units are consumed the ship will become ready.

If there is an option to include money then all problems are solved and that would be the best option
Stratego (dev)
Site Admin
Posts: 15734
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2014 9:28 pm

Re: Battleships should be considered as mega building

Post by Stratego (dev) »

the "money" and the "resource" is a little different to me.

resource always need to be "collected" farmed - that makes a little more logistical feature.
but he plain "money" can be afixed amount in each game (or eg. paid each turn?) so player dont need to "farm" them.

so the money thing is a little less problematic to make.

but yes currently we dont have any, but i am getting closer to maybe make sometime)
---------------------------------------------------
but thinking the money couriers you simply made it more turns to make, as you need to train the "skeleton" BS and 2-3 extra courier wagons to make it work.

this is almost totally equivalent to simply increasing the BS costs.

or am i missing something?
Post Reply

Return to “Balancing discussions”