Community subsim - Page 2

Dr.Sid · 01-28-07, 07:35 AM

SQ: sure .. the first version will have one or two subs, simple environment. Anyway some basic idea what it should look like in the end should exist.

sonar732: Hmm .. that's a good idea. Simply 'you can' approach. No admiral on flagship, but rather 'god' able to see everything and able to man any station on any ship falling under his command. Certain limits could be switched on for specific mission. Like commanding just one platform, or commanding the fleet but being unable to leave your flagship. Also with multiplayer you could allocate ships to players .. you two handle ASW, you command the aircrafts and I'll command the carrier's protection fleet.

XabbaRus: I'm sceptical about 3rd party GFX engine. Sim has quite specific requirements. I know some nice engines for 1st person shooters, and some even for real-time-strategies. But they all have limits.
On the other hand subsim engine does not need much. It's just different things. We need to display scenery from 20km height to 500m depth. It would be great to have unlimited mission area (limited to whole world). We need to display water, sea-bottom, rocks, clouds, ice, maybe some marine life. And boats, sure. No human,no trees (or just very basic), no animation is needed (I don't call rotating screws and turrets animation).
I don't know engine which could allow that. Anyway I don't consider making such engine to be a problem. It needs smart terrain model, good level-of-detail management, and some playing with water reflectivity so it looks cool.
Uh .. I forgot explosions ! :rotfl: I'd say it's doable.

Really good sonar model still bugs me more. It needs to be really fast. It must handle all platforms listening all other platforms with high time compressions. Sure .. it is no problem to write simple and fast simulation .. but we want realistic and fast one.
I'm already testing some ideas here. Currently I have some nice sound wave tracing program, which can demonstrate layer, deep channel, convergence zones .. but it is too slow to be used in simulation.

SeaQueen · 01-28-07, 09:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dr.Sid

Really good sonar model still bugs me more. It needs to be really fast. .. I'm already testing some ideas here. Currently I have some nice sound wave tracing program, which can demonstrate layer, deep channel, convergence zones .. but it is too slow to be used in simulation.

Out of curiousity, what is the program called?

What you're using definitely isn't the way to go. Computational acoustics is a universe all of it's own, and there's no chance you'll ever be able to use a scientific model like what you're describing to do it. You'll need something simpler.

The simplest thing to do, in my mind, would be to create TL v. range curves based on spherical or cylindrical spreading, and then add bumps to it because of various environmental factors. I suspect this is what DW does, actually.

Dr.Sid · 01-28-07, 10:36 AM

It's my own program .. it's just simulation of beam bending based on different speed of propagation. You give it speed vs. depth, sound source position and it draws 2D map (distance vs depth) of sound transfer effectivity. I'll make some user interface and will post it somewhere.
It's really simple .. while I use more or less real sound speeds, I also multiply the bending effect so it is more visible. It by no means gives realistic data. Sure it can't be used .. but maybe some sound propagation effectivity maps could be computed with this and then used in simulation.
Anyway it seems you know something about it. Can you list most important phenomenons ? Let's walk thru that, let's discuss tactical importance of such effects and let's talk about their implementation, both accurate and fast.

Molon Labe · 01-28-07, 11:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SeaQueen

Quote:

Originally Posted by Molon Labe

Didn't the NWP take care of that?

Dunno, haven't seen the version.

From http://www.navalwarfare.info/files/N...tryClssSer.rar

NWP F-14 loadouts:
US
F-14A:
AAW1: Gun, 2xAIM-7, 2xAIM-9, 4xAIM-54
AAW2: Gun, 4xAIM-7, 2xAIM-9
RCN: Gun, 2xAIM-7, 2xAIM-9
STK: Gun, 2xAIM-7, 2xAIM-9, 2x1000lb LGB

F-14B:
AAW: Gun, 4xAIM-54, 2xAIM-9, 2xAIM-7
RCN: Gun, 2xAIM-9, 2xAIM-7
STK: Gun, 2xAIM-9, 2xAIM-7, 2x1000lb LGB

F-14D:
AAW: Gun, 4xAIM-54, 2xAIM-9, 2xAIM-7
RCN: Gun, 2xAIM-9, 2xAIM-7
STK: Gun, 2xAGM-123, 2xAIM-9, 2xAIM-7
STK2: Gun, 2x2000lb LGB, 2xAIM-9, 2xAIM-7
STK3: Gun, 4xJDAM (possibly typo), 2xAIM-9

Iranian versions come equipped with combos of Sparrows, Archers, and some Pheonixes and Sidewinders.

No Harpoons.

XabbaRus · 01-28-07, 11:14 AM

I think a clear idea of where we want to be is needed.

I say keep it at the tactical level for now.
An idea I had was like this

Develop single player operation of one or two submarine platforms to start. There should be single missions and a campaign. The campaign could either be dynamic like IL-2 FB or maybe EECH or a set of missions kind of like we have in DW.

Then what would be a possible is if later on in a multiplayer environment (depending of course on SP working) you had a commander who would have an over view who would send orders to individual units. This I think is a pipedream and would need a persistent online Multi MORG whatever type space.

Then add new platforms as time goes by. I do think though it should be kept to the searching and shooting level.

Anyway maybe Dr Sid could list a proposal of what he would like to acheive and then we could comment on it.

It is doable and I think it could be fun.

OneShot · 01-28-07, 11:28 AM

I would suggest starting with working on the enviroment like getting a functioning sonar and radar modell and other stuff like that. Once you have a nice ocean where the sound does what it should and stones you throw in sink to the ground as they are supposed to do (and so on) as well as a world above the surface that works like it is supposed to do you can start thinking about your first platform to actually use that enviroment.

If the physics and everything else is ok ... well you are certainly a long way down the road to the game everybody wants.

After all the biggest gripes in the community are not centered around the platforms/units/weapons/... themselves but the ways in which they behave in the enviroment and the way in which the enviroment itself behaves (sound propagation for starters).

As the first modell I wouldn't suggest a sub... instead model a Tico, Burke or something similar. Because with a Burke for example you could test the whole enviroment ... after all it is designed to fight AAW, ASW and ASuW. You can test out the whole enviroment ...

Btw. if the game should ever move on to a more strategic level, talking to the GCB guys might be a very good idea.

Dr.Sid · 01-28-07, 12:09 PM

XabbaRus: ok .. my scenario is pretty same.

Phase 1:

Main focus of this phase would be control interface (screens and buttons) and main game core. This phase should also set base-stones for each game aspect so design is proved. Also this will be the pilot phase which will be subjected to discussion.

Platforms: 1 or 2 subs with anti-submarine warfare, clearly sub vs. sub fight
Graphics: sub models, basic water, bottom. Control interface engine should be final, if not complete.
Boat physics: simple course, speed and depth change with some inertia. No buoancy model.
Passive sonar: simple with only signal weakening by distance. No layer or anything. We just need something to feed sonar screens.
Active sonar: simplest possible, only distance dependent.
Subs interface: navmap, sonar (NB, BB, active, demon, sonar warning), torpedoes, TMA. No need for dedicated sub controls panel, electronics, periscope
Sounds: very basic, no speech.
AI: simple, hard coded (no doctrine language)
Game logic: basic, but with time compression.
Game interface: just basic .. mission start, basic options .. just so we can say there is some game interface.

Other phases should build upon these in order we will find best.

- Multiplayer should be added soon.
- Platforms will be added one by one as the time allows
- When enough platforms will be available, strategic command will be implemented

My ideas about the game development process:
- I'll be the main programmer. Preferably the only programmer. I think I have experience enough at least for phase 1. We can develop specialist for GFX or sonar or doctrine language later, but the core should be one man work, so it fits nicely together.
- APIs will be OpenGL, OpenAL, Win32 should be isolated (we would need very little of it anyway). Would be nice to have the game multiplatform one day. Again I have some experience with multiplatform project, I made PC/Unix, PC/Palm software. I don't want to develop anything but Windows version now. Any other platform will have it's own volunteer programmer who will port it and keep it ported.
We also don't need the latest crazy GFX features available only thru DirectX. Last but not least, I have much more experience with OpenGL.
- XabbaRus is main 3D modeler
- we don't need anybody else at the moment. Sure except for comments and suggestions.

My ideas about the game interface itself.
- there is nothing wrong with DW, SH3 concept of control stations switched by F keys. Putting all into one screen like Harpoon tries is nonsense.
- there is no need to have free inside camera (like SH3), stations alone are just fine. The stations itself will be 2D, but not artworked (as DW), at least in the phase one.
We can customize boats with screen types, control layouts and colors, but no artwork is needed in the first phase. It also need people with special talent, quite rare today.
- there will be navmap with computed solutions and known contacts, with optional 'true' mode.

Dr.Sid · 01-28-07, 12:16 PM

OneShot: Burke needs something to hunt and somebody to shoot at him. Also radar is simple compared to sonar. That's why I plan subs only in the begining.

kage · 01-28-07, 01:01 PM

Actually, if you're even 10% serious about this, I have a suggestion to add; throwing away the obsolete concept of 'unit database'.

I saw a bit of what the GCB people did, and the code apparently got messy because they tried to cram special cases into a homogenous database.

And I do have an alternative to propose; though I don't have it in a 'written' format yet.

Quote:

I'll be the main programmer. Preferably the only programmer. I think I have experience enough at least for phase 1. We can develop specialist for GFX or sonar or doctrine language later, but the core should be one man work, so it fits nicely together.

I read the emphasized parts as this project won't ever complete. If you can't modularize the core well enough, and provide stable interfaces between them, (which as a side effect would enable several programmers to cooperate without much problems*) you'll end up with spaghetti code whose maintainance will be a typical "Herculean Task" (tm?)

*Presuming communication, particularly in interface documentation, works properly.

sonar732 · 01-28-07, 01:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kage

And I do have an alternative to propose; though I don't have it in a 'written' format yet.

We're listening. :hmm::hmm:

Dr.Sid · 01-28-07, 02:48 PM

Quote:

I read the emphasized parts as this project won't ever complete. If you can't modularize the core well enough, and provide stable interfaces between them, (which as a side effect would enable several programmers to cooperate without much problems*) you'll end up with spaghetti code whose maintainance will be a typical "Herculean Task" (tm?)

Sure .. there must be modules. Not only because of cooperation, but because of isolation. Parts will be changed in the future .. for sure. It must be simple to change just parts. I say I prefer 1 programmer because the task allows it in the first phase and because communication will complicate things a lot. It's free time activity .. nobody can meat any dead-line for sure. We are from all parts of the world. If it was me and two of my friends from the same city, with some time allocated to it, so we can do time estimates and dead-lines .. no problem with that. Also no other programmer showed up yet.
I hope I have experience enough to make something maintainable. I would also discuss as much decisions as possible.

Which reminds me .. we need some better place to talk about this.

Btw. here are some references to my older work:

University projects and diploma, pretty old, all links are dead:
http://roger.questions.cz/project.html
http://roger.questions.cz/project2.html
http://roger.questions.cz/diploma.html

Palm OS:
http://www.palmgear.com/index.cfm?fu...1&prodID=17153
3D game with engine built from scratch, I mean there is no underlying OpenGL on Palm. It was not finished as a game, there is only 2 levels. It became obsolete with new color palms with processors which allowed Doom to be compiled for Palm. Making levels and designing enemies also showed to be much more time consuming and not much fun. Therefore I hope somebody else would do that for the sim.

http://www.palmgear.com/index.cfm?fu...1&prodID=13348
My favorite project because of the users reactions. It's just fun to make something people really use.

Now I work for local GIS company, we do mostly GIS for utility companies (water, gas, electricity) or info system for cities and factories. Here's the web but there is nothing really fancy there.
http://www.espace.cz/en/frames.htm

I did some other smaller private projects which are not published anywhere, which includes several 3d engines, some basic aircraft simulation, programming language design (now I have like 5 half-baked languages), sound analysis (for musical purposes).

Btw. my timezone is GMT+1, I live in Olomouc, Czech Republic, English is not my native language (as you have already noticed I guess).

XabbaRus · 01-28-07, 03:18 PM

Pretty much agree with Sid. However once the mechanics are worked out there will be allowance in the code for artworked control panels? There are quite a few round here who are good at the old PhotoShopr and PSP.

I also assume the navmap and sonar controls only is just to have proof of concept where the core of the sub works, after that fire control, ESm and persicopes would be added.

sonar732 · 01-28-07, 03:21 PM

There is also the LinuxSSN people to talk with regarding code.

Dr.Sid · 01-28-07, 03:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by XabbaRus

Pretty much agree with Sid. However once the mechanics are worked out there will be allowance in the code for artworked control panels? There are quite a few round here who are good at the old PhotoShopr and PSP.

I also assume the navmap and sonar controls only is just to have proof of concept where the core of the sub works, after that fire control, ESm and persicopes would be added.

If there is someone who can make it .. sure. For example that WW2 subsim mentioned earlier has amazing 2D graphics. Putting 2D bitmap under the controls and aligning them together is no problem.

Dr.Sid · 01-28-07, 03:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sonar732

There is also the LinuxSSN people to talk with regarding code.

Very little info on their site. Will try to contact them anyway.

01-28-07, 11:14 AM	#20
XabbaRus Navy Seal Join Date: Sep 2001 Posts: 5,330 Downloads: 5 Uploads: 0	I think a clear idea of where we want to be is needed. I say keep it at the tactical level for now. An idea I had was like this Develop single player operation of one or two submarine platforms to start. There should be single missions and a campaign. The campaign could either be dynamic like IL-2 FB or maybe EECH or a set of missions kind of like we have in DW. Then what would be a possible is if later on in a multiplayer environment (depending of course on SP working) you had a commander who would have an over view who would send orders to individual units. This I think is a pipedream and would need a persistent online Multi MORG whatever type space. Then add new platforms as time goes by. I do think though it should be kept to the searching and shooting level. Anyway maybe Dr Sid could list a proposal of what he would like to acheive and then we could comment on it. It is doable and I think it could be fun. __________________

01-28-07, 11:28 AM	#21
OneShot Grey Wolf Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Germany Posts: 956 Downloads: 9 Uploads: 0	I would suggest starting with working on the enviroment like getting a functioning sonar and radar modell and other stuff like that. Once you have a nice ocean where the sound does what it should and stones you throw in sink to the ground as they are supposed to do (and so on) as well as a world above the surface that works like it is supposed to do you can start thinking about your first platform to actually use that enviroment. If the physics and everything else is ok ... well you are certainly a long way down the road to the game everybody wants. After all the biggest gripes in the community are not centered around the platforms/units/weapons/... themselves but the ways in which they behave in the enviroment and the way in which the enviroment itself behaves (sound propagation for starters). As the first modell I wouldn't suggest a sub... instead model a Tico, Burke or something similar. Because with a Burke for example you could test the whole enviroment ... after all it is designed to fight AAW, ASW and ASuW. You can test out the whole enviroment ... Btw. if the game should ever move on to a more strategic level, talking to the GCB guys might be a very good idea. __________________ All the things you always wanted to know about Dangerous Waters but never dared to ask!

01-28-07, 03:18 PM	#27
XabbaRus Navy Seal Join Date: Sep 2001 Posts: 5,330 Downloads: 5 Uploads: 0	Pretty much agree with Sid. However once the mechanics are worked out there will be allowance in the code for artworked control panels? There are quite a few round here who are good at the old PhotoShopr and PSP. I also assume the navmap and sonar controls only is just to have proof of concept where the core of the sub works, after that fire control, ESm and persicopes would be added. __________________

01-28-07, 07:35 AM	#16
Dr.Sid The Old Man Join Date: May 2005 Location: Czech Republic Posts: 1,458 Downloads: 6 Uploads: 0	SQ: sure .. the first version will have one or two subs, simple environment. Anyway some basic idea what it should look like in the end should exist. sonar732: Hmm .. that's a good idea. Simply 'you can' approach. No admiral on flagship, but rather 'god' able to see everything and able to man any station on any ship falling under his command. Certain limits could be switched on for specific mission. Like commanding just one platform, or commanding the fleet but being unable to leave your flagship. Also with multiplayer you could allocate ships to players .. you two handle ASW, you command the aircrafts and I'll command the carrier's protection fleet. XabbaRus: I'm sceptical about 3rd party GFX engine. Sim has quite specific requirements. I know some nice engines for 1st person shooters, and some even for real-time-strategies. But they all have limits. On the other hand subsim engine does not need much. It's just different things. We need to display scenery from 20km height to 500m depth. It would be great to have unlimited mission area (limited to whole world). We need to display water, sea-bottom, rocks, clouds, ice, maybe some marine life. And boats, sure. No human,no trees (or just very basic), no animation is needed (I don't call rotating screws and turrets animation). I don't know engine which could allow that. Anyway I don't consider making such engine to be a problem. It needs smart terrain model, good level-of-detail management, and some playing with water reflectivity so it looks cool. Uh .. I forgot explosions ! :rotfl: I'd say it's doable. Really good sonar model still bugs me more. It needs to be really fast. It must handle all platforms listening all other platforms with high time compressions. Sure .. it is no problem to write simple and fast simulation .. but we want realistic and fast one. I'm already testing some ideas here. Currently I have some nice sound wave tracing program, which can demonstrate layer, deep channel, convergence zones .. but it is too slow to be used in simulation.

01-28-07, 10:36 AM	#18
Dr.Sid The Old Man Join Date: May 2005 Location: Czech Republic Posts: 1,458 Downloads: 6 Uploads: 0	It's my own program .. it's just simulation of beam bending based on different speed of propagation. You give it speed vs. depth, sound source position and it draws 2D map (distance vs depth) of sound transfer effectivity. I'll make some user interface and will post it somewhere. It's really simple .. while I use more or less real sound speeds, I also multiply the bending effect so it is more visible. It by no means gives realistic data. Sure it can't be used .. but maybe some sound propagation effectivity maps could be computed with this and then used in simulation. Anyway it seems you know something about it. Can you list most important phenomenons ? Let's walk thru that, let's discuss tactical importance of such effects and let's talk about their implementation, both accurate and fast.

01-28-07, 12:09 PM	#22
Dr.Sid The Old Man Join Date: May 2005 Location: Czech Republic Posts: 1,458 Downloads: 6 Uploads: 0	XabbaRus: ok .. my scenario is pretty same. Phase 1: Main focus of this phase would be control interface (screens and buttons) and main game core. This phase should also set base-stones for each game aspect so design is proved. Also this will be the pilot phase which will be subjected to discussion. Platforms: 1 or 2 subs with anti-submarine warfare, clearly sub vs. sub fight Graphics: sub models, basic water, bottom. Control interface engine should be final, if not complete. Boat physics: simple course, speed and depth change with some inertia. No buoancy model. Passive sonar: simple with only signal weakening by distance. No layer or anything. We just need something to feed sonar screens. Active sonar: simplest possible, only distance dependent. Subs interface: navmap, sonar (NB, BB, active, demon, sonar warning), torpedoes, TMA. No need for dedicated sub controls panel, electronics, periscope Sounds: very basic, no speech. AI: simple, hard coded (no doctrine language) Game logic: basic, but with time compression. Game interface: just basic .. mission start, basic options .. just so we can say there is some game interface. Other phases should build upon these in order we will find best. - Multiplayer should be added soon. - Platforms will be added one by one as the time allows - When enough platforms will be available, strategic command will be implemented My ideas about the game development process: - I'll be the main programmer. Preferably the only programmer. I think I have experience enough at least for phase 1. We can develop specialist for GFX or sonar or doctrine language later, but the core should be one man work, so it fits nicely together. - APIs will be OpenGL, OpenAL, Win32 should be isolated (we would need very little of it anyway). Would be nice to have the game multiplatform one day. Again I have some experience with multiplatform project, I made PC/Unix, PC/Palm software. I don't want to develop anything but Windows version now. Any other platform will have it's own volunteer programmer who will port it and keep it ported. We also don't need the latest crazy GFX features available only thru DirectX. Last but not least, I have much more experience with OpenGL. - XabbaRus is main 3D modeler - we don't need anybody else at the moment. Sure except for comments and suggestions. My ideas about the game interface itself. - there is nothing wrong with DW, SH3 concept of control stations switched by F keys. Putting all into one screen like Harpoon tries is nonsense. - there is no need to have free inside camera (like SH3), stations alone are just fine. The stations itself will be 2D, but not artworked (as DW), at least in the phase one. We can customize boats with screen types, control layouts and colors, but no artwork is needed in the first phase. It also need people with special talent, quite rare today. - there will be navmap with computed solutions and known contacts, with optional 'true' mode.

01-28-07, 12:16 PM	#23
Dr.Sid The Old Man Join Date: May 2005 Location: Czech Republic Posts: 1,458 Downloads: 6 Uploads: 0	OneShot: Burke needs something to hunt and somebody to shoot at him. Also radar is simple compared to sonar. That's why I plan subs only in the begining.

01-28-07, 03:21 PM	#28
sonar732 The Old Man Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Central MO Posts: 1,562 Downloads: 6 Uploads: 0	There is also the LinuxSSN people to talk with regarding code.