If Sonalysts made a new game...

[fusoya77]

Sonalysts still doesn't have any new news to share, this question is purely for me: (but if I get the chance I will pass the knowledge along)

If Sonalysts was to make a new modern sim, what game should it be like:

1. Fleet Command (many vehicles no stations)
2. Dangerous Waters (one vehicle multiple stations)
3. Other (name a game it should be like)

Also please give 1 new feature that the game must have. Here is example:

The new game should be like DW, with the feature to be able to walk around the ship/sub and see/communicate with crew members.

[Frying Tiger]

Be nice. He's young and impressionable. (grin)

[nikimcbee]

I thought this conversation sounded familiar.


I vote for: Something like DW, but Cold War (see something like the Red Storm Rising storyline). The special feature, you could work the de-cyphering equipment; like the enigma machine or what ever they used.
Or a mix of Fleet Command and DW, where you could make strategic decisions, then hot seat in to command as your fleet contact stuff.

WW2 US PT boat game. The special feature for the PT boat game, walking around the boat and being able to use all of the equipment would be cool. (like the radio)

[nikimcbee]

If you need a designer, researcher, writer...

...willing to relocate

[FERdeBOER]

Well, you asked for it...
Like Dangerous Waters but with dynamic campaign, the possibility to navigate worldwide in the same mission, more time compression with auto 1x when something important happens... and more modable.



But some Fleet Command like things would also be great.

[Molon Labe]

I love questions like this. And yeah, you asked for it!

Commercially, I think SCS would be better off with a "strategy" style game like Fleet Command.
Improvements: Logistics.


Personally, I'd like to see a new tactical study-sim like DW. Improvements:

1. Modular construction intended for the addition of new platforms regularly (great commercial option too; you can have regular expansion packs and charge for them)
2. Switch from a Submarine-Focus to a Naval-Focus, meaning make Air and Surface warfare just as important as Submarine warfare. This will require updating the physics engine for everything not in the water and upgrading the signals/radar modeling to at least the standard of DW's acoustics modeling.
3. Mission Editor
   • Allow placement of objects/triggers relative to the position of a platform, instead of just placement on the map.
   • Bring back Player Action doctrine
   • Allow dynamic locations for Formations
   • Allow destination/approach triggers to fire for bullets/shells (would allow "warning shots" to be detected by sim engine)
   • Differentiate sonar/radar EMCON
   • Add a "GoCode" doctrine that would fire a trigger based on player input.
4. Damage model
   • For ships/subs, include flooding/buoyancy, and fire. Combining this idea with existing system damage and you have the makings of a DC Central crew Station where you can allocate DC resources and set priorities.
   • Generally, factor Armor into damage. Reduce/nullify damage to Armored platforms by non-armor-piercing ammunition.
5. Multiplayer
   • I practically wrote a book on this.
   • Short version: rejoin dropped games, save games, security features, Side-separated multiplayer lobbies with a 2D simulation running
6. Persistent dynamic campaign engine, similar to what is used in Falcon 4.0. (Which will also create the ability to time lapse when not in the 3D world, something badly needed in multiplayer). This is probably the most important improvement that can be made, IMO. Linear campaigns aren't really campaigns at all, and without such an engine multiplayer is limited to engagements that lack realism because of time constraints and lack of continuity.

My wildest fantasy of the "next sim" would be something like Fleet Command that launches something like DW. The idea being that the players could play at the command level to handle deployments and logistics, then move to the tactical level for the fight. A player could even stay behind to provide command and control while the others head to the front lines. Think "massively multiplayer" too--whole wars played out by hundreds of players worldwide.

[TLAM Strike]

Well this is what I would like to see:

Dangerous waters with a new graphics engine and better weapon engagement code (Especially for missiles).

The legacy DW platforms with the LCS, Burke Flt IIA, and P-8 added on the US Side and the Type 052C DDG, Type 054/054A frigates and Z-9C helicopter on the OPFOR side.

Iranian Kilos added.

Kilo realism increased, no TEST-71 in main rack (or in main rack but no wireguide unless fired in proper tubes). Missiles only in Tubes 1 and 2 on boats so equipped. Increased battery endurance. Proper MGK-400EM Sonar on Project 636 boats (four auto tracker + 12 manual, waterfall display), older analog MGK-400 remains for Project 877s.

An "AWACS or CVIC Mode" allowing for one player on each side in MP to play Fleet Command style with the AI units.

Multiplayer campaigns.

Large dynamic Silent Hunter style campaign.

Sub Command style user doctrine language for all platforms.

Weapon inventory tracking on multiple platforms in static campaigns.

Rejoin MP game in progress capability.

Limited sub comms in MP option. (as an option because unlimited sub comms would be nice for training new players.)

In game VOIP and text messaging linked to communications intercept and sonar for underwater comms.

[Molon Labe]

It shouldn't surprise me that you and I are on the same page on this, TLAM! (common experiences with modding and mission design, maybe?)


EDIT: good call on passing the OPFOR torch to the ChiComs too.

[goldorak]

No please, don't make a new game. Build on the one you have already developed.
Start selling addons, the infrastructure is already there so you get to spend only on developing new playable units. Oh and fix bugs in the navalsimengine and maybe just maybe add 2-3 new capabilities into the sim.
How about radar being able to detect periscope mast, esm mast, radio mast etc... ?

Don't start from zero, otherwise I'm pretty confident we will suffer the same growing pains the we underwent with DW.

No dynamic campaign, $ spent on DC means less $ (or no $) spent on more critical issues.

Default campaign a little bit more oomph, and bring back the videos during briefing.

Enhance the mission editor (use a more detailed map so that the panama canal actually exists, as well as the bosphorus strait). Add new triggers, and scripts.

Oh and maybe while you're at it, how about updating those horrbile, horribile and I mean truly horrible 3d models in the usni database ?

Make the whole thing comptabile with XP (it still has over 50% of the maket).

Thats all.

[Molon Labe]

Red Pill has some awesome scenario design utilities.
I would absolutely love to be able to save/load certain facilities into scenarios rather than have to painstakingly place them every time.

[TLAM Strike]

Originally Posted by Molon Labe

It shouldn't surprise me that you and I are on the same page on this, TLAM! (common experiences with modding and mission design, maybe?)

Funny I was going to say the same then my wifi started acting up. But yea we both experienced a lot of the same stuff with DW doing all the moding and testing.

Also might have a bit to do with us both doing Clash in the Caribbean and seeing what a real multiplayer campaign could be.

EDIT: good call on passing the OPFOR torch to the ChiComs too.

Might have something to do with me modeling half their new units. Plus the Russians really got very little in the way of new ships that can match ours (Maybe that will change when the new Gorshkov is finished). Most of the cold war era ships are bound for the scrappers except for the Udaloys and a few cruisers. The other major OPFORs (Iran, North Korea) got very little in the way of ships that would be interesting to drive except for the midget subs and I see very little marketable appeal in those right now (and plus I can't see very many wartime scenarios with them that don't end with "and she was lost with all hands...")

EDIT: The only other major units I would consider would be Indian and Pakistani but no doubt a flame war would descend upon subsim should playable units of those countries be included. But a Scopene' and U-212/4 subs would be interesting as OPFOR and Blue diesels since India and Pakistan want those but haven't decided on which yet and might not buy (Pakistan is now interested in the Chinese Song class boat and India wants new Russian subs, two words: Logistical Nightmare!)

Originally Posted by Molon Labe

I would absolutely love to be able to save/load certain facilities into scenarios rather than have to painstakingly place them every time.

You can do that right now. This is the easy way. Take the mission file in the editor with the facility you want. Delete everything else and save it as a new mission. Now open it up in a text editor and cut and paste it in to another mission file. Now move it in the mission editor to where you want it. It also helps to make a "base map" of a critical area like I did with the Straits of Hormuz.

Originally Posted by fusoya77

Sonalysts still doesn't have any new news to share, this question is purely for me: (but if I get the chance I will pass the knowledge along)

If Sonalysts was to make a new modern sim, what game should it be like:

1. Fleet Command (many vehicles no stations)
2. Dangerous Waters (one vehicle multiple stations)
3. Other (name a game it should be like)

Also please give 1 new feature that the game must have. Here is example:

The new game should be like DW, with the feature to be able to walk around the ship/sub and see/communicate with crew members.

Also do not forget about kitchen, with the ship cook.

[fusoya77]

Sorry I didn't explain why I am asking a question that was already asked. I am still getting use to what I can and can't say on these forums.

Frying Tiger and I were talking about what a new game would be like and I thought it would be more like DW. Also I wanted all the recent suggestions in one spot.

My speculation is for commercial and non-commercial purposes any new game would have to be modern. I would love to do WW2 but its not dual purpose. I am not ruling anything out because we could do purely commercial games (I hope we do).

Now that my reason for posting is done these suggestions are great! I grew up playing PC games and love moddablility. I was just a kid when I made some Duke Nukem 3d levels. I love games that came with level builders, sdks, etc. So I would love the next game to support mods. As for the doctrine files, those are written in a pseudo language, if the game was to support modding I would love for it to implement a script language like Lua for more powerful doctrines/modding. This also seems to be the trend in video games.

DW has such old graphics; I would love a new game XP/Vista/Win7 compatible, all new graphics engine. FC style players commanding DW players in the same persistent server is a great idea also

[nikimcbee]

Did you meet with us at the subsim meeting? FT was there.

[nikimcbee]

I like a good story, plausible storyline: (note, designed to play as both sides)

• Korean War Part II: War escalates and China intervenes (surprise, surprise).
• China reunification with Taiwan (by force). I drafted up a 12 mission campaign for DW, that included the opening moves of the invasion, including an attack on the US. To keep us in our place, so to speak.
• Chinese economic collapse from too much competition in the region. China levels the playing field and attacks Japan and South Korea.
• Iran moves to cripple the US by shutting down the Middle East oil sea lanes. Russia sides with Iran in a defense pact.
• Pakistan switches teams in the War on Terror. India sides with US.
• India-China conflict over resources?