WiTP II A Weather model discussion

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

WiTP II A Weather model discussion

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> WiTP II A Weather model discussion

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

WiTP II A Weather model discussion - 4/24/2006 2:25:43 PM

2Stepper

Posts: 948
Joined: 1/19/2003
From: North Burbs of Omaha
Status: offline

Greetings all. I wanted to start this out slowly as good discussion ideas always hit me at bad times (<30 min til I have to leave for work). But I figured seeing as Ver 1.8 was done it was a good time to really get to the details on any further sequel from a weathermans perspective.

First off, just so you know, I'm one of a few weather forecasters in the forum and in particular I have a specialization in tropical meteorology. In fact I did a 15 month stint on Guam dealing with Typhoons and the like, so its all fairly familiar territory.

So this is a topic of great interest to me... That said though, the "devil is in the details" when it comes to something like this. Here's my thought on how something like this might work... applying some basic climatology and some historical spin. I'll start fairly high level and we can build on it from there...

1. Build climate zones with specific weather affects in each zone. (for example: Sandstorm in Mongolia, snow storm in northern japan, "endless" rains in SE Asia and tropical storm in the Philippines.

2. Differentiate these processes by land and sea models. Basically tradewind conditions over water, Monsoon over SE Asia and northern Austrailia and Frontal weather in the far north and south hemispheres. (i.e. did I mention build climate zones?)

3. Next, determine how much of a weather phase you want by combining data from coastal spotters and recon planes, etc to allow the forecasters of the period to build "weather forecasts". Hence give the commander a battle picture. This should be limited, but if air spotters for example are flying to various locations they'd report on weather over bombing target areas as much as they would pictures of the target.

NOTE: It would be easy to get "very" detailed here because of our modern visions of the weather. This wouldn't be the case for the time. As many of the history buffs in the forum know about Halsey and his typhoons, the Typhoon hunters of Guam were created in 1947 for the specific purpose of hunting down big weather features for the navy. So my idea of how this should look wouldn't be much different from where we have it now at least "visually". Just perhaps some added details to it based on photo recon flights and coastal spotter information (i.e. Weather forecast is A, recon over the area for bomber targets resulted in B).

4. The biggest trick is programatic in nature I suspect and I have no clue how it would work. Obviously you can't visualize a typhoon on the map unless a spotter reported they were in one... The more important part is, how do you program the creation of one in the game? Or do you? I've had a few ideas on the matter, but don't know enough about programming to even start. Its worth at least investigating though...

Anyway, those are a few starting points... I'll hash on this more while I'm at work today. Anyone, feel free to interject whatever you like on this. Good, bad or otherwise. Just be good to get some healthy discussion going on the matter. And I'll more then likely add more to this as ideas come to my mind after work today.

regards...

_____________________________

"Send in the Infantry. Tanks cost money... the dead cost nothing..." :)

Post #: 1

RE: WiTP II A Weather model discussion - 4/24/2006 2:47:58 PM

Terminus

Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline

The prognosticative (is that a word?) part of the weather model is the weakest by far. It tends to tilt over to one extreme of the spectrum and stay there. Could certainly use improvement, but only as a secondary objective (sorry, 2Stepper).

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to 2Stepper)

Post #: 2

RE: WiTP II A Weather model discussion - 4/24/2006 3:02:49 PM

Rainer

Posts: 1210
Joined: 11/21/2000
From: Neuching, Bavaria, Germany
Status: offline

Typhoons could be handled by the program as "virtual" enemy task forces. Meaning that a TF in the hex where the typhoon rages would suffer damage (excluding fire). The visual representation of the typhoon could be a cloud with black color or something like that. This should not be too difficult to be implemented.
Handling a typhoon as a "virtual" TF also means it is only visible after being spotted.

It is probably more difficult to handle how the typhoon crosses the map, e.g coming into existence, and then moving (how fast, what direction?) and finally dies down.
The typhoon as a "virtual" TF must damage BOTH sides, of course, which probably is a programming issue.
Another programming problem surely is crossing land areas (damage to bases? What sort of damage? How much damage?).

In any way this is what the Matrix/3by2 folks use to name a "hard coded" issue, meaning source code has to be changed/added. Not likely they are prepared do this in the very near future. However, I remember there is a sort of Wish List somewhere in this forum. May be your suggestion can find its home there.

Still, would be a great enhancement.
Cheers and Good Luck
Rainer

(in reply to 2Stepper)

Post #: 3

RE: WiTP II A Weather model discussion - 4/24/2006 3:59:44 PM

jwilkerson

Posts: 10525
Joined: 9/15/2002
From: Kansas
Status: offline

Thanks 2stepper !

Don't forget the Aleutians !!

Also I'm not sure we absolutely have to directly model typhoons in the game. Getting the representation of predominate weather imporved by at least an order of magnitude would seem to be the priority.

We could add some "random events" to model rare catestrophic events on many types. And if i'm not mistaken, it was felt at the time that Halsey had enough data to avoid the typhoons and choose not to for his own operational reason (and he was criticised for that later - he was not really punished for - though he never became CNO). So perhaps our assumption is that commanders avoid typhoons but we can model random catesptrophic ship damage with more regard for statistical frequency than root cause (such as Mutsu explosion, or any number of ship to ship collisions).

_____________________________

AE Project Lead
New Game Project Lead

(in reply to 2Stepper)

Post #: 4

RE: WiTP II A Weather model discussion - 4/24/2006 7:04:58 PM

bradfordkay

Posts: 8683
Joined: 3/24/2002
From: Olympia, WA
Status: offline

I think that the most important adjustment would be to model the SEAsian monsoon season. The second most important adjustment would be to the tendency to get stuck on "Thunderstorms". After that, any improvement would be gravy...

_____________________________

fair winds,
Brad

(in reply to jwilkerson)

Post #: 5

RE: WiTP II A Weather model discussion - 4/24/2006 7:58:44 PM

Mike Scholl

Posts: 9349
Joined: 1/1/2003
From: Kansas City, MO
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: bradfordkay

I think that the most important adjustment would be to model the SEAsian monsoon season. The second most important adjustment would be to the tendency to get stuck on "Thunderstorms". After that, any improvement would be gravy...

Reverse those two and I'm with you. Gotta believe fixing the "Thunderstorm two-step" will be the easiest "fix", and should be first.

(in reply to bradfordkay)

Post #: 6

RE: WiTP II A Weather model discussion - 4/25/2006 1:46:21 AM

2Stepper

Posts: 948
Joined: 1/19/2003
From: North Burbs of Omaha
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

The prognosticative (is that a word?) part of the weather model is the weakest by far. It tends to tilt over to one extreme of the spectrum and stay there. Could certainly use improvement, but only as a secondary objective (sorry, 2Stepper).

There's ample room to be selective in what you improve and to what extent. I agree that it should be on a list, but hopefully not last or so far down it only sees a weeks worth of development initiative. Why do I say that? Read on...

quote:

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson

Thanks 2stepper !

Don't forget the Aleutians !!

Also I'm not sure we absolutely have to directly model typhoons in the game. Getting the representation of predominate weather imporved by at least an order of magnitude would seem to be the priority.

We could add some "random events" to model rare catestrophic events on many types. And if i'm not mistaken, it was felt at the time that Halsey had enough data to avoid the typhoons and choose not to for his own operational reason (and he was criticised for that later - he was not really punished for - though he never became CNO). So perhaps our assumption is that commanders avoid typhoons but we can model random catesptrophic ship damage with more regard for statistical frequency than root cause (such as Mutsu explosion, or any number of ship to ship collisions).

As to the "crux" of the matter to both yours and others comments... How much do you change? One could easily get down to the gnats @ss of detail and look at anything from how much precipitation to the eventual "state of the ground" as the army and marines refer to it.

That said however, here's some of the basics...

Tradewinds over ocean, 80% partly cloudy, 15% mostly cloudy, 5% storm/cloudy.

The latter (bad weather) components occur primarily at night as that's considered the "maximum" time for convection to develop over water.

Land in most respects is the opposite in the tropics. This depends though on its relationship to the monsoon troughs which can be found from Northern India all the way to Guam in the northern hemisphere, and across Northern Austrailia in the Southern hemisphere.

Both of those are seasonally driven. North is, March to December, and South is January to June.

The far north and south hemispheres (north/south of 25deg) are subject to frontal systems and less at risk for typhoons, etc. Though anyone could tell you Japan and Korea get hit all the time...

Why all that? The point I make is that its cyclic. All you'd really need to do (said somewhat "faciously") is model the cycles. Once you do that, you can incorporate weather affects in given hexes for the routine features, then build a process where by a cyclone can be generated, moved and ultimately dissipated.

In my minds eye, I can visualize it, but as Terminous alluded to, the devils in the details and just how much you wanted to invest in programming the details. Bottom line is cost to benefit. Is there benefit in improving the weather model? Definitely... Question is, at what cost, and how much... But that's not for me to decide... Just here to enjoy the game and interject ideas. :) Enjoy...

< Message edited by 2Stepper -- 4/25/2006 1:48:30 AM >

_____________________________

"Send in the Infantry. Tanks cost money... the dead cost nothing..." :)

(in reply to Terminus)

Post #: 7

RE: WiTP II A Weather model discussion - 4/25/2006 2:23:49 AM

ADavidB

Posts: 2464
Joined: 9/17/2001
From: Toronto, Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson

Thanks 2stepper !

Don't forget the Aleutians !!

Also I'm not sure we absolutely have to directly model typhoons in the game. Getting the representation of predominate weather imporved by at least an order of magnitude would seem to be the priority.

We could add some "random events" to model rare catestrophic events on many types. And if i'm not mistaken, it was felt at the time that Halsey had enough data to avoid the typhoons and choose not to for his own operational reason (and he was criticised for that later - he was not really punished for - though he never became CNO). So perhaps our assumption is that commanders avoid typhoons but we can model random catesptrophic ship damage with more regard for statistical frequency than root cause (such as Mutsu explosion, or any number of ship to ship collisions).

JW - the most beneficial change you could make would be to get rid of the problem with "Advanced Weather" getting stuck in continuous thunderstorm weather over non-tropical parts of the map for months on end. I've had games where the California bases and the Eastern Australian bases were stuck under daily thunderstorms literally for five of six months straight. This meant constant operational losses for any aircraft that weren't grounded. This makes it extremely difficult to try to train pilots in the backwaters.

But it's not only the problem of bad weather in the regions that are supposed to not have six-month monsoon seasons. There is also the problem of having 8 out of 9 map regions being rainy 90% of the time.

"Advanced Weather" is buggered up. Please fix it.

Thanks -

Dave Baranyi

(in reply to jwilkerson)

Post #: 8

RE: WiTP II A Weather model discussion - 4/25/2006 6:56:41 AM

33Vyper

Posts: 542
Joined: 10/20/2004
From: New Westminster BC
Status: offline

This is one of those really bad shortcomming areas of WITP.

I belive that historical weather information is avaiable.....why is it not modeled effectively? I realize that it would probably be quite a bit of code .... but think of the realism that it would add to the game. Not to mention that it would SLOW the game down from its current 1942-43 blitzkrieg that can currently happen.

(in reply to ADavidB)

Post #: 9

RE: WiTP II A Weather model discussion - 4/25/2006 9:00:03 AM

1EyedJacks

Posts: 2244
Joined: 3/12/2006
From: The Eastern Sierras
Status: offline

What would be cool is to have an option for the game pull "current" weather conditions from www.weather.com or somthing - you know - with a 5 day forcast... Then I could check the current weather forcast when plotting my moves

It'd be educational

_____________________________

TTFN,

Mike

(in reply to 33Vyper)

Post #: 10

RE: WiTP II A Weather model discussion - 4/26/2006 4:11:10 AM

2Stepper

Posts: 948
Joined: 1/19/2003
From: North Burbs of Omaha
Status: offline

bump

_____________________________

"Send in the Infantry. Tanks cost money... the dead cost nothing..." :)

(in reply to 1EyedJacks)

Post #: 11

RE: WiTP II A Weather model discussion - 5/1/2006 10:29:27 PM

TheElf

Posts: 3870
Joined: 5/14/2003
From: Pax River, MD
Status: offline

bump

_____________________________

IN PERPETUUM SINGULARIS SEDES

(in reply to 2Stepper)

Post #: 12

RE: WiTP II A Weather model discussion - 5/3/2006 9:09:04 PM

CaptDave

Posts: 659
Joined: 6/21/2002
From: Federal Way, WA
Status: offline

I've been away for a while -- working on a graduate degree in addition to full-time work and high-level positions in two non-profits, so not a lot of gaming time! Nevertheless, I'm another of the few actual meteorologists here, and, like 2Stepper, spent time on Guam (24 months in my case, since I was accompanied, and at the time I was there I earned a reputation for forecasting typhoons better than the typhoon center did).

I'm also a software developer, although now in management, so I can offer some degree of insight from that side of things, as well.

Technically, modeling the weather is no big deal for a game like this -- except for trying to fit everything into memory. WitP is already large enough to cause serious performance problems on many machines, even those bought quite recently.

The way I would approach it, if there were no limitations, would be to (a) shrink the size of the existing climate zones, which obviously means adding a lot more of them, and (b) overlay typhoons/cyclones/etc without regard to the zones. The zones right now are too broad, leading to unrealistic weather, to wit:

It rarely rains in California outside the period November through February.

San Francisco averages under one thunderstorm day per year.

Seattle has a lot of rain days, but less actual rainfall than Chicago.

Ketchikan is the rainiest spot in the continental US.

Don't forget that northern Australia is also subject to monsoons. We deployed to Darwin only three quarters each year because of the rainy weather in the fourth (talking in the 1980s, not during the War).

That's enough examples. As far as big, tropical storms go, it would be a matter of (a) determining a path, (b) determining a size, and (c) determining a strength. Since the game uses 60 mile hexes, (b) and (c) would pretty much go hand-in-hand. Little guys that are mainly a nuisance would be one hex, moderate ones would be one hex plus all the surrounding hexes, and the rare-but-not-unheard-of monster would be a central hex plus two surrounding rings. Storm strength would be highest in the inner hex, weakest in the outer ring.

There's still that memory issue, though...

(in reply to TheElf)

Post #: 13

Page: [1]

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> WiTP II A Weather model discussion

Page: [1]