homepage

Baptism By Fire - A integrated simulation game

Posted By: Si89_Studios

Baptism By Fire - A integrated simulation game - 08/11/17 07:45 PM

Hello everyone!

I am here to share with you about the game we are creating. We are friends indie dev team (we named Si89 Studios), developing in this moment (for 4 months so far) a simulation game called Baptism By Fire, and I am here because it is very hard to find people interested in good ideas (at least we think this game will be a good idea dancinfools ). So I will explain some ideas of the game here, for the right understanding about what is this, and I need your feedback if its a good idea, if we need to change or improve something etc. We really need your ideas and support.

1 - The game is called Baptism By Fire and is under development for 4 months, we are using Unity engine for several reasons.
2 - The game will be made with almost full simulation features.
3 - The game will be a WW2 combat simulator, including tanks, infantry, air force, artillery, submarines etc, but we will start in this pre alpha with the armor part, that we are going to call "Steel".
4 - For resuming, the idea of the game is make something similar to Forgotten Hope 2 when it comes to variety of vehicles and kinds of maps, but not arcade like FH2. The difference with our maps is the size... now, in the tests, I am working with a 5km x 5km map, but the idea is bigger maps.
5 - It will be something similar to T34 vs Tiger when it comes to armored vehicle and battle distances, and the interior will be something like what is presented in the Red Orchestra 2 interiors of the tanks. The tanks will be made with positions, and military hierarchy
6 - It will be something similar to IL2 Sturmovik 1946 when it comes to aircrafts.
7 - It will be something like Operation Flashpoint : Dragon Rising 2 when it comes to FPS, but the damage will be as realist as possible to have a good gameplay and realism balance, but the realism will be the priority.
8 - The military hierarchy will be funcional in the war mode, but in the arena mode will be different.

The game is in very beginning, and for start from a good start, we are here to collect opinions and support, because we will need to test the game and we will need to recruit some of your for testing sometimes.

Here is the last video which shows some tests, we are working in the multiplayer system now. Almost everything is different now from the video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OCROL844xqk

Thank you in advance and feel free to give your opinion smile

Posted By: Master

Re: Baptism By Fire - A integrated simulation game - 08/11/17 10:25 PM

I dont hate what I am seeing so i'll wish you guys luck and hope to see more from you guys down the road.
Posted By: Si89_Studios

Re: Baptism By Fire - A integrated simulation game - 08/12/17 12:01 AM

Thank you for the support! We are going to post here all the updates and news... have you watched the video ? What do you think about the ideas itself ?
Posted By: Falstar

Re: Baptism By Fire - A integrated simulation game - 08/12/17 03:23 AM

Looking good. I don't like having that much bounce in my step though.
Posted By: Master

Re: Baptism By Fire - A integrated simulation game - 08/12/17 03:31 AM

I like the idea and if it is implemented smoothly it should be a good game. Video looked good but too much motion blur and stuttering. It is very early view of the game though so I cant knock you for that.
Posted By: Si89_Studios

Re: Baptism By Fire - A integrated simulation game - 08/12/17 09:40 AM

Yes, I agree because there is nothing done related to graphics and image yet, only provisional stuff. But the penetration values due to distance, angle of impact, bullet hardness vs armor hardness materials, ballistics etc is almost done! Because my primary focus is on the mechanics of the game, because this game is supposed to be free of complains like OP or nerf, because it will be accurate in historic data and physics... And thank you for the feedback!
Posted By: B25Mitch

Re: Baptism By Fire - A integrated simulation game - 08/12/17 12:34 PM

I see you are attempting a "ground-up" method of game development, and this is fine, but it can be very easy to lose control of the project scope. If at this stage your focus is on ground vehicles, you should be careful to pin down the limits of the game and where you will draw the line with regards to features. There are 5 different games (each successful in their own right) listed as gameplay goals for different parts of the simulator, and this is where I see a problem.

As an indie dev team you don't have the manpower to make a game or simulator in the traditional sense using the same methods as larger studios, so you'll need to focus on a niche and do it better than everyone else. For example, as a vehicle simulator, consider using Unity's physics libraries to spice up your vehicle damage modeling. Using rigid body physics components linked by joints (a la Kerbal Space Program) could be a great head start towards a very robust damage system.

You'll need a dedicated artist on the team to ensure your scenes are visually consistent. This is a role that should never be attempted by the lead programmer, simply because it represents a conflict of interest (optimization vs. beauty) which usually results in mediocrity on both ends. A sound designer is also crucial - don't underestimate how difficult and time consuming an immersive audio environment can be to produce.

Those concerns aside, I wish you the best of luck in your development and hope to see you release a completed product in the near future!
Posted By: Si89_Studios

Re: Baptism By Fire - A integrated simulation game - 08/12/17 12:59 PM

Originally Posted by B25Mitch
I see you are attempting a "ground-up" method of game development, and this is fine, but it can be very easy to lose control of the project scope. If at this stage your focus is on ground vehicles, you should be careful to pin down the limits of the game and where you will draw the line with regards to features. There are 5 different games (each successful in their own right) listed as gameplay goals for different parts of the simulator, and this is where I see a problem.

As an indie dev team you don't have the manpower to make a game or simulator in the traditional sense using the same methods as larger studios, so you'll need to focus on a niche and do it better than everyone else. For example, as a vehicle simulator, consider using Unity's physics libraries to spice up your vehicle damage modeling. Using rigid body physics components linked by joints (a la Kerbal Space Program) could be a great head start towards a very robust damage system.

You'll need a dedicated artist on the team to ensure your scenes are visually consistent. This is a role that should never be attempted by the lead programmer, simply because it represents a conflict of interest (optimization vs. beauty) which usually results in mediocrity on both ends. A sound designer is also crucial - don't underestimate how difficult and time consuming an immersive audio environment can be to produce.

Those concerns aside, I wish you the best of luck in your development and hope to see you release a completed product in the near future!


Hello! smile

When it comes to the 5 games I mentioned, it is only an example, because our goal is to make different, but in the same level. The game is being developed in parts exactly for do as you said. We are already using Rigidbody physics for the bullet system, and I had to create something more reliable than the unity's default collision detection system. I am a KSP player as well since I was student of aerospace engineering. We are in 6 now, 4 artists (2 photoshop artists for textures, UI etc and 1 char 3D modeler and 1 level and vehicle modeler, we already have a lot of 3D tanks ready to be prepared, I am a sound designer as well and composer, I used to be professional musician and composer for years ^^, I have composed 3 symphonies, for example haha).

I think we can go relatively fast since I was with 0 knowledge of unity 4 months ago (I was trained only in C language and 3D design for engineering), and now I have learned some stuff that i generally see the people having a lot of problems, I learn the stuff a little bit fast :P

Thank you for you feedback and I am really happy you liked the ideas. I explained the ideas veeeeeeery summarized , there are a lot of other details, for example: We are going to implement medics, with ambulances, needs of transport patients... combat support, with trucks of ammo for tanks, artillery etc... the game will be based on courses system, the war mode will be based on military hierarchy including dictators and presidents, which will manage supplies, position troops in the maps etc... the war will last 1 month and this month will be split in years of the war, which will be make vehicle available or not according with the years of availability in real life . The idea is pretty complete, I will telling here gradually !

Thanks biggrin
Posted By: James McKenzie-Smith

Re: Baptism By Fire - A integrated simulation game - 08/12/17 04:39 PM

I see that you are doing multiplayer. What are the plans for SP? Will there be any AI units in MP?
Posted By: Si89_Studios

Re: Baptism By Fire - A integrated simulation game - 08/12/17 08:43 PM

Since it is a simulator, I haven't planned to add AI or SP so far, but it depends on the purpose, what ideas do you have about it ?
Posted By: James McKenzie-Smith

Re: Baptism By Fire - A integrated simulation game - 08/13/17 01:10 AM

Thanks for the quick reply.

I think that there is a problem with having a game relying on MP, and being the scale that you are simulating. Simply put, even if you have a battlefield that has say 100 people in it, it will feel quite empty, and also have unrealistic force ratios. With 100 players and a 5x5 km map, you will average 4 people per square km. Of course, during game play, some areas will be more densely populated, but some rather less, and in no case will any area be anything close to what one might expect in a WW2 battlefield. Also, as noted previously, force ratios will be skewed; with even one aircraft in the air, that means a greater proportion of the total force in an air role than in reality, by a long shot. Put in a number of aircraft that will make for minimally good game play, say four fighter bombers vs. four fighter bombers, and things get radically skewed away from reality. Same thing for tanks. You will require unrealistic numbers of AT guns and systems, and AAA as well, in order to give leg units a chance. You might end up with about ten riflemen a side when all is said and done. This is all to say nothing about the inclusion of submarines.

There is another problem with having an MP only game; it cannot be played without other players. This is not a problem for a game with solid SP options, and also one that requires only small numbers of MP players (two player games such as chess being a classic example). However, if you have a 5x5 km battlefield, you need a significant number of players to make things viable. There are millions of game players out there, but once you factor in everyone in the world's different tastes, different languages, schedules, owned systems, purchasing power, competing products etc., coupled with your marketing budget - I am guessing that this is going to be small - then you will need to be damned lucky to get enough players to make this game viable. Just look at the many MP specific games on Steam that die immediately for lack of players.

I asked about AI because AI can assist in eliminating some of these deficiencies. I play the ArmA2 derivative sim Iron Front in SP mode, and, given the type of game play that I do, viz., player controlled companies and understrength battalions with the ability to jump into any of the units on the battlefield at any time, I could not hope to experience this without AI. I like some of your ideas, to be sure, but the sort of game play that I enjoy in Iron Front will likely not be possible in an MP only product.

I suggest that you have a few alternatives available to you:

1. Carry on with your plan, and hope that you can attract a meaningful player base to make the game viable. In all sincerity, if you choose to carry on this course, I wish you the very best of luck.

2. Introduce AI into the existing design to make up deficiencies in player numbers, in order to avoid a vast, depopulated game.

3. Radically reduce the scope of the game. Think MUCH smaller battles, like the modern conflict-based game Squad, and lose things like submarines entirely, and player controlled aircraft. Ensure that tanks are present in relatively small numbers, except for specifically tank-centric scenarios, where you can probably increase distances a little. Other aspects of game play can be added as desired after initial release. This is my recommended solution if you must remain an MP-only, AI free game, although do note this market has a few games in it already, with more on the horizon.

4. Produce a game that with each layer of game play simulated rather differently. Something like the solutions developed for WW2 Online and Heroes and Generals, with several small ground battlefields connected on a larger strategic map, on which air action can take place. When aircraft enter the air space of the ground battlefields, then these can be rendered for the aircraft (and the AC can appear to the ground troops as well). Of course, this space is occupied by Heroes and Generals, but AI filling out units would help you stand out.
Posted By: Si89_Studios

Re: Baptism By Fire - A integrated simulation game - 08/13/17 11:02 AM

Thank you for your time!

What I have to say is I haven't thought about these details yet, and you gave me a light, so the AI system and SP systems will be implemented , but I will program these systems after the multiplayer system is done and stable.
About the number 3 advice, this is already in the plans, there will be the arena mode and the war mode for it. Aircraft and submarine will be done later, not now. The 5km maps will allow bug battles but the advances will be like in real life, in groups, and for specific points. I am already planning a system to avoid forever alone players in nowhere: if the distance between one soldier and the officer greater than X, the officer will be informed, and can kick the player if he wants, exactly for not having the heroes and generals problems (tank rambos on bike, tank balance problems like OP and NERF stuff etc will not be here as well, because these is one of the most problematic issues in heroes and generals. Since our game will be based on physics and real data, this problem will be eliminated). The tip number 4 is in the plans too. The huge maps will be as well for the aircraft pilots having a realistic experience (the first map Idea was 60km x 60km hahaahaha).

I really appreciate your help! And you just changed important things of the game! If you have some game developing ability, even as a beginner, join us! Let's participate to make this idea real!

Thank you for everything smile
Posted By: Ajay

Re: Baptism By Fire - A integrated simulation game - 08/13/17 03:04 PM

As a long time player of War Thunder, specifically Ground Forces in Sim Mode, the big killer for me and a big complaint was to many aircraft and their ability to easily one shot ground units and take you out of the game early, sometimes only a minute after you had spawned into a 30 minute match. Another other problem from a game play point was small maps, even Kursk is only something like 4k by 4k, but it seems you are not going that route. Another biggie was it doesn't take long for people to work out the best one shot spots on tanks, Tiger through the drivers hatch, Shermans in the front corners etc. so as long as you had the bigger gun/better pen value and you weren't a noob you could wreak havoc. The game was a ton of fun and looks beautiful but i'm convinced the devs seem to want to kill it and leave it as an arcade fest which is terrible considering how many good points it does have. Great models, decent physics, some really good looking maps despite the sizes and nice environment destruction. The ship side of it they are working on now had me excited initially but world of warships has that covered and far far better than what they have shown as to leave me totally uninterested in the merge of water with land and sky battles.

Pop up or long range rendering, also a problem with many pvp games, how good does Unity handle that as it's a big factor in long distance battles? You think you're hidden or at least partially in cover but you are standing out starkly and easily picked off.

Heroes and Generals kept me interested for about a month but the grind and level up factor is once again terrible once you hit the wall after the initial quick rewards, please don't make yet another grind game, the market is past flooded smile

Good luck, it's a long road and many games die early, wish you lot the best and drop me a pm if you need any testing done i would be more than happy.
Posted By: Si89_Studios

Re: Baptism By Fire - A integrated simulation game - 08/13/17 05:40 PM

Thank you Ajay, for your feedback!

In the case of war thunder, there is no simulation mode, the game is only arcade and what changes is only some features and details. There is no simulation in any tank game which the player can shot and drive at the same time.
When it comes to overpowered aircrafts, the problem is that they really were OP, but, these situations you have mentioned aren't so common because there was a lot of anti aircraft guns everywhere to avoid it.
The one shot kill spots would only exists if it was like that in real life, because our game is not based on raycast shots. Instead raycast we are using rigidbodies so physics rules.
As a player, I can say you are completely right when you say a lot of game devs are trying to kill the their own games when they DON'T LISTEN to the players! Not the complains but important stuff like bugs or unrealistic and unfair gameplay problems. Not the realistic unfair features (there was a lot, and we are not going to give unrealistic features in exchange with fair gameplay features).

In unity, I have tested in my provisional 5km x 5km maps shots in distances around 4km and works very fine. The penetration tests we are building as in real life, exhaustive empiric tests, shooting several times, in several angles on a large range of distances, and it is the main goal: this bullet system works fine. For deal with rendering distance issues, we are using LOD and Occlusion Culling optimization... Because we need some precision, like, for example, it will be possible to attach vegetation on the tanks, for camouflage, for examples, but the tank crew or infantry will need to add it manually.

Do you believe my first idea about make a game myself was because I was a Heroes and Generals player (3000 hours playing), and I know deeply their problems. Our game is going to work in a course system, and will be very different to H&G but I will try to preserve the good features of the game, and the Pay to win from heroes and generals is not on the plans. We have a very different way of thinking.

If you want, email us for it, because we are going to need tester players soon (today for example we would test some features, but it was not possible due to the others haha).

Thank you for your feedback and we will appreciate your help or anyone else from this forum as test players biggrin
Posted By: Ssnake

Re: Baptism By Fire - A integrated simulation game - 08/14/17 06:32 AM

I think it is still possible as an independent developer to work on a project like this if you
  • Use third party elements like render engine, network libraries, etc. as much as possible
  • keep your staff small
  • keep your work focused on the barebone components, to flesh them out later if the initial concept is successful
  • are prepared that everything takes longer than expected
  • establish your design goals early, and stick to them

Also, you want to keep in mind scalability:
  • Will your game still perform if you increase the map size by a factor of 100, or 1,000?
  • Will your game perform with 10 players, 1,000, a million, ten million?
  • Different units need different map sizes. Different map sizes require different levels of detail.
    Different LODs can become a big issue once that you have, say, the aircraft shooting on the infantry guy. The infantry guy sees himself in cover, but the aircraft player's LOD doesn't include the covering elements, so the infantry player actually is exposed. This correlation problem is serious because it threatens the perception of balance and fairness.
  • Who will create your maps and your game scenarios - can you scale the content creation as well?

If you want to do everything as a simulation, be preprared for the consequences, or drop the "simulation" argument in your marketing.
Posted By: Brit44 'Aldo'

Re: Baptism By Fire - A integrated simulation game - 08/14/17 07:23 AM

Originally Posted by Ssnake
  • are prepared that everything takes longer than expected
  • establish your design goals early, and stick to them

Those are the most important in my experience. Also, do not be afraid to kick anyone from the team if they do not share and follow the teams dream. PEDG would have done better if they had kicked me to the curb rather then moving on and leaving it to me. But, then SB may not have had some of the great people they had.

Originally Posted by Ssnake

If you want to do everything as a simulation, be preprared for the consequences, or drop the "simulation" argument in your marketing.

Yes, be prepared for the people that think your simulation is not accurate enough, or think it is too difficult. There will always be people who are not happy with your dream. Do not take there opinion as a personal attack.
Posted By: 33lima

Re: Baptism By Fire - A integrated simulation game - 08/14/17 10:36 AM

Some random, personal observations...

1. For me, no SP = no interest, no matter how good the rest is.

2. SP should include a decent mission builder and one or more campaigns (even if composed of no more than themed mission sets). Frills like medals or crew management are non-essential.

3. Must feature (i) reasonably accurate crew drills eg for target indication and tank commander role, and (ii) reasonably good platoon command and control, including R/T and intercom traffic, including spotting/contact/damage reports.

4. AI should be at least adequate eg keeping frontal armour towards threats, preferably using cover.

5. For the tank sim/game element, playing and learning from existing sims that do most or all of the above best - currently Steel Beasts, Panzer Elite and SABOW - is essential. OFP/ARMA2/Iron Front is not a great example, as a tanksim. T-34-v-Tiger is very good at simulating the handling of one tank, but is very much let down by doing 2 above inadequately, not doing at all the second part of 3, and doing 4 badly.

6. Something that a real soldier would recognise as an accurate representation of the military activity being portrayed is an important goal - for 'Steel', get some real tankers involved. Accurate armour penetration etc is useless, on its own. And read a lot, concentrating on tankie memoirs. My recommendations would include Mailed Fist by John Foley, Take These Men by Cyril Jolly, Tank Action by David Render & Stuart Tootal, and Armoured Guardsmen by Robert Bowscawen. Donald Featherstone was a tanker in Tunis and Italy and his 'Tank Battles in Miniature - a Wargamer's Guide to the Mediterranean Campaigns 1943-1945' is very useful. Also stuff like this [url=http://pedg.chollie.co.uk/index/Britno41pt2.pdf][/url]. You need to understand how armies work, not just how tanks work.

7. Ostfront has been overdone, even as a first theatre. NW Europe 1944-45 would be much preferable - British & US -v- German. Or North Africa 1941-2, DAK -v- 8th Army.

8. Make it mod-able, so that modders can add content like additional vehicles and weapons, and maps etc.

9. The programme seems impossibly ambitious, such that wider goals could interfere with getting any one thing done sufficiently well (to me, 'sufficiently well' = to the standard where, even if a 'sim lite', the result is still clearly a sim and not an arcade game (ie has realistic gunsights, no floating target markers for gunning in the external view etc). To make a decent ww2 tanksim would be more than ambitious enough for any one project. OFP demonstrates that a soldier sim is likely to be an indifferent tanksim or air combat sim - 'jack of all trades and master of none' syndrome. By all means, plan to follow up a tanksim/game with other genres based on similar engine or whatever, but don't compromise any one product - especially not the first one - for the sake of trying to do 'everything'. Park the rest, concentrate on making Phase 1 everything that you (and the potential customers you're aiming it at) want it to be.



Posted By: PanzerMeyer

Re: Baptism By Fire - A integrated simulation game - 08/14/17 11:05 AM

Originally Posted by 33lima
Some random, personal observations...

1. For me, no SP = no interest, no matter how good the rest is.





+1


I will also chime in with my 2 cents. The demographic that is mostly going to be interested in a game like this is the SimHQ one (ie males over the age of 35 or so).


A strong single-player component is vital for this demographic.
Posted By: Si89_Studios

Re: Baptism By Fire - A integrated simulation game - 08/14/17 10:46 PM

Originally Posted by Ssnake
I think it is still possible as an independent developer to work on a project like this if you
  • Use third party elements like render engine, network libraries, etc. as much as possible
  • keep your staff small
  • keep your work focused on the barebone components, to flesh them out later if the initial concept is successful
  • are prepared that everything takes longer than expected
  • establish your design goals early, and stick to them

Also, you want to keep in mind scalability:
  • Will your game still perform if you increase the map size by a factor of 100, or 1,000?
  • Will your game perform with 10 players, 1,000, a million, ten million?
  • Different units need different map sizes. Different map sizes require different levels of detail.
    Different LODs can become a big issue once that you have, say, the aircraft shooting on the infantry guy. The infantry guy sees himself in cover, but the aircraft player's LOD doesn't include the covering elements, so the infantry player actually is exposed. This correlation problem is serious because it threatens the perception of balance and fairness.
  • Who will create your maps and your game scenarios - can you scale the content creation as well?

If you want to do everything as a simulation, be preprared for the consequences, or drop the "simulation" argument in your marketing.


Hello Ssnake!

Thank you for your time thinking about it (and writing as well haha)! I can say almost everything you said is already on the plans! This part of LOD system is something "basic" for me even for me as a new unity user, I have studied it a lot because I am very focused in the details in my life, in general, so when it comes to something what would me angry as player, I will do it right! biggrin

The "responsibility" of being a simulator is really something very important, and we are going to have a arena mode of playing, which will include more "arcade" stuff.. I can't really call arcade because it will work with the same features of the war mode, but with a common matchmarking system..

Thank you! biggrin

Feel free to add more ideas, I am glad that you guys are participating! Thank you all ! biggrin
Posted By: Si89_Studios

Re: Baptism By Fire - A integrated simulation game - 08/14/17 10:57 PM

Thank you for your opinion Brit44 'Aldo'! It is very important for us!

I don't know what is PEDG or SB though haha. I know the people are crazy... if there are doubts about it, just look for the comments in any video on youtube... almost every topic there are people unsatisfied and complaining and we are prepared to it (no, indeed we aren't because nobody is prepared to it hahah).
With the support from here, we can make this game a game that born here, created by the simhq users.. I am new on the forum but with you all support we can do that like this, I guess.

If you want to help more, feel free to say what you want, and you don't need to care about nothing you want to say: just say sincerely what is in your mind, without "smooth" nothing biggrin

Thank you for you help!
Posted By: Si89_Studios

Re: Baptism By Fire - A integrated simulation game - 08/14/17 11:22 PM

Hello 33lima, thank you for your collaboration, you have great ideas!

1 - It will be included, as I said before... my idea changed about it in this topic, as you can see above.

2 - It will be in the future, since it seems more complex than the rest of the game, I guess...

3 - It is already in the plans! biggrin If you want to help us , you are welcome smile

4 - AI will be programmed when the SP system is started to be done!

5 - You said about an important topic for me personally, and I am learning like you said, playing other games, but not as a regular player currently... I think I have lost the ability of play freely without observe the technical aspects of the games haha;

6 - My dad is historian and passionate about WW2 since he was a kid, so he has a lot of material to read... and I have read some WW2 serious books as well, but currently I am a lazy reader haha If you want to join us to help in this part, you are very welcome!

7 - I am thinking about include all europe since the War mode will include all the europe lands, because it will be split in a lot of squares, and each square will be a land for conquest... and some will be subdued without battle, and other will have battle, but all squares will be different terrains and maps of battles (yes, I know , this idea is very hard to implement);

8 - I still don't know how to do that LOL

9 - Yes, I agree with you, and the game will be split in parts to take care of it... and we will need a lot of help. I am thinking in open polls here in the forum to make important decisions when we need this, and I hope you all participate smile

So, Thank you for your answer, we are glad with this kind of feedback, you all are great! Thank you all!
Posted By: Si89_Studios

Re: Baptism By Fire - A integrated simulation game - 08/14/17 11:28 PM

Hello PanzerMeyer !

The SP will be implemented for sure since everyone here (so far) thinks it is important, and I agreed. The game will be made by you all, of you all and for you all! We will need you as players, because the course system I am creating will include some "virtually in person" courses, by using voice chats, tasks, training fields etc... I think the people will like! smile

Thank you for everything and keep helping us, it is very important for us, mainly when the people are more experient on it , like you all seems to be !
Posted By: Brit44 'Aldo'

Re: Baptism By Fire - A integrated simulation game - 08/15/17 09:19 AM

Si89,
LOL, I have no problem speaking what comes to my mind. I have always thought "looks good" is a poor excuse for an opinion. Counting rivets is only bad if you count them wrong.

33Lima,
mod-able has been replaced by DLC frown
Posted By: Pooch

Re: Baptism By Fire - A integrated simulation game - 08/15/17 01:57 PM

Single player is important if you are going to call it a combat simulator. Not having any sp works for Steel Beasts because of it's complexity. That keeps the children out. But if it is a game anyone can jump in and play then every clown with a computer can get in and pretty soon the whole "simulator" idea goes up in smoke as everyone is grabbing a Tiger Tank and the kids are crashing their Stukas into you.
If not sp, at least give the "serious" players a co-op option. Again, just my two cents. I've been wrong before and God know I'll be wrong again. Just ask my wife.
Posted By: Ssnake

Re: Baptism By Fire - A integrated simulation game - 08/15/17 04:10 PM

Originally Posted by Pooch
Not having any sp works for Steel Beasts because of it's complexity.

There's hundreds of single player scenarios for Steel Beasts...
Posted By: Si89_Studios

Re: Baptism By Fire - A integrated simulation game - 08/15/17 04:32 PM

Originally Posted by Brit44 'Aldo'
Si89,
LOL, I have no problem speaking what comes to my mind. I have always thought "looks good" is a poor excuse for an opinion. Counting rivets is only bad if you count them wrong.

33Lima,
mod-able has been replaced by DLC frown



Haha, agreed!
Posted By: Si89_Studios

Re: Baptism By Fire - A integrated simulation game - 08/15/17 04:33 PM

Hello Pooch!

We have in the plans features to avoid these things you have mentioned! biggrin

Thank you! I hope the game will be what the serious players are looking for, for years!
Posted By: 33lima

Re: Baptism By Fire - A integrated simulation game - 08/16/17 07:21 AM

Happy to help in any way possible, Si-89 - testing, research, feedback, whatever.

SB=Steel Beasts (and as mentioned, it has plenty of SP content and good enough AI to make it much better than just shooting dumb 'bots' for MP practice) . PEDG is the Panzer Elite Development Group...

http://pedg.chollie.co.uk/

... a group of skilled modders and serious, knowledgeable tanksimmers who made the mods later released by PE as a 'bonus' CD with Panzer Elite Special Edition (PESE) - to the basic game, this added new theatres, vehicles, missions and campaigns. A few of the group are still active, including Aldo, and I am working on some missions for a new release of the Britpack '44 mod.

Allowing for the fact thay they showed an early stage in the work, with very basic particle effects etc, your videos on facebook/Youtube have some impressive features. The T-34-85 and Tiger I did not behave like dune buggies and the physics looked quite good. The tracer richochet effect in the T-34 clip also looked good.

About maps, it would be much better not to design these as generic regional landscapes suitable for deathmatch, capture the flag and other such MP silliness smile

Do it like Panzer Elite. They (Wings Simulations and later, the modders) took real maps of real areas where battles were fought in WW2. And built game maps of these, on which both the included SP missions and MP battles could be fought. Like this period map of the area near Mortain, used for a PE scenario based on the famous German counterattack at the time of Operation Cobra, the breakout from the Normandy bridgehead.

[Linked Image]

These maps and associated files were included on the 'bonus' CD with PESE, so modders could use them.

Steel Fury - Kharkov 1942 (and the many Graviteam Tactics wargames released later) do the same - their maps are based closely on the real locations. Iron Front - Liberation 44 I think did the same - maps based on real locations so you could re-fight real battles, or company-level parts of them anyway.

That way, people can re-fight real battles from Normandy, N Africa or the USSR, not just ones that feel like they are exercises on a field training area that might as well be anywhere. Bring history to life for the player! And if you provide modders the ability to add maps and other content, more people will buy the base product, and future base products, over a longer period, probably generating more revenue than DLCs at less cost.

Anyway happy to help in any way I can.

Attached picture Mortain04Scan.jpg
Posted By: Si89_Studios

Re: Baptism By Fire - A integrated simulation game - 08/16/17 06:36 PM

Hello 33lima!

I really like the idea and I am already doing something in this direction. For example, the terrain I am using in the tests is a heightmap based on the area of Brody, where there was a great WW2 tank battle, but I have modified it completely. I used this base for make sure it will be possible in large maps!
I have experienced something related to good maps when I was editing and playing the ARMA3. The maps are very realistic as possible...

Thank you for your help! Let's keep in touch!
Posted By: Si89_Studios

Re: Baptism By Fire - A integrated simulation game - 08/18/17 01:09 AM

@33lima I forgot to add. Do you remember forgotten hope 2 ? So, we are trying to make a game with the same (and more) features, but with simulation standards related to tanks and fps.. in tanks we are going to have real tank damage, angle of piercing, penetration, metal hardness etc and in FPS, the damage of bullets will be more realistic , something like 1 shot in the arm, you can't shot anymore unless the medic help you, 1 shot in torso = kill, 1 shot in leg = fall waiting ambulance. The medic class, for example, will have ambulances and they will run around the map looking for hurt players . The support car will have a truck full of ammo, tank ammo, artillery ammo, fuel etc.. and the idea is run and provide supplies to other players that call in radio, so the support will need a radio operator working with him or going asking haha (the voice chat will be added). The engineer will do the same but looking for damaged vehicles or equipment or artillery... and only the engineer will be able to make a diagnostic, take the right part in the truck, and perform the repair...

This game will be great, I hope haha
Posted By: Ssnake

Re: Baptism By Fire - A integrated simulation game - 08/18/17 07:11 AM

With vehicle repairs you are probably leaving the simulation domain and enter game territory. Realistic repair times is something that nobody wants.
Logistics is another topic where realism probably stands in the way of fun. During the 1944 Ardennes offensive poor roads with icy, slippery surfaces on steep gradients plus the overloading of the road network with too much military traffic led to massive traffic jams on the German side, making it impossible to bring forward fuel, spare parts, and ammunition in sufficient quantities (enough of all this had been alotted, contrary to popular belief). Allied airpower from Dec 23rd then mostly targeted the long columns of supply vehicles which were all nicely lined up on the long roads. Playing a supply truck driver would be no fun at all: You can hardly drive, are stuck in a traffic jam 95% of the time for a week, and then you die. There's less entertainment value in that the more realistic it gets.

But there's the problem, then - if you make supply runs sufficiently entertaining, you might be able to give better supply to a side than it historically had, in some scenarios. There are ways to address this, of course - if people need to purchase their equipment, scenario specific prices can be a solution. Or an artificial restriction on the ratio of players who may actually grab a supply job slot compared to combat forces; a realistic ratio would be 80...90% supply vehicles, 9.8% infantry, 0.19% tanks, and 0.01% artillery pieces. IOW, with a realistic force mix nobody would ever get to play an artillery unit, and very rarely a tank. Rather, it would be mostly a supply game. Again, this is probably not what you want, and that's cool. You just need to be aware of this, and make game design decisions here. These game design decisions will have a substantial influence on the realism/simulation aspect.
Posted By: Si89_Studios

Re: Baptism By Fire - A integrated simulation game - 08/18/17 01:11 PM

Hello Ssnake! biggrin

As vehicle repair I mean tank track maintenance for example, which was done in combat in real time, depending on the track type... I am not talking about that repair that exists on battlefield or heroes and generals...
The logistics and supply topic is extensive, and I am going to try to find a way to implement this, but there is no problem of remove that if it's something that prejudices the realism. By the way, there will be 2 modes: Arena mode and War mode. I can make the realism balance here, but the priority is to have a most realistic experience than the most of the games we already have... I would not need to make this game if, for example, Iron Front had a realistic tank behavior/battle or realistic aircraft play, and if it was more player friendly and intuitive. The game is very hard to get started and the most of the players abandon the try in the beginning because of that... I hope you can help us in such decisions as you already are doing.

Thank you!
Posted By: Ssnake

Re: Baptism By Fire - A integrated simulation game - 08/18/17 03:15 PM

Anything repair and supply related that's supposed to be done in (realistic) real-time is going to be extremely boring.

Can a tank crew fix a broken track? Sure, it just takes between 30 minutes if you're lucky, and an hour or two (depending how complicated the case is) during which you don't do anything but cursing and sweating, preferably in icy rain with numb fingers, in the middle of the night - and then you just lost your important pin and/or tool into that muddy pit. Been there, done that, got a T-shirt. It's a realistic amount of friction that happens, but nobody wants to play that. At least I wouldn't. Supply is extremely important, yet also neither very glamorous nor particularly exciting (unless, maybe, you're hauling 10 tons of high explosive artillery shells with your truck and find one of your tires on fire). I don't think I could possibly give a more striking example that what I wrote in my previous post about the German supply situation during the Battle of the Bulge. The fuel was there, it just couldn't be delivered because of terrible road conditions and incessant air attacks which puts the player into an extremely passive role, if done in a realistic manner. In short, when it comes to logistics in a wargame, you don't want realism. Trust me on that.
Posted By: 33lima

Re: Baptism By Fire - A integrated simulation game - 08/18/17 06:49 PM

Originally Posted by Si89_Studios
@33lima I forgot to add. Do you remember forgotten hope 2 ? So, we are trying to make a game with the same (and more) features, but with simulation standards related to tanks and fps.. in tanks we are going to have real tank damage, angle of piercing, penetration, metal hardness etc and in FPS, the damage of bullets will be more realistic , something like 1 shot in the arm, you can't shot anymore unless the medic help you, 1 shot in torso = kill, 1 shot in leg = fall waiting ambulance. The medic class, for example, will have ambulances and they will run around the map looking for hurt players . The support car will have a truck full of ammo, tank ammo, artillery ammo, fuel etc.. and the idea is run and provide supplies to other players that call in radio, so the support will need a radio operator working with him or going asking haha (the voice chat will be added). The engineer will do the same but looking for damaged vehicles or equipment or artillery... and only the engineer will be able to make a diagnostic, take the right part in the truck, and perform the repair...

This game will be great, I hope haha


I hope so too!

But - there is always a 'but'... smile

This business of healing via medics is bad enough in a (non-milsim) game of airsoft - been there done that and never liked it. But it is completely out of place in any game that wants to be a realistic simulation of military activity. Get hit and if not dead you are not bandaged by some guy with a Red Cross armband and a Magic Sponge, then back in action. You are evacuated to the rear to the Regimental Aid Post (in British Army parlance) and if necessary on back, to a Casualty Clearing Station and thence to a Field Hospital.

That's a bit like the infanteer equivalent of the tankie repair situation Ssnake described - and not something worth simulating. If your soldier or tank is broke in any given battle, it stays broke. Make a tank (combat) simulation, not a Medical Officer simulation, or a Light Aid Detachment simulation. That will be challenging and time-consuming enough, without dispersing your not-unlimited time, effort and enthusiasm by adding peripheral or unrealistic representations, especially of boring stuff.

OFP and the like diminish their claim to be soldier sims by providing the ability to be healed on the spot and go back into action. That is a 'gamey' feature. It's an arcade game feature. Fine if you implement sim and arcade modes but if you try to do both well I fear you will do neither justice and it will end up being the sim mode that gets compromised.

As Ssnake could also I'm sure tell you, the master Principle of War is 'Selection and Maintenance of the Aim' and like most of the others (there were nine all told in my day) they apply fairly well to any endeavour, warlike or not. Close behind that in importance come 'Concentration of Force' and 'Economy of Effort'. I think you need to focus on doing one thing well and not let it get too ambitious, aka mission (or scope) creep. FWIW, my idea of a suitable aim is along the lines of a realistic WW2 tanksim, with ALL AND ANY other elements - like the ability to play as a soldier, or man a crew-served weapon, let alone fly a plane - very secondary. That, I would be in the market for. Others will of course differ but I have tried a lot of ground sims or games and most of them are just variations on 'run and gun'. Even moderately good ones like Brothers in Arms are still fundamentally run and gun (and don't run too far, because you're on rails). Hidden and Dangerous Deluxe I found about the best of these, with OFP (and Iron Front) better still but just as a soldier sim.

IMHO the fact that OFP and its successors are about the best soldier sims but very limited as tanksims, helesims etc is not a co-incidence. It tends to prove that you are doing well, if you manage, in the scope of a single game, to get one core element right. The latter is what I am hoping you will do, but it's your game, or sim.
Posted By: Si89_Studios

Re: Baptism By Fire - A integrated simulation game - 08/19/17 03:20 AM

Thank you guys, you made me think a lot!

We have tested the game yesterday online with something like 10 players, but it was to laggy because of some configuration of server region I made wrong hahahah and It is already solved! But in the game, it was possible to notice the interest of all of them in the tank crew combat, because clearly the idea of one group inside one tank against another group inside another tank make them more "United" like, we were using teamspeak and I noticed their voice hahah, things like "Turn left, TURN LEFT!!!!" haha And it was not the game, it was only a test of connection and some stuff of the multiplayer system.

I took your ideas and it is in my count now..

I am going to need serious testers to help me to test connections etc... I would be glad if you both help me!

Thank you for everything!
Posted By: 33lima

Re: Baptism By Fire - A integrated simulation game - 08/19/17 10:14 AM

Happy to help, let me know how (pm?).

Sorry to lecture you or 'rain on your parade'. It's just a passion to see the type of game that I think would be realistic and fun see the light of day!

A 'tank crew simulator' sounds very interesting, but if realistic, it might not be much fun for some of the roles. The loader may have little or no view. The gunner can see nothing except through a telescope or periscope. The driver can only see a narrow arc ahead and relies on the TC to tell him where to go. Only the TC has a good view of outside, when 'unbuttoned', or really deserves to be able to use an external view (to compensate for the linitations of monitor vision). So if you are a driver, in a realistic tank crew simulator, you are just sitting there with a vision slit ot maybe a periscope with limited traverse in front of you, waiting for your TC to say 'Driver, speed up!' or 'Driver, move to fold in ground, half left, 30 meters' and able to see or hear little or nothing of the battle.
Posted By: Si89_Studios

Re: Baptism By Fire - A integrated simulation game - 08/19/17 02:21 PM

33lima

Yes, thats the idea (part of it actually)... Feel free to pm me or contact us by email: si89studios@gmail.com , or my personal email : keineleben@gmail.com.

I REALLY like your enthusiasm because we need it... I think, with your help, we can make de difference when it comes to ww2 simulators game industry. Do you have any 3D design, photoshop, programming etc ability as well ? I mean you already helps a lot with the most important thing in a new game: ideas, but maybe you can join us directly as well smile

Thank you smile
Posted By: Sokol1

Re: Baptism By Fire - A integrated simulation game - 08/19/17 02:45 PM

Interesting, something in the line of WWII Online/Battleground Europe will be interesting.

Tanks don'y need have detailled 3D interior like Red Orchestra 2, Red Orchestra 1 style will be fine. Planes need detailed interior.

But another "clone" of Heroes & Generals with COD/BF "Bunny & Kangaroo" gameplay I pass.
Posted By: Si89_Studios

Re: Baptism By Fire - A integrated simulation game - 08/19/17 04:42 PM

Hello Sokol1

The battleground europe has a lot of features we are going to implement (similar);

Tanks will be with a simple interior in the beginning, but with time, we will improve it... Our 3D vehicles designer just finished the tiger with interior (the simple one, for now) and I will prepare it in few days;

You said about exactly what we are avoiding hahaha We really don't like such arcade games that take sim features as you take food in a self-service restaurant haha

Thanks
Posted By: Ssnake

Re: Baptism By Fire - A integrated simulation game - 08/19/17 11:27 PM

Ideas come at a dime per dozen. Implementing ideas is the most important job that costs you 99.9% of your time and money. That being said, 90% of the remaining .1% of the total effort should go into weeding out bad ideas.
Posted By: Brit44 'Aldo'

Re: Baptism By Fire - A integrated simulation game - 08/20/17 06:25 AM

You are not making an engineering software, you are creating a game that simulates the experience. So keep in mind, as you make realism sacrifices for game play reasons, to be cautious about revealing exact details how your "sim" works. What is important is the "feel". If you reveal the magic, the illusion is spoiled.

A car analogy: People love there sexy looking sports car if it can hold the road better then they can drive. They hate it as soon as they learn the suspension is made from VW Beetle parts. You will never make Massa say your car is best.

wink But, do not ignore the rivet counters. If they find a problem, then the chances are it is hurting your "sim" mode of play.

Armoured is not the quick thrill of FPS or the fanciful glory of the fly guy. It is a hard genera to make a buck with as a recreational software..
Posted By: 33lima

Re: Baptism By Fire - A integrated simulation game - 08/20/17 10:08 AM

OK just for me to be a bit more constructive, by way of suggesting (what I think are) good ideas and less as Ssnake described it weeding out (what I think are) bad ideas, if I was going to make a game of WW2 tank combat, this is what it would be like.

Working title, or sub-title below the snappy one - 'Tank Platoon Leader'

The player - SP or MP - is cast in the role of the leader of a platoon of 3-5 WW2 tanks or SP guns. Focussing on a role is important, because role-playing draws the player in as well as giving game design its objectives, scope and boundaries. And this role provides the best combination of tactical challenges.

The basic mission type - SP or MP - is the type of mission which a WW2 tank platoon would be given - advance to contact, attack, defence, maybe withdrawal, standard stuff. The most common mission would be - like those featured in stock Steel Fury - Kharkov 1942 - a daylight attack by a mixed tank-infantry force of about re-inforced company strength with artillery/mortar support, and on occasion air support.

In both MP and SP, the player would command his own tank and control the rest of his AI platoon. Probably, he could do this from the gunner sight if he wanted, for gameplay reasons, and play a sort of combined TC/gunner role. But he needs to be able to play just as TC and have a good AI gunner whose fire he can direct. Likewise, driver & loader. Likewise, he needs decent AI crews in his other 2-4 tanks.

For SP, the other tank (or infantry) platoons that are involved in the mission are 'all AI'. Instead of having an MP player in charge like the player's platoon, the other platoons follow the mission-maker's script.

For MP, the players can choose to command any of the other (AFV) platoons that are involved in the operation. One of the players acts as company commander, ideally with a smaller platoon (the HQ element). The fun comes from co-operating and following (preferably realistic) command and control, with players using voice messaging to issue and acknowledge orders, and send sitreps, contact reports etc, responding to the developing battle in real time. If you listen to some of the Steel Beasts MP battles - preferably the ones with players who understand and follow realistic battle drill and radio voice procedure, engaging brain before putting mouth into gear etc - you will see and hear this sort of thing in action.

In both SP and MP, if your tank gets KO'ed, you could take over one of your other platoon tanks, much as in real life.

I would forget about tanks crewed by several players. That is ok for a tank CREW simulator but it is a distraction from doing one thing well and the thing that would be most immersive, realistic and fun is a tank PLATOON LEADER sim.

SP would have 'themed mission set campaigns' like Panzer Elite's, set in N Africa 1941-42 and NW Europe 1944-45 - anything more like Tunis, Italy, Ostfront, NW Europe 1940, is icing on the cake. Plus map and mission editors and some sort of quick battle generator.

If there was enough development time, the player(s) could have their own 3d figure as in OFP/ARMA/IFL'44 who could dismount from the tank, eg to scout on foot, guide your tank by hand signals, bale out and take over another platoon tank, or maybe even engage in a bit of dismounted combat.

An another 'nice to have' feature would be the ability to command non-AFV platoons in a comparable way, especially dismounted or mech infantry. Or act at the company team's Forward Observation Officer.

Though dating from the 1970s, this British Army training film illustrates how my ideal tanksim would look, sound and feel, for the player:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3zo5f6l-ZP4

Posted By: marko1231123

Re: Baptism By Fire - A integrated simulation game - 08/21/17 01:00 AM

I am a long time armour sim enthusiast.
As such i have been looking for a updated and more comprehensive WW2 that's currently available.
Will watch this with great interest
Good luck with the project.
I do agree with previous posts.I would focus on the warfighting and not the logistics and engineering aspects
Posted By: Si89_Studios

Re: Baptism By Fire - A integrated simulation game - 08/22/17 02:01 AM

Hello Brit44 'Aldo'!

You are talking about, maybe, one of our harder challenges! You analogy was great haha Thank you!
Posted By: Si89_Studios

Re: Baptism By Fire - A integrated simulation game - 08/22/17 02:14 AM

Hello 33lima biggrin

The tactical feature will be well observed when the radio communication is implemented. These kind of posts, like leaders of platoons will be achieved by courses and leveling up. You have described the kind of gameplay of Operation Flashpoint: Dragon Rising 2 and everything you said is planned! We are going to post a new video soon, because the multiplayer system is under heavy test and programmings biggrin About the crew system, I really want that in the game, but only max 4 per tank (Commander, Driver, Shooter and Radio operator/MG operator, no reloader required, just a animated player when there is nobody in this position) .

I am looking forward to make the desert landscapes and combats haha

"If there was enough development time, the player(s) could have their own 3d figure as in OFP/ARMA/IFL'44 who could dismount from the tank, eg to scout on foot, guide your tank by hand signals, bale out and take over another platoon tank, or maybe even engage in a bit of dismounted combat." This is in the plans since the fps sim feature will be implemented... but it will be easier to play, differently of IF of OFP , both are not intuitive or friendly for new players, we will be different!

Thank you again! biggrin
Posted By: Si89_Studios

Re: Baptism By Fire - A integrated simulation game - 08/22/17 02:16 AM

Hello marko1231123 !

I hope we can make what you were looking for (and me too hahah this is the why I am doing that)!
Thank you biggrin I hope make you proud!

I want to put the logotype of SIMHQ in the beginning of the game! If the owner of the forum give me the authorization smile
Posted By: Si89_Studios

Re: Baptism By Fire - A integrated simulation game - 08/28/17 09:59 PM

What do you think about the firtst version of the login menu ?


[img]https://scontent.fbsb8-1.fna.fbcdn....d8d463b139f44453216e725c&oe=5A5DBC29[/img]
Posted By: Ssnake

Re: Baptism By Fire - A integrated simulation game - 08/29/17 05:22 AM

I don't know if you want to make a human skull a part of your product logo.
While funny, here are a lot of the reasons why that is a bad idea.
Posted By: PanzerMeyer

Re: Baptism By Fire - A integrated simulation game - 08/29/17 10:41 AM

Originally Posted by Ssnake
I don't know if you want to make a human skull a part of your product logo.
While funny, here are a lot of the reasons why that is a bad idea.



Well for the German and Austrian markets at least. It's not a big deal in any other country.
Posted By: Ssnake

Re: Baptism By Fire - A integrated simulation game - 08/29/17 12:31 PM

Skulls are never associated with anything positive - death, poison, beheadings, and pirates (which may be fun, but still are the baddies).
You may consider a certain demographic as your target audience that overlaps with those who like Metallica and Zombies, but at the same time you already say that 99% of the population are not your target audience.

I'm not saying that you should never use a skull in your product logo. All I'm saying is that it creates a hurdle towards impulse buyers and a general mainstream audience. That may be just fine and dandy depending on what your marketing plan is, but at least you should be aware of it and make it a conscious decision, for better or for worse.
Posted By: F4UDash4

Re: Baptism By Fire - A integrated simulation game - 08/29/17 01:53 PM

I used to own and ride a Harley and skulls are big in the Harley world, skull on gas tanks, saddle bags, foot pegs, clutch covers etc. I never could understand that.
Posted By: PanzerMeyer

Re: Baptism By Fire - A integrated simulation game - 08/29/17 01:54 PM

Some Navy fighter squadrons have skulls in their insignia. No problem there. smile
Posted By: Ssnake

Re: Baptism By Fire - A integrated simulation game - 08/29/17 03:25 PM

Neither Navy fighter squadrons nor Harleys represent even a significant minority of the population; they may want to borrow from the romantic pirate/renegade charisma, or they are trying to come across as people to be feared. Like I wrote - you can do it, but make sure you know what you're doing rather than blundering on it because you didn't have a plan in the first place. Few things will be as recurrent as the product logo - if you manage to turn it into a strong brand. The perfect logo conveys the spirit of the product.
Posted By: Si89_Studios

Re: Baptism By Fire - A integrated simulation game - 08/29/17 06:00 PM

Originally Posted by Ssnake
I don't know if you want to make a human skull a part of your product logo.
While funny, here are a lot of the reasons why that is a bad idea.


Ssnake, good observation! We are going to think about that!
Posted By: 33lima

Re: Baptism By Fire - A integrated simulation game - 08/29/17 06:14 PM

Is the plan, then, that you must be logged in, to play - like Rise of Flight for example? Some may prefer not to have to do this (RoF has an ofline mode). Some even today may have poor connections.

'1945' implies a time limit which could deter some from buying. You could at least go '1944-45' for an overlay as at your two current tanks fought in that period, the Tiger I (less zimmerit) earlier of course. The battles fought in 1944 - or even earlier - were probably as or more exciting or interesting, if not more desperate for the Germans, that those fought in 1945.

If you are not worried about people who aren't already armour enthusiants, the close-up of part of a Tiger may not be a problem, especially as that is probably the most recognised WW2 tank. But there is probably a good reason that most tanksims have a more or less complete tank on their DVD case or main screen. IIRC.

The combination of heavy metal style logo with a detailed shot is a bit harsh, but maybe that is the effect you want.

A rose by any other name would smell as sweet but now that I see the name, 'Steel' is a bit - well, monosyllabic and idiosyncratic, not especially effective on its own, or even as a sub-heading to the name of the parent game. Steel what? The word is already well used in tanksims. So is 'Panzer' but at least it is more evocative and descriptive. Something like 'Fire and Steel' has more of a ring to it, without getting too melodramatic. Tri- or bi-syllabic is usually good. Monosyllabic could be somebody clearing their throat.

Maybe have a little competition for the best name? I would not choose the winner by poll, though, a hostage to fortune and it's your call.
Posted By: Si89_Studios

Re: Baptism By Fire - A integrated simulation game - 08/29/17 08:28 PM

Hello 33lima biggrin

The year was only for provisional pourposes, we are going to implement all the ww2 years, and the vehicles will be available according to the year (in war mode). The Tiger tank, in the game , will not be easily deployed in the war mode, because the resources needed to deploy it will be high.

The name Steel is because we are going to launch first the version of the game which there are only tanks to play, since the FPS gameplay will not be available in this time. In this way, we can launch the game in parts and launch as soon as possible. When the FPS is included, the name will be "Blood" instead "Steel". This is a way of identify the alpha versions, and only.

I think the poll's idea great, about a lot of things, since the focuses is simulation. I am going to record and upload a video maybe today about the current progress biggrin

Thank you, you are being helpful as usual!
Posted By: Si89_Studios

Re: Baptism By Fire - A integrated simulation game - 08/30/17 06:23 AM

Here we go!
Here is the video I've uploaded today.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YerfvBYSLM8

Almost nothing done these last days is visual, we are working in the multiplayer system and optimization (like LOD and Occlusion Culling).

Tell me your opinion please smile

Thanks
Posted By: Ssnake

Re: Baptism By Fire - A integrated simulation game - 08/30/17 06:49 AM

At 9:20, cant angle doesn't seem to play a role in the trajectory.

Also, it would be a courtesy of yours to cut the video to elements that you wanted to text/where you're asking for public opinion. Watching 20 minutes of a tank driving through an empty landscape is an activity for people without a job, or maybe some exotic forms of WW2 themed zen meditation. If you can't spare the time to edit, I can't spare the time to watch it in full.
Posted By: Si89_Studios

Re: Baptism By Fire - A integrated simulation game - 08/30/17 08:45 AM

Originally Posted by Ssnake
At 9:20, cant angle doesn't seem to play a role in the trajectory.


What do you mean?

The bullet weight, exit velocity, aerodynamics (drag etc) are precisely considered... There is an rigidbody accelerated to the right speed and right aerodynamics to give this effect... (different than what I expected, in the beggining) ... The zoom make the bullet trajectory seem more curved than it is...

About the long video, I have no video edit skills to cut the important parts, I have updated and edited only in youtube while coding :P

Thanks again! smile
Posted By: Ssnake

Re: Baptism By Fire - A integrated simulation game - 08/30/17 08:56 AM

Wikipedia/Cant

If your vehicle isn't leveled but tilted sideways on a cross slope, rounds will fall short, and to the left (or right) of the crosshair center line; not what happened in the video. That's why shooting ghetto style misses at all but the shortest distances (cant angle = 90°).
Posted By: Si89_Studios

Re: Baptism By Fire - A integrated simulation game - 08/30/17 05:17 PM

Originally Posted by Ssnake
Wikipedia/Cant

If your vehicle isn't leveled but tilted sideways on a cross slope, rounds will fall short, and to the left (or right) of the crosshair center line; not what happened in the video. That's why shooting ghetto style misses at all but the shortest distances (cant angle = 90°).


But it is happening! Watch the video again smile
The tank is not leveled and there is an angle, and there is another angle related to the turret... What is happening is physics based only, so this is similar to the real life...
(Or i didn't understand exactly what you are talking about) haha
Posted By: 33lima

Re: Baptism By Fire - A integrated simulation game - 08/30/17 06:35 PM

It's also called 'trunnion tilt", the trunnions being the pivots either side on which the gun tube rests in its cradle. If not level (on a side to side axis) the upward component of the trajectory is also not level (ie not totally vertical) but can become so as gravity takes over. Will watch the video now to see if I san see it.


Edit - hard to follow the trajectory, the point of aim is not a specific target and the recoil effect makes it harder, but the round does seem to impact slightly right (downhill side) of the line of sight - whether enough at that range and with that degree of trunnion tilt I have no idea.
Posted By: Si89_Studios

Re: Baptism By Fire - A integrated simulation game - 09/02/17 07:15 AM

Originally Posted by 33lima
It's also called 'trunnion tilt", the trunnions being the pivots either side on which the gun tube rests in its cradle. If not level (on a side to side axis) the upward component of the trajectory is also not level (ie not totally vertical) but can become so as gravity takes over. Will watch the video now to see if I san see it.


Edit - hard to follow the trajectory, the point of aim is not a specific target and the recoil effect makes it harder, but the round does seem to impact slightly right (downhill side) of the line of sight - whether enough at that range and with that degree of trunnion tilt I have no idea.



Yes, but we have to remember that not only the terrain where the tank is isn't leveled.. the terrain that receive the bullet is not leveled as well...
Posted By: Brit44 'Aldo'

Re: Baptism By Fire - A integrated simulation game - 09/02/17 08:08 AM

Quote
Yes, but we have to remember that not only the terrain where the tank is isn't leveled.. the terrain that receive the bullet is not leveled as well..


Now that is a rivet count that I could get into, but that is a trap when developing a game.

If you are making an engineering simulation, then count these rivets. If you are trying to sell a game, think about the "feel" of the player.
Posted By: Brit44 'Aldo'

Re: Baptism By Fire - A integrated simulation game - 09/02/17 08:17 AM

The shell leaves the barrel at an angle and the impact is the angle trajectory / polygon struck.
Posted By: Brit44 'Aldo'

Re: Baptism By Fire - A integrated simulation game - 09/02/17 08:23 AM

I do not mean to be rude, but there are not many purchaser of a WW2 gunnery,engineering simulation.
Posted By: Si89_Studios

Re: Baptism By Fire - A integrated simulation game - 09/05/17 02:24 AM

Hello Brit44 'Aldo' !

Yes, the feel of the player is one of the main priorities here biggrin
Posted By: Si89_Studios

Re: Baptism By Fire - A integrated simulation game - 09/20/17 03:55 PM

Hello!
Only for remembering: we are still working on the game, rigt now we are preparing the Tiger tank with full interior (a simple version of the interior firstly).

Thank you all for the support!
Posted By: Brit44 'Aldo'

Re: Baptism By Fire - A integrated simulation game - 10/01/17 02:48 AM

I think it is unfortunate that you develop the Tiger. This creates an unbalanced game unless you are developing for late 1944. For all previous times, the Pz4 or Pz3L is a better choice against the T34/76, Sherman 75, and 6 Pdr British. We all love the Tiger I, but for game play and simulation through the years, it is a poor choice as a first tank. If you do choose the Tiger I, then the opposing tanks of choice should be the T34/85, Sherman 76, and rare Firefly with Sherman 75. But, if you are historical, the Firefly is not a command tank until two per platoon is common.
Posted By: Si89_Studios

Re: Baptism By Fire - A integrated simulation game - 10/09/17 04:28 PM

Originally Posted by Brit44 'Aldo'
I think it is unfortunate that you develop the Tiger. This creates an unbalanced game unless you are developing for late 1944. For all previous times, the Pz4 or Pz3L is a better choice against the T34/76, Sherman 75, and 6 Pdr British. We all love the Tiger I, but for game play and simulation through the years, it is a poor choice as a first tank. If you do choose the Tiger I, then the opposing tanks of choice should be the T34/85, Sherman 76, and rare Firefly with Sherman 75. But, if you are historical, the Firefly is not a command tank until two per platoon is common.


Hello Aldo!

These tanks you have seen in the videos are not the actual tank we are use in the game...They are there only for test of the systems...
Posted By: Master

Re: Baptism By Fire - A integrated simulation game - 10/09/17 07:16 PM

Originally Posted by Ssnake
Skulls are never associated with anything positive .



He is just trying to confuse you. I mean can you really trust a guy who goes by ssnake! Snakes are the original evil! Ask eve!
Posted By: Ssnake

Re: Baptism By Fire - A integrated simulation game - 10/10/17 05:03 PM

It was Eve who made the decision. The snake merely presented an option.
And then Eve had regrets and blamed someone else, typically human.
Posted By: Master

Re: Baptism By Fire - A integrated simulation game - 10/10/17 06:29 PM

Originally Posted by Ssnake
It wasssss Eve who made the deccccccision. The ssnake merely presssented an option.
And then Eve had regretsssss and blamed sssomeone elssse, typical humansssssssz.


Somehow that does make you seem less evil... biggrin
Posted By: Si89_Studios

Re: Baptism By Fire - A integrated simulation game - 11/09/17 01:47 AM

The game is going on, we are creating some scenery stuff and other details biggrin
© 2024 SimHQ Forums