How do I learn about things?

moltobenny · 07-29-09, 04:04 PM

Big fan of the game -- the slow, grueling, almost majestic nature of naval combat just does it for me. My question is, for someone who likes the game, likes the genre, but doesn't know much about the equipment and weaponry being modeled, and how to best use it, is there some easy-to-find, easy-to-use repository of information like that?

I know there's countless history books I could pore through, but something more like a tutorial or reference guide would be helpful just to get started.

Thanks!

MoToM · 07-29-09, 05:04 PM

A fair bit of digging involved but the Distant Guns forum on Gamesquad has lengthy disscusions and plenty of regular players happy to answer most questions.

The wiki has some info but not everything.

Raptor1 · 07-29-09, 05:16 PM

Most things usually comes from general knowledge of the era and the navies involved. Otherwise, I can't help much except for the raw technical data.

Navweaps is an excellent place if you want to know about the performance of guns and such at the time

The Dreadnought Project has some interesting stuff

Otherwise, most of what Wikipedia says about the ships and the like is reliable, I believe

Bullethead · 07-29-09, 05:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by moltobenny

I know there's countless history books I could pore through, but something more like a tutorial or reference guide would be helpful just to get started.

Well, what specifically do you want to know? That would let me point you in the right direction or just tell you myself

. The DG manual, however, does have some useful tidbits in it.

alexsmith · 07-30-09, 04:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bullethead

The DG manual, however, does have some useful tidbits in it.

Sorry for inconvenience, mr. Bullethead, you probably missed my post about manual. Not just DG1.5's contains some obsolete data but also there is (IMHO) a lack of important information concerning gunnery and accuracy. For example - COMPLETE list of factors affecting accuracy, description of circumstances they appear in, possible tips & tricks, examples etc. Historical and technical information is probably not quite enough - I would say either manual upgrade or separate manual (say to download from SES website) would be very helpfull...

jdkbph · 07-31-09, 12:02 PM

Asked for and dismissed many times. This is apparently viewed as pearls before the unwashed paying masses, trade secret, if-they-told-us-they'd-have-to-kill-us, or whatever, type information.

They like to think their sim is so good that all you need to know is the real world stuff in order to understand the game. However, significant "inconsistencies" have been discovered in area like gunnery modeling (subsequently argued, flamed and vehemently denied by company reps and fan bois alike, with accompanying suggestions that any such "perceived" anomaly must be the result of end user stupidity and incompetence) that warrant a closer look at the sim engine.

Denied.

But even if they had nailed everything just so, we know there's a line drawn when it comes to fidelity... particularly in an entertainment type product. Knowing where that line was drawn - or more specifically, knowing exactly what factors influence things like gunnery (and to what degree) and which do not - would be very helpful when it comes to understanding the game.

Denied.

And don't bother posting on gamesquad. Criticism, contructive or otherwise - and this includes uncomfortable questions such you pose here - is simply not tolerated.

JD

Bullethead · 07-31-09, 03:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jdkbph

And don't bother posting on gamesquad. Criticism, contructive or otherwise - and this includes uncomfortable questions such you pose here - is simply not tolerated.

Now JD, where do you get off saying stuff like this? In this very thread, I asked the OP what he wanted to talk about and he ain't been back since.

As for stuff going on in GameSquad, how many mega pages of text have I typed over there explaining how stuff works? Quite a lot of it has found its way into the Wiki.

Which, in case anybody here is interested, check this out: http://<a href="http://jutland.wikia...s:_Jutland</a>

So I ask again--What do you want to know?

jdkbph · 07-31-09, 04:16 PM

I think he (and I and many others) would like a peek at some of the inner working. Not code, mind you, but jut an idea of what affects what and how. For instance, how hit problabilities are calculated and what are the factors that modify those probabilities.

I just had a look at some of my old SSI naval warfare computer game manuals (Warship and Battlecruiser) and even back in the day that information was provided.

I'm not getting why this should be top secret.

alexsmith · 07-31-09, 04:38 PM

mr. Bullethead! Do you ignore my posts at all?

2jdkbph: I think possible reason for ignoring such requests and not to give detailed vital information may be the fear of criticism of game models

For example mr. Bullethead declares that "computer have not any advantage to player" - which is either lie or misunderstanding which is worse. There are SO MANY examples of that I'm tired to shout

But when I ask detailed question - he prefer to ignore it or just answer common words like "you just got bad luck". Altough there are not many guys who do ask such questions - most are quite happy with "great look"...

cj95 · 07-31-09, 08:33 PM

I cant believe this stupid arguement is still going on.

How come when its your point of view it has to be true, but when its the majority of everybody elses view its 'fan bias' or company 'secrets' or something else?

Jutland and DG perform remarkably. Most ppl think so. I think so.

But I guess we're all idiots because we're having fun instad of bitching nonstop.

Jeez we get the point you hate the game.

Buddahaid · 07-31-09, 09:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alexsmith

mr. Bullethead! Do you ignore my posts at all?

I ignore them. Ooops!

Buddahaid

alexsmith · 08-01-09, 04:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cj95

I cant believe this stupid arguement is still going on.

How come when its your point of view it has to be true, but when its the majority of everybody elses view its 'fan bias' or company 'secrets' or something else?

Jeez we get the point you hate the game.

Many people are eating hamburgers with cola - are they also right - just for as many of them? Those who watch stupid TV shows - are they? The majority means nothing. I am the same customer as any other - I also payed my money for the game. I don't hate it! I just want it to become better. And I want to better understanding of game principles - without that I can't get much pleasure from game. And I'm not the only one who theats things the same - about that "stupid question". There are many people concerning about that - I know them. Maybe they just not as active as I am

Quote:

But I guess we're all idiots because we're having fun instad of bitching nonstop.

Most people love pop-music instead of - don't know - King Crimson - which I do. This means neither they're idiots nor me. Most people always content about their lifes, some are not - and these idiots always push history forward

Quote:

Jutland and DG perform remarkably. Most ppl think so. I think so.

You think, I think - that's not the point. The reality is obvios

Zakalwe · 08-01-09, 06:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jdkbph

And don't bother posting on gamesquad. Criticism, contructive or otherwise - and this includes uncomfortable questions such you pose here - is simply not tolerated.

This Sir,

is, to put it mildly, not true. Very few posts on Gameaquad have been moderated, IIRC no post has been ever deleted and IF there had action from the mods, it was mostly when things got personal. If you don`t like the aswers you get, well this is another piece of cake. Plus, you know that you and others are pulling some legs at times, don`t you?

Critisism even often led to patches. See f.e. "The Duel" with EOI often being hammered with the first salvoes. I don`t know how many bug reports or suggestions I added to the ticket system, I think my count is in the 40ies now. Most of them where answered within 24 hours and IIRC all cured or explained why it wasn`t a bug later.

As for the factors influencing gunnery, BH often explained it, most of it is too to be found on the Jutland Wiki. And comparing it to the manual or the mechanics under the hood of Fighting Steel, well this is just apples to oranges IMO. I think Jutland and DG have a much more sophisticated gunnery and damage model, which isn`t just based on hitpoints. So I would bet, it is not as easy to put out hard figures, like in the FS manual.

cj95 · 08-01-09, 08:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alexsmith

and these idiots always push history forward

ROTFLMAO!!
Pushing history forward? Oh geez that was funny. I didnt realize you were such a brave revolutionary.

Hee hee....

jdkbph · 08-01-09, 09:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zakalwe

This Sir, is, to put it mildly, not true.

Sorry, but this has been my experience. I watched as two very knowledgeable and even tempered individuals were shouted down by a couple of rabid fan bois for daring to suggest there was something amiss with the gunnery model. Everyone saw the same thing I saw. But no one had the balls to speak up. That's when I decided Gamesquad was not worth my time.

Quote:

Plus, you know that you and others are pulling some legs at times, don`t you?

Yes, but this is not one of those times.

Quote:

Most of them where answered within 24 hours and IIRC all cured or explained why it wasn`t a bug later.

Yes, they are particularly good at explaining why they are correct and we are wrong.

Quote:

So I would bet, it is not as easy to put out hard figures, like in the FS manual.

For sheer complexity it's hard to beat War in the Pacific. Yet WitP is quite thoroughly documented. Jutland's manual looks more like a FAQ. Different games to be sure, but I think the comparison is valid.

Oh, and BTW....

WitP Admiral's Edition installed on my machine without phoning home! Even more amazing is that just this morning I went over to the Matrix Games web site and...

It's still there!!

I was fully expecting that army of Chinese and Russian pirates SES is always going on about to have driven them out of business by now!

(yes, that last bit would be an example of me pullling legs

)

JD

07-29-09, 04:04 PM	#1
moltobenny In the Brig Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Banned for spamming Posts: 3 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	How do I learn about things? Big fan of the game -- the slow, grueling, almost majestic nature of naval combat just does it for me. My question is, for someone who likes the game, likes the genre, but doesn't know much about the equipment and weaponry being modeled, and how to best use it, is there some easy-to-find, easy-to-use repository of information like that? I know there's countless history books I could pore through, but something more like a tutorial or reference guide would be helpful just to get started. Thanks!

07-29-09, 05:04 PM	#2
MoToM Watch Join Date: Jan 2009 Posts: 29 Downloads: 2 Uploads: 0	A fair bit of digging involved but the Distant Guns forum on Gamesquad has lengthy disscusions and plenty of regular players happy to answer most questions. The wiki has some info but not everything. __________________ "My rule is: If you meet the weakest vessel, attack; if it is a vessel equal to yours, attack; and if it is stronger than yours, also attack…" Admiral Stepan O. Makarov

07-29-09, 05:16 PM	#3
Raptor1 Navy Seal Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Stavka Posts: 8,211 Downloads: 13 Uploads: 0	Most things usually comes from general knowledge of the era and the navies involved. Otherwise, I can't help much except for the raw technical data. Navweaps is an excellent place if you want to know about the performance of guns and such at the time The Dreadnought Project has some interesting stuff Otherwise, most of what Wikipedia says about the ships and the like is reliable, I believe __________________ Current Eastern Front status: Probable Victory

07-31-09, 04:38 PM	#9
alexsmith Loader Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 81 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	mr. Bullethead! Do you ignore my posts at all? 2jdkbph: I think possible reason for ignoring such requests and not to give detailed vital information may be the fear of criticism of game models For example mr. Bullethead declares that "computer have not any advantage to player" - which is either lie or misunderstanding which is worse. There are SO MANY examples of that I'm tired to shout But when I ask detailed question - he prefer to ignore it or just answer common words like "you just got bad luck". Altough there are not many guys who do ask such questions - most are quite happy with "great look"... Last edited by alexsmith; 07-31-09 at 04:52 PM.

07-31-09, 08:33 PM	#10
cj95 Lieutenant Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Houston, Texas Posts: 258 Downloads: 141 Uploads: 0	I cant believe this stupid arguement is still going on. How come when its your point of view it has to be true, but when its the majority of everybody elses view its 'fan bias' or company 'secrets' or something else? Jutland and DG perform remarkably. Most ppl think so. I think so. But I guess we're all idiots because we're having fun instad of bitching nonstop. Jeez we get the point you hate the game. __________________ . >> USS TEXAS BB-35 Restoration CrewMember <<

07-31-09, 12:02 PM	#6
jdkbph Captain Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 508 Downloads: 104 Uploads: 0	Asked for and dismissed many times. This is apparently viewed as pearls before the unwashed paying masses, trade secret, if-they-told-us-they'd-have-to-kill-us, or whatever, type information. They like to think their sim is so good that all you need to know is the real world stuff in order to understand the game. However, significant "inconsistencies" have been discovered in area like gunnery modeling (subsequently argued, flamed and vehemently denied by company reps and fan bois alike, with accompanying suggestions that any such "perceived" anomaly must be the result of end user stupidity and incompetence) that warrant a closer look at the sim engine. Denied. But even if they had nailed everything just so, we know there's a line drawn when it comes to fidelity... particularly in an entertainment type product. Knowing where that line was drawn - or more specifically, knowing exactly what factors influence things like gunnery (and to what degree) and which do not - would be very helpful when it comes to understanding the game. Denied. And don't bother posting on gamesquad. Criticism, contructive or otherwise - and this includes uncomfortable questions such you pose here - is simply not tolerated. JD

07-31-09, 04:16 PM	#8
jdkbph Captain Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 508 Downloads: 104 Uploads: 0	I think he (and I and many others) would like a peek at some of the inner working. Not code, mind you, but jut an idea of what affects what and how. For instance, how hit problabilities are calculated and what are the factors that modify those probabilities. I just had a look at some of my old SSI naval warfare computer game manuals (Warship and Battlecruiser) and even back in the day that information was provided. I'm not getting why this should be top secret.