For those who REALLY wanted a boat...
TerraBlade
Join Date: 2015-05-25 Member: 204886Members
Join Date: 2015-05-25 Member: 204886Members
Basically this is a boat that also is a sub. Even mostly fits into the look of Subnautica and it's specs have it capable of diving 300m. The RL designation is the Nomad 1000-T. I still don't see the point of a surface vessel, but this could be a way to make another sub and still make that crowd happy.
http://www.ussubmarines.com/submarines/nomad_1000_t_technical.php3
http://www.ussubmarines.com/submarines/nomad_1000_t_technical.php3
Comments
Much more purposeful, instead of just another sub.
More quickly WHERE? 90% of the game will be under the water, and no boat will be able to replicate the faculties of an actual base. Even if there were more floating islands out there, you still will spend more time under the water then anywhere else. Especially if any kind of actual effective weather gets put in.
Players might be able to use the boat to raise downed subs, or large objects (base sections?) like Project Azorian did. You might also be able to berth the Cyclops under/in the boat to preform upgrades, or even repairs. Also, because the boat is on the surface it would be able to draw solar power, so for once players would have a sustainable vehicle. Besides, if currents are ever implemented, the sub might get tossed around in open water, but a SWATH craft has inherent stability. Not to mention, the boat could have a build in constructor; it can be used to build even larger submersibles, because I doubt that little buoy could construct anything larger than the cyclops given the small size of the constructor bots.
Additionally, boats have a major cool factor and have a certain maritime allure to them. Lots of people dream about owning yachts and basking in the sun on the deck of an expensive craft. All the vehicles in the game right now are confining and claustrophobic. With a boat, player gets their own mobile base/island - appealing to the curiosity of why players are attracted to exploring floating islands.
Even if the world gets bigger, that still means the actual area to explore, underwater, would be exponentially bigger then the surface. How would you even know you were getting anywhere interesting without first traveling underwater to get there?
As for docking and upgrading, isn't that what the seabases are for? There also wouldn't be any reason we couldn't use one sub to raise another, and at that point I would rather we be just able to recover resources either from interior lockers and from the sub itself to build another.
For the floating islands, there still is no reason that the cyclops or other subs aren't suited. In fact, the island you can currently reach has a kind of natural 'moon pool' that you could build a base over. It probably will be where I set up my full base once the actual moon pool modules gets added, and would make more sense for the current version of solar panels.
While it is cool in theory, there just isn't much of a point to a fully dedicated surface vessel. A hybrid maybe, and I could see one that traveled faster on the surface then underwater. But a fully realized surface vessel just doesn't seem worth it in a game where 90% of the time you are going to want to be underwater.
So in that case having to rise 200m+, dock with a boat, drive the boat, then undock to descend to a base becomes more tedious. Just having a nice boat looking sub that let you walk out on deck would give you all of that WITHOUT needing a separate sub. That was kinda the whole point when I came across this sub. Because unlike the real world where all the logistics, fuel, food, and equipment come from a surface port all of these things will be coming from what we find/recover from an underwater environment.
Given the nature of the sub having it travel faster on the surface then underwater, giving it a boat like look, and maybe upgraded with solar cells would meet all the points you want without needing a dedicated surface vehicle. Heck, if we could upgrade the Cyclops to look like this kind of sub with those kinds of functions...that would be a perk right there.
There is no need for a dedicated surface vessel, and you haven't given any reason that can't be covered by what we have already. However having an upgraded Cyclops or just a new sub that had more of a boat's look and function would be perfectly reasonable. Even perhaps practical. But once again when all your building resources, your food, and objectives are underwater...what role does the boat really have in any real capacity?
Sorry, but I'm not buying that. Submersibles are not good for salvage operations because they lack the stability, traction, and displacement required for a lifting operation.
Also, I believe one of the devs mentioned that he wanted to make the cyclops more realistic so far as handling and operation. If weight and displacement ever becomes part of the games mechanics a boat would be extremely useful for hauling large quantities of raw materials.
An additional consideration is safety. It is yet unknown if the Sea Emperor poses any threat to the cyclops. If in fact is is capable of damaging the craft, perhaps a vessel such as a boat would provide safety in open water. Also, I'm glad you mentioned that part about open water. The Sea Emperor might be able to entangle the sub and pull it down to crush depth, but given the boat's displacement and large size that is unlikely.
As for open water operations, boats are great for that kind of thing. Considering that space aboard the cyclops is very limited, the boat would act as the ultimate mobile base. Players routinely return to stationary bases with their cyclops... that or establish multiple bases (which costs a great deal of resources and time). Still, if resources become even more diversified this exacerbates the issue... how do you haul all those resources?
Players can probably fit a maximum of 20 - 40 lockers aboard the cyclops. I'd imagine you could fit 60 - 80 (perhaps even more) aboard a ship the size I proposed. Not only is the sip faster, it holds much more and players can dock the sub! It's the ultimate mobile base - great for relocation and open water operations. The time that would be wasted ferrying resources back to central bases, or creating mini bases and then hauling pooled material, is now spend exploring. Considering this game is all about exploration that is a major bonus.
How about a name similar to the seamoth or the cyclops? Greek mythology or "sea+animal".
Kraken
Hippocampus (mythological sea-horse)
Seabeetle
There will always need to eventually be a break from game convienience and 'reality'. Realistically, how is it that our pod can be that messed up and we be perfectly OK? Or that our pod just happened to come down in a 'safe' area? Or that we were just happened to be wearing a wetsuit? The list continues, but the point is that at some point you just accept that this is a game and perfect realism is just not going to be there. No matter how many of these games you play, you would be screwed in a similar situation in real life.
So that said saying that subs don't have the traction and lifting power is silly...especially since there could be work arounds. Such as maybe you need to place three lifting items (call them bubbles) in the downed sub and have the appropriate modules, if such a thing is added to the game right there is a reasonable explination for one sub to raise another WITHOUT a surface vessel.
I can do that all day. Any situation you pose I can make a counter argument. The reason being that surface vessels have major drawbacks before you even consider this game's world. They can, and do, capsize. They can't go past certain longitudes because of severe risk from wandering icebergs, let alone trying to actualy reach the poles without specific outfitting due to the possibility of getting trapped and crushed in the ice. Let alone weather damage, navigation, and other problems.
To the point of the massive planned creature...it could just as easily pull and damage a boat as much as sub if not more so. So claiming it would only be a risk to subs is silly. I've had reapers push and pull my cyclops into completely different bioms so having a sea emperor follow my subs to a surface vessel is not only possible but a real danger.
So again, you haven't pointed to anything that the surface vessel would really have to contribute. Having a ship be a full on base replacement I don't agree with since it diminishes the point of a seabase, which is supposed to be the allowance of things you just can't do otherwise. No ship, sub or otherwise, should be able to replace a base. As for storage...you still would need to ferry parts to and from the base. So 60+ lockers would be something that falls into the 'awesome but impractical' area.
Again, the whole point of this post was that as much as I would like a surface vessel in the grand scheme of the game it would be impractical. But considering the large viewport of the lower section and overall aesthetic design I felt that such a sub would make a nice compromise. I don't know if it would be better as an upgrade to the Cyclops, or as it's own thing. But a hybrid would be not only a good compromise in terms of the game, but I imagine a good one for the dev team without having to build all new mechanics, animations, and ect. just for a vessel or two that wouldn't have much more then a niche use. I know this would be my thinking if I were making a game such as this on an indie budget.
A deep recovery vehicle template would be a useful addition to the player's PDA.
Let's call it "Haephestus" (or 'Vulcan', if you prefer).
Haephestus would be the work-horse of your fleet. It has a pair of retractable manipulator arms, each fitted with Fabricator emitters, a welding torch and a mining drill.
Onboard storage lockers allow collection of raw materials, placement of navigation beacons or deploying air-lift bags on sunken submarines during salvage operations.
While a submersible luxury yacht ('mesoscaphe') would be a fairly nice piece of eye-candy, a surface ship similar to a floating oil rig would be of more immediate use to the Survivor:
It all depends on which direction Subnautica is ultimately heading.
Oh, and again, the image was mostly for ideas. Having a pleasure yacht in the middle of a survival situation in an alien sea probably wouldn't be that useful. It was mainly for ideas that might actually be possible to incline the devs to put in. Thus giving more options for subs to use/build and to also make the people who want boats happy. I came across it while trying to look up what it might be possible to build on my own time when it came to subs, and personally I think it would be the best of both worlds.
If it were an upgraded Cyclops then if you could keep the seamoth/exosuit bay you not only would have a ship that would be faster on the surface but able to participate in all fields of play. Since it has the RL operating depth of 300m then as an upgrade you already get an advantage to depth over the Cyclops, which would further it being a reward for progression. At the same time giving those who want a boat...what they want. Looking at the blueprints i've been able to find, if this were an upgraded cyclops it would even give an extra deck which could mean more storage space for lockers or other equipment.
But all of this was an attempt to put something out there that the devs might be willing to consider putting in. Boats handle differently, and would have to have a whole lot of stuff added just for them, which overall could make them a lot of work to put in. I know if I were a dev on this game, I probably would think it was to much for to little return when I could put the time, money, and effort into making other parts of the game better. This was an attempt at a realistic compromise.
That is a double edged sword and it can be used to justify innumerable aspects of game play; one of them conveniently being a boat.
Any situation you pose I can make a counter argument.
Not really, if realism isn't an issue - anything can be justified.
...full on base replacement I don't agree with since it diminishes the point of a seabase...
I never said that. Bases still fulfill a vital niche.
awesome but impractical
Sending humans to do the job of terraforming - the game's very premise is unrealistic, but that can't be used as justification now; it is not good argument in any regard.
Again, the whole point of this post was that as much as I would like a surface vessel in the grand scheme of the game it would be impractical.
Impracticability again. A surface vessel would only be practical for open ocean use, but of course as I already stated, any practicability or lack of it is a debunked argument. Considering the premise of anything is saturated in impracticability... I rest my case.
Exactly, so there's no use arguing if it's just going to be something the devs might, or might not include. No need to get bent out of shape over something whimsical like a boat.
...At this point I wonder if you are trying to troll me. Yes the whole game has impracticality, and I believe that was my point earlier. However from a gameplay purpose the concept of a surface only vessel is in itself nothing but impractical for the resources it would take to build it since it just can't do as much with it as the subs. Why build something that does LESS then the things that can the same job and more? To offset this you would either to need to make it so good to offset that fact it would only have limited use in comparison to the other two vessels; or you would have to find some way to make it just as versatile as the two subs. The easiest way to accomplish THAT would be, in effect, make it a hybrid style sub.
You are arguing for a ship that can only sit on top of the water. I am arguing for a ship that sits on top of the water AND can dive under it so that it isn't outclassed. You are essentially arguing for LESS options, not more. Both are boats and the only sticking point for this 'argument' is aesthetics at this point, which was the whole gosh darn point of me putting up a picture of a submarine that has the aesthetics of a boat.
This is a 'have your cake and eat it too' thread...and you still aren't happy? o.O
The seamoth is okayish, but slow and has no capacity for cargo. The cyclops is just too bulky and overkill, just to travel places, it's more of a mobile base. On top of that it uses stupid amounts of energy to move and is very, very slow. (Which is perfectly okay).
So my idea would be something that's small, like the seamoth, with a small, but decent cargo capacity and perhaps 4 times as fast as a seamoth. Since a submarine or submersible just doesn't make much sense when given theese design goals, a surface vessel would fit the role.
If elevators (even if it's just a cord of steel that you hook into), or long ladder tubes for bases come out, it would be sensible to have small surface platforms on your bases to dock such a vessel.
If you were to look at another game, namely Anno 2070 (I know, it's both terrible for it's ubisoft crap and a totally different concept), you would notice that undersea bases have surface access, which is what I envision for my bases, too.
As for lifting sunken submarines, I'd say you'd rather just scrap them to make a new one...
If you argue for practicality, you might just scrap bases, too. It's much more practical to have just the cyclops. It has a built in dock to recharge, you can build anything you could build on a base, and on top of that it is mobile.
Besides all of that, there might be more land to come...
Why not just make this thing?
Or more practically, This?
That first ship cannot go underwater.
Anything can go anywhere if you want it to..... after all, this is a game.
The way i see it, TerraBlade, we have two reasons for getting into one of those machines. Exploring and Travel. Like you said exploring takes place underwater like 99% of the time. But travel doesn't necessarily has to. When i travel long-distance, i usually am very close to the surface. I like to build my main in the shallows and the closer go-to bases are never deeper than 80m down. If they implemented elevators, cord-rails or ladders the depth would really not be an argument anymore even for great depths. Maybe the boat itself could have some tech to solve that problem.
That said, if there were to be a "Boat-Sub". What would happen to the other subs?
If it were big enough to build lockers inside, about the size of a cyclops, you'd basically had another mobile base. If that thing - able to dock a moth or not - were fast enough to be an actual option for item transportation it had to be so ridiculous power-hungry, to not overpower every other kind of base immediately, it'd be of no big use. Otherwise you could as well take the cyclops.
If it were not to be upgraded with storage capacity or other conveniences but still very fast, it would probably take the seamoth out of business most of the time. The only advantage of the seamoth is it's tiny size and speed. If there is no cyclops or moonpool around, it's just a very small sub, with low health and power-capacity compared to the bigger one. It'd probably wait in the cyclops until you decide to come back to waters were waltzing around in said cyclops isn't a total ruin to your powercell-account, or you build a new one everywhere you set up camp. If this Boat-Sub was as fast as a moth or slower, why bother building one in the first place?
The only Sub-Type i can imagine would be cool, is smaller but faster than the cyclops, with no storage capacity but a docking point for the moth. The cyclops would probably still eat some dust with this in the game.
Imo the only way to make a craft with speed as well as room for storage and modules would be, to give it a drawback, namely being bound to the surface. Maybe this way even a moth-dock would be acceptable (probably still beats the cyclops by a landslide but whatevs)
Slow underwater and fast at the surface is about the same as thinking about as fast in general.
I'm kinda tired and it could happen that i change my mind about this over a good night of sleep, but this is what seems logic to me right now.
___
Now to the huge as$ Cruisers...
I don't think we should think big, in terms of "60 to 80 lockers".
A simple speed boat or supportable, mobile surface base. Small and pretty.
A yacht or giant sea platform would be overkill.
When it comes to salvage operations, i don't think this should be more useful than the cyclops would be. So people have a CHOICE ... which is what makes a game like this a good game.
___
For me a boat is about a balanced new option for travel and transport, without taking other machines out of busines. There should neither be a must-have or a benchwarmer.
You forgot the third option, which is to make the 'boat-sub' an upgrade of the Cyclops. If you look at the one pic that shows a cross section, it looks quite similar to the Cyclops deck plan. Therefore adding a second control station and third deck would not only give more storage space, but an upgrade option that doesn't reduce the other subs.
Heck, you could go on to have other upgrade paths for the cyclops, such as a beefier option for surviving in more treacherous/deeper areas without needing to use up an upgrade slot. This way you are not, again, making anything any more or less desirable in the long run. Just like the fin and tank upgrade options.
Everything that would end up making the cyclops faster and more agile is a bad idea towards regular bases. Also if you had to steer a, still slow but otherwise advanced, cyclops down to god knows what depth, you'd have no use from it being a boat in the first place.
Making it bulkier or upgrading it otherwise is fine i guess. Nothing against some good options to make our two subs............ °-° waaaaait a minute!
What about upgrading the MOTH? This thing is meant to be fast. If it had a "Boat-Mode" to be even faster at the surface, we wouldn't need to add a new thing. The design could be very boat like. Wouldn't be quite what i had in mind when i first posted in this thread, but i think i kinda like the idea.
The other option (as i said, i like having choices) would be storage capacity. Utility vs speed.
Something like this:
(sry picture tool is broken)
http://pre01.deviantart.net/fad4/th/pre/f/2013/156/e/c/space_racer_by_thomaswievegg-d66rqel.jpg
Why would it make the bases obsolete? Far as I know there are plans for base only upgrades, and even not, bases have so much more room to build then a Cyclops. Not to mention that there probably will be things (hopefully) soon that could threaten the cyclops and actually sink them. So putting all your eggs in one basket such as a Cyclops probably won't end well. That said I'm not against upgrading the moth either, and hopefully it gets some different forms/functions too.
As for bulkier and deeper ranges negating the boat/speed function, not necessarily do you have a point. It's like the charge vs glide fins. For the most part the charge are my mainstay equipment. But the glide fins are good for zooming around areas I know are either safe or know well enough to avoid danger to get the materials I need. I imagine it might be the same way for having a few different upgraded forms of the subs. Sturdiness might beat speed for dangerous locations such as near reapers or lava vents, while speed might be better for open exploration.
There is this really cool company that makes mini-subs for people whom have stupid money. Now just imagine one of those subs except with ground effect capabilities.
I imagine this new sub would be slightly slower than a Seamoth underwater, but faster than the Cyclops. Basically, it would fill a niche roll between the two existing subs. The Seamoth's small size makes it good for use in cave exploration, and the Cyclops has its utility as a mobile base. This new craft would have the advantage of being able to soar across the surface at extreme speed, or slow down and boat around. Quite possible the craft would have auxillary storage, but no more than 3 - 5 lockers worth.
Because the craft is slightly larger than the Seamoth it doesn't have the small craft's nimbleness, or ability to dock with the Cyclops. Right now there is no way to efficiently and quickly transport bulk materials. The Roc (named after the mythological bird) would have unparalleled speed on the surface, balanced by its slower speed underwater and reduced maneuverability (not great at pinpoint turns like the Seamoth).
The Seamoth is an exploratory vessel, whereas the Cyclops extends the range of the Seamoth. I imagine the Roc would be used for closing distanced between bases - something neither existing sub excels at. Of course, the Roc's surface speed mode would need to have less range than the Cyclops for balance reasons, but the Roc would still have longer subsurface range than the Seamoth (basically the Seamoth is an integral part of the Cyclops and they have a codependent advantage when used in conjunction).
Here is a new craft that fills the speed role without imposing on the roles of existing vehicles.
Tell me what you guys think.
Sorry, but what you just described sounds useless. All the vehicles currently in the game are quality and are useful for their own purposes.
A cheap boat is also very counterintuitive. If a player is encountering Reapers, they obviously have explored areas with the necessary resources for the constructing the Cyclops. Also, with the implementation of the moonpool, this will become even more so.
I originally liked the idea of a boat, but in order to justify one, a boat would infringe upon the roles of existing game mechanics, or be utterly useless - destroy balance, or defeat the purpose.
What I mentioned above is an attempt to fill a role void without bastardizing existing vehicles.
As for travel, assuming we don't eventually end up with warpers, the cyclops is quite fast already for my needs (if only it could suck less energy though).
What I could see a need for is a vehicle that won't get STUCK in the shallow like the Cyclops; i.e, that can float.
No kidding - in my latest game I got stuck so BAD with the cyclops i could no longer drive it in any direction and had barely enough space to leave. And there is no way to deconstruct it. Nasty.