Model Development (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Shadow Empire >> Suggestions and Feedback



Message

postfux -> Model Development (7/30/2021 9:29:31 AM)

While the system works well as long as there is a linear model development as with infantry and MGs it becomes a hopeless mess as soon as there are branching possibilities like with aircraft.

I think as soon as there are major changes (like engine upgrades or changes in aircraft roles) it should become a new model with a new design quality. A great interceptor may be a horrible bomber. A heavier engine will most likely make a light tank much less reliable.



Elver -> RE: Model Development (7/30/2021 4:07:55 PM)

TBH, changes in armor thickness should fall into the same category, as well as some changes in weapon systems. That's sorta handled by the whole "weapon/armor/engine design can get better but not worse" system, and it might be best to leave it at that just for clarity reasons even if realism suffers. There's gonna be some abstraction in this game no matter what.



zgrssd -> RE: Model Development (7/30/2021 5:31:17 PM)

The M1 Abrahams had:
- it's gun replaced
- its armor changed (in game terms I would say downgraded from Polymer to Steel Armor)
- they are actively looking to replace the engine

And that is stuff they are doing via upgrades, not scrapping rebuilding from scratch.



postfux -> RE: Model Development (8/2/2021 9:48:29 AM)

Gun and armor upgrades are pretty common for tanks. Also engine upgrades have been done for tanks. But I guess these were exklusively reworks of existing engines (a new roll on a existing size in game terms). I am sure they dont plan to replace the Abrahams gas turbine with a double diesel engine.

As I said the mechanic works well for linear models. It does begin to show its weakness with tanks. While it is possible to increase the size of the engine and still have the same model it is not possible to make a variant using a high velocity gun for AT purposes.

It becomes outright silly with planes. You can design a ground attack aircraft with a propeller barely able to take off. Then you can use your experience in strafing helpless aliens and surrounded rebels with this plane to build a high performence interceptor with jet engines. You cant have a variant of the same model specialized for ground support at the same time so you have to design your ground attack plane from scrap.

Right now the game mechanic doesnt give the feeling of really developing and using different type of models.



zgrssd -> RE: Model Development (8/2/2021 11:15:27 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: postfux
I am sure they dont plan to replace the Abrahams gas turbine with a double diesel engine.


They are planing exactly that.

The Original engine is a "Honeywell AGT1500C multi-fuel turbine engine". Capable of burning Diesel among other things.

A shelved replacement was: "Honeywell was developing another gas turbine engine with General Electric for the XM2001 Crusader program that was to be a replacement for the Abrams's AGT-1500 engine."
Note the lack of Multi-Fuel in that one. Engine replacement was shelved with teh Crusader programm.

The current plan is: "General Dynamics has been working on a drop-in diesel engine to replace the gas turbine engine. It is smaller than the turbine, 14% cheaper to operate per mile, and has a four-fan cooling system that is to greatly reduce the tank's heat signature.[132] General Dynamics is offering the Tognum America/12V883 diesel engine with new Diehl 570P3 tracks."



postfux -> RE: Model Development (8/2/2021 3:12:48 PM)

quote:



The current plan is: "General Dynamics has been working on a drop-in diesel engine to replace the gas turbine engine. It is smaller than the turbine, 14% cheaper to operate per mile, and has a four-fan cooling system that is to greatly reduce the tank's heat signature.[132] General Dynamics is offering the Tognum America/12V883 diesel engine with new Diehl 570P3 tracks."


Didnt know that (obviously). On the other hand they have the "current" plan for a while now and I guess they are not only happy with the gas turbine decision and changing to another engine does pose some serious challenges. I wonder whether the reference to new "tracks" in connection with a new engine points at a greater rework than just putting in a new engine.

You are right of course, that engine changes for tanks can be done (and have been done). It is not very common to my knowledge.

In game terms I am unhappy with what constitutes a new model.

While you can fit a much bigger engine in an existing model within some months of development you might decide to continue a proven set of components in a "new model" just because the development cost of the existing model is high after several reworks.

There is no connection in the game between design decisions and the fact you are getting a new model.



zgrssd -> RE: Model Development (8/4/2021 8:50:54 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: postfux

quote:



The current plan is: "General Dynamics has been working on a drop-in diesel engine to replace the gas turbine engine. It is smaller than the turbine, 14% cheaper to operate per mile, and has a four-fan cooling system that is to greatly reduce the tank's heat signature.[132] General Dynamics is offering the Tognum America/12V883 diesel engine with new Diehl 570P3 tracks."


Didnt know that (obviously). On the other hand they have the "current" plan for a while now and I guess they are not only happy with the gas turbine decision and changing to another engine does pose some serious challenges. I wonder whether the reference to new "tracks" in connection with a new engine points at a greater rework than just putting in a new engine.


The idea of a multi-fuel engine made a lot of sense back in the start of the cold war. A unit might be deployed with allied forces that used different fuel, far away from any american supply line. Especially if you consider the difficulty of getting fuel transported across a literal ocean and how much infrastructure exists in Europe.

But in 2020 they focus on one fuel for all land vehicles, one fuel for ships, one fuel for aircraft. Where the tanks a sent, nearly no secure fuel infrastruture exists. So needing less of a common fuel makes more sense.


quote:

ORIGINAL: postfux

While you can fit a much bigger engine in an existing model within some months of development you might decide to continue a proven set of components in a "new model" just because the development cost of the existing model is high after several reworks.

There is no connection in the game between design decisions and the fact you are getting a new model.

I am 90% sure that design passes do not increase the design cost.
Only adding totally new model line of a type causes a increased price - and only for new models.

So one of us has a faulty asumption, and there is only a low chance of it being me.



Soar_Slitherine -> RE: Model Development (8/5/2021 11:54:48 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: zgrssd
I am 90% sure that design passes do not increase the design cost.
Only adding totally new model line of a type causes a increased price - and only for new models.

The cost of developing new models in the same line does increase the more iterations there are.



postfux -> RE: Model Development (8/5/2021 2:03:58 PM)

Also when the Abrams was designed diesel engines were not where they are now and heat sensors were much less common on the battlefield. With unmanned turrets looming on the horizon and the M1 beeing around for quite some time I doubt they will do structural changes like fitting a new engine. But that is just an uneducated guess.

The game at the moment does not encourage to have two different models at the same time. Therefore it is more like developing a certain class. Designing a new model does not have a real meaning. While it works well for infantry and is ok for tanks it is very unsatisfying with planes and artillery, because it does not meaningfull allow branching.

Perhaps just changing the pricing of upgrades/ new models could make the system more flexible (inviting to build different models).

I also think there should be some restrictions within a model. At least for plane roles, airframes (wing size) and arty tube size, but also for engines.

The solution I would find most satisfying is a modular system where certain components are put together in a model and then you gain experience on the components as well as the model. The components as well as the model can be upgraded using the experience gained.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.7189941