ITEC 2019

[Colebrook]

Arty and pioneer(?),great, can't wait for the video!

[Grenny]

25 minutes ago, Colebrook said:

Arty and pioneer(?),great, can't wait for the video!

Have a cookie:

 

[Ssnake]

1 hour ago, Gibsonm said:

How was the event?

 

I understand its footprint has shrunk a little but was there serious interest in your product (as opposed to people just kicking tyres)? Not after commercial in confidence information but whether it was a "success" in terms of serious interest that may translate into new business.

Well, As far as our own stand is concerned, and contact to the press, I won't complain. In a way it was the best looking stand we ever had, visualizing the new HE model on the wall and giving a good overview over the spectrum of application cases of SB Pro. ALso, we could sit down with a number of core customers and discuss further improvements.

 

We may even have found one new customer.

Now, in all fairness, if there were all of a sudden three or four new customers threatening us with truckloads of money we'd probably have to send them away since we're close to the capacity limit as far as software development is concerned. If it were only about selling licenses, that would be too easy. Next to no customer ever bought SB Pro to use it "out of the box". To that extent, "one customer", if it's the right one, could be exactly the sweet spot.

 

And still, I'm dissatisfied.

ITEC has now shrunk the fifth year in a row, the last two events by about 20% each, before maybe 10% every year. It still is "the biggest event" dedicated to training and simulation but nevertheless it's the acceleration of a negative trend that worries me a lot. If the event is good for us and maybe one or two other companies, it still isn't good for the rest of the market, and that will work only for a limited time. The big players in the market no longer show up, probably because they don't have to. I don't want to speculate about the why, although from our perspective the mere fact that ITEC is in a different town and country every year makes it unnecessarily hard and costly to exhibit. The organizers are unreasonably stingy with giving exhibitor staff access to the conference. It used to be possible to send at least one team member to a discussion of particular interest, now they insist on payment to upgrade as if the member would attend the entire conference. Whoever decided to change the policy here, it's not helping us to maintain a positive attitude.

In short, I doidn't feel treated like a valued customer but rather like dubious folk from a flying circus that is tolerated on the show floor because it provides a colorful and entertaining backdrop for the delegates' lunch break. The garish choice of floor carpet - baby blue in various levels of faded, orange, and pink - looked tacky, as if they stole thrown away carpets from a factory that had a highly bizarre major industrial accident involving explosives, cans of neon paint, and UV lamps. So I'm beginning to ask myself if ITEC still is the place to go to find new customers. Most of our customers in the last years we found because they saw Steel Beasts in use, or actively recommended by our existing customers.

I don't know if there will still be an ITEC in 2021.

[Grenny]

 

[Ssnake]

1 hour ago, Colebrook said:

The new HE model affects other ammo types (like keft,mpat or heat rounds)?,And what about offmap HE arty,is also using this new model?

Looks great, is amazing that despite all the  improvements we are going to have better fps.

KETF uses a different submodel (but is part of the new HE/frag framework); HEAT rounds and all artillery also use the Gourney/Taylor/Mott model. There aree still rounds which do not (and I don't mean APFSDS) - canister would be such a case, HESH only partially, PELE rounds are still on the old framework. But, we will gradually make them work as well, just not for the 4.1 release.

 

As far as the fps count is concerned, I just ran a (small) scenario starting with 7km visbility and details cranked up above default and it was still in the mid 40s to mid 50s. That won't be always the case, but still I think it's nice, and I'll see how things will go when the visibility rises to 11km+

 

Another side effect is that forests no longer need to be closed and uniform as far as the trees are concerned. In the past we strongly recommended that to keep the framerate high due to the cluster billboarding. We no longer use that method, so the forests not only give good framerates even in scenes with high overdraw (at least for higher end graphics cards like GTX980, 1070, ...), they also look much better at a distance, and you can use the tree spray tool virtually without penalty now. So, yeah, I'm quite a happy ssnake right now.

[Gibsonm]

15 minutes ago, Ssnake said:

Well, As far as our own stand is concerned, and contact to the press, I won't complain. In a way it was the best looking stand we ever had, visualizing the new HE model on the wall and giving a good overview over the spectrum of application cases of SB Pro. ALso, we could sit down with a number of core customers and discuss further improvements.

 

We may even have found one new customer.

Now, in all fairness, if there were all of a sudden three or four new customers threatening us with truckloads of money we'd probably have to send them away since we're close to the capacity limit as far as software development is concerned. If it were only about selling licenses, that would be too easy. Next to no customer ever bought SB Pro to use it "out of the box". To that extent, "one customer", if it's the right one, could be exactly the sweet spot.

 

And still, I'm dissatisfied.

ITEC has now shrunk the fifth year in a row, the last two events by about 20% each, before maybe 10% every year. It still is "the biggest event" dedicated to training and simulation but nevertheless it's the acceleration of a negative trend that worries me a lot. If the event is good for us and maybe one or two other companies, it still isn't good for the rest of the market, and that will work only for a limited time. The big players in the market no longer show up, probably because they don't have to. I don't want to speculate about the why, although from our perspective the mere fact that ITEC is in a different town and country every year makes it unnecessarily hard and costly to exhibit. The organizers are unreasonably stingy with giving exhibitor staff access to the conference. It used to be possible to send at least one team member to a discussion of particular interest, now they insist on payment to upgrade as if the member would attend the entire conference. Whoever decided to change the policy here, it's not helping us to maintain a positive attitude.

In short, I doidn't feel treated like a valued customer but rather like dubious folk from a flying circus that is tolerated on the show floor because it provides a colorful and entertaining backdrop for the delegates' lunch break. The garish choice of floor carpet - baby blue in various levels of faded, orange, and pink - looked tacky, as if they stole thrown away carpets from a factory that had a highly bizarre major industrial accident involving explosives, cans of neon paint, and UV lamps. So I'm beginning to ask myself if ITEC still is the place to go to find new customers. Most of our customers in the last years we found because they saw Steel Beasts in use, or actively recommended by our existing customers.

I don't know if there will still be an ITEC in 2021.

 

I'm glad that it was worth the time/ money etc from your POV, even it the organisers are regarding it as "side show alley" compared to the Conference.

 

I guess the people at I/ITSEC will be happier without the European "distraction" (as I heard one of the people there refer to ITEC as).

[Apocalypse 31]

30 minutes ago, Grenny said:

 

Thanks for posting.

 

Didn't see anything with riflemen. Any updates?

[Grenny]

Just now, Apocalypse 31 said:

Thanks for posting.

 

Didn't see anything with riflemen. Any updates?

Not as such...

[Apocalypse 31]

Just now, Grenny said:

Not as such...

Heartbreaking

 

Thanks.

[Grenny]

3 minutes ago, Apocalypse 31 said:

Heartbreaking

 

Thanks.

Well, they have promissing plans...but well, my crystal ball ain't working at the moment ;-/

I still think you'll like the Improvements to dismounted scouting and the weapon teams...not perfect but a way forward.

[Gibsonm]

9 minutes ago, Apocalypse 31 said:

Heartbreaking

 

Thanks.

Small steps - at least there are changes / improvements, as opposed to no change at all.

[Grenny]

23 minutes ago, Gibsonm said:

Small steps - at least there are changes / improvements, as opposed to no change at all.

Yes, (only) small steps...but one can't compare a 250 person team with a  7 person team

[Apocalypse 31]

6 minutes ago, Grenny said:

one can't compare a 250 person team with a  7 person team

Of course not, that's not fair. But also, nobody is doing that, either.

[Ssnake]

When you compare SB Pro with certain shooter games, how indirectly you might do it, you implicitly evoke that comparison. That's not intended as a rebuke or anything. I don't know how familiar you are with software development in general, game development in particular, or, especially, the market environment in which eSim Games operates. And in all fairness, Nobody should expect you to be familiar with that. You have a certain set of things that you're looking for, just like everybody else, and you're free to speak up and say what you want (like everybody else). And that irrespective of the practical viability. If I wanted to buy a new car, I wish it would be fast and good-looking like a Ferrari, would drive 200 miles per gallon, had room to accommodate ten people and their luggage, and could fly safely without much piloting skills. It's not going to happen, but still I wish there was a car like that.

 

So, I'm trying to take such comments in this context. At the same time I feel the maternal urge to defend the guys in the team who worked so hard for such a long time and did so much good, and yet the response isn't quite the level of enthusiasm that they hoped for (and which, IMO, they deserve). (Usually I get that impulse under control before posting anything stupid.)

 

I guess that's then the point where others with a similar sentiment will speak up, and that's then where misunderstandings begin about the motives behind other people's remarks.

[Gibsonm]

34 minutes ago, Ssnake said:

At the same time I feel the maternal urge to defend the guys in the team who worked so hard for such a long time and did so much good, and yet the response isn't quite the level of enthusiasm that they hoped for (and which, IMO, they deserve). (Usually I get that impulse under control before posting anything stupid.)

 

To mitigate this, without consuming too much development time of course, is it possible to create two videos of the same action (or perhaps one with a split screen) - one in 4.023 and one in 4.1x comparing and contrasting the differences?

 

Preferably not including a new vehicle (which would create various spin off discussions) but one that focused on say old vs new terrain, old vs new HE effects, old vs new forests etc?

 

Perhaps a stock 4.023 scenario played once in 4.023 and once in 4.1x?

 

That might garner the requisite Oohs and Aahs??

 

Edited May 24, 2019 by Gibsonm

[Apocalypse 31]

You and a few others seem to think that I'm wishing for a full fidelity infantry simulation experience, akin to VBS or ArmA, or maybe one of those $60 shooter games that EA or Activision shits out every other year - or at least that my expectation is that SB becomes or does something that it wasn't designed to be or do.

 

You're still getting my $40. You have been since 2007 and you will continue to do so until the lights go out.

[Grenny]

1 minute ago, Apocalypse 31 said:

You and a few others seem to think that I'm wishing for a full fidelity infantry simulation experience, akin to VBS or ArmA, or maybe one of those $60 shooter games that EA or Activision shits out every other year - or at least that my expectation is that SB becomes or does something that it wasn't designed to be or do.

 

You're still getting my $40. You have been since 2007 and you will continue to do so until the lights go out.

I'd pay up more for at least the addition of simple rifle sights( a"pointer" would do) and a trigger for the  rifles as well as sights and triggers for at least some AT/RPG weapon...

 

Hmmm, Ssnake....can you tell something about Bug-fixes in the aiming procedures for the rifle men you talked about?

 

[Apocalypse 31]

2 minutes ago, Grenny said:

I'd pay up more for at least the addition of simple rifle sights( a"pointer" would do) and a trigger for the  rifles as well as sights and triggers for at least some AT/RPG weapon

It would be incredible. Don't even care about 3d anything. Give me a white reticle and we'll be good.

[Hedgehog]

2 hours ago, Ssnake said:

Well, As far as our own stand is concerned, and contact to the press, I won't complain. In a way it was the best looking stand we ever had, visualizing the new HE model on the wall and giving a good overview over the spectrum of application cases of SB Pro. ALso, we could sit down with a number of core customers and discuss further improvements.

 

We may even have found one new customer.

Now, in all fairness, if there were all of a sudden three or four new customers threatening us with truckloads of money we'd probably have to send them away since we're close to the capacity limit as far as software development is concerned. If it were only about selling licenses, that would be too easy. Next to no customer ever bought SB Pro to use it "out of the box". To that extent, "one customer", if it's the right one, could be exactly the sweet spot.

 

And still, I'm dissatisfied.

ITEC has now shrunk the fifth year in a row, the last two events by about 20% each, before maybe 10% every year. It still is "the biggest event" dedicated to training and simulation but nevertheless it's the acceleration of a negative trend that worries me a lot. If the event is good for us and maybe one or two other companies, it still isn't good for the rest of the market, and that will work only for a limited time. The big players in the market no longer show up, probably because they don't have to. I don't want to speculate about the why, although from our perspective the mere fact that ITEC is in a different town and country every year makes it unnecessarily hard and costly to exhibit. The organizers are unreasonably stingy with giving exhibitor staff access to the conference. It used to be possible to send at least one team member to a discussion of particular interest, now they insist on payment to upgrade as if the member would attend the entire conference. Whoever decided to change the policy here, it's not helping us to maintain a positive attitude.

In short, I doidn't feel treated like a valued customer but rather like dubious folk from a flying circus that is tolerated on the show floor because it provides a colorful and entertaining backdrop for the delegates' lunch break. The garish choice of floor carpet - baby blue in various levels of faded, orange, and pink - looked tacky, as if they stole thrown away carpets from a factory that had a highly bizarre major industrial accident involving explosives, cans of neon paint, and UV lamps. So I'm beginning to ask myself if ITEC still is the place to go to find new customers. Most of our customers in the last years we found because they saw Steel Beasts in use, or actively recommended by our existing customers.

I don't know if there will still be an ITEC in 2021.

What about ITSEC? 

(The American one, assuming say, Ed, is willing to manage a storage unit for expo gear. )

[Ssnake]

37 minutes ago, Grenny said:

Hmmm, Ssnake....can you tell something about Bug-fixes in the aiming procedures for the rifle men you talked about?

Once more, I am clueless about what you're hinting at, Maybe we should talk by phone or email rather than through the forum.

[Ssnake]

1 minute ago, Hedgehog said:

What about ITSEC? 

(The American one, assuming say, Ed, is willing to manage a storage unit for expo gear. )

Well, none of our current customers is from North America, and what we might save in storage and exhibition preparation we'd more than make up for in travel costs (not to speak that of our customers). So, there's a non-zero chance that we might actually shift towards exhibiting at IITSEC, but it's not exactly in the 90% range either. Another aspect is that IISEC is, unsurprisingly, very US centric. Of course, the US market alone probably represents 70...80% of the world market for simulation - but our niche are the 10, 15% that are neither US, nor China or Iran. Will they come to the US? Some will, but not all of them.

[Gibsonm]

There's also the SE Asian one based in Singapore, but logistically that's an even bigger issue.

[TankHunter]

For even the ability for the AT/RPG man of an infantry squad to be "manned" and "playable" it would probably require some rather significant work on other things. Its not just the reticle and adding in the code to fire RPGs manually. People are going to try to suppress you by fire. How do you implement the effects of suppression? How do you throw in the moral effects of being shot at so that you don't have pinned infantry just popping up shooting off RPGs because a human player jumped into the position and is manually aiming the things? Those are fairly fundamental things that might take a long time to iron out that eSim is unlikely to try unless a military pays them to make the effort. And then there are some simplifications that would have to become unsimplified.

 

Don't get me wrong, I'd love to be able to fire RPGs from infantry, it would be a useful thing, but it would require mucho effort to get it right if I had to hazard a guess.

Edited May 24, 2019 by TankHunter

[Ssnake]

12 minutes ago, TankHunter said:

... fundamental things that might take a long time to iron out that eSim is unlikely to try unless a military pays them to make the effort.

Military procurement rarely, if ever, works along such lines. It's typically: We have Equipment X. We need a training solution for X. Game balance, wargaming aspects are usually secondary considerations (if at all), it's more about "What's available on the market" and "Which of the available solutions is least costly?" where a 75% solution can be picked over a 95% one, if only it's 6% cheaper.

 

 

Yes.

I'm still pissed about that. Sore loser, and all.

[Hedgehog]

I do like the shiny things!

Tracers & impacts, the dushka's barrow, the AAR widgets (projectiles & the unit icons)