Introducing TASK FORCE ADMIRAL Vol.1: American Carrier Battles

[rocketman]

Get onboard the hype train - chooo, choooo  :wow: :clap: :D

[Destraex]

Hi guys! ^-^

Had a lot of smaller updates since the last time, but this one is perhaps a bit more important - we're prototyping our menu & our soundtrack, care to tell us if you feel like the mood is adequate considering the topic? The footage is kinda old so no worries this will be changed and made more relevant, but it was picked based on the sort of feeling we wanted to convey more than anything. Thanks in advance ;)

I like it. It fits the period and sounds like a military band or movie sound track. I turn the music off anyway. So am more interested in top notch sound effects rather than purchased canned varieties. Are you sourcing sounds for each aircraft and weapon specifically?

[The_Admiral]

Thanks Gents!

Regarding the gun sound effects, yes we do. Fortunately all this stuff is pretty standard (that is, all together the US Navy uses 4 different light AA guns & machineguns, and the IJN two...) so we can go the extra mile pretty easily. Actually larger calibers will be more generic, for several reasons though - besides the fact they get fired less, naturally sources are also very, very... scarce on the sound they produce. At least, not to the point of being able to say "Hey that's obviously a US 8 inch gun, not a Japanese 20cm! What did you do!"

In regard of planes, it is also less of a daunting task as one might think, because it's not so much about the planes than it is about the engines themselves (and their variation when there are several of them). That brings the larger selection down to less than 10 different sounds models able to cover 40 or 50 different plane types, which comes in handy.

[rocketman]

Regarding sound effects: for me a huge part is the 3D feeling of the direction of the sound effects and the delay caused by distance. It produces a feeling of "being there" rather than viewing something on a screen. Given the top notch quality of the graphics, it could lead to an incredibly immersive gaming experience.

When can we some actual gameplay? From stategic planning to execution to result of an attack.

[Toonces]

Very nice.

But, you had me at Battle Generator and Scenario Editor.      :hug:   

[MOS:96B2P]

Very cool.  Looking forward to this.  And a scenario editor.  A good editor can be a game all by itself.   :)

[em2nought]

Music sounds kinda Civil War(ish) to me.   I'm fond of something like the soundtrack from Tora, Tora, Tora! for the Japanese, or big band sounds for the allies.  I'd like the night battle sounds from "In Harm's Way" too.

[rocketman]

Very nice.

But, you had me at Battle Generator and Scenario Editor.      :hug:   

...and Battle Replays  :D

[The_Admiral]

Hello there chaps!

Some bits of animated gameplay options for a change

As of late we've been posting a lot of 3D stuff, but it doesn't mean we've been inactive under the hood - quite the opposite actually. Although from the standpoint of aesthetics most remains to be done (it's somewhat there, just not cute enough to be showed according to our artists...), we have been very busy with the gameplay functions themselves.

One of the important features of Task Force Admiral are notably our advanced formation system, which will recognize two main types of formations - simple formations, and compound formations - which will be customizable and manageable to an extent that hasn't been done before in any game about the topic. This GIF from the formation editor within the mission editor proper gives you an idea of how easy and intuitive it is to move your ships around in a larger, multi-division task group. This destroyer division is being formed into a line formation, a bent line formation, a loose/customized formation, an arc formation, an echelon right and an echelon left formation using a few clicks.

This is not only necessary from a tactical standpoint, it is also the best way to ensure that we will be able to recreate meticulously historical task groups by placing ships where they ought to be when the information is available. The in-game configuration screen uses the same system, with an actual grid placed on your navigation table instead of a paper maneuvering board. Paired with the fleet defense interface that allows you to customize threat arcs and defensive air operations (Combat Air Patrols & Inner Patrols, mainly), the common interface allows you to remain familiar with the tools you use in both modes in order to achieve maximum efficiency.

Hope the wall of text didn't scare you! Feel free to comment, just bear in mind that it is very bare-bone. Don't worry, it gets only prettier from here  ;)



In other news, Yamato had a small tribute a few days ago too - I know some of you in here probably are fans of the Missy, so allow me to post a few good views of the Lady while I am at it ;)

[MOS:96B2P]

Very interesting stuff.  It looks like your team is doing quality work.  Looking forward to the finished product.   

[rocketman]

Love the design of the chart on the right, very period like looking. Like something out of a book rather than in a game. Nice touch.

[Destraex]

The formation gif reminds me of something drawn on a ships map\plot room\course\charts. I like it.

Once again I really hope this game will not be a case of point ships in a direction and fast forward for 2hrs. That air battles are not just a case of watching all the effort the devs put in without appreciating all of the detail. Gotta get that feedback going to let the player know whats going on.... tighter turn, deflection shot skill used, go vertical boom n zoom etc. With ships... sighted, range problems etc
I hope their is some deep gameplay.

[Silent Disapproval Robot]

Please do NOT throw in a bunch of data points at the player during gameplay unless they're presented in a realistic manner reflective of the times.  Leave that kind of detail out until the player reviews battles after the fact with the replay feature.  The Graviteam Tactics games use this approach and it works very well.

[The_Admiral]

Thank you all for the kind words and the feedback chaps 

Actually, I haven't highlighted it elsewhere, but the true dope contained in this pic is probably the organization itself. As you can see, the force is organized into divisions (a CarDiv, a CruDiv and a DesDiv) and this is the primary maneuvering unit within the game once you get below Task Group level. It's a big departure from what is done today, although TF1942 & Fighting Steel both had that. It means that once you're engaged in combat, especially surface combat, your divisions can be detached without detaching each ship and reorganizing them - a handy tool for setting up crossfires or deliberate attacks (in particular torpedo runs) but we'll get there more details about that later  ;)

Once again I really hope this game will not be a case of point ships in a direction and fast forward for 2hrs. That air battles are not just a case of watching all the effort the devs put in without appreciating all of the detail. Gotta get that feedback going to let the player know whats going on.... tighter turn, deflection shot skill used, go vertical boom n zoom etc. With ships... sighted, range problems etc
I hope their is some deep gameplay.

Well I can't say that you won't have moments like that - just like you'd have them in, say, Silent Hunter or John Tiller's naval wargames. The wait and intelligence collecting is part of the hunt, and carrier battles are a matter of punching in the dark until the climax is suddenly reached very fast within 2 or 3 hours of action, before another moment of R&R. We will add as much detail as possible to make lulls interesting, but lulls are lulls. When combat comes in, we sure intend to have a great audio environment, especially in terms of radio chatter, but don't expect labels popping up around the planes just yet - although having speech bubbles could be nice at some point 

Please do NOT throw in a bunch of data points at the player during gameplay unless they're presented in a realistic manner reflective of the times.  Leave that kind of detail out until the player reviews battles after the fact with the replay feature.  The Graviteam Tactics games use this approach and it works very well.

Hey there SDR - not sure what you mean by that - you mean data that shouldn't be available to the player at a realistic level (aka force levels, enemy ORBAT, score/victory level, etc...?)  :)
If that what it is, yes, these packets of data are not expected to be made available to you at the highest level of difficulty, it's up to you to decide how much you want to be in the know. That was the topic of this update a few weeks ago, actually, if it can be of interest to you 

https://twitter.com/DrydockDreams/status/1364565614560337921

[Silent Disapproval Robot]

Thanks Admiral, Sim Mode looks like the one for me! (but I hope I can enable external views). 

What I meant was I didn't want to see the types of data that the people in the field wouldn't have had access to in real time.  When I play CMO, one of the things that pulls me out of the sim is the fact that they're giving you data such as the percentage chance to hit for weapons and the damage inflicted by each round.  Seeing that kind of thing during the after battle report is fine but I don't personally care to see it during play.  I much prefer a system like Mius Front.  You can see your rounds impacting an enemy tank but you don't necessarily know what damage those rounds are doing (unless the poor buggers explode and catch fire).  The tank might already be knocked out but your gunners can't know for sure so they keep hammering it.