Polygon count doesn't have anything to do with texture stretching. The only things that matter are:

• The texture size.
• The amount of space the ship takes up on the screen.
• The UV unwrapping quality (though unless it's egregiously bad this shouldn't matter that much).
  
  

Again, here some content of what I thought it could look like (Mass Effect 3 Ending Fight Scene Spoilers btw)



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tLlAObjR-gs&feature=related



(You can even see fighters! in the final fight) Oh god, if we could have something at least similar to this. So good. It would be endlessgood.



@Ingcom1 Well, I'm just giving a hint of what it could be like, we could just make the dreadnought more effective / bigger.

I think we need more different size like battleship 15x more big than the small ship like Master of Orion 2 because for now the ship has not a lot of hit point and the damage are for a little weapon tech difference is like 15000 dmg inflict and 5000 dmg received both fleet has been destroyed

Hit points alone wont serve as much of a buffer, you require the use of the defenses, at that point i think you will find ships to be survivable enough for a few battles.



Ships don't need to be 15X larger then they are now or everyone will essentially be impenetrable.

Igncom1 wrote:
Hit points alone wont serve as much of a buffer, you require the use of the defenses, at that point i think you will find ships to be survivable enough for a few battles.



Ships don't need to be 15X larger then they are now or everyone will essentially be impenetrable.

Well, 15x larger is a bit extreme obviously. But that is what I think too, make them ships BIGGER. The "Battleship" is just, well. Twice as big at best.



But I've talked enough, you know my point. Having ships differ a bit more and especially the dreadnoughts should be way bigger.

I once calculated the tonnage the ships should have even now. It is a bit misleading, since judging from their graphical size they should have a different ratio than 1 (destroyer) : 2 (battleship) : 3 (dreadnaught) in tonnage.

Nosferatiel wrote:
Thanks to Evil4Zerggin for pointing out to me that there's actually a concept art with a meter scale.

Evil4Zerggin wrote:
I didn't calculate it, it says so directly on the concept art, e.g. http://i.imgur.com/z2ted.jpg .

Nosferatiel wrote:
Nice. Then taking your Bismack example it had a volume of roughly 250*36*20=180000 m[SUP]3[/SUP] and a weight of 50 kt. That's, rounded, a density of 0.28 t/m[SUP]3[/SUP].



Taking my pixel measurements of the dreadnaught skin and all dreadnaught-lengths as roughly equal, 770 pixels are 1 km. So it's 1.3 m/pixel.



With the same density, the ship types would then have roughly:



Small hull = 125 kt

Middle hull = 524 kt

Large hull = 3.7 Mt



That is remarkably heavy...

It should be 1:4:30.

If you made the ships even bigger... Right now they're, frankly, hollow. Then they'll be mostly vacuum.

Seeing as you never have to resupply is could be assumed most of the space is taken up by farms, schools, hospitals, industrial sectors...everything you need to resupply ammo, food, fuel and people.

Nosferatiel wrote:


If you made the ships even bigger... Right now they're, frankly, hollow. Then they'll be mostly vacuum.

Well, it does not have to be realistic tho. (At least not in my opinion)



It's rather about the optic in that case, having huge ships (and smaller ships ofc) fighting each other, and in other games it does work sort of. You have that big ship in Halo. Also in Star wars, big ships in EVE online, even Sins of a solar Empire managed to get a big ship in (Titan) I've always hated how they only had "small" ships. At least one big ass ship is required. I mean seriously, who would not want that?

The dreadnaught is you big ship!



Why is it that everyone assumes it is just like all of the others, it is the big ship!

Igncom1 wrote:
Seeing as you never have to resupply is could be assumed most of the space is taken up by farms, schools, hospitals, industrial sectors...everything you need to resupply ammo, food, fuel and people.

But you need those things for all ship classes and unless you include a nonlinear "luxury" scalefactor or say that dreadnoughts need disproportionally much crew, everything should increase linearly, but the hull weight, that should increase quadratically. If the dreadnought has Volume V in total and uses Volume C for crews + everything else in support that isn't used for the installable modules, the tonnage T is:



T(Destroyer)=V(Destroyer)-C(Destroyer)



If you now say that everything scales linearly:



V(Battleship)=x*V(Destroyer)

and

C(Battleship)=y*C(Destroyer)

so

T(Battleship)=V(Battleship)-C(Battleship)=x*V(Destroyer)-y*C(Destroyer)



Right now T(Battleship) is 2 times T(Destroyer) and V(Battleship) is 4 times V(Destroyer) as estimated in the quoted thread. Then the crew quarters + support expansion factor y can be estimated:



T(Battleship)=2*T(Destroyer)

4*V(Destroyer)-y*C(Destroyer)=2*[V(Destroyer)-C(Destroyer)]

2*V(Destroyer)=[y-2]*C(Destroyer)



y(Battleship)=2*V(Destroyer)/C(Destroyer)+2



For the dreadnaught with 30 times the volume of a destroyer and thrice the tonnage it's



y(Dreadnought)=27*V(Destroyer)/C(Destroyer)+3



or in general: y(anything)=[(volumescalefactortodestroyer)-(tonnagescalefactortodestroyer)]*V(Destroyer)/C(Destroyer)+(tonnage scale factor to destroyer)



Let's say half the destroyer is occupied by support structures, crew quarters etc. Then V(Destroyer)/C(Destroyer)=1/2

For battleships we'd then need triple the size crew quarters + support structures compared to the destroyers and for dreadnaughts epic 16.5 times the size. If that is mainly crew, it is definitely not reflected in their military invasion power, nor in their military power. o_O



To put it into numbers, taking Bismarck density (yes, the old warship), we'd have crew and support structures weighing:

Destroyer: 72.5 kt out of 155 kt or 50% of the whole mass. Then another 72.5 kt is used for weapons.

Battleship: 217.5 kt out of 524 kt or 41.5% of the whole mass. Here 155 kt is used for weapons. Where have the 151.5 additional kt gone?

Dreadnaught: 1.2 Mt out of 3.7 Mt or 32% of the whole mass. Here 227.5 kt is used for weapons. Imagine all the hospitals that weigh almost 2.3 Mt as an additional luxury offset...



The only good thing is, that even with this calculation the larger ships should be more effective (since I took the realistic volume scalings), which they obviously aren't. So I guess the explanation is really that in destroyers the crew lives in bunks and on dreadnoughts they live in lush gardens, little palaces and have ultradense pillows.



If we instead assume quadratical increase, no crew and just a very heavy hull taking up 50% of the destroyer's weight:

C(Battleship)=z²*C(Destroyer)

-> z(Battleship)=Sqrt[2*V(Destroyer)/C(Destroyer)+2]=Sqrt[y(Battleship)]=Sqrt(3) which is roughly 1.7

-> z(Dreadnaught)=Sqrt(16.5) which is roughly 4

Comparing that to the tonnage scalings of 2 and 3, it is actually a better explanation, but still... You can estimate the relative hull density by dividing z by the tonnage scaling factor and then it's 85% hull density for the battleship classes and 133% hull density for the dreadnaughts, which just doesn't fit with their HP.



All I'm saying at the end of the day is simply that the numbers don't add up in my opinion. 4 o' clock in germany and I'm calculating. I hope I haven't done too many errors.

Nosferatiel wrote:
But you need those things for all ship classes and unless you include a nonlinear "luxury" scalefactor or say that dreadnoughts need disproportionally much crew, everything should increase linearly, but the hull weight, that should increase quadratically. If the dreadnought has Volume V in total and uses Volume C for crews + everything else in support that isn't used for the installable modules, the tonnage T is:



T(Destroyer)=V(Destroyer)-C(Destroyer)



If you now say that everything scales linearly:



V(Battleship)=x*V(Destroyer)

and

C(Battleship)=y*C(Destroyer)

so

T(Battleship)=V(Battleship)-C(Battleship)=x*V(Destroyer)-y*C(Destroyer)



Right now T(Battleship) is 2 times T(Destroyer) and V(Battleship) is 4 times V(Destroyer) as estimated in the quoted thread. Then the crew quarters + support expansion factor y can be estimated:



T(Battleship)=2*T(Destroyer)

4*V(Destroyer)-y*C(Destroyer)=2*[V(Destroyer)-C(Destroyer)]

2*V(Destroyer)=[y-2]*C(Destroyer)



y(Battleship)=2*V(Destroyer)/C(Destroyer)+2



For the dreadnaught with 30 times the volume of a destroyer and thrice the tonnage it's



y(Dreadnought)=27*V(Destroyer)/C(Destroyer)+3



or in general: y(anything)=[(volumescalefactortodestroyer)-(tonnagescalefactortodestroyer)]*V(Destroyer)/C(Destroyer)+(tonnage scale factor to destroyer)



Let's say half the destroyer is occupied by support structures, crew quarters etc. Then V(Destroyer)/C(Destroyer)=1/2

For battleships we'd then need triple the size crew quarters + support structures compared to the destroyers and for dreadnaughts epic 16.5 times the size. If that is mainly crew, it is definitely not reflected in their military invasion power, nor in their military power. o_O



To put it into numbers, taking Bismarck density (yes, the old warship), we'd have crew and support structures weighing:

Destroyer: 72.5 kt out of 155 kt or 50% of the whole mass. Then another 72.5 kt is used for weapons.

Battleship: 217.5 kt out of 524 kt or 41.5% of the whole mass. Here 155 kt is used for weapons. Where have the 234 additional kt gone?

Dreadnaught: 1.2 Mt out of 3.7 Mt or 32% of the whole mass. Here 227.5 kt is used for weapons. Imagine all the hospitals that weigh almost 2.3 Mt...



The only good thing is, that even with this calculation the larger ships should be more effective (since I took the realistic volume scalings), which they obviously aren't. So I guess the explanation is really that in destroyers the crew lives in bunks and on dreadnoughts they live in lush gardens, little palaces and have ultradense pillows.



If we instead assume quadratical increase, no crew and just a very heavy hull taking up 50% of the destroyer's weight:

C(Battleship)=z²*C(Destroyer)

-> z(Battleship)=Sqrt[2*V(Destroyer)/C(Destroyer)+2]=Sqrt[y(Battleship)]=Sqrt(3) which is roughly 1.7

-> z(Dreadnaught)=Sqrt(16.5) which is roughly 4

Comparing that to the tonnage scalings of 2 and 3, it is actually a better explanation, but still... You can estimate the relative hull density by dividing z by the tonnage scaling factor and then it's 85% hull density for the battleship classes and 133% hull density for the dreadnaughts, which just doesn't fit with their HP.



All I'm saying at the end of the day is simply that the numbers don't add up in my opinion. 4 o' clock in germany and I'm calculating. I hope I haven't done too many errors.

You just blew my mind.

Igncom1 wrote:




You just blew my mind.

Mission accomplished

Igncom1 wrote:
The dreadnaught is you big ship!



Why is it that everyone assumes it is just like all of the others, it is the big ship!

The size of the dreadnaught compared to the other ships is....lacking, and underwhelming. Why is it that everyone assumes we need realism? It seems more like a hollow argument to try and change the game in a certain way because they'd prefer it that way, when really it would be much more prudent to discuss gameplay and aesthetics. If you want realism, perhaps you should also bring up the fact that weapons and engines make noise? Knock knock, science!



But I'm getting off topic. I thought I'd also chime in and say that some ship size variation would be nice to have, and (after reading the linked topic regarding the argument against fighters), fighters would be nice too. That other topic is fairly old, so I'll put my brief thoughts on them here:

Fighters should be another weapon module that (aesthetically) uses the highest researched weapon you have available to you. If it's a tie, it'll just use lasers. All of the weapons that exist now have 'gimmicks', so to speak, in that missiles can only be fired once a round, kinetics don't particularly increase in damage, but instead increase bullet yield per round, and lasers are more damage focused. I think, optimally, the 'gimmick' for fighters would be that they are launched only once in combat, and do damage over the course of the fight. This would give them a unique purpose and use over missiles, which people have compared them to, and also opens a path to an easily brainstormed counter- weapons. Because they are launched only once, this would make them vulnerable to fire. Whatever weapons the enemy ships are equipped with (missiles would be the least accurate against fighters, lasers medium, and kinetics...well, they'd just be spewed anyway, so they'll eventually hit) would passively lend a defensive bonus against fighters. Whatever attacks against fighters are made, this would not detract from the damage that the ships would otherwise deal to the other fleet- these bullets would be free defensive stuff.



That was much longer than I thought it'd be. >>;; Anyway, just my 8 cents. Cya.

zetal911 wrote:
The size of the dreadnaught compared to the other ships is....lacking, and underwhelming. Why is it that everyone assumes we need realism? It seems more like a hollow argument to try and change the game in a certain way because they'd prefer it that way, when really it would be much more prudent to discuss gameplay and aesthetics. If you want realism, perhaps you should also bring up the fact that weapons and engines make noise? Knock knock, science!

1km length, as described in the artworks, is pretty epic in my opinion. It's just visually not very well transported, maybe. There's just no scale for size comparisons.

Nosferatiel wrote:
1km length, as described in the artworks, is pretty epic in my opinion. It's just visually not very well transported, maybe. There's just no scale for size comparisons.

Well, what.



1km length is impressive if you can't actually tell that it is 1km long, now is it? I don't actually care if it is 1-2 or 5 km long, as long as it looks bigger than the other ships. That's my only complain.



I was around the LoP Forums (Legens of Pegasus) and some users even insulted ES in the matter of ship sizes and fleet sizes so there are some people disliking it. And thinking about it, just making them a biiiit bigger shouldn't be that hard? (I don't know, I've never created a game or something alike that) (Okay I made an RPG with RPGMaker, does that count? )

Mavcu wrote:
Well, what.



1km length is impressive if you can't actually tell that it is 1km long, now is it? I don't actually care if it is 1-2 or 5 km long, as long as it looks bigger than the other ships. That's my only complain.



I was around the LoP Forums (Legens of Pegasus) and some users even insulted ES in the matter of ship sizes and fleet sizes so there are some people disliking it. And thinking about it, just making them a biiiit bigger shouldn't be that hard? (I don't know, I've never created a game or something alike that) (Okay I made an RPG with RPGMaker, does that count? )

Agreed. The ingame representation of the ship should definitely be changed, especially if it's as you say, Nosferatiel. The only reason I could see them not wanting to increase the size is (possibly) having to increase the polygon count on the model, in order to prevent texture stretching. That would be a nuisance, but should have been taken care of in the first place. Or, maybe you don't have to deal with texture stretching either way... I don't have much experience with UV Layouts.

Mavcu wrote:


Perhaps adding 3 more ship types (Smaller / bigger ships) or just make the ship types we already have differently.



But I really would love to see something even bigger than dreadnoughts, titans for instance. Like after 150 turns I had fleets full with dreadnoughts, that's not actually how it should be (they were effective as hell)



The Titan type could be even bigger, but expensive, very expensive. Perhaps even cost dust to maintain it or something like that? (Just a balancing idea)

I feel as it this would undermine the importance of dreadnaught.



As the dreadnaught is very effective, but not cost effective like smaller ships, not even close.

So if i had to vote, it would either be leave the dreads how they currently are or make them into true powerhouses with 1000 tonnage but costing 400 dust a turn.

I would like to see much larger Dreadnoughts, but it simply isn't going to work unless the targeting/combat system is revamped so that large ships are actually viable and Dreadnoughts get some sort of tonnage bonus like the other ship classes. Right now large ships overkill too much, and fleet module stacking favors small ships very heavily. At current larger Dreadnoughts would simply suffer even more than they do now.

Why would dreadnaughts need a tonnage bonus? they currently have twice the tonnage of battleships?