GWAS/SWWAS players? A site of our own?

[tlangston28]

I currently have a version of the code of PG-HQ from about 2 years ago which would probably not include some of the significant updates.

First on the list would be to get permission from Shad to get the most up-to-date code. Also, we would probably need to have a separate database with the user's having separate profiles for the GWAS/SWWAS site.

Since I don't have any SWWAS games, would it warrant having a separate sub-site for these or are the games close enough where it could be combined?

Alan - would you be willing to have a conversation on this at some point?

[richvalle]

I have neither games, but I'd say one site for both series and then break it up into separate forums like PG-HQ does with PG-Modern and Inf Attacks.

[Shad]

I don't have any boat games, but from a site development perspective there really isn't any code worth carrying over from PG-HQ to another series. It only makes sense to reuse the actual code if you're going to expand the existing site.

The site layout and data structures have a bit of value, since we've iterated a fair ways from the original design 4 years ago... but the code isn't worth anything.

My suggestion would be to look at how PG-HQ organizes data and think critically about what would and wouldn't work for the naval games. Your organizational methodology is far and away the most important component, and also extremely difficult to modify or redesign after you've started coding.

Example: PG-HQ rates scenarios with an integer from 1 to 5. Does this suit naval scenarios? Maybe rating multiple discreet factors is more appropriate? (enjoyment, historicity, replay value, etc.) Maybe 1-to-5 is itself a false accuracy and you should just go with a simple thumbs up/down? Maybe throw out ratings all together and make AARs the focus of your site with all sorts of AAR enhancements like inline photos and text searching and hotlinking and what not?

See what I mean by thinking critically? There's a lot you guys accept at PG-HQ just because it already exists... maybe we didn't do it right to begin with!

Hope that helps... no matter how large you assume the scale of work required to set up a WAS-HQ, I assure you that your estimate is too small!

[thomaso827]

One difference with the At Sea games is that they are 2 games in 1, having tactical and operational scenarios. That might need 2 sets of scales. Otherwise things could be quite similar, changing promotion ranks to Navy ranks, that sort of thing. I have had no experience with code since I tinkered with Color Basic, and that following some work on punch card stuff. Back in the dark ages of computers by today's standards.

[larry marak]

I'm in, been playing since GWAS in GWAS 0, Pacific Rim's Black Seas Fleet.

The different nature of the games would call for different a kind of presense there. A forum would work, and AAR's. Maybe a site for naval architecture through the ages.

[goosebrown]

I think I would like to take a swing at this but need to think about a phased release. what of the "features" are most important? I already have a ship data sheet builder where you can select which ships get onto a datasheet then print it out. 

I would want to add the membership and blogs and BBS a little after later. If anyone is interested in providing content LMK. 

Also if there ever is a academy, people are going to need to be willing to mentor and not flake. Still initial thoughts so if anyone is interested, please message me

[goosebrown]

I have just a little shell of what I want to do here:

http://216.119.70.204/was-fc/

If you are interested in helping out I have a few things I would like before I get to much further. 

I need help early on with content. I want:

1. ship of the day entries for the home page. I am thinking this would be for ships in the game.

2. this day in history. This is available from the Navy actually and I want to grab the first paragraph then link to them. 

Both of them need data. I also want to get some confirmation on other parts of the sites. I need quite a bit of help. I do not want to just take APL content so I need descriptions of the games and so on. Articles on interesting things that would keep people entertained as well. 

I want to contribute some how to videos and set up a section for finding players and AARs. 

I don't know how APL feels about VASSAL Modules, but I think with some academy and mentoring, perhaps we could offer them. I have four at various stages of completion, but without OK, I don't think I can distribute them.  

Note that it might change a lot since I don't know what the APL staff will think of it. It is their IP and I am really sensitive no not doing something they do not want.

[Shad]

This looks very nice! Stick with it!

[goosebrown]

This looks very nice! Stick with it!

Thank you! That is a real compliment coming from you.

I am starting to get daily content and have started on an article (Damage Control in Japanese and American navies).

I am looking for people that might want to donate time to writing. 

Also I have started some how to videos. I have one for the battle impulse system and only need to do the voice over on one for the tactical air combat system. They are on YouTube now but i will link from the site as well. 

I have the VASSAL mods mostly built out for Midway, Bismarck, Eastern Fleet. Once done I will tackle Coral Sea, Defending Australia and Midway 1940. Once I get the money to get South Pacific that will slip stream in. They are going to be unique modules for each battle, not like the PG titles. Since so many ships appear in multiple places they aren't all "from scratch"

Next after that will be Jutland at least and then based on what I can get my hands on. 

I need to get the games unpunched for scanning, but I do not need to hold on to the games so if someone has some unpunched and wants to work something out I could return them back to you.

I was hoping to get some approval, or at least some OK from APL but so far I have not been able to get time to explain it all. It was a busy year for them of course.

[Shad]

Don't forget PG-HQ was already 11 years old when you joined, goose! It's a marathon, not a sprint. We didn't even have a forum the first couple of years. It seems silly in hindsight, but it was a controversial decision to add one. Some people felt yet another place to chat was entirely unnecessary.

Just keep chipping away at it. There's always more to do. One day you'll step back and go OMG.

Cheers! :-)