Came back to SAI and why

[pz501]

Over the last few years I've been neglecting SAI and playing RTW most of the time. I purchased RTW2 on day one, but in this last week or so I've returned to SAI, and will be giving RTW (both games) a break.

Why? Hard to explain, but SAI after all these years just feels more "real" to me. I enjoy playing historical and semi historical campaigns and scenarios more, and while the RTW games are really well done, and I do like the ship design aspects, they somehow (especially RTW2) are now failing to "scratch the itch". Can't really put my finger on it, but RTW2 has left me a bit disinterested despite all of the new features and a whole lot of new and very enthusiastic players supporting and playing it. That's a good thing, and I hope the player base continues to grow. Right now though, it's just not for me.

I'll be staying right here for a while, despite the fact that all development of SAI seems to have ceased. I've even started to tinker with the scenario and campaign editors...not as hard as I thought it would be!

Maybe one day SAI will be expanded to cover WW II. (I know a few user experiments/mods were attempted.) Who knows? It would be fun to have scenarios and campaigns that cover the KM vs RN in the North Atlantic, or RM vs RN in the Med. Convoy battles, raiders, fleet actions, and wolfpacks. Something to dream of, with the addition of land-based and carrier-based aircraft. All done in a historical way, using an expanded and revamped SAI engine. Probably not very likely to happen at all, but like I said, something to wish for and dream of - SAI2.

In the meantime, I'll continue to play SAI (might even purchase Russo-Japanese War too), while monitoring RTW2 as it matures and improves.

[vonfriedman]

I completely agree with you, especially with regards to the desired SAI2.
Another aspect that I would like to see improved in the sense of making it more user friendly is the SAI Campaign editor.
In all these years a campaign designed by users that is completely new has never appeared (the valuable raider campaign takes place in the Baltic).
I assume - after having tried it myself - that this depends on the difficulty in using the current campaing editor and its very sketchy manual.

[randomizer]

I could echo all of the above with regards to RTW (for which I was a Beta tester) and RTW2. They are certainly wonderful and unique naval games but I could never get a handle on the sandbox nature of the RTW universe. So I still regularly fire up SAI and currently have two campaigns on the go. On 31 May I ran the Jutland Operational scenario as the Grand Fleet and lost the Germans when the weather socked in and I decided not to risk my big ships in a short-range knife fight. Really a lot of fun and a historically reasonable result.

Fredrick made some changes to the combat algorithms for SAI-RJW so if pre-dreadnoughts are of interest, it does an excellent job for that era. Unfortunately there is an odd bug that runs time backwards when you set time before 1900, not really a game killer but the sun rising in the west can be off-putting. I solved it by ignoring the issue or just setting pre-1900 scenarios to 1900.

Scenario building is fun but it's non-linear, that is to say I have always found it impractical to attempt to create a scenario is a set sequence or impose a checklist to the process. Rather, some things (like fuel) require exiting and reloading and some aspects such as the Forces alternate starting point routine takes some practice to get the desired results. Still it's a pretty powerful editor and you can create all manner of great situations.

Vonfriedman's observations regarding the Campaign Editor are spot on. But we need to recall that it was used to create the campaigns that shipped with both games.

So welcome back and don't feel alone, some of us are still here.

[vonfriedman]

One of the strengths of RTW compared to SAI is the great variety of opponents and situations in which a naval battle occurs.
On the other hand, in RTW the aspect of "great tactics" is poorer than in SAI, where it can be the most interesting part of the game.
For example, in a current North Sea campaign my scouts have spotted the Hochseeflotte at night. The problem arises of maintaining contact without suffering too many losses and understanding the mission of the Germans, in order to make the Grand Fleet converge in the best position to face a daytime battle. I've never been in a similar situation while playing RTW.
I believe that by promoting the creation of new SAI campaigns created by the users themselves (a prize competition?), we could obviate the relative repetitiveness of the situations we have in playing with SAI. As a theme of the competition I would assign a hypothetical conflict in the Pacific and / or in the Mediterranean, also in order to facilitate the development of the future SAI2 for NWS.

[pz501]

Jun 8, 2019 1:53:04 GMT -6 vonfriedman said:

I completely agree with you, especially with regards to the desired SAI2.
Another aspect that I would like to see improved in the sense of making it more user friendly is the SAI Campaign editor.
In all these years a campaign designed by users that is completely new has never appeared (the valuable raider campaign takes place in the Baltic).
I assume - after having tried it myself - that this depends on the difficulty in using the current campaing editor and its very sketchy manual.

I agree, the Campaign editor really could use some development to make it more user friendly and understandable. A fleshed out manual would go a long way in helping as a first step.

Right now beyond making a few changes to stock campaigns, and "modding" existing mods, I'm limited in what I can do. It's all a hit or miss experience really, but I'm slowly learning. Funny thing is SAI is really much more easy to play than any of the Gary Grigsby monsters, but the editors included in his titles (War in the Pacific-AE comes to mind) are actually easier to use. Go figure!

Recently another mod was posted here based on the North Sea Campaign that looked pretty interesting. I downloaded it, followed the instructions, and have yet to get it to work at all. That fact that it uses a modified (18"?) game .exe makes it that much more difficult to get running. I had to give up on it finally. I was probably overlooking something very simple. Clearer and more detailed instructions might have helped.

It's all how things are worded and explained I think. SAI, with more time devoted to it (including an effort to increase it's user-friendliness) could make a big come back in popularity I'll bet. 

[randomizer]

I am working on a fictional 1905-06 campaign for SAI-RJW where the Anglo-French Entente go to war with Germany and possibly her allies over the Second Moroccan Crisis. Of course Russia is still fighting Japan and on the verge of revolution so she is out of the fight.

The scenario is not really that far fetched as France, with essentially a blank cheque from Great Britain, was ready to declare war over the protectorship of Morocco but the Kaiser backed down when Germany proved unable to rally any third-party diplomatic support except for Austria-Hungary. Such a war probably would have been limited in scope, at least in the beginning and the prospect of a successful German invasion of France would have been greatly hindered by the lack of heavy artillery and the absence of the tactical superiority of German infantry that was the result of the 1908 Infantry Combat Manual.

So far I have produced the core campaign files and am building the OOB but I need to figure out some aspects of fighting in the Med and the North Sea and what the scope for Imperial naval operations should be, if any. I have an idea where an Entente Player can buy Dreadnought but gives up the two Agamemnon Class to do so.  Historically, 80% of Dreadnoughts armament and most of her armour was looted from the Agamemnon building program. Not sure if I can execute it though, the Campaign Editor really needs an event engine. No idea when (or if) the campaign sees the light of day however.

[dickturpin]

Hi, I am new to modding so hence why the instructions for my mod may be unclear. I also put this together over a number of years in small stages so I may be a bit hazy on exactly what I did.

The 18+ Armour mod is downloaded from the forum and is only necessary to make the improved and advanced directors work; the mod worked fine otherwise without it. The application is SAICampaign_fix. The CAM, BAK, CRF, MSN and Text Documents need to go in the Steam and Iron > Scenarios >Campaigns file. 

It may be that you need to use all my ship designs as the OOB has been modified; these are available within the files that I put on the forum and would need to be copied into the Steam and Iron > Customs File folder.

Otherwise, I agree with the comments on S&I and RTW.

I would recommend the RJW campaign as this plays differently from the WW1 campaigns. Due to the low repair rates for the Russian side, I played this using commerce raiding as my primary strategy and this is very different from anything else available. 


nws-online.proboards.com/thread/1295/18-armor-mod-sai

[gato]

I plan to return to SAI too.

Between summer 2016 and autumn 2018, possibly, winter 2019, I played a lot in RtW-1.

This is wonderful game, but this time I plan to buy SAI RJW, despite the fact that recently release RTW-2, with a big improvements in comparison to RTW-1

Why?

First, I came to that, what, in time to playing in RtW-1, I go to project, construct and combine a prototypes of real ships. I create a conversion of SAI sdf.files, and pointwise make changes in historical projects, and use 640X160 pixels ships silhouettes from Conways All the World`s Figthing Ships books.

Why?

As for my, the real shipbuilding are very alternate in every projecting step. This is no problem to construct new ship in SAI`ship editor, without RtW limitations.

For example, I can`t to create in RTW a Russian Ekaterina II barbette battleship (in fact, I can, but with ship file editing in project list, and orders it without opening this file). I want to have a well history balanced opponent naval projects, such Japanese Asama-class, etc. 

The second, I have a big interest to Victorian Age Naval Warfare, and real naval clashes.

Absolutely, SAI & RtW have a excellent deep, but today I want to experiment with Russo-Japanese Naval War.

Then of course I go to buy RtW-2. But, first, RJW.

I want to express my deepest appreciation to Fredrik, and him team.

SAI & RtW are a brilliant naval wargames, with fine accuracy and  analytical generalization of the Naval Warfare issues of 1900-1925 historical period.

In conclusion  I want to note that I playng this last year in Pride of Nations (a interesting, and enough accurate AGEOD`s Victorian Age grand-strategy model). It`s а fine, but unfortunately, there is no ship designer option ...

[nikademus]

Jun 7, 2019 23:19:40 GMT -6 pz501 said:

Over the last few years I've been neglecting SAI and playing RTW most of the time. I purchased RTW2 on day one, but in this last week or so I've returned to SAI, and will be giving RTW (both games) a break.

Why? Hard to explain, but SAI after all these years just feels more "real" to me. I enjoy playing historical and semi historical campaigns and scenarios more, and while the RTW games are really well done, and I do like the ship design aspects, they somehow (especially RTW2) are now failing to "scratch the itch". Can't really put my finger on it, but RTW2 has left me a bit disinterested despite all of the new features and a whole lot of new and very enthusiastic players supporting and playing it. That's a good thing, and I hope the player base continues to grow. Right now though, it's just not for me.

I'll be staying right here for a while, despite the fact that all development of SAI seems to have ceased. I've even started to tinker with the scenario and campaign editors...not as hard as I thought it would be!

Maybe one day SAI will be expanded to cover WW II. (I know a few user experiments/mods were attempted.) Who knows? It would be fun to have scenarios and campaigns that cover the KM vs RN in the North Atlantic, or RM vs RN in the Med. Convoy battles, raiders, fleet actions, and wolfpacks. Something to dream of, with the addition of land-based and carrier-based aircraft. All done in a historical way, using an expanded and revamped SAI engine. Probably not very likely to happen at all, but like I said, something to wish for and dream of - SAI2.

In the meantime, I'll continue to play SAI (might even purchase Russo-Japanese War too), while monitoring RTW2 as it matures and improves.

Feel similar.   But I think I can put a more specific reason.     Simply,  its too generic.    My bad for not doing better research before purchasing.    My expectation was that if say,  I chose the 1920 scenario, i'd be faced with the historical fleets at the end of WWI and could then build/scrap/upgrade accordingly.....in both Treaty and non-Treaty situations.    Instead.....i found that every nation pretty much started the game with the same fictional cookie cutter designs.......often in the image of a Bellerophon class Dreadnought.


A purely fictional universe for me at least simply has far less appeal.

[vonfriedman]

The eighty years since the beginning of WW2 has passed without SAI2 appearing. Perhaps we can hope that the NWS team will want to do it before December 7, 2021?
In that case I would have some other suggestions to improve the current SAI game mechanism.
In situations where, given the disparity of forces, one can expect that the ships moved by AI will flee, I have often seen that, after a while, they come back and are more or less easily sunk. Perhaps this depends on an invariability of the behavioral mode (attack, normal, cautious). Beatty, who behaved in attack mode at the beginning of his unfortunate encounter with Hipper at Jutland, became cautious (albeit in a somewhat messy way) when he received news of the approach of the Hochseeflotte.
Furthermore, in the game at the campaign level, AI does not always seem to respect the principle of concentration of strength, dividing its ships into various groups that do not always collaborate effectively with each other.
In theaters of war that include islands and sea passages, ships moved by the AI ​​find it difficult to move from one area to another. This is particularly noticeable in the Mediterranean (I have direct experience of this, having developed a campaign in this environment) but it would probably also hinder a simulation of naval operations around Guadalcanal or the Gulf of Leyte.
In a recent simulation of mine I was able to sink several enemy ships while the bulk of the AI forces, much stronger than my squadron, was a short distance north of the Strait of Messina (between Sicily and Italy mainland), which failed in any way to go across. This defect could be attenuated by virtually rounding off the jagged contours of the coastline, so that ships moved by AI can slide along a less uneven path, avoiding being trapped, as often happens. In my Mediterranean campaign - which will soon reappear in an improved version - I proceeded to create false mined zones that have a smooth border.
It also seems to me that when the route followed by the AI ships takes them close to a friendly base, they apparently forget about their mission and disappear into the port, even if they have not suffered any damage.
Finally: the effectiveness of the submarines seems terribly under-valued. In WW1 and WW2 many warships were sunk by submarines. IN SAI one can lead his ships on a real UBoote trap (I tried to do it with a dozen of them, in a specially made scenario) without suffering damage if not very, very rarely.

[randomizer]

Well, no U-Boat trap ever actually succeeded in reaching the capital ships and way back when, SAI submarines were far closer to their historical effectiveness than in the final, current version.

Once upon a time there were loud and virulent screams of "Unfair", "Inaccurate", "Unplayable" from much of the community since the campaign losses through submarine attacks tended to approach the catastrophic. Much of this was due, in my opinion, to the inflated operational tempo allowed in the campaign. More frequent sorties by capital ships equalled greater exposure to submarine attack equalled more casualties to submarines.

I recall that the original SAI forum (lost due to a hack) was chock full of objections to this feature of the game and while Fredrik or William might remember differently, dumbing down the submarines' effectiveness in later versions was a popular change from the initial release.

If you give submarines their historical power you run a very real risk of making your battle fleets largely irrelevant in the game, which is exactly what happened historically. Probably an unintended and negative consequence for a game designed to model surface gunnery combat.

[vonfriedman]

As for the submarines, it might be worth trying a fine tuning of the model and - maybe - leaving the player the choice if he wants a simulation as close as possible to the historical events or another one where surface combat is preferred.
To the limit, one could aim at a deepening of various aspects of submarine / anti-submarine warfare in a period that also saw strange realizations appearing, such as the steam SS of the British K class and, at the same time, the advanced submarine killers of the R class.

[gregb7111]

An SAI2 would be an instant buy for me.