|
Post by kasuga on Nov 12, 2013 7:08:46 GMT -6
Soon™ hehehe. Maybe after RJW WWII has more options but i dont say no to a age of sail title... maybe when game cover crew as a 3rd part in ship damage (apart see damage by hit see how many casualties are). Finally can post in the new forum
|
|
|
Post by vonfriedman on Nov 12, 2013 7:21:43 GMT -6
I see. thanks for the explanation. Could you expand on what you found good in the TAS scenario editor? It might be possible to incorporate some of the features in SAI. SAI scenario editor is aimed at getting the player and the AI naval forces into battle as quickly as possible. TAS scenario editor, even if much less user friendly, is aimed at simulating a naval operation which would last several days or even weeks. For example, I was able to simulate in some way Operation Grog, ie the naval bombadment of Genoa in 1941. Several different courses and time schedules could be chosen at random by the enemy. Air reconnaisance, sub and MTB patrol zones had to be established in advance, airforces and airbases introduced and so on. I do not remember if even the enemy force could be picked somewhat at random (in this case the Italians would have been at risk of facing Rodney and Nelson, instead of Renown and Malaya). The game focus was, in any case, on intercepting or avoiding to be intercepted, rather than on engaging in battle. The flow of messages, either true or fake, was quite realistic and the historical outcome would be obtained in some cases, while in others a FS battle would ensue. This is the kind of game that I would like to play again. Either historical or hypotetical events could be simulated in the same way. Another thing: TAS and FS allowed to change the effectiveness of the opposing ships quite easily. So green or worn out ship and crew conditions, lack of radar sets or night training etc. could be simulated at will.
|
|
|
Post by dragoon on Nov 12, 2013 13:27:41 GMT -6
Well whatever comes our way my money is waiting..
|
|
|
Post by randomizer on Nov 12, 2013 14:10:01 GMT -6
I would suggest that this is entirely up to the scenario author. Operational level scenarios where action is not guaranteed can certainly be created using the SAI editor, the stock Jutland Operational scenario runs at least 66-hours and the options open to both sides are potentially vast in scope. The editor provides all sorts of tools to create uncertainty and variations including crew quality and mechanical reliability of individual ships.
Having no familiarity with the TAS editor I cannot speak to its features but can attest to the capabilities and limitations of the SAI editor with a fair bit of experience. It allows for the creation of a large number of potential situations within its intended time frame that can reliably reproduce major historical aspects of the desired situation. Some events cannot be reliably recreated, a scenario intended to recreate running the Dardanelles forts in 1915 for example works pretty well as the Allied Player but was essentially unplayable as the Turks. For that reason it was never uploaded. The SAI-AI sometimes has issues operating close to shore but more conventional bombardment objectives are certainly possible.
The SAI editor allows separate surface and air search zones, random patrols, submarines and other factors present within its time frame. Writing scenarios where the scope is less aimed at producing a battle and more oriented towards search and evasion is entirely dependent on the scenario author being willing to make the effort to do so; with the caveat that the participant ships are fuel-limited to a maximum of four or five days.
|
|
|
Post by vonfriedman on Nov 12, 2013 14:45:19 GMT -6
I'd like to know if you have already developed a scenario on all the initial naval operations of the WW1 in the Mediterranean, namely: all the actions of the Goeben, the movements of the British forces, the French convoys, etc.. With regard to the autonomy: why not include coaling in port?
|
|
|
Post by randomizer on Nov 12, 2013 15:31:50 GMT -6
I'd like to know if you have already developed a scenario on all the initial naval operations of the WW1 in the Mediterranean, namely: all the actions of the Goeben, the movements of the British forces, the French convoys, etc.. With regard to the autonomy: why not include coaling in port? At present refuelling is not supported and so an accurate recreation of the entire Goeben episode using the SAI Editor is not really possible. As I wrote, there are limitations to what situations the program can recreate and it handles some situations better than others. I would really be interested to know of any computer game/simulation or scenario creation program that would allow for all of the potential variables present in the Flight of the Goeben situation or even a significant percentage of them. I have written operational scenarios dealing with certain aspects of the events in the Med in August 1914 but only uploaded one since I had anticipated Player criticism regarding the inability to recreate certain aspects of the pursuit. In the old forum I had uploaded a non-historical operational scenario about Goeben vs. the French Navy during the period before the British declaration of war that had troop ships, shore targets with several ways for Goeben and the French forces to win. As to why features may not be included in the Editor as yet, FW will need to address this. Thanks.
|
|
|
Post by vonfriedman on Nov 13, 2013 7:37:41 GMT -6
You are right. "Perfect is the enemy of the good". Would it be possible to find that scenario on Goeben and the French?
|
|
|
Post by randomizer on Nov 13, 2013 10:14:28 GMT -6
... and Better is the enemy of Good Enough.
I hope that I did not come off as harsh or indifferent as your input is always appreciated.
As I see it, SAI has things it recreates very well and others perhaps not so much but there is potential for growth provided the market is there to justify continued development. We're concentrating on getting the RJW out the door; a situation where some player requested features such as refuelling at sea, ship-borne aviation and others are not required to produce a simulation of that era.
With regards to the Goeben vs. the French Navy scenario, I have shined it up a bit for SAI v1.6 and hope to upload it in a few days.
As for the rest, please be patient and keep the ideas coming.
Thanks.
|
|
|
Post by vonfriedman on Nov 14, 2013 6:27:52 GMT -6
I assume that in any future WW2 SAI scenario in the Pacific the issue of autonomy and refueling, both in port or by means of supply ships, will be considered. Refueling was already included in TAS. You only need not to disband a naval force when it sailed into port and wait until it was ready for sailing again.
One negative aspect of the scenario editor of TAS concerned landings. To send a convoy it was necessary to establish a base in the landing area, with the result that the damaged ships were heading there as if it were a friendly port.
In addition, it was not possible to disperse a convoy, or change its course, which had set out from the scenario.
|
|
|
Post by genchaos on Nov 16, 2013 1:54:04 GMT -6
I would love to see a U-boat game. I don't need 3-d graphics or even sound. Just a basic SAI-type map where I can deploy boats in response to intelligence reports. Give me a realistic damage system, realistic supply and fuel consumption, realistic shipping density, realistic weather. I could spend many, many Saturday mornings playing such a game, coffee mug in hand. +1. Forget the useless eye candy of the SilentHunter series. A U-boat version of SAI engine would KICK A$$!!! Plus, it would be a good way to test/introduce aircraft into the SAI engine. (before going to a full blown air/naval Pacific/Atlantic WWII game)
|
|
|
Post by vonfriedman on Nov 16, 2013 7:09:07 GMT -6
I would love to see a U-boat game. I don't need 3-d graphics or even sound. Just a basic SAI-type map where I can deploy boats in response to intelligence reports. Give me a realistic damage system, realistic supply and fuel consumption, realistic shipping density, realistic weather. I could spend many, many Saturday mornings playing such a game, coffee mug in hand. +1. Forget the useless eye candy of the SilentHunter series. A U-boat version of SAI engine would KICK A$$!!! Plus, it would be a good way to test/introduce aircraft into the SAI engine. (before going to a full blown air/naval Pacific/Atlantic WWII game) I too would be interested to play this kind of game. I'd also like a repeat of the TAS scenarios dedicated to hunting merchant raiders.
|
|
|
Post by fredsanford on Nov 18, 2013 19:15:59 GMT -6
I've been playing this for my naval ops fix, and playing Command Ops for my land warfare game. In either case, I wish they were the same game, and was maybe conducting a WW2 Med campaign with land, sea, subs and air all in one.
|
|
|
Post by dickturpin on Nov 23, 2013 16:24:01 GMT -6
I would respectfully suggest that developing S&I would be easier if this was confined to the period say 1880 - 1925 rather than attempting WW2.
- WW2 is much more complex and requires far more features to be developed than the earlier period.
- The historical campaigns present difficult practical problems.
- Many "naval" players interested in WW2 tend to think in terms of surface combat but the reality is that this was rather rare and the war was really determined by air combat. S&I is essentially a game that allows for the deployment of large fleets; this kind of combat is unlikely in WW2 as the major fleet actions were dominated by aircraft,
In my opinion, trying to "bolt on" aircraft to a surface naval game would probably be a mistake in a period that aircraft dominate combat.
That is not to say that the very talented Developers at NWS should not develop WW2 games or age of sail games (or even land based games for that matter) as these would no doubt be worth buying and playing; only that the S&I concept better lends itself to the period dominated by iron ships, surface gunnery and torpedoes.
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Nov 23, 2013 18:57:09 GMT -6
In my view, air power was a third component, added essentially during the first World War, then expanded during the interwar period and solidified during and after WWiI. it was no less important or more, than the other two components. However, this is not the time or forum for such a discussion. It is my opinion that a WW2 version of the game is possible but will take more time and dedication to detail. And detail is the name of the game, how deep do you wish to drill down into, for the gamer. Do you wish to give him the capability of equipping air wings for carriers or squadrons, wings and air forces or will this be dealt with by the computer AI? Will flight paths and all other details be handled automatically or will they configurable by the player? I don't think we need to tell the NWS team how to do this, they are experienced in producing games. They also know who to call on, if they require technical assistance.
In summary, the issue is one of economics. Is that version of this game, economically viable? Possibly, but I am not certain of that and only the team knows the economics. I say " good luck" to the team, in whatever decision they make.
|
|
|
Post by fredsanford on Nov 26, 2013 10:36:48 GMT -6
I agree. I'd like to see the expanded naval model for the pre-aviation period more fully developed before attempting to go to WW2. I'd like to hear more about Fredrik's vision for the grand-strategic model. It seems that such a game would have to cover at least a couple of decades, so 1880-1925 seems reasonable. I'd think going back to say 1850-60's, dawn of the steam ironclads, would be a more natural expansion, modeling naval development up until 1925 or so. BTW, the prior post about WW2 Med campaign was just wishful thinking, not necessarily for suggestion for the next step. But, if the strategic engine got developed for pre-WW2, combined/amphibious ops would be a really cool addition. I would respectfully suggest that developing S&I would be easier if this was confined to the period say 1880 - 1925 rather than attempting WW2.
- WW2 is much more complex and requires far more features to be developed than the earlier period.
- The historical campaigns present difficult practical problems.
- Many "naval" players interested in WW2 tend to think in terms of surface combat but the reality is that this was rather rare and the war was really determined by air combat. S&I is essentially a game that allows for the deployment of large fleets; this kind of combat is unlikely in WW2 as the major fleet actions were dominated by aircraft,
In my opinion, trying to "bolt on" aircraft to a surface naval game would probably be a mistake in a period that aircraft dominate combat.
That is not to say that the very talented Developers at NWS should not develop WW2 games or age of sail games (or even land based games for that matter) as these would no doubt be worth buying and playing; only that the S&I concept better lends itself to the period dominated by iron ships, surface gunnery and torpedoes.
|
|