PDA

View Full Version : Truely making something new



TLAM Strike
01-13-2008, 04:32 PM
Ok now we could always try to make another SC or DW or SH but what does that really give us? Let take a look at what we have in other sims and what we want. We are all enthusiasts and have no need to market this to the masses. Now what do we want? Something new I assume or we wouldn’t be attempting to undertake a project like this!

What hasn’t been done in a major sub sim?

Accurate Ballast Tanks: Actually controlling the Ballast and Trim tanks to dive a submarine. This is the heart of a submarine! Most games just have a button or keystroke and the sub dives and surfaces at the players will but I think any die-hard player of DW or SHIII/IV can figure out how to dive and trim a sub if we give them the tools.

Accurate Fire Control: Few games have every given us an in depth system for launching weapons. The only one I can think of was Fast Attack. Giving the player control over which tactic a torpedo uses, what direction is snakes or circles, what depth its running at and the ability to change its depth. Limiting the number of fish under wire guidance. Maybe even simulating the individual racks for each weapon meaning a player will have to strategize where he puts his weapons.

Different Radios: I can’t think of any game that’s simulated ELF and VLF traffic in addition to the normal VHF, UHF and Satcomm traffic. Oh and SLOT buoys! Certenly intresting MP prospects with realistic Comms.

System not Interface based architecture: One of the problems with SCU and DW is that each platform had its own interface folder instead of a common database of interfaces that each platform draws from. Each sub should have a simple text file that the program searches using for each interface allowing a programmer to make a new sub using interfaces from different subs without copying each interface file again and again. Virtual Sailor and FS9 did this to some extent.

Dr.Sid
01-13-2008, 04:55 PM
I consider all these as 'must have' features and I plan them since the start. There are some more:

- better control over micromanagement - more autocrew options.
- strategic options .. little crossover toward fleet control - commanding AI units, or at least suggesting what they should to (with correct comms, too). Or even one player able to switch between let's say helo and frigate, or frigate and sub - but only when they will be at comms situation, so no information leakage occurs.
- AI units follows totally same rules as controllable (or controlled at the moment).
- Global scope

Zachstar
01-14-2008, 12:42 AM
Those are important as long as you allow people to have the simple interfaces as well.

I see your point TLAM, However it seems now that Sid is the ONLY one working on a nonclassified modern submarine simulation project.

Sad as it may seem... It may end up being the simulation of the masses...

If you ask me. It seems the whole idea of accurate simulation seems to be taking a back seat when these game designers realize the scope of what they are getting involved in. Obviously, a modern submarine sim that will sell for 50 bucks needs to look atleast as good as SH4, add in all the effects and complexity on top of that and you can see why you need a huge amount of start money.

Perhaps the next generation of computer technology will urge the simulation developers to develop more projects.

Phil21
01-14-2008, 09:12 AM
I think the two points "getting an accurate simulation (with ballast tanks, fire controll and Sonar/TMA)" and "getting more controll over micromanagment e.g. Autocrew" have to be seen together:
If you have a very complex model of your simulation you can't do everything by yourself. At least not in that qualitiy you need. SO you can chose to let the Autocrew handle the thing. Thats the way DW did it.
The next step would be to make the Autocrew some kind of 'customizable'. Take TMA as an example. Right now, you can only turn it on or off. The next step would be to make it possible to assigne it different contacts only, so the low priority merchant is watched by aTMA, while you keep an eye on the sub...
You can extend this to a point where you can give the AI more input from the sonar (range estimations from WAA, DEMON etc.) for its calculations rather then pure geometry (or true data for DW)....
Same apllies for everything else: Sonar, Radar, Trim tanks etc....

So the more complex the simulation gets, the smarter has the Autocrew to be...

Zachstar
04-26-2008, 05:23 PM
There is a multitude of AI research over the years. For instance it has gotten to the point where AI has a nervous system and does animations on the fly rather than using canned animations.

Now of course in a subsim I talk about reactive AI rather than truth based. AI that takes what info it can to determine if action or reaction is needed or note to the captain and wait for instructions.

You can likely find tons of info from universities on the subject of smart AI