RA and Alfa tau - A case for freespeach

[Raptor_341]

>> This thread is not to talk about the mods per say, but more to discuss why our old thread about these "less than EULA legal" mods have been banned. After checking on the forum rules, i could see nothing wrong about discussing mods, and seeing that this makes up 90% of what we do here, i hope not. Its not about SCS, its about letting us at subsim have the right disguss and talk about the things that we please reguarding our simulations without having it closed off.

[Onkel Neal]

First, you may want to spell "speech" correctly. ;)

Be patient, let's see what we can do. Free speech is welcome but we do have responsibilities.

thanks
Neal

[goldorak]

Let me say that closing threads only for talking about mods, albeit mods of dubious legal status should not happen.
We are not giving links, subsim is not hosting those incriminating files so honestly there shouldn't be censorship going on here. :-?

[MBot]

Thanks Neal for contacting SCS about that. Meanwhile I think we should respect his wish and wait with further discussions.

It is his forum after all. Free speech does not exist in a private forum by default, it is Neals right to decide what to allow and what not.

[goldorak]

Thanks Neal for contacting SCS about that. Meanwhile I think we should respect his wish and wait with further discussions.

It is his forum after all. Free speech does not exist in a private forum by default, it is Neals right to decide what to allow and what not.

Fair enough. Even if I think the decision to close the thread was quite drastic.

[Castout]

Fair enough. Even if I think the decision to close the thread was quite drastic.

It was a gesture to show that subsim is serious.

Seems Neal is fair enough. I'll trust he will advocate for us, DW fans in this matter ;).

[Raptor_341]

>> Other than the "Speech" misspell :damn:, i suppose i will just wait. I didnt know that this is a private forum, so its fair enough but i still disagree. If we are not allowed to talk about mods like this in the future, i will rethink being apart of this community. Until then, i will wait and see.

[Onkel Neal]

Thanks guys, I appreciate that. Yes, it is a private forum but at the same time we don't ignore that it is your forum, too. When DW was new, SCS held the position that they had the sole right to add playables to the game, and the community acknowledged this right. That kind of respect between community and developers is a rare and wonderful thing. Now that DW has been out a while, perhaps SCS will consider mods a benefit.

Neal

[Castout]

Thanks guys, I appreciate that. Yes, it is a private forum but at the same time we don't ignore that it is your forum, too. When DW was new, SCS held the position that they had the sole right to add playables to the game, and the community acknowledged this right. That kind of respect between community and developers is a rare and wonderful thing. Now that DW has been out a while, perhaps SCS will consider mods a benefit.

Neal

We'll be waiting for your news Mr Neal ;)

[PeriscopeDepth]

Any news here?

And if it's news we're not allowed to talk about as of yet, please send a PM. :)

PD

[Raptor_341]

>> Aye, same here. And i found disturbing things about RA that i need to share thats plus one for AT. my head is spinning.

[Onkel Neal]

I did receive a response, they are going have a meeting over it and get back with me.

Neal

[Castout]

I did receive a response, they are going have a meeting over it and get back with me.

Neal

Thanks Neal the community owes you for your effort ;). Much appreciated

[Molon Labe]

I did receive a response, they are going have a meeting over it and get back with me.

Neal

So they left someone behind in the lighthouse after all!

[To be]

Quite unprecedented.

[PeriscopeDepth]

I did receive a response, they are going have a meeting over it and get back with me.

Neal
Thank you for presenting our case to them Neal. I appreciate this as well.

PD

[Raptor_341]

>> Ill just reply here to be quick. I got alot of PMs over the "issues" i found with RA. Its not a major bug, but i didnt want to play it until i fixed it after i found it. I dont know who uses DWedit here but i do to check stats and make small changes if i need to. RA has, what i think, are poor damage values for most torpedos. Even advanced ones such as the shaped charge Mk50 in stock RA only do about 50 damage, not even enough to sink a kilo. You would need 10 to sink the phoon. Shes strong but i dont think even she could take 10 torps. So what i did was just update the damage back to LWMAI values which are much more on par with how deadly a torpedo would be, save for that 30 pound POS one. I like RA, but the damage is my biggest problem, even the harpoon only does 90 damage. So after i fixed it, then it works well. I could make a better change then post it so others dont have to put up with useless ASW torps.

[Raptor_341]

What i meant also is that AT has good damage values right off the start, but i believe RA favours the submarines because of badly weak ASW torps, even the large ones. After its changed though it performs much better.

[goldorak]

Yes it can be a thorny issue, depending on who you talk to.
Lwami damage model is not perfect either. The weapons are much too powerful.

[Raptor_341]

Its not perfect im sure but i think its the best ive seen. I dont think some people really think about how much damage a torp slamming into the side of the pressure hull would do. And seeing as DW doesnt model flooding, i believe its best to model the torps around the max damage as you all know you need 100% damage to sink AI where as in realife you just need to criple it. I know it changes with who you talk to but im sure they make AWS torps such as the MK 50 and 54 to sink something, not just put a little dent in the side of a kilo. The spearfish "should" be able to sink a tyhoon with a single hit as it uses a double shaped charge to go through both hulls. But im sure you all understand what im talking about.

[goldorak]

Well I just did a test, a p-3 dropping a lightweight torpedo on a 688i and it scores 100% damage with lwami. It seems just too powerful.
Now on the other hand, its true the other mod does tone down a little bit too much some weapons. Same exercise, a p-3 charging a 688i took me 3 lightweight torpedos to sink.
I think *good average values* should be in between those 2 extremes.

[Raptor_341]

thats what ive done - ive made it a good balance i think. However, the 688i is nothing special, no double hull, could it really stand up to a 100 kg shaped charge? Realism is more important than balance, and SCS always had Mk50s sinking 688s with a single hit like LWMAI. However, in the changes i made to RA a single Mk50 will criple, but not always sink a 688.

[Raptor_341]

what i can do is set to work testing and refineing the damage vaules to find the best realism i can with the data i can take from SCS 1.04, LWAMI, and online information to tweak the damages for realisic levels, then if subguru could host the file it would be can easy fix to the otherwise good RA. Kind of like taking LWAMI and mixing it with RA, but keeping the great RA doctine and units.

[Castout]

Pls share your work in the end. Sounds interesting

[Castout]

Well I just did a test, a p-3 dropping a lightweight torpedo on a 688i and it scores 100% damage with lwami. It seems just too powerful.
Now on the other hand, its true the other mod does tone down a little bit too much some weapons. Same exercise, a p-3 charging a 688i took me 3 lightweight torpedos to sink.
I think *good average values* should be in between those 2 extremes.

Hmm it's supposed to be a secret but the 688i is using plasma shield :damn:


:rotfl:

[Kazuaki Shimazaki II]

>> Ill just reply here to be quick. I got alot of PMs over the "issues" i found with RA. Its not a major bug, but i didnt want to play it until i fixed it after i found it. I dont know who uses DWedit here but i do to check stats and make small changes if i need to. RA has, what i think, are poor damage values for most torpedos. Even advanced ones such as the shaped charge Mk50 in stock RA only do about 50 damage, not even enough to sink a kilo. You would need 10 to sink the phoon. Shes strong but i dont think even she could take 10 torps. So what i did was just update the damage back to LWMAI values which are much more on par with how deadly a torpedo would be, save for that 30 pound POS one. I like RA, but the damage is my biggest problem, even the harpoon only does 90 damage. So after i fixed it, then it works well. I could make a better change then post it so others dont have to put up with useless ASW torps.

Well, I hadn't really checked the damage, but I should have been more sensitivity when missiles keep hitting my Udaloy with so little effect.

Looking at it, RA pretty much just uses the 1kg warhead = 1 point damage system (though why are the Harpoons only 90?) Which is OK. The real problem is how much variation there is in survivability with different ships in different conditions that using one number just doesn't work.

For example, it actually makes some sense for the a shaped charge torpedo like the Mk50 not to sink a Kilo, or even for Spearfish not to bag a Typhoon.

The issue is that the shaped charge quickly punches a hole in the sub, and THEN the water floods in, but not so much the blast. At under 100m, the compartmentalization might hold (that's what it is there for) and with the reserve buoyancy the sub may well survive (though it won't be doing much fighting). However, at a bit over 100m, the chances fall to zero because most of the internal compartments are only rated for 100m (not full pressure) and so as the compartment floods at great depth it starts going into other compartments...

Meanwhile, the same Mk50 would certainly spell the doom for any submerged US submarine at any depth too deep to VERY quickly patch the hole in the hull since Thresher with their 3 compartment layout and a low reserve buoyancy. The compartment is holed, it floods, it sinks.

I would suggest, therefore, instead of fiddling with the damage, you focus on fiddling with the survivability scores.

[PeriscopeDepth]

I think, except for a few select subs, ANY torpedo hit will likely mission kill you anyways. And I don't think depth is a variable that DW calculates when damaged?

PD

[Raptor_341]

A mission kill for a human, not AI. I mostly fly ASW, but keep in mind im not anti-submarine either, im just looking for the best realism thats all. Ill set to work on it this weekend/next week, let you know how it goes and share it with you all, i think it will work very well. However, one suggested i change the "survivability" of each unit, what did you mean by that? As far as i can tell all i can model is damage done and units "total" health. As for 1 kg to 1 hit point, thats a poor system to model the effects of taking direct hits which blow a hole in the hull... and the rest we know from there. Im going to try to get it the best i can, where a very light non-shaped charge torp ( cant remember number.. A244 or something ) will be very unlikly to sink say a 688 with a single hit, but the advanced mk50 and 54s can and will most of the time, yet will have less of an effect on the heavys such as tyhoon with the double hull. And yes, the DDs will be sinkable again.

[suBB]

:hmm:

i think if you guys continue on this path of discussion about RA, you are asking for another thead lock.. or possibly worse... since you obviously didn't learn the 1st time around.... :roll:

[Castout]

You may be right. So please discontinue further discussion on either RA or Alfa Tau until Neal has received news from Sonalyst. We cannot hope to be taken seriously or respected if we do not respect or take other people seriously. Besides I believe we are all hoping for the best to RA and Alfa Tau.

[suBB]

You may be right. So please discontinue further discussion on either RA or Alfa Tau until Neal has received news from Sonalyst. We cannot hope to be taken seriously or respected if we do not respect or take other people seriously.
rig ship for ultra quiet.....

:ping:

[Onkel Neal]

You may be right. So please discontinue further discussion on either RA or Alfa Tau until Neal has received news from Sonalyst. We cannot hope to be taken seriously or respected if we do not respect or take other people seriously. Besides I believe we are all hoping for the best to RA and Alfa Tau.

Yes, I hope the best for RA/Alfa Tau, as well. I'm always in favor of new mods and improvements to subsims. I am not a member of the Sonalysts company, so it's not my business to know their daily status. In light of DW's age, I advocated allowing RA/Alfa Tau, but of course, I have to respect their commercial decision. I do not know how mods affect their business. I trust them, if they think it will not be a problem, Sonalysts will be happy to allow it. If it costs them business with non-game customers, they may be reluctant to allow it.

thanks
Neal

[Hitman]

Damn, it might be too late now that you have mailed them, but since SCS's main concern was the use of MODERN platforms you could have asked them if they would allow us to implement COLD WAR ones, i.e. those that no modern Navy uses like the Victor III, Alfa, Sturgeon, etc. :hmm:

[Bill Nichols]

I did receive a response, they are going have a meeting over it and get back with me.

Neal

At least they didn't say NO outright. Once the corporate lawyers get involved, though, I can guess what their answer will be...


(My fantasy: Sonalysts will decide to completely finish DW, update its graphics to the latest state-of-the-art, and fully support community mods, like what ThirdWire has been doing with their Strike Fighters series. Wouldn't that be nice?)

:know:

[Raptor_341]

standing by for now.

[goldorak]

(My fantasy: Sonalysts will decide to completely finish DW, update its graphics to the latest state-of-the-art, and fully support community mods, like what ThirdWire has been doing with their Strike Fighters series. Wouldn't that be nice?)

:know:

Sonalysts just throw us a bone here. How about using digital distribution to distribute you know electronic content. How about an udaloy for 10$ ? You don't have to design a whole new game for that, just give us some new playables, either bundle them together and sell it, or sell them individually.
Forget retail, just use the frickkin' internet as independent developers do to distribute DLC.
You know, you could from time to time issue a patch to correct the bugs and crashes that still occur in DW, you could sell single models etc... The options are yours to make.

[LoBlo]

SCS could easily not make any statement one way or the other.

That way we would mod in our community yet their *official* customers (the US military) would still be dependent on their official releases for upgrades. IE, the US military would not be using the mods, but we as laypersons will.

Seems the ideal solution to me.

[Castout]

I don't think they are going to be silent. Because they responded to Neal mediation and told him that they were going to have a meeting over it.

[Raptor_341]

ill believe it when i see it.

[Sea Demon]

(My fantasy: Sonalysts will decide to completely finish DW, update its graphics to the latest state-of-the-art, and fully support community mods, like what ThirdWire has been doing with their Strike Fighters series. Wouldn't that be nice?)

:know:

Sonalysts just throw us a bone here. How about using digital distribution to distribute you know electronic content. How about an udaloy for 10$ ? You don't have to design a whole new game for that, just give us some new playables, either bundle them together and sell it, or sell them individually.
Forget retail, just use the frickkin' internet as independent developers do to distribute DLC.
You know, you could from time to time issue a patch to correct the bugs and crashes that still occur in DW, you could sell single models etc... The options are yours to make.

I agree with both the Subguru and goldorak here. And I have always wondered myself why Sonalysts couldn't commercialize some of those military playables and sell them to us by internet distribution. I remember Jamie Carlson saying that it sounds easier than it really is. But if they have built playable models for the military, what makes it so difficult to commercialize it and distribute thos already made playables for a fair price on the web? Never got an answer to that one. Here's hoping we get some answers from Sonalysts soon.

[MBot]

Yes, it is interesting that it seems SCS could never build their entertainment products more upon developements for the military. Eagle Dynamics has made that step with their new DCS line quite well. Recently they announced that they could port the A-10C they built for a US National Guard desktop simulator over to their commercial DCS line. Obviously with some adjustments to sensitive components, but still to their extremly high quality and realism standart.

But perhaps there also is a different philosophy about protection of data between the military branches. While detailed information about USAF aircraft are quite well available (flight manuals, tactical manuals etc.), even Eagly Dynamics was unable to optain the necessary documentation to simulate USN aircraft (for entertainment). So it sounds plausible to me that the USN would forbid SCS to use platforms developed for them in entertainment software, even if those are not necessary a classification problem. The information restriction of the USN just seem to be tighter than those of the USAF. Unfortunatly for us the USAF does not have ships and subs :)

[PeriscopeDepth]

The platforms in question are also much different. The A-10 is a 30 year old close support aircraft. There is nothing that remarkable/need to be classified about its performance. Submarines and naval combat systems/sensors are very different. I bet DCS would run into some trouble trying to get accurate F-22 performance data.

PD

[goldorak]

Forgive me if I'm being boneheaded, but wouldn't the classified part be in the database values. Can you qualify a low polygon 3d model classified ? Really ?
If they are so afraid, why don't they let the community make the 3d model/s with the different stations and then SCS would fill in the blanks interfacing the 3d model/stations with the navalsimengine. Win-win for everyone. The modders are not sued because they haven't actually modified anything and SCS is the only one to know how to "integrate" the models with the navalsimengine.

[MBot]

Very true about F-22 and similar aircraft, the are still off limits for many years.

But consider that the A-10C is a very new development of the A-10 with a top moder avionics suite. That ED received permission to publicise the A-10C was quite a surprise, for both the community and ED. It was first estimated that this would not happen for the next 10 years. Other current frontline fighters that ED has the necessary documentation are the F-15C and F-16C. While these are not the newest generation anymore, they still form the bulk of the USAF.

[goldorak]

Well in this case we are dealing with the Silent Service. How ironic isn't it ?

[OneShot]

Forgive me if I'm being boneheaded, but wouldn't the classified part be in the database values. Can you qualify a low polygon 3d model classified ? Really ?
If they are so afraid, why don't they let the community make the 3d model/s with the different stations and then SCS would fill in the blanks interfacing the 3d model/stations with the navalsimengine. Win-win for everyone. The modders are not sued because they haven't actually modified anything and SCS is the only one to know how to "integrate" the models with the navalsimengine.

I've asked Jamie a similar question back when, the answer I got in regard to using community mods by SCS is basically a big legal issue. Even if the modders would sign a big bunch of papers saying that they forgo any rights and whatever on their mods and SCS can freely use all their work and so on it still would be a problem of sorts.

This issue was adressed when the first LwAmi was released before patch 1.03. One of the major problems back then was the lack of difference between VLADs and DIFARs ... LwAmi adressed this plus some other issues and we asked why SCS not simply uses Lwami for their next patch and puts in some improvements of their own. The aforementioned statement came from Jamie as response.

Bottom line (considering that statement) at the moment thus is that anything developed in the community can only be distributed by the community and while it might be official endorsed by SCS it cant be part of a patch for example.

As for porting over stuff from their military developments ... aside from classification issues is that the NSE has been branched off and the branch for goverment purposes has been continually developed further ... depending on how they did their coding this might pose a serious technical problem when converting or using fixes from one branch for the other. At least thats my guess.

[goldorak]

Bottom line (considering that statement) at the moment thus is that anything developed in the community can only be distributed by the community and while it might be official endorsed by SCS it cant be part of a patch for example.


:o that is so :cry: , even if they wanted to they couldn't possibly follow Lead Pursuit's example.

[MBot]

Bottom line (considering that statement) at the moment thus is that anything developed in the community can only be distributed by the community and while it might be official endorsed by SCS it cant be part of a patch for example.


Its a pitty. I submitted some weapon 3d models to Eagle Dynamics that were included in the Flaming Cliffs 1.11 patch and are now also in Black Shark as far as I know. I didn't sign anything, simply told them by e-mail "you can have them and do with them as you please". While this was only a very minor contribution, other community members have provided quite a significant amount of vehicle and aircraft models for Black Shark (for free). It's a win-win situation for the developer and the community.


The point about branching of the engine sounds pretty plausible.

[goldorak]

Any update on Sonalysts ?

[Linton]

Any update on Sonalysts ?
I think they are too busy counting their money at the moment to worry about DW:
http://archive.theday.com/store/itm.aspx?re=3d068542-38ad-4f33-b6f6-49c3c9d69bfb&itm=art

[Bill Nichols]

Any update on Sonalysts ?

It takes a long time to write a legal brief, you know.
(Lawyers get paid by the hour...)

:know:

[goldorak]

Any update on Sonalysts ?

It takes a long time to write a legal brief, you know.
(Lawyers get paid by the hour...)

:know:


It has to be brief, right to the point, and non ambiguos.
Something along these lines,

Dear DW community,

Don't mod the game.

Sincerly, legal department, SCS.

Ok we will get their refusal in early 2009 :ping: :rotfl:

[Raptor_341]

Any update on Sonalysts ?

It takes a long time to write a legal brief, you know.
(Lawyers get paid by the hour...)

:know:


It has to be brief, right to the point, and non ambiguos.
Something along these lines,

Dear DW community,

Don't mod the game.

Sincerly, legal department, SCS.

Ok we will get their refusal in early 2009 :ping: :rotfl:

> Not that it will stop modding anyways. If you need me ill be working my fix, ill PM when im done. Someone tell me when we can talk about mods again. thanks

[Bill Nichols]

Any update on Sonalysts ?

It takes a long time to write a legal brief, you know.
(Lawyers get paid by the hour...)

:know:


It has to be brief, right to the point, and non ambiguos.
Something along these lines,

Dear DW community,

Don't mod the game.

Sincerly, legal department, SCS.

Ok we will get their refusal in early 2009 :ping: :rotfl:

That will be $7500. Please pay ASAP or late fees will incur.

[GrayOwl]

[/quote] Not that it will stop modding anyways. If you need me ill be working my fix, ill PM when im done. Someone tell me when we can talk about mods again. thanks

obvious never.

[Raptor_341]

Greyowl, good to see you, i need to have a chat with you. ill PM

[Raptor_341]

wtf shore leave? what this thread feels like - oh dam, now a A-ganager?

[Castout]

Not that it will stop modding anyways. If you need me ill be working my fix, ill PM when im done. Someone tell me when we can talk about mods again. thanks
obvious never.[/quote]

Hey I haven't heard from you for a while. How are things going?

[goldorak]

Mr Neal Stevens, have you got any update on SCS regarding these mods ? :ping: :ping:

[LoBlo]

I don't think they are going to be silent. Because they responded to Neal mediation and told him that they were going to have a meeting over it.

They can have the meeting... and decide to just leave it alone.

Its a plus plus for them. The military comes to them for official releases. The mod community generates interest and excitement in their commerical (nonmilitary) products.

Overall I think SCS underestimation of the important of a vigourous/innovative open mod community is a mistake. Sims like Microsoft Flight (an extremely complicated sim) have prospered 2nd to an active rigour mod community that continues to create lasting power/new interest in the software.

[goldorak]

One way or the other it would be correct for them to come here and state once and for all where they stand. Just say yes or no.

[Hawk66]

I don't understand completely yet why Sonalysts does not the same thing as AGSI (Harpoon) or eSim (SteelBeasts Pro) / Bohemia Interactive (Arma/VBS 2)

I doubt that one of the first two mentioned titles reach the number of sold licenses of DW or its predecessors.

Or is the NSE now itself classified?

Why not have an online meeting Sonalysts <-> community (or just some guys) to discuss all the open issues? All the recurrent threads and guessing might be gone.

Sonalysts might not gained any or much profit with DW but at least it helped them surely to improve the NSE for their government customers, so such an approach would be just fair and a respect to their customers IMHO.

[Raptor_341]

Ive already moved on to another forum, waiting for something we are not likely to get is a waste of time. Back to work.

[XabbaRus]

The problem is SCS provide extra platforms for the US NAvy at a cost.

Sure they come with extra bells and whistles but if the modding community adds units and interfaces and the navy just wants a tactical trainer, why go to SCS when you can have a free mod that will suit your needs?

[goldorak]

The problem is SCS provide extra platforms for the US NAvy at a cost.

Sure they come with extra bells and whistles but if the modding community adds units and interfaces and the navy just wants a tactical trainer, why go to SCS when you can have a free mod that will suit your needs?


Well two things,

The Navy DW version could have a license that FORBIDS using non approved and developed in house extensions (in house means developped by SCS).
So even if the Navy wanted to use those free mods they would be infringing on SCS license (or eula) and so could be sued.

Second, even if a mod is free it doesn't mean it can't have a license. Think at all the freeware/opensource software out there, every one of them has a license and they are valid in court. So if the license says, this mod can only be used in a non commerical way you bet the Navy can't use it.
I don't think their tactical trainer falls under the "fun" game category.

The point is this, IF SCS had wanted to clarify the license (and eula) of the game version and the Navy version of DW we wouldn't be in this mess.
Nothing forbids SCS to having 2 different licenses for the two different versions of DW.

[Castout]

I want to have the Navy DW version. . . . . . . . . . . .

[goldorak]

I want to have the Navy DW version. . . . . . . . . . . .

Yeah me too, I have this nightmare that the Navy version has full DX 10 compliance, 32 bit color mode, full support for AA and AF. Full support for an SDK. Hundreds of playables, the simulator doesn't crash when playing the frigate, The radar model is good, the periscope and other masts are not invsibile to radar and leave a wake on the surface of the water.
Meanwhile we're stuck with a 1998 game engine with hurray 16 bit support.
It will be a miracle if the next windows os will be able to support it. :damn:

[Raptor_341]

Aye - you said it. Now then back to RA.

[GrayOwl]

The problem is SCS provide extra platforms for the US NAvy at a cost.

Sure they come with extra bells and whistles but if the modding community adds units and interfaces and the navy just wants a tactical trainer, why go to SCS when you can have a free mod that will suit your needs?

:hmm:
To use modding with a the bugs and wrong loadouts in interfaces!?
And with completely absent physics in program kernel.:rotfl:

After training on such sim all fleet will sink...

[Onkel Neal]

Mr Neal Stevens, have you got any update on SCS regarding these mods ? :ping: :ping:

No, not yet.

[Castout]

I want to have the Navy DW version. . . . . . . . . . . .
Yeah me too, I have this nightmare that the Navy version has full DX 10 compliance, 32 bit color mode, full support for AA and AF. Full support for an SDK. Hundreds of playables, the simulator doesn't crash when playing the frigate, The radar model is good, the periscope and other masts are not invsibile to radar and leave a wake on the surface of the water.
Meanwhile we're stuck with a 1998 game engine with hurray 16 bit support.
It will be a miracle if the next windows os will be able to support it. :damn:

Well I don't dream of all those fancy stuffs....just a maximum level of realism which includes RL sonar performance and modeling, real weapons behavior and capability, real platform performance.

[goldorak]

Well I don't dream of all those fancy stuffs....just a maximum level of realism which includes RL sonar performance and modeling, real weapons behavior and capability, real platform performance.


Me, I just want the real McCoy. Graphics and all. :yep:

[OneShot]

Well I don't dream of all those fancy stuffs....just a maximum level of realism which includes RL sonar performance and modeling, real weapons behavior and capability, real platform performance.
Of course, the usually so open US Navy will be more than happy to have one of its contractors put highly classified and protected data into a freely commercial available product ... most excellent. Now if the other navies of the world could be as forthcomming, then all this guessing about the question "Are Akula's really up to par with a 688(i)" (for example) would finally be over. And thats only the tip of the iceberg ... you could test for "real" what a Mk48 ADCAP does to a Kilo compared to a Typhoon ... the possibilities are endless. If only those pesky people from the military and intelligence communities could be more open about their secrets - we, the honorable simmers, who have every right to have the most accurate information possible could finally rest, assured that our game does represent the reality.

While talking about reality ... how bout returning to it ? To reality I mean, instead of those fantasies ...

[goldorak]

@ OneShot : loosen up a bit, while we are waiting for SCS's final judgement.
You wouldn't want to deny the poor simmers the "what-if" game before being send into oblivion by an army of lawyers now do you ? :rotfl:

[Raptor_341]

>> Well ive been ordered to cease all comments on this thread. To those still around, please keep me posted. If you have questions about my work please PM. Ill be back if and when this is over.

[OneShot]

I'm loose (or on the loose :|\\ ) ... and daydreams are ok, but some comments read like being made while on drugs (or maybe after some serious meditation) ... anyway, such stuff regularly brings out the sarcastic side in me. I just can't help it.

Besides, while I don't hold my breath in regard to SCS changing its stance on community made new playables I surely would appreciate it, if it actually happens.

Aside from that, while some people might believe that their anger (and thus their comments in regard to SCS) is "righteous" I for myself question that attitude (I dont remember seing the explicit right to mod DW or the definite promise of new playables on the game box - on the contrary, SCS made their stance clear before the release) ... after all its not advisable to bite the hand that feeds you or in this case to piss of the people you are asking to give up some of their money making options.

I'm not advocating to be an ass kisser but it should be common sense that if you are asking for something (which we do through Neal) you better behave unless you are in a superior position (which we are clearly not). I think thats called being diplomatic.

Think about it ...

[Hitman]

Of course, the usually so open US Navy will be more than happy to have one of its contractors put highly classified and protected data into a freely commercial available product ... most excellent. Now if the other navies of the world could be as forthcomming, then all this guessing about the question "Are Akula's really up to par with a 688(i)" (for example) would finally be over. And thats only the tip of the iceberg ... you could test for "real" what a Mk48 ADCAP does to a Kilo compared to a Typhoon ... the possibilities are endless. If only those pesky people from the military and intelligence communities could be more open about their secrets - we, the honorable simmers, who have every right to have the most accurate information possible could finally rest, assured that our game does represent the reality.


Oh come on, be positive....in 70 years we will have FULL access to all that information :lol: Don't we already have all the secret documents about the WW2 Fleet boats? :lol:

No, joking aside....I understand that many people want the "real" thing, but what if the real thing would be dissapointing? I'm having weekly a lot of fun with some friends using my Kilo or my Akula against a 688i, a Perry, an MH60 and we are already leaving the Seawolf out and downgrading a bit sonobuoys to have a more balanced and playable sim....after all this is just a game and we intend to have a balanced fun. Where would that go if the US side were able to simply crush the enemy without effort? (If that's the "real" thing we don't know). And, if the "real" thing is more balanced...well we have that already, don't we?

Either way we seem to have the best possible solution, so I say:

Realism? Yes, much wellcomed....but not as much as to kill fun, thanks.

[Raptor_341]

Realism should ALWAYS be the highest goal of any sim. Its why i own SB, ArmA, IL-2, each running the best realism mods and things out, oh, and GWX :arrgh!:. Thats why without mods such as LWAMI or now RA that i just wouldnt even use DW, which is why i have endless support for them, whatever the cost. If you build to the highest level of realism, you can always set it down for people who like it that way. But the enemy of all simulations is balance, make it like it is, or as close to as it is, or not at all.

[goldorak]

The problem is : if you make it too realistic then it isn't going to sell a lot.
SCS should have decided upfront who were its potential customers for Dangerous Waters. The mass market or the niche market.
Of course that choice would have reflected itself on the price of the sim.
People spend what 100$/€ for a version of SBP, would such a price be viable for a naval sim ?
What happens when you spend 100 €/$ for a sim and find out that they won't allow modding. You're going to be 100x more pissed off. :rotfl:

[MR. Wood]

are we ever going to hear back from them????:damn: :arrgh!:

[Hawk66]

I'm not advocating to be an ass kisser but it should be common sense that if you are asking for something (which we do through Neal) you better behave unless you are in a superior position (which we are clearly not). I think thats called being diplomatic.

Think about it ... I agree.

The point for me is not that I/we have the 'right' that Sonalysts continues their commercial product line.
It's just a matter of communication (or the lack of it). They don't even seem post to their own forum after having a quick look at it.

Hence, I've made the proposal that a small online meeting (via IRC or whatever) would sync both 'sides'. Or just writing an info post and clarify the stuff which is discussed here again and again.

If they don't intend to get back into the commercial market in the foreseeable future and they can't/want help by allowing more modding or providing SDK to improve the NSE than just communicate that clearly.

BTW: Don't know if I'm alone with this opinion, but I think the main issue with this sim is not the lack of platforms but more the NSE and -especially- its AI/mission handling - at least if you don't play multiplayer.
I've invested much time this sommer trying to improve it via the doctrines but unfortunately the behaviour (dependent on the platform type) is so intransparant and buggy that it is just not possble to achieve a satisfying solution IMHO. It was frustrating to be honest :down:

[OneShot]

I agree.

The point for me is not that I/we have the 'right' that Sonalysts continues their commercial product line. It's just a matter of communication (or the lack of it). They don't even seem post to their own forum after having a quick look at it.

Hence, I've made the proposal that a small online meeting (via IRC or whatever) would sync both 'sides'. Or just writing an info post and clarify the stuff which is discussed here again and again.

If they don't intend to get back into the commercial market in the foreseeable future and they can't/want help by allowing more modding or providing SDK to improve the NSE than just communicate that clearly.

BTW: Don't know if I'm alone with this opinion, but I think the main issue with this sim is not the lack of platforms but more the NSE and -especially- its AI/mission handling - at least if you don't play multiplayer. I've invested much time this sommer trying to improve it via the doctrines but unfortunately the behaviour (dependent on the platform type) is so intransparant and buggy that it is just not possble to achieve a satisfying solution IMHO. It was frustrating to be honest :down:

There are some valid points in here ... first of, I'm right up with you on the communication issue or actually the lack of it and an online chat would be a nice thing, however feasible only with a small number of people otherwise it prolly would end up in a way nobody wants. A better alternative would be an actual clear and unequivocal statement.

As far as the NSE goes I think we will run into a brick wall ... one of the reasons being the lack of development for "our" version compared to the "goverment" version and the most likely resulting problem of transfering the achieved fixes. And face it, obviously DW didnt make enough revenue to justify continued development which is why we are without a new patch for so long. So I highly doubt we will get a fixed NSE (which I would prefer over new platforms) and since the NSE is integral to their government product I don't think we will get a SDK to work on the NSE ourselves.

I dont wanna squash any hopes its just my point of view on this situation.

Bottom line, I do hope we hear from SCS soon ... one way or another.

[Bill Nichols]

Of course, the usually so open US Navy will be more than happy to have one of its contractors put highly classified and protected data into a freely commercial available product ... most excellent. Now if the other navies of the world could be as forthcomming, then all this guessing about the question "Are Akula's really up to par with a 688(i)" (for example) would finally be over. And thats only the tip of the iceberg ... you could test for "real" what a Mk48 ADCAP does to a Kilo compared to a Typhoon ... the possibilities are endless. If only those pesky people from the military and intelligence communities could be more open about their secrets - we, the honorable simmers, who have every right to have the most accurate information possible could finally rest, assured that our game does represent the reality.


Oh come on, be positive....in 70 years we will have FULL access to all that information :lol: .

Hmmm... in 70 years, I'll be 125.
I don't think I can wait that long.

:know:

[Castout]

Of course, the usually so open US Navy will be more than happy to have one of its contractors put highly classified and protected data into a freely commercial available product ... most excellent. Now if the other navies of the world could be as forthcomming, then all this guessing about the question "Are Akula's really up to par with a 688(i)" (for example) would finally be over. And thats only the tip of the iceberg ... you could test for "real" what a Mk48 ADCAP does to a Kilo compared to a Typhoon ... the possibilities are endless. If only those pesky people from the military and intelligence communities could be more open about their secrets - we, the honorable simmers, who have every right to have the most accurate information possible could finally rest, assured that our game does represent the reality.

Oh come on, be positive....in 70 years we will have FULL access to all that information :lol: .
Hmmm... in 70 years, I'll be 125.
I don't think I can wait that long.

:know:

And I'll be about 100. I'll be in sheol, sleeping, in most probability.

SO SCS please give us a break. Alfa Tau and RA are the only hope for us:D. Besides they are silly mods which in all probability doesn't and will never will compare to official add-on or your military grade product.

[Onkel Neal]

I received word that it's ok to open the thread. Thanks for the understanding. A lot of people would have ignored this issue and done whatever they wanted. It's nice to be part of a responsible, serious group of subsim enthusiasts. :up:

Neal
Subsim

[PeriscopeDepth]

I received word that it's ok to open the thread. Thanks for the understanding. A lot of people would have ignored this issue and done whatever they wanted. It's nice to be part of a responsible, serious group of subsim enthusiasts. :up:

Neal
Subsim
Excellent, thank you sir. I am pleasantly surprised. I guess I could have discussed it at another forum, but my Russian is a little rusty.

PD

[goldorak]

Ok nice to know that at least spelling A-T-3 and R-A won't have us throwned in the brigg and hanged on the public place. :D

[Castout]

Thank you Sonalysts. Thank you Neal!:up:

[CapitanPiluso]

Oh come on, be positive....in 70 years we will have FULL access to all that information :lol: Don't we already have all the secret documents about the WW2 Fleet boats? :lol:

No, joking aside....I understand that many people want the "real" thing, but what if the real thing would be dissapointing? I'm having weekly a lot of fun with some friends using my Kilo or my Akula against a 688i, a Perry, an MH60 and we are already leaving the Seawolf out and downgrading a bit sonobuoys to have a more balanced and playable sim....after all this is just a game and we intend to have a balanced fun. Where would that go if the US side were able to simply crush the enemy without effort? (If that's the "real" thing we don't know). And, if the "real" thing is more balanced...well we have that already, don't we?

Either way we seem to have the best possible solution, so I say:

Realism? Yes, much wellcomed....but not as much as to kill fun, thanks.

I m with you on this :up:

[:FI:Rabitski]

I have a question about the RA mod, I was trying to fire the tigerfish torpedoes, each time I do I get the message that the wire has been severed and the torpedo disappears. Perhaps I have the mod installed wrong or something. Anybody have any idea on this. Sorry if this post is a bit off topic.

[Castout]

I have a question about the RA mod, I was trying to fire the tigerfish torpedoes, each time I do I get the message that the wire has been severed and the torpedo disappears. Perhaps I have the mod installed wrong or something. Anybody have any idea on this. Sorry if this post is a bit off topic.
Are you playing with the beta version of RA or the official release.
I'm playing with the most current beta version and if I remember correctly tigerfish was fine. Try to get the beta version imo. Somebody please help this chap to get his beta RA?

Bill could you host the beta version instead? I've helped quite a number of people to get their hands on the RA beta version. Xabba and Subb are the few names that I remember.

The RA is still being worked on. The modders encounters an unforeseen problem making the new gepard sonar station to work. So the release date has been delayed. Be patient it is still a mod in development. We don't want to play a buggy RA don't we.

[:FI:Rabitski]

Thanks for the prompt reply castout, I'm currently use the version on that Bill put the link to, if there is a better version I'll take it:D , link anybody

[goldorak]

Castout : since I'm not using the latest beta and you are, can you tell me if the trafalgar (and trenchant) have finally the uuv's and the ability to launch mines ? :oops:

[Castout]

Castout : since I'm not using the latest beta and you are, can you tell me if the trafalgar (and trenchant) have finally the uuv's and the ability to launch mines ? :oops:

I haven't played or exhausted all the playable platform and test all the features yet. All I know that Bill's version doesn't have playable Typhoon and playable Los Angeles flight I boat.

[Castout]

My upload speed sucks. I have distributed the beta RA version to quite a number of people using my email as the download place. I'm hoping at least one of them would be kind enough to send Bill the beta version so that everyone could play with the newer version. If this is okay with GrayOwl of course.

[PeriscopeDepth]

Is there a better place than mediafire to upload the RA beta files to?

Unless GrayOwl would prefer I didn't...

PD

[suBB]

My upload speed sucks. I have distributed the beta RA version to quite a number of people using my email as the download place. I'm hoping at least one of them would be kind enough to send Bill the beta version so that everyone could play with the newer version. If this is okay with GrayOwl of course.
be patient.. still trying to resolve my connection issues..

i had ftp capability before.. trying to restore it now...

[suBB]

@ Castout:

since you have hyperacoustics working, maybe you know the answer to this riddle... :D (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?p=1000835#post1000835)

[Theta Sigma]

Lately, I find that zshare.net has great speeds, and even allows simultaneous transfers. Just an idea. ;)

[Hawk66]

@Neal: Did you get any informations from the SCS guys regarding the future of DW or their commercial (non-government) plans?
Thanks.

[goldorak]

@Neal: Did you get any informations from the SCS guys regarding the future of DW or their commercial (non-government) plans?
Thanks.


The future of DW is dead as in DEAD. 100% sure.
A friend of mine, was at the european presentation of Dangerous Waters several years ago. He told me that at that time SCS was working on a 1.05 patch.
Have you seen it materialize after all these years ? There is your answer.

[Theta Sigma]

I've been out of it lately, I know, but I know of no other modern submarine sim like this. Sure, it's dated graphically, but who's filling the void with a real DW alternative? SCS have the lock on this and the ball is in their court. They can and should develop a new sim altogether. I just don't know if there's money in it.

[OneShot]

@Neal: Did you get any informations from the SCS guys regarding the future of DW or their commercial (non-government) plans?
Thanks.


The future of DW is dead as in DEAD. 100% sure.
A friend of mine, was at the european presentation of Dangerous Waters several years ago. He told me that at that time SCS was working on a 1.05 patch.
Have you seen it materialize after all these years ? There is your answer.

I'm not so sure ... I think DW has still some life left in it and if SCS has actually changed its stance on "who is allowed to make playable platforms" the biggest gripe from the community is essentially over becausefinally we can have all the platforms we want (even if they all look the same station wise).

Aside from that, I've been to the European release presentation in Great Britain myself and I'm pretty sure that they (as in Jamie) didn't mention anything bout a Patch 1.05.

Cheers
OS

[goldorak]

I'm not so sure ... I think DW has still some life left in it and if SCS has actually changed its stance on "who is allowed to make playable platforms" the biggest gripe from the community is essentially over becausefinally we can have all the platforms we want (even if they all look the same station wise).


Well here we disagree. SCS has allowed "scu mods" for DW simply because they don't care anymore. Look at the official forum, when is the last time someone from SCS actually intervened ? :-? There are still crashes in DW, and unfortunately without a patch from SCS it will never be fixed because it requires tinkering directly with the .exe. Lets be realistic, DW is a dead project for them, and so they have nothing to loose by letting us mod to our hearts content. It might even revive some sales, how ironic a situation would that be ? ;)



Aside from that, I've been to the European release presentation in Great Britain myself and I'm pretty sure that they (as in Jamie) didn't mention anything bout a Patch 1.05.

Cheers
OS

Jamie didn't mention anything, but my friend said that in some images during the presentation you could see the version number of the game and it was 1.05.
Ok its not a definite proof, but it would be really sad if they scrapped the patch simply because the sales were not up to it.

[OneShot]

Hmm ... I just checked the presentation Jamie used and the photos I made (after the presentation Jamie played some with the game itself), couldn't find any reference to a 1.05 ... but then this is a moot point anyway - we only have 1.04 (which was still in the making at the european release) and unless SCS steps forward and says otherwise I doubt we will ever see a patch 1.05.

[Hawk66]

regarding modding:

I'm not an expert in hard-core modding ;-) of DW; that means to add new playable platforms etc.
Any chance to mod the NSE itself or is that not possible/not allowed?

[goldorak]

regarding modding:

I'm not an expert in hard-core modding ;-) of DW; that means to add new playable platforms etc.
Any chance to mod the NSE itself or is that not possible/not allowed?

You must be joking right ? :hmm:
Modding the NSE means modifiying the .exe.
I think SCS even of they don't care anymore about DW would go completely "ape s h i t " over this issue. Modding the dll's is one thing, changing the heart of the simulation through the .exe is completely different and a legal mine field for any crazy modder/s willing to actually tinker with the NSE.

[Hawk66]

just asking...though I had the same feeling.

I know that some publisher/developer have allowed to modify coding (and provide even the source code) but DW will probably never reach this state, since the NSE is still used in their government products.

[LoBlo]

You know. Given the wonderful work that these two mods are producing. I would be uber cool, if one of the two were to consider some "how-to's" to allow the fans a glimpse to how to change weapon loadouts, etc. Just a thought.

[Onkel Neal]

@Neal: Did you get any informations from the SCS guys regarding the future of DW or their commercial (non-government) plans?
Thanks.


No news is bad news. I do not think we will see anything in the next 5 years, if ever.

What's the status of the RA and Alfa Tau mod? Where is the post here about it?

[goldorak]

No news is bad news. I do not think we will see anything in the next 5 years, if ever.

What's the status of the RA and Alfa Tau mod? Where is the post here about it?

The discussions have been moved to the DW mod workshop subforum.

Ra mod : http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=145517

Alfa Tau 3 mod : http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=145516

[Onkel Neal]

D'oh! I'm a victim of my own forum strata. :haha:

thanks!

[Sea Demon]

No news is bad news. I do not think we will see anything in the next 5 years, if ever.

What's the status of the RA and Alfa Tau mod? Where is the post here about it?

:cry: This is truly disappointing. Subsims simply won't be the same without modern naval games. If not Sonalysts, who else will develop these games in the commercial markets? Sonalysts laid some very good groundwork. I'm sad to hear they're not going forward and propagating any of it beyond DW. Lots of potential in their sim engine.

[jmr]

What are these two mods exactly?

Do they install on top of LWAMI or are they completely stand alone mods?

Do they have homepages where I can learn more about them?

[Theta Sigma]

If not Sonalysts, who else will develop these games in the commercial markets?

Dr.Sid's project looks promising.
http://www.commanders-academy.com/comsubsim/index.php?title=Main_Page

[goldorak]

Dr.Sid's project looks promising.
http://www.commanders-academy.com/comsubsim/index.php?title=Main_Page

Yes, but still several years will pass before we even have a version with basic functionality at least to play with. So in the meantime, you better like LwAmi/AT3/RA because there is nothing else on the horizon. :03:

[Sea Demon]

Dr.Sid's project looks promising.

Yes, but still several years will pass before we even have a version with basic functionality at least to play with. So in the meantime, you better like LwAmi/AT3/RA because there is nothing else on the horizon. :03:

Right. And I'm not putting down those efforts. And I also agree that Sid's project looks very promising. But I still believe a commercial release from a game developer holds much more promise IMO. A gaming company has financial incentives to release their product in a timely manner and support the product with patches and other framework. A project like this has no financial incentive, nor are there any guarantees of support or even a release. Nor should there be without financial compensation. I'm looking forward to Dr. Sid's project, and am watching it with interest. But I would much rather prefer a game from Sonalysts. Or at this point, any other developer interested in selling a modern naval sim. Just my opinion.

[Theta Sigma]

What are these two mods exactly?

Do they install on top of LWAMI or are they completely stand alone mods?

Do they have homepages where I can learn more about them?

Forums yes, but not homepages really, since these projects started as unofficial and unsanctioned mods. As of the moment, Sonalysts is permissive of their existence, but who knows if they take on a more official seeming public profile?

Alfa Tau (Italian Project):
http://www.forum.maricosom.net (In Italian).

Reinforce Alert (Russian Project):
http://www.sukhoi.ru/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=123
http://redrodgers.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=172
(Both in Russian)

The forums have some English sections, but are also somewhat permissive of English posts in the main Russian threads. Use Babelfish or Google Translate if need be.