FEATURE REQ: Ship class naming

[jalapen0]

All,

I'd like to be able to create new ship clases, if only for organization and proper upgrading. Here's what I thought could be done.

1. This is a human only feature. The AI doesn't need to know how to use it.
2. Put an interface, either in empire policies, or the ship design screen.
3. Have a dropdown list of player controllable ships (no civilian ships), a text field for naming a ship class. An apply and cancel button.
-The reason civilian ships should not be included is that the AI would have to be taught how to use them. If this is easy to do, then I'd say include them.

The way this works is simple. Lets say I want to create a heavy destroyer class. I click the dropdown and select destroyer. Then in the text field, I type Heavy Destroyer. Then I click apply. The game will then create a new heavy destroyer class and copy all properties of the destroyer class into heavy destroyer class. It's purely cosmetic mostly to allow the player to organize better. However, when I tell a Heavy destroyer to upgrade, it will upgrade to the latest heavy destroyer.

Another example. I want to create 2 new classes. A light carrier to support system defense and a heavy carrier to support attacks. First, I will go to this screen, click the dropdown and select destroyer. Type into the text field "Light Carrier", then click apply. Light Carrier created. I then type into the text field "Heavy Carrier" and click apply. Heavy Carrier created. Then I got to the ship creation screen. Create a new ship, Light Carrier. I select the new class from the dropdown. Pick my various components, etc. It might only have a size of 250. I then create create a second new ship. Heavy Carrier is in the list, so I select it as my class. Size 450, select my components, etc. I can now go to the build screen and build my light carrier and my heavy carrier.

The possibilities are endless and the AI doesn't need to be "taught" to use it, so it should be easer to implement (imo)
Quick Examples:
Light missile boat
Corvette
Super Battleship
Juggernaut
Dreadnaut
Battle Cruiser
Long range explorer
Short range explorer

Trekies (copied and pasted from a site, I know nothing of these actually):
Hermes Class
Intrepid Class
Independence Class
Oberth Class
Olympic Class
Prometheus Class
Bird of Prey
D-7 Cruiser
K'tinga
Negh'Var
Vor'cha

Star Wars (also copied from a site):
Death Star
Star Battlecruiser
Star Cruiser
Star Defender
Star Destroyer
Star Dreadnought
Star frigate
Escort Carrier


There also needs to be a way to delete them, when you are done. Personally, I think this idea sounds kick ass and shouldn't be too terrible to implement. Might take some DB magic. But it would make things alot easier, fun, and increase believeablity.

[Data]

sounds juicy, +1

[Shark7]

I wouldn't even mind if I had a few hard coded extras to choose from, even it it were simply:

Carrier
Battleship
Battlecruiser
Heavy Cruiser
Light Cruiser
Destroyer
Frigate
Corvette
Sloop

etc

As it is, I usually have 3 or 4 designs to each class:

A heavily shielded gun only design
A moderately shielded gun/missile design
A lightly shielded torpedo/gun design
A slower but well shielded carrier design

Being able to define these and have them upgrade to their own class, instead of the 'latest' design would be welcome.

[gmot]

An excellent suggestion. For example, I always have a carrier vs. a fighter design for the larger ship sizes. Having them both as "cruisers" seems vague as they do entirely separate tasks.

[jalapen0]

Glad to see there is some positive response to this. I hope Matrix is watching.

[Data]

watching is not the problem, they do that (and even better, Elliot is doing it also)..the problem is the loooong list of pending improvments [:)]

[jalapen0]

I'm hoping this one is easy enough to add that they move it up the priority list.

I've seen them do that too.

[J HG T]

Mighty good idea. Would definetly help when having several different ships of the same class, like several different heavy cruisers for example (especially now that ship-design is even deeper in the expansion).

[Data]

more so now when we have techs that affect the entire fleet so you only need them on one ship....multiple designs for the same class of ships become almost mandatory now

[jalapen0]

Yea, you'd almost want a Command Ship for that.

[Lord_Astraios]

Here is a list I use as custom ship in the designation i put in the names of ships i make,   but also like it in the Hard-coded ship class.   But just adding names i think the devs. have to tweek the game to let it know how to build them.

Anyways i use this.

Carrier
Scout
Escort
Frigate
Destroyer
Cruiser
Battle Cruiser
Heavy Cruiser
Light Cruiser
Corvette
Battleship
Dreadnought
Juggernaut
Base ship

[Shark7]

Currently I use the USN designation system for mine...not that it makes any difference in game, but at least I can tell at a glance how the ship is armed.

Examples:

AGI - explorer
FFL- Corvette - gun only escort
FF - Torpedo or gun only frigate
FFG - Missile armed frigate
CVE - fighter carrying frigate or destroyer

etc

[Pipewrench]

ORIGINAL: jalapen0


The possibilities are endless and the AI doesn't need to be "taught" to use it, so it should be easier to implement

I like your idea but how would the AI compete against many specialized units each directed to a specific task when its limited fleet cannot have a chance to adapt,

I know we can ,as it stands, create different versions of active ships now. Unfortunately the AI is sort of trapped in a vice with a limited pool of ships to draw on unless of course it finds a ship.

if we were playing human vs human then for me that would be a fantastic idea.

not trying to trash your idea, just curious on your AI reaction.

[Data]

maybe we can create new military policy features for this to aid the AI in making the correct choices

[jalapen0]

Hey Pipewrench, you are right of course. But as you said, it can be done now. My proposal only makes it easier and adds some flavor to the game.

I suppose one solution would be to increase the pool size the AI has to pick from. Or actually be able to dynamically design ships based on the situation although that might be asking for too much.

Either way, if allowing the human player to use this feature ultimately makes the developers rethink and improve the AI, then everyone wins. If others have ideas, please post. I'm not an expert on this game nor development. In fact, I hardly get to play much. An hour here and there. So I cannot comment how this might effect late game. I've only gotten to midgame once. But I don't think that should discount my idea. When I do play, I imagine having this feature and I really wish it was in there now. It would make things so much easier and just be cool in general.

[Rebel Yell]

ORIGINAL: Shark7

I wouldn't even mind if I had a few hard coded extras to choose from, even it it were simply:

Carrier
Battleship
Battlecruiser
Heavy Cruiser
Light Cruiser
Destroyer
Frigate
Corvette
Sloop

This is exactly what I have always wanted.

[Igard]

I think it's a great idea, jalapen. I'd like to see something like this get implemented.

I don't think anyone can really know what effect it will have on balance. It will need to be tested. I know that in the games I play, when I design multiple ships and use them to good effect, the AI is really compromised. So I think it's essential that some sort of AI ship design improvement be implemented as well. I think this is probably the easy part.

The AI must then know how to use it's new ships to good effect.

For example, the AI must know that if it designs a powerful short range, close combat Destroyer, then it should set its behaviour accordingly. It should attack weaker opponents at point blank, and in some cases, never flee from battle.

The attack overmatch ratio could be used to determine how the ship reacts in small, less than 5 ship battles, medium 5-10 ship battles, and large 15+ battles.

Here's an explanation of how the AI could determine the behaviour in each battle scenario. This is just for the short range, weapon heavy, moderately shielded, light on everything else, no troops Destroyer.

If our tough, short range destroyer is engaged in a small battle then it'll engage stronger opponents at stand-off, weaker opponents at point blank and it'll flee when it's shields reach 20%.

In a medium size battle, our ships captain will take more pot-shots at stronger opponents, because other ships are their in support. Again, it's probably best to flee from battle when the shields are 20%.

In a large battle, the stakes are higher, so the ship will engage all opponents with all weapons. The captain will not flee from this battle because his/her ship is there to provide the firepower and the risk is acceptable. Perhaps it should depend on racial aggression, but I'd like to see a captain with some guts for a change in these large fleet battles. They're too important to run away from.

Ok,I don't know. I just about deleted this whole thing just now. I'm not actually sure if this is right. Any thoughts?

I'm sure we can all agree that the AI needs to know how to use it's new ships. But what jalapen has suggested for human ship classes is a step in the right direction, but eventually, the AI needs to get some extra help too.

[Lord_Astraios]

In the trek names ,  i dont know the accuracy in the star trek universe but to my knowledge,  They use the Destroyer,  Cruisers,  Frigates,  ecorts system but not in the names directly,  they use the name and class,  plus the NCC-######,  for example,  Akira Class and Ambassador Class both are Heavy Cruisers,  same as the Excelsior.  The Galaxy Class is a Explorer Class,  etc etc...  But those sub classes are obscured. 

[EisenHammer]

I would like to tell the AI to design a missile destroyer, and then it goes and makes a destroyer size ship with only missile on it. That would be so F…ing cool.