Accepted/under consideration, and rejected suggestions lists?

[foggy lion]

A new channel below the suggestions forum that show what suggestions the devs are considering, or have accepted and intend to add to the roadmap (optional, forum rules did say devs are under no obligation to add stuff from here), and suggestions that are rejected for x,y, and/or z reasons. A note at the top of the channel should remind people that the stuff on the list is under consideration, and may or may not be implemented.

Purpose of this is to help people know what has been seen by the devs, and give a better idea of what the future of NO may look like.
Also could reduce redundant/repeated, or unnecessary suggestions of things already under consideration, already being implemented, or have been rejected.

[chilly shadow]

As much as like this idea, There would be a lot of people who would take criticism the wrong way (they do this already) and crusade like a Karen because they didn't have great idea.

Reducing redundant things is tough when many users don't search in the first place.....(many suggestions are peoples first only and only posts)

I would be willing to bet ideas the devs like or want to try out would be listed on on some closed section, and could watch from a distance on how the community reacts to it.

[foggy lion]

Yea, like, I meant a closed channel like #announcements or #faq, where the devs can only post the accepted/under consideration stuff.

[foggy lion]

Also, perhaps a checkbox unlock before access to forums is granted, so people read forum rules and info before they gain acess to the forums, which I believe should help with the issue of people who don't search, and don't see redundant posts.

[fathom coral]

I know of another games server where the mods can add an approved or declined tag, maybe something like that may work better.

[chilly shadow]

but when the "decline" tag get put on, there will be small % that will get feelings hurt, and go on X/twitter, steam, reedita and go Karen on about it.

[foggy lion]

At that point however, if the individuals in question are sensitive enough to do that over a rejected suggestion, they'd end up complaining about other things anyway.

So I personally wager it wouldn't necessarily mean much for getting in the way of adding the tag system and/or lists, since it's basically something that happens with or without it.

[tulip wind]

oh no! anyway

[idle pagoda]

I like the idea but you'd be surprised the kinda people that come to games like this

[winged cargo]

Dropping the "decline" tag and just having a "[was already] planned" or "considered" tag instead would be a little better

And then just don't touch the suggestions which arent up to snuff

[foggy lion]

Pretty good approach to this, ghost the volatile instead of lighting their fuses.

Albeit, however, it in some special cases could result in "That one guy" type incidents where a guy could keep reposting a coal suggestion repetitively hoping to get his suggestion noticed and accepted, until people/mods get annoyed and drama ensues.

[winged cargo]

At that point go "repeat suggestion, previous will be deleted"

[foggy lion]

I imagined in the special case I came up with the individual in question would be volatile to be offended at that, but it's all just a rare special case incident, so we shouldn't put too much thought into this in the wider scope. That type of response, though, is pretty much the best that could be reasonably come up with.

[placid lynx]

99% of suggestions won't be implemented, but might sway direction of development if a certain theme keeps popping up. More utility planes, more weapon effects and futuristic (albeit currently feasible) munitions like stealth cruise missiles are likely to be implemented. Railguns might be developed, but likely ship only.

[foggy lion]

True, likewise the under consideration suggestions list are basically what the devs have seen, and are thinking about in terms of whether to implement them or not, or develop something akin to a considered suggestion.

[wary geode]

Railguns could also be used in turrets with land forces too

[tropic wasp]

As much as id like to know what the devs want and what they are doing this would probably do more harm than good and would be counterproductive in general. The roadmap is already a lot imo

[foggy lion]

Fair criticism, it may produce hype train effect, particularly among the younger/more excitable folks.

[old hollow]

for what tho

[wary geode]

Heavy Tanks, Hardened turrets, etc. It could also be applicable to armored trains of we get rails in the current or the newer map

[old hollow]

ehh,heavy tanks don't really exist anymore due to the whole thing of air power. for hardened turrets and hardened sites in general its better to lob a very large HE/HESH shell to destroy them

[foggy lion]

Armoured trains, maybe when they come to a stop with a power generator. Tanks, I don't see them practically carrying railguns, not to mention the power source needed for it.

[old hollow]

the only real use i could see on ground platforms is as some extreme anti air weapon.For all intents and purposes other equipment can do the job better than what a railgun could

And even then,for the absurdly large cost of energy that a railgun needs,you might just be better off using a laser

[foggy lion]

The only ground purpose for railguns that I can see within practicality myself is as a very long range artillery weapon, which is basically what the destroyer's gun is.

So in other words, basically a ground based version of the DDG's gun, for the same purpose.

[old hollow]

That could make sense in the way that if a ship wants to support operations on land,a railgun can help it extend its range considerably.But for ground purposes the vehicle can just...move up.If a target is so far enemy lines that you need a railgun to hit it,chances are you'd be better off using a missile

[foggy lion]

Well... it's the best usage for a ground railgun I could think of, a long range artillery weapon firing guided shells that do not have an IR signature unlike missiles, so I suppose an advantage over missiles in size and signature, but it's just about the only purpose I could think of that's practical. 🤷‍♂️

[old hollow]

The zumwalt tried that...it was not good
but hey,70 years into the future maybe then it'd be viable

[obsidian hearth]

anything travelling at hypersonic speeds in the lower atmosphere will have an enormous IR signature

[foggy lion]

My bad then, I didn't account for the plasma field.

I guess there isn't much room for a practical ground based usage for a railgun then, unless I'm overlooking an advantage that Hypersonic missiles would also have.

[obsidian hearth]

railguns have the advantage of potentially higher velocity/longer range than a conventional gun, and magazines that won't explode if hit

[azure cape]

i feel like a magazine not exploding if hit is not a big deal if you're hit with an exploding bomb

[fathom coral]

Think of what happened to HMS Hood, it could of survive multiple hits, but was sunk from the magazine detonating and splitting the ship essentially in 2

[azure cape]

true that, but modern missiles can generally cripple modern ships in one hit anyways
altho my war thunder days have taught me to be wary off my ammo

[lucid obsidian]

For anti air/anti vehicle applications sure, but will just kinetic energy cut it for HE replacement for say ground bombardment? W/o ridiculous orbital KEW speeds (it will most likely melt the shell)

[hard trail]

I think railguns could potentially have a lot more volume of fire too if they can recharge fast enough (as compared to missiles)

[azure cape]

ye but a VLS can volley missiles really quickly; also you can launch loads of missiles after one another then edit their flight plan so that the arrive at the target at the same time @hard trail

[hard trail]

That’s true, but the railgun magazines will take up a whole lot less space compared to missiles, so you’ll be able to fit more ammo into the same space. Also, I think railguns could use a time on target strategy by varying velocity and elevation when fired.

If you can fit a big power source on something you can probably do sustained fire for longer using a railgun.

[stable gulch]

Wanna make a new thread for this?

[hard trail]

we could

[ebon flame]

the capacitor takes a lot of space and can go boom

[winged cargo]

Chat still wildly off topic, gonna repost

And then just don't touch the suggestions which aren't up to snuff```

[ebon flame]

Wow...yeah I totally didnt even remember this post being about that, and I am 100% behind the idea BTW

[lunar bronze]

Not sure is it so necessary. But im sure necessary have a suggestions forum to give devs interesting idea about all game conceptions or smth balance tweaks. Im sure more part of suggestions devs read and think about implementations of them and see what about it think community. And devs with that make some plans for now or for near future or for far future implementations. And mark some suggestions like actual or something another dont have any sense

[stable gulch]

Do NOT let me hear that "we dont need it" line.

Anyone who is an active member of this channel knows how much I and several others hate those words.