Selsey I

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

[Stuart2007]

Hoovers suck, Hovercraft blow. 

careful McG. Some of our American members might think you are showing disrespect to a type of vacumn clearner there.

[McGherkin]

careful McG. Some of our American members might think you are showing disrespect to a type of vacumn clearner there.

Sorry, I have only one word for Vacuum Cleaner enthusiasts;

DYSON

 

[Stuart2007]

Sorry, I have only one word for Vacuum Cleaner enthusiasts;

DYSON

 

Suckers?

[Aad The Pirate]

Don't tell me you tried for each one?

*ahem*

Hoovers suck, Hovercraft blow. 

No, I knew 'cause I play SS08 for quite a while now and special in my Hometown I trie the whole enviroment with as much as possible vessels.

Sorry for the Typo, nobody is perfect.
BTW, my middlename is nobody.

[McGherkin]

No, I knew 'cause I play SS08 for quite a while now and special in my Hometown I trie the whole enviroment with as much as possible vessels.

Sorry for the Typo, nobody is perfect.
BTW, my middlename is nobody.

Okay and don't worry we're only pulling your leg!

[Ncena1]

The selsey 2 is an awesome add-on, maybe its not the best model, but the dynamics are blowing me away! awesome, i drive alot in a sailing boat like that and its so near

And the best is, that it's for free!

[Aad The Pirate]

The selsey 2 is an awesome add-on, maybe its not the best model, but the dynamics are blowing me away! awesome, i drive alot in a sailing boat like that and its so near

And the best is, that it's for free!

I assume that your comment is about the Sailing Boat, right?
Well her name is Selsey I (one) and not Selsey II (two).

[TerryRussell]

Selsey III and IV will be good, as well... (I may change the names, though)

[The Ferry Man]

Selsey III and IV will be good, as well... (I may change the names, though)

Looking forward to them 

*Starts praying that one will be the Coromuel...

*Implants Subliminal Message: Earl Granville (http://www.faktaomfartyg.se/earl_granville_1973_bild_3.htmhttp://www.faktaomfartyg.se/earl_granville_1973_bild_3.htm) 

[saltydog]

What's wrong in saying that Hoovers suck..?  That's what they're supposed to do, aren't they..?
The opposite of Moby Dick ..  

[Ncena1]

I assume that your comment is about the Sailing Boat, right?
Well her name is Selsey I (one) and not Selsey II (two).

of course 

[Mad_Fred]

*Starts praying that one will be the Coromuel...

I wouldn't get my hopes up. 

Only AI vessels that already have the basic dynamics to sail can be used for Terry's projects, since he can't add a 3d model to the game and make it playable, nor turn a static ojbect sailable. He can only finetune what is there, already sailing abouts, so to speak. It takes the Vstep team a lot of time and effort to turn a ship from bare model to player vessel. And that core part can only be done by them. All the ships that ARE already sailing and thus have that part covered, are eligable, they can then be outfitted with new 'forces' and such, to tweak the performance to what you need it to be. This is still a big effort ofcourse, not just anyone can do that. And it leaves plenty of ships still to perhaps be converted, no worries about that! 

So think AI vessels, rather than static objects or new objects being introduced.

I have my hopes up for certain ones..  so Terry.. think Dutch! Think canals/rivers..   hehe   

[Ballast]

I have my hopes up for certain ones..  so Terry.. think Dutch! Think canals/rivers..   hehe   

[cough] That container vessel from SS06 and the Voortvarend Besparen demo [/cough]

[The Ferry Man]

I wouldn't get my hopes up. 

Only AI vessels that already have the basic dynamics to sail can be used for Terry's projects, since he can't add a 3d model to the game and make it playable, nor turn a static ojbect sailable. He can only finetune what is there, already sailing abouts, so to speak. It takes the Vstep team a lot of time and effort to turn a ship from bare model to player vessel. And that core part can only be done by them. All the ships that ARE already sailing and thus have that part covered, are eligable, they can then be outfitted with new 'forces' and such, to tweak the performance to what you need it to be. This is still a big effort ofcourse, not just anyone can do that. And it leaves plenty of ships still to perhaps be converted, no worries about that! 

So think AI vessels, rather than static objects or new objects being introduced.

I have my hopes up for certain ones..  so Terry.. think Dutch! Think canals/rivers..   hehe   

Okay didn't realise that...

but still... 

Well all the packs are good... 

[TerryRussell]

Fred is quite right that the static objects cannot be turned into playable vessels. They aren't really ships, just a picture of a ship.

In many (most) cases, the AI vessels cannot be used. As described elsewhere, unless the surfaces have been layered in such a way as to be suitably opaqure when viwed from the inside as well as the outside, they simply are not there when you go inside the vessel. And most of them are constructed in that way, of course. Why wouldn't they be? Otherwise it would increase the loading on Ship Simulator to a level where you couldn't play the game at all.

The AI ships are designed to be viewed from a distance. The sailing boat is just a jpg image laid over the top of a box that is shaped like a boat. It's an excellent impression from a short way away, but close up, it does not look so good. So Selsey 1 was originally a blurry impression of edges and surfaces. Although I spent a lot of time adjusting the overlay image, the sailing boat can never look any sharper than it does now or have any more detail in it. But it is a good impression and it is a lot of fun!  

The vessels in Ship Simulator 2006 are a completely different format and cannot be transferred across. They need rebuilding from scratch. Although I can do most of that, it also needs a lot of time from Vstep developers to integrate them into the game after that, before I can continue with the other stages. I therefore won't/can't do it. (I want Extremes to come out on time, just like everyone else!).

Similarly, the Voortvarend Besparen vessels are not Ship SImulator 2008 compatible. They are actualy closer to Pro, but not identical. Again, they could be rebuilt from scratch, but...

Now, all that said, there are two special cases that I can add to the game myself. Neither has ever been in Ship Simulator 2006 or 2008. One is very Dutch. The other is bigger than any other ship in the game. I have spent a lot of time making sure it can get into the major ports (Padstow is out, though!). I hope you enjoy both of them.

In both cases, they are nearing completion and are being tested by the team. But something could turn up that means they can't be used. So no promises. Also, no matter what, from the way they were originally developed, these ships can't have smoke or wakes. I can only do that if I seriously disturb Vstep developers and I won't do that.

But they do have walk throughs, detailed interiors and so on.

[Aad The Pirate]

Ahoy Terry,
First of all: Thank You and your companions for the last Super-Pack  . Thanks to your spouse too for her patience (she must be quite sulky when you are working for the community ).
Your last post made me very curious, can't wait but have to.
Any chance that the SS Rotterdam (SS 08 CE - The Dutch version) is suitable to be transferred from a towable to a playable vessel?
Kind regards
Aad

[TerryRussell]

I couldn't possibly release these super packs week after week without the continual help from Horst (Artship), Eric (Sadsid), Hugh (HughGammon) and Des Healey (Thassos). Week after week they write missions, test them, check my vessels and give valuable feedback on all sorts of things. For every hour I put in, they must put in about 5 -10 more. Gents, THANK YOU!

Bev, Dana and Hana (the Spambot in my life) are always interested in my work on the Ships. Keeps me out of their way, I suspect...

Regarding SS Rotterdam, I simply don't know. I keep meaning to locate and buy a copy of the Dutch game and keep forgetting.  

[Stuart2007]

I'm sure for all the valuable work that you do for the community and vstep, I would have thought they could send you a copy, Doc. It would at least be a gesture of appreciation on their part...


Terry, I'm curious about one thing. You (and others) say that vessels need to be re-made from scratch. Seeing as how they are- in the first instance- just a collection of joined up dots with a 3 figure key to describe their relative location, surely this doesn't mean that the entire model needs to be made from scratch.

I can quite appreciate that the dynamics and other 'magic' will be, but not the actual 3d model, surely. Therefore, as someone mentioned the Corumnel (sp?)- can a ship of similar size/type not 'donate' its dynamics to that ship?

[TerryRussell]

Terry, I'm curious about one thing. You (and others) say that vessels need to be re-made from scratch. Seeing as how they are- in the first instance- just a collection of joined up dots with a 3 figure key to describe their relative location, surely this doesn't mean that the entire model needs to be made from scratch.

I can quite appreciate that the dynamics and other 'magic' will be, but not the actual 3d model, surely. Therefore, as someone mentioned the Corumnel (sp?)- can a ship of similar size/type not 'donate' its dynamics to that ship?

The 3-D model isn't the scratch they have to start from. The model has to first of all be delayered and various magical incantations and sacrificial rites performed. Then it has to be "questivated" (my term!), which can take a huge amount of time. That is a specific excercise for the version of Ship SImulator.

That just gives a hull that floats. Then all the other stuff has to be done, from adding in the helm control layers and linking them to the relevant bits (no point linking the rudder controls to the engine speed, etc) through to setting up all the lights and selecting their actions (lit when moored, lit when being towed, and all the other options). The solid sufaces have to be set up for walkthroughs, all the camera locations set up and and and and...

The dynamics are totally different for each vessel. When I do a simple thing like change one element, such as the mass of the vessel (as I did with the Pontoon for this week's release), that affects every one of the dynamics. It can take a week or more just make the thing float properly never mind turn correctly and pitch and roll correctly.

It is by no means a simple process. If I could take the dynamics of something else, I would be so happy... (dreaming...)

As each game has more and more dynamics controls and so on, they don't transfer. Rebuilding a vessel for a different game means redoing it all.

[Offizier]

Can someone explain me what is new with the Jumbo Pontoon and what this Cargo carrying facility is?

[McGherkin]

Can someone explain me what is new with the Jumbo Pontoon and what this Cargo carrying facility is?

New dynamics which I haven't really tested yet, and it can now carry containers, and has lights...

[TerryRussell]

There is a list in the file that comes with it.

But in summary, you should find that:

• it no longer floats in the air from time to time
• it can be towed properly (it was hardly moveable before)
• it has the correct weight
• it has the correct draft (2 metres instead of about 7-9 metres previously)
• in missions, you can load containers, including via the crane
• And those lights, of course

[Stuart2007]

The 3-D model isn't the scratch they have to start from. The model has to first of all be delayered and various magical incantations and sacrificial rites performed. Then it has to be "questivated" (my term!), which can take a huge amount of time. That is a specific excercise for the version of Ship SImulator.

That just gives a hull that floats. Then all the other stuff has to be done, from adding in the helm control layers and linking them to the relevant bits (no point linking the rudder controls to the engine speed, etc) through to setting up all the lights and selecting their actions (lit when moored, lit when being towed, and all the other options). The solid sufaces have to be set up for walkthroughs, all the camera locations set up and and and and...

The dynamics are totally different for each vessel. When I do a simple thing like change one element, such as the mass of the vessel (as I did with the Pontoon for this week's release), that affects every one of the dynamics. It can take a week or more just make the thing float properly never mind turn correctly and pitch and roll correctly.

It is by no means a simple process. If I could take the dynamics of something else, I would be so happy... (dreaming...)

As each game has more and more dynamics controls and so on, they don't transfer. Rebuilding a vessel for a different game means redoing it all.

Forgive the large quote, but just to avoid confusion. Doc, I wasn't being sarcastic for once. Sacrificial incantations? Sounds like it

What I mean is, for example if one were to make a model of the Pride of Hull, it would be the same model- both appearance and dynamics, yes?

If one were to then take a similar sized ship with similar engine power, GRT etc etc, but a different physical appearance, then the dynamics would be sufficiently similar as far as a game type simulator to be acceptable, perhaps?

I am not trying to make light of the work that either vstep does or you and your CF friends at all. Just a genuine interest in the technical aspects of it. I can see how making collision models for walkthroughs etc and 'questivating' it can be time consuming. All I mean by this is what percentage of this work can be re-used on a generic basis.. From what you are saying, not a great deal

[TerryRussell]

Hi Stu.

So far none of the work has been reusable (damn!). There are no vessels in Ship Simulator that are much like any other, of course.

If the vessels were identical in terms of hull shape, size, weight, engines etc, then yes, I guess it would be possible to cut and paste the dynamics, lights and so on PoR => PoH). But, sadly, every ship seems to be different in some way. Even very close siblings seem to always have some difference. Engine responses seem to vary immensely even on apparent clones. A barnacle in a different place seems to affect the handling wildly. That might be that the test data on them is not consistent, or it may be the real situation. Not quite sure about that, but I suspect it is a bit of both. Reliable test data is difficult to get, when it is available at all.

Then, even a tiny change to the dynamics files causes all the work I mentioned above. It isn't a situation I'm happy with, and I would love to get the computer to do the drudgery, but I haven't managed that (yet).

As an illustration, I have been working on Latitude. I had previously managed to get it to have less draft by changing the mass and a lot of other tweaks (artificially changing the centre of floation etc). That resulted in a vessel that could do what I wanted, but where the AI version was not so good. AIs use a set of light-weight in-built dynamics that don't take much computation. But when you come closer, they switch to the full set. This was causing them to suddenly shed 70,000 tons of mass and leap skywards.

So, I went back to basics and redid the entire set of dynamics. After several goes around the block, I have come up with a version that works extremely well. So, even for a vessel that is identical to itself (naturally!), I had to rewrite the dynamics.

Now, off to sacrifice a few chickens (that was a joke!). I like nice, precise things. To me the flitting back and forth to tune everything up really does feel like "hubble and bubble", sometimes.

[Stuart2007]

Thanks for that, Terry.

That has explained one or two points a lot clearer than anyhwere else before- especially about the flying tanker!

So if I understand you correctly, you don't put in 'how a ship will behave under XYZ' you tell the computer 'this ship is x heavy y long z soonandsoforth' and let the computer work out how it actually behaves... The programme is trying to calculate in real time what the ship will do...

Ouch... I didn't realise that was the way it was done. Now I see why certain things can't be done... Damned and blast (replacing the two words that goderators like deleting)