#vt's simming problems

[equinoxts2]

Redefining Building

Kulo Sena is well on its way to being something resembling an uberhood, with four subhoods, two "downtowns" as regions of the Spirit World, one university (also representing the Spirit World, and there are at least three more in the pipelines) and way too many lots to build. And you know me and building.

Here's the thing, though: I've been on a major text-string replacing kick in my TS2 game. I've replaced strings for the names of the seasons, the days of the week, all the romantic interactions, the zodiac signs, you name it. All to give my game more of a fantasy flavour, reflecting the worldbuilding I've already done for it, and also to help me feel more at ease with romance as a gameplay element.

So I was chatting with my mum this evening, and we were talking about doing the same sort of thing for my own view of building - reframing it as something other than a tedious chore that I have to keep doing because no downloaded lots ever meet my sims' needs. Here's what we've come up with...

If you play TS2 as a life simulator (as opposed to a building simulator or a shooter) then you are probably the kind of player who loves your sims. Like I am. Therefore, building is an act of kindness. It's what you do to ensure that your sims don't starve or freeze on an empty lot, and that's what makes the actual playing bit possible. And if, like me, you loathe the task, even if you're only building for pixels... that makes it closer to a truly selfless or charitable act.

With that worked out, I'm actually motivated to get the first few households somewhere to live... yay! It just goes to show that the language we use to describe things and the stories we tell ourselves about what those things signify are immensely powerful. And on that note, I'm off to nurture my sims by giving them a roof over their heads. :)

[osakanone]

The steel battalion controller could fix me. Some company needs to make specialty mech controllers so i dont have to spend £350 on 2003 hardware (so i can spend £350 on 2025 hardware).

Mech game Controllers: Solving the unsolvable

I have put so much time into thinking about this and you've basically asked the perfect question.

I think there are really complex and important questions that nobody really has a good robust answer to but also that nobody is really asking those big questions in the first place either, so we're stuck on this issue.

My take is I genuinely think if we want big mecha controllers we have to think about this stuff deeply and profoundly. Like, why we need them and what they're for.

So… This has been tried many times.

NOK or NextOfKin Creatives did try this.

The Mek-Fu lopped horribly, and I was absoloutely fascinated by this at the time and wanted to understand exactly why it had failed. I think we must learn from this failure, so we don't make the same mistakes again.

The lesson I took from Mek-Fu was this: it didn't take because players had nothing to use it in where it was the best fit.

What does this mean?

1) For other games in the real world, it was inferior to keyboard and mouse in games which do not simulate a vehicle. 2) The design wasn't trying to meet some sort of pre-existing need from other games. 3) Steel Battalion emulation did not exist meaningfully yet, and in turn no equivalent game existed on the PC platform which would need it.

Therefor: There was no special environment where its employment made the best sense.

It had nowhere to excel and thrive.

So where have specialty controllers existed, and thrived?

Digital Combat Sim (DCS)

Star Citizen

Euro Truck Simulator

Farming Simulator

What do they all have in common?

They all have robust modding tools for user-created content

They all have some form of social experience or multiplayer

They all are highly accessible (PC, and are controller agnostic*)

They are all sandboxes in some capacity and let users find their own fun.

No mech game which exists at time of writing meets all these terms that I know of.

So what do these controllers look like?

In the case of real vehicles, you can simply ape the real vehicle 1:1, but for fictional vehicles, something special happens -- you see people approach and try to solve the problem in many different ways.

You see, control design in any area exists to solve a problem. The Mek Fu (a response to the VT controller) was a solution looking for a problem, and no problem existed.

From this, we learn that for specialty mech controllers to exist, you first need specialty mech games. Steel Battallion is limited, because it won't run on general hardware and doesn't network or mod easily so it isn't a good fit for this because it makes the game inaccessible and limited.

Let's actually think about the SB controller for a bit:

Steel Battalion approaches its problem from the standpoint of a robot. You might not realize this but a VT or Vertical Tank intentionally controls very similarly to a tractor.

It is influenced by a real thing. I know that sounds absurd, but let me show you what a modern tractor's task control console looks like:

Yeah, not what any of us would have expected.

If you wanna be a mech pilot in 2025, go drive a tractor. I'm not kidding.

Once you're on the field, your hands aren't on the wheel, they're on this thing:

The big stick controls the course in the computer, the little one controls your tool, the many buttons toggle states (or what the little stick is currently triggering) and through these inputs you drive the tractor.

Steel Battalion is very fun, but it won't hold your attention for more than around 100 hours unless you're a real freak about tractors and just don't know it yet.

What's more, Steel Batallion isn't playable to anybody without the controller which limits how many people will be playing it and it isn't social or moddable like the successful games we talked about earlier.

Okay, so what can we do about this?

I think the one feature here that nobody talks about is that of input-agnosticism: The ability to bind your own inputs to something in the game (directly or indirectly through some middle thing) and get good results… But not in some hugely "okay bind 100 things using our controller, or use a keyboard and mouse" binary.

The binary is still not input-agnosticism, and it still will not work.

It has to be granular.

Input agnosticism results in controller agnosticism:

You can bind as much or as little as you want, and you can pass features you don't want to bind directly to a helper subsystem middle-man like an assistant or instructor which will perform limited tasks for you - while you provide the helpers context by telling them which of a limited set of goals you want to achieve.

Say, face a target, or a direction, or aim at a thing. It saves you mental time, though if you did it manually you might get better results (incentivising you towards experimenting in that direction).

Let's touch on why controller agnostic design is really what's needed here, and why its important:

This is the omnithrottle, and and this is the Sublight Dynamics 6dof joystick.

The Omnithrottle tries to solve 6dof throttle management by adding an extra piece to a joystick at the bottom, turning the yaw z-axis-twist of the stick into a sort of vertical axis for direct up and down movement, ascending and descending.

The Sublight Dynamics 6dof joystick combines all six axis into a single device, and is an interesting experiment. I particularly like the puck switches ahead of the user's fingers, inspired likely by Evangelion which in turn was inspired by Sol Bianca's use of them.

We got great lessons in human factors for space dogfighting from both:

The omnithrottle produces huge fatigue if you use it in coupled mode (software assisted flight), because you have to hold the joystick base forward, fighting the springs. This is fine in decoupled mode (where you coast under newtonian force) but not everybody uses it. Likewise, if you remove that spring, you lose fine movement because you can no longer feel where the middle is anymore.

The SD6DOF creates a conflict in Fitt's law (speed and precision are enemies of each-other, and to get both you need a tool in the middle to help you) where some precision is lost due to the same muscles needing to drive more axis at once.

These are both many years old now, and over time we've seen many many solutions to this problem flop.

Well, VKB announced the Space Throttle Grip a few days ago, which rethinks the distribution of axis and combines the best features of both.

The key thing is, this is an evolutionary space with competing ideas. A healthy ecosystem.

And its only possible because the game's inputs are controller agnostic.

This doesn't just mean that it'll let you bind any input device directly to things, but that there are multiple ways to achieve your desired outcomes even on the software side with the helper middleman we talked about (in this case, coupling modes).

Does your machine turn to face an arbitrary vector which is the thing you actually steer or select (Warthunder)? Do you have direct input control? Do you haven an autopilot?

Here's a lecture by F22 Raptor test-pilot Randy Gordon talking about some of this stuff, giving you a frame of reference with a real vehicle which exists.

When you can pick between those goals them, you have what's called "a software" in human factors. Your two grips become arbitrary and are now called inceptors.

The software drives the machine, and you drive the software. You can override the software and provide a manual input, but the other elements you are not overriding will try to compensate to maintain a desired state. If you know how to manipulate this, it means you only need a small number of axis to achieve a very complex control action.

A great example is how long you hold the A-button in Mario changes how much power his jump has. The action is a versatile verb.

Imagine a person balancing. If their goal is to stay upright, and I push them, they translate across the ground and try to stay the right way up, turning that push force into horizontal force. They are following an instruction: remain upright.

If I make that person carry a very heavy thing, they compensate their body's balance accordingly. If I then use my finger and tell them to act as if I am pushing them with that gentle motion, they will respond but if they go too far they can say "hey, don't do that, I'll drop the heavy thing!" and ignore my pushing instruction -- because my directive telling them to remain upright superseded it.

We need to think of mecha in terms like these, and to do mecha, we need to make a standard of accessible rules like this which input devices can talk to via axis and buttons, with lots of middlemen.

Absolute (mouse-like) and relative (stick like) and accumiulated (driving a mouse with a stick by having a variable over time) and blended (driving a car with a d-pad with a simulated wheel that wants to return to zero all the time, replicating a stick) inputs must be middle-modes processing and digesting inputs in these ways. Curves matter. Biases and preferences must be accounted for.

This means finally solving "how" the giant robot works in software (even if its a design conceit), and then having systems which poke at the "how" to bias it in a direction toward an outcome.

My favourite version of this is a deliberately clumsy mech-game called Robot Alchemic Drive (RAD for short).

Playable on a regular PS2 controller, the triggers and bumpers drive the legs like a tank. The sticks drive the arms.

The robot's body has physics. You are controlling a thing.

There are no helpers to correct your motions other than when the robot stands up and to keep it upright (its otherwise 100% manual, playing back motion planning which gets fed into the physics) but yes, there is a simulated body here.

With helpers, this could get faster and way, way more fluent.

So how might these "helpers" in software work?

Think for example of how a body in motion continues to move. With a robot in a vacuum like space, you'd continue indefinitely. That's hard to control.

Do you automatically slow down and fake aerodynamic drag axially with your boosters to allow curved trajectories and soft stopping with a motion-control-decoupling-mode (as Star Citizen does), or do you have a breaking system a user can activate on a pedal or trigger, to apply those forces on different axis when they want them?

What are those axis bound to, the pelvis, the thorax, the head, the synthetic vision 3rd person camera?

These are really complicated questions, and this is just about how we make a vehicle come to a stop!

Now this might seem niche, but this exact same kind of thought also applies to how a robot balances, and how it digs its feet into the ground, creating torque or not situationally.

This isn't just fine grained motion like "moving our legs manually", but how and when we apply breaking force on the ground.

Do we apply it when we let go of the left stick?

Does the left stick prescribe a preferred velocity?

Does it prescribe input forces?

Do we change between these situationally, or maybe with a button?

Its important to think about these things.

"You're making this too complex!!"

"But why would we do this? What is the value? People are playing Armored Core 6 with a HOTAS!!"

Yeah, and that experience is not great, actually?

You're actually less capable than a keyboard and mouse-player, because Armored Core 6 isn't a game which simulates orientation over time (the body turns instantly as if by magic), so you're just driving relative inputs. You are literally disadvantaged.

Armored Core 6 has no "vehicle": This is an action-game's 3rd person control software. Its Elden Ring's horse, with a jetpack, and the roll replaced with a dash. Everything else is animations.

Its visually impressive, but there's something fundamentally missing:

Fahrvergnügen.

It means "driving pleasure" in German.

The feeling you get when you speed up going down hill, or you feel the give of the wheels against the road and the lean of the car when you take a corner.

When you bank against air in an aircraft, or turn faster than your velocity changes and you drift.

That good feeling, that's fahrvergnügen.

A game which really gets this I think is Armored Core: For Answer. I know many of you might have expected Mechwarrior here but the physics of Mechwarrior games are extremely simple, following an interpolative model.

Interpolative here means, a bit of calculus is used to ensure a smooth arching curve is how you go from zero to a high speed at all times, or a rotation, so on and so forth. This "smoothness" is the same smoothness present in Armored Core 6.

Armored Core For Answer on the other hand, is additive in how it calculates velocity per second, meaning your AC's velocity curve is inconsistent. The game has hidden stats calculating aerodynamic drag per part, it has a simplified model of angular momentum, and it has ground friction and its boosting system is different on each axis.

All of your inputs are analogue, including the angle of your boosters on left stick, and two booster-types: Your main booster handling like a motor-cycle throttle curve, and the other not only having many stages of output for flashes of thrust via contexts (combining motion and direction together to produce an intent) but also combos and even cancels. Its VERY sophisticated!

That's a lot of different factors to control. A lot of fahrvergnügen to be experienced when you master them, and feel ownership of them.

Lots of areas for skill expression.

This, combined with a rich weapon balance and a complex combat geometry (the emergent spatial and pressure rules of motion, aspects, angles and motions similar to the aircraft dogfighting) are why people are still playing this game today.

The match I uploaded was from four days ago, as of time of writing. People are still modding a game from 2008, limited to console by hacking the rom file's patches. Yeah.

I know among many game reviewers, "smooth" and "smoothness" is considered a compliment in game design (its easy to control), but interpolative motion really is the opposite of fahrvergnügen:

Interpolative suffers from feeling "zippy" and "hollow" when its fast, which is why lots of players and designers insist on slowing games down so they recover their fahrvergnügen.

You don't have to do things this way. A good mech sandbox should reward both fast and slow movement in its design!

There should be room for everybody to play!

In interpolative movement games, motion is already solved, to sell you the superficial power-fantasy (that you're good, despite not having learned how to be good) instead of giving you the experience.

Interpolation is insisting the burger you got at McDonalds is the same as the burger on the commercial. Like the burger at McDonalds, its also way way easier to make, and in today's market yeah, you take what's easy and known because you have economic pressures to get things done quickly.

You can't make a five star meal in a McDonalds kitchen, and the AAA games industry is the McDonalds kitchen of gaming.

So, what is a three star michelin meal, in terms of inputs, with additive movement?

You incentivise people with the cheaper stuff on the menu. That's robust helper tools which let keyboard and mouse players, or gamepads interact fluently.

Its affordable, and easy and gets people invested in your experience.

Then when people use fancy controllers, you get better response-rate. Because everybody buys into the mecha fantasy when they play, being beaten by someone who is controlling more complex control factors more directly at once (making them a better pilot) feels fairer.

They are negotiating the machine's limits better than you are.

You both know they more "an char" than you are:

It becomes aspirational, rather than annoying, which is how the culture of space-simming, and flight-sims, and other vehicle sims express this. It also fits the mecha fantasy, because those with basic controls are your grunt units.

We see this if we look at cockpit controls in Gundam: A Jegan's control inceptor is way simpler than say, Unicorn's.

It is just part of the fantasy.

So let's talk about these limits we negotiate.

It means, some kind of vehicle must be simulated in software, even if its a very simple abstraction purely enough so it feels good for players.

Also, I say "a software" or "helpers" what do I mean?

I don't just mean the simulated vehicle, but a robust modular middle system in the "player controller" part of the game simulation which interprets desired outcomes from a pilot user or operator and tries to achieve them.

Here's an example, let's talk about Armored Core's lockon system, which uses a software stack to turn your intention into an outcome in exactly this way.

Your robot's simulated sensors (radar, visual, etc) detects a list of potential targets…

Which uses camera orientation of a synthetic vision system to give you comprehensive 3d awareness to determine which target is interesting to you…

After selecting the target, it passes that information to the fire control system which computes a trajectory from its position and velocity…

This then talks to your weapons which know how fast your bullets go…

and this picks where to lead along that trajectory…

then that location is sent to the arms to execute that command…

Which then sends the state of this command chain to your HUD, so you understand what the body of your robot is currently trying to achieve.

Each step is influenced by ingame statistics and simulated mechanical limits -- meaning, how well you can lock up, or even select a target is very important.

You can't instantly put a cursor on something and bot a game, because everybody already has a deliberately limited aimbot, it came with your robot, to negotiate its deliberately limited body.

The key thing is, this is much much faster and more effective than you could as a human select the target manually and hit accurate than you could with round velocities -- with most videogames hiding this with hitscan (instantaneous bullet) weapons meaning whatever you click on is hit right away.

When the round takes time to get there, things are far more difficult. This is why almost nobody uses manual aiming unless they're throwing explosives at big bulky targets in AC.

From limitations like this, booster performance, turn-rate, and so on and so forth -- the negotiation of limits produces a combat geometry and how well you understand that combat geometry, and how well you understand your abilities to your opponents abilities dictates how the fight will go.

We see something somewhat similar in Steel Batallion with the lockon system but we also have a lot of deep manual control over our VT's orientations which change its balance and so on. Steel Batallion is in fact, one of the few games where your robot can fall over and get back up.

This is exactly how DCS and Star Citizen also work, and very similar principles apply in Eurotruck Simulator and Farming Simulator via the fuel, cooling, air, combustion cycle, and transmission, and shock absorbsion systems of your vehicle.

Okay, so now what?

I've been thinking for a while now about writing what I think would be the mech-game equivalent of the paper Tim Berners Lee wrote for the web (Information Management: A proposal) going into what I think the simulation would really need, what the software would need, what the controller would need and some suggested practical strategies for solving these problems based in real research I and others have done.

The system I've already built solves for fire control, fine arm motion, head movement, independent pelvis and foot motion, the operation of boosters and other similar systems in a 6dof environment which accounts for gravity, aerodynamics, balancing, alignment and full motion control -- all on a standard game controller. Its not modular yet, simply because I am not a skilled programmer, and would need real help to do this.

There's also game-design research here, which would ensure the combat geometry would reward skill expression via investing in that agnostic game design, so the control skill aligns with the power-fantasy through skill expression. This means no one strategy becomes overwhelming.

It likewise, also has the "for gamepad and keyboard/mouse" solve which would be needed to ensure its accessible for those who aren't ready yet for custom controllers.

In turn, it also has considerations and proposals for such likely controller designs and probable strategies of employment which of course translate and map to two big sticks, in a HOSAS (Hands on Stick and Stick) layout.

So what's your ideal controller?

Less a controller, and more a principle:

Key to the proposal is you can scale up the amount of control bindings, or scale it down passing automation to helper subsystems which take your intention and act on it in a useful way.

You could have just two plain sticks with foot pedals, or you could go ham and have some complex force feedback device with tons of inputs -- because of this input agnosticism.

The secret sauce I think to the highest end control is the use of software defined force-feedback not only for the two big sticks, but also four smaller ones: one each for your thumb, and one each for your finger on each hand, and an analogue trigger. I've seen this solved in open source projects, so its entirely doable.

What does this actually mean?

Source: KAIST-HCIL/FS-Pad

The purpose of a force-feedback stick is software defined -- driving the camera, pelvis, upper body, boosters, walking etc variably, with the feedback not necessarily telling you about the environment -- but also by providing what amounts to new input devices.

To explain, force feedback works by providing input to the stick like a robot arm and is not at all like a rumble feedback device. This means the position the stick "wants to return to" at any given time is not defined by springs like it is in a conventional controller, but by active software which can update in real-time.

This means resistance can be different in different directions, or the stick can even hold a position you give it in one axis but not another, replicating a hat switch or a flight throttle.

I've looked at many different open source projects which achieve these outcomes both on thumb-sticks and main sticks with great outcomes, and I think a prototype could be made if I had a team, or other people to work with.

If interest is expressed, I'll produce a specification proposal for what this input agnostic design in software needs to be (eg, how the robot is controlling) in strictly defined terms which can be implemented.

You can already see it on my Tumblr account as TOMINO, NAGANO, etc where I go into some of this -- all of which works on a standard controller, but adapts extremely well to a large HOSAS.

Likewise, I'd (eventually) also produce a proposal for a controller design which meets this specification.

I've been testing this concept on and off for many years now in Unreal Engine (I'm not a skilled programmer, not skilled with CAD or electronics, depression limits my effective outcome returns -- but I'm still getting very promising outcomes).

Ultimately what I'd really want access to is expertise and help, since my background is mainly thinking about and designing solutions for problems not necessarily implementing them -- and I'm essentially on disability, so I have unlimited time to think about this.

I don't want to ask for money, which I figure is the thing everybody is anticipating: I'd rather get this done than make money from it.

In conclusion?

To solve this what's needed isn't some figure of brilliance in a basement or garage somewhere, but an organic ecosystem of designers and builders responding to pressures, and we've already see that work many times very well.

In our case, nobody has defined the vehicle or the modular helpers in a way robust enough to capture every fantasy effectively.

That's the issue.

tl;dr coming away from this:

For the controller to exist, you first must have something to control.

To be a pilot, you first need a vehicle.

--

Live forever, Apes.

[st4rboyloser]

I've been playing Vondel for the past couple of days. It's a bit more CQB-based (I'm slightly better at CQB but I'm really just all in on the midrange, think 15-60 meters) and the strongholds feel easier and I get more loot anyway.

Al Mazrah feels like the old wild west in some ways, like I'm at the OK Corral or on the frontier gunslinging or in literally any southern part of Arizona/California. I never could get into Ashika Island (it just doesn't feel right, it feels like seasonal depression, worse so than Vondel even).

I like the FJX Imperium because its quickscoping potential is off the charts. It's pretty much exactly like the original MW2 Intervention in so many ways, particularly the appearance, the ADS animation (I think they wanted to pay homage to the smoothness of the original Intervention), the high damage and reasonable fire rate and the fact that oh my god is it awesome with flinch resistance and low aiming idle sway.

I just got the holographic sight I wanted from the PDSW. It was a thermal holographic sight (which makes a fine replacement for the weird reflex rail I was using). That being said it shines light on HOW BAD AND INACCURATE MY GUN IS AT RANGE. I mean holy shit. I aim at the furthest target (granted I usually don't have a problem with them) but even with my gyro controls (which make fine adjustments in aiming easier, as I can just tilt my controller slightly) I was hard pressed to land a single shot on the fucking dummy. I will be grinding the Chimera to use that optic for it, or else maybe the BAS-P (because I often see people use the optic with both of those guns). I wonder even if it will work on other rifles (I am curious about the Lockwood MK2. I do think I'll have to grind to get the other popular thermal/NV optic that goes on snipers, but I forget its name. This of course will be for the FJX.)

Hey, do you think the FJX Imperium will be worth something in Black Ops 6? An unspoken meta? I mean, in terms of damage, MWII and MWIII weapons really aren't that bad in BO6, and as a matter of fact the Kar98K and Superi 46 are still often used as well-known metas. MWIII's Gutter Knife is way better than BO6's Knife. However, I did try to make myself an M4 build from MWII and if I'm being honest while it had damage at most ranges similar to a new-er BO6 gun (the beloved Kilo 141, previously seen in CODM and MW2019), dawg, the recoil was so bad I never tried to use it. (It was one of the lower recoil weapons from MWII, which makes sense given MWII has a sort of Mil-Sim sort of vibe to it that COD never really did before except maybe for Ghosts). It was actually comparable to my favorite MCW build. (omg I could gush for weeks how my MCW build was so pretty I mean MY GOD did I design a good lookin- rifle. I did a modified Scump class, which notably has a Talon grip, Slate Reflector and VT-7 Spitfire, but I did it over the Well-Traveled build, so the gun was all decorated and shit also with stickers and decals and charms, then there was this sort of accent of cynical, dull black that made the gun look so cool. Sort of related, but, well, I'm on a huge yapping sesh and another tangent couldn't do what I haven't already done right now. Anyway, this 7yo was playing with me in Bootcamp cuz of Squad Fill, and I pick up my loadout from a crate cuz we're in the final circle. It was the dope-ass MCW, my trans-flag-theme Renetti I hadn't matured from, and I also had me some general stuff. I was wearing my Numbers Woods skin I grinded seven hours for cuz in the summer I'm a no-life- I'm not really ever allowed to go anywhere or do anything- and this kid already went "Wow, bro, where did you get that skin?" So we end up winning and this MCW just feels so amazing. Anyway, imagine no recoil, 9-shot kill which makes for a kill in a tiny split second if I'm accurate, some pretty nice range, a nice little click that kind of sounds like tapping soft-soled shoes on the ground, and some dull, sort of bright visuals. It's a shame I only got the fucking pre-order disco-type bonus camo in MW3 cuz I would have FUCKED THAT UP in DMZ. It's chill tho, I can still use my beloved Basilisk in BO6 and call it the West Coast Striker.)

Hey, here are some fun gun blueprint names I made up:

West Coast Striker- Basilisk, with the disco skin from the BO6 Pre-order bonus Tampa Bay- Modified Thorns blueprint for the Tanto .22, with Granite camo Napalm In 'Nam- Modified Wild Manners Blackcell blueprint, with a more low-recoil, long-range build. Alligator- Modified Unrepentant build for the Marine SP, modified to be deadly at a longer close-range range. Pretty much the same case as the Tampa Bay. AK-Fiddy Cal- SVD, modified to be more effective in CQB (including utilizing the iron sights). Speed Drill/Speedier Drill- A pair of Kilo 141 builds I made. Speed Drill is meant to work with the Overkill wildcard, and Speedier Drill makes use of the Gunfighter wildcard. They're called that for their relatively fast movement and reload speeds, which reminded me of US Marines speed drills. Golden Grinch- This is actually for CODM but fuck it, it's creative. The USS-9 modded to be long-range. Handles slightly better than the Interdimensional Mythic build everyone likes, plus it has a sweet Holographic/Reflex optic on it. My first gold camo ever, actually.

I made these names up because I was looking to make some pretty dope builds similar to the typa shit you see in a good MWIII match where everyone has a bundle or two they bought.

genuinely don’t know a single thing about any of this but i think it’s pretty cool to read through

[ellasdocwork]

In depth ideas part 1.

These are some of my ideas that i have for my documentary due to another Covid lock down i had to change my idea - what I could feature and what the content would include. 

2021. [image] Available at: <https://unsplash.com/photos/0DlSfc0LpwU> [Accessed 21 February 2021].

Photo by Claudio Schwarz | @purzlbaum on Unsplash 

2021. [image] Available at: <https://unsplash.com/photos/0DlSfc0LpwU> [Accessed 21 February 2021]. 

Contraception

C Card

How do you get access

What’s available and where

General locations – schools, colleges, pharmacies and clinics etc.

Birth control

Look at the video : how birth control made me four different people

Different types

What age you can get it and confidentiality

Abortion

Look at abortion laws

Follow that up with Ireland’s abortion story

Movement and protests

Show archived footage from abortion related protests over the years.

Maybe see if i can briefly talk to someone who’s had an abortion

Your Bibliography: 2021. [image] Available at: <https://www.bing.com/images/search?view=detailV2&ccid=45e5ocag&id=4491E42330DB9CC491D753F3598D331567EEA469&thid=OIP.45e5ocagM8bjo4j_fQiUCAHaEo&mediaurl=https%3A%2F%2Fth.bing.com%2Fth%2Fid%2FRe397b9a1c6a033c6e3a388ff7d089408%3Frik%3DaaTuZxUzjVnzUw%26riu%3Dhttp%253a%252f%252fwww.telegraph.co.uk%252fcontent%252fdam%252fwomen%252f2015%252f11%252f30%252fireland_2399928b-xlarge_trans%252b%252bqVzuuqpFlyLIwiB6NTmJwZwVSIA7rSIkPn18jgFKEo0.jpg%26ehk%3DAQnymgd2gYy9sqPe7qnl6BfK4l4TWFc01vFMdXlXpB8%253d%26risl%3D%26pid%3DImgRaw&exph=389&expw=621&q=ireland+abortion+protests&simid=608018003504858720&ck=7BD2DD34AB71C1B9EA07F6BEC30CCECF&selectedindex=54&form=IRPRST&ajaxhist=0&vt=0&sim=11&gt; [Accessed 7 January 2021].

2021. [online] Available at: <https://lifecharity.org.uk/current-abortion-laws/?gclid=CjwKCAiA-_L9BRBQEiwA-bm5fp4E3KPz0CpMph4–v0_yYNay_zkHf7J57eLfHEvhAzOJeQaQ5KWxBoC0PcQAvD_BwE&gt; [Accessed 7 January 2021].

Abortion laws

Your Bibliography: 2021. [image] Available at: <https://www.bing.com/images/search?view=detailV2&ccid=45e5ocag&id=4491E42330DB9CC491D753F3598D331567EEA469&thid=OIP.45e5ocagM8bjo4j_fQiUCAHaEo&mediaurl=https%3A%2F%2Fth.bing.com%2Fth%2Fid%2FRe397b9a1c6a033c6e3a388ff7d089408%3Frik%3DaaTuZxUzjVnzUw%26riu%3Dhttp%253a%252f%252fwww.telegraph.co.uk%252fcontent%252fdam%252fwomen%252f2015%252f11%252f30%252fireland_2399928b-xlarge_trans%252b%252bqVzuuqpFlyLIwiB6NTmJwZwVSIA7rSIkPn18jgFKEo0.jpg%26ehk%3DAQnymgd2gYy9sqPe7qnl6BfK4l4TWFc01vFMdXlXpB8%253d%26risl%3D%26pid%3DImgRaw&exph=389&expw=621&q=ireland+abortion+protests&simid=608018003504858720&ck=7BD2DD34AB71C1B9EA07F6BEC30CCECF&selectedindex=54&form=IRPRST&ajaxhist=0&vt=0&sim=11&gt; [Accessed 7 January 2021].

2021. [online] Available at: <https://lifecharity.org.uk/current-abortion-laws/?gclid=CjwKCAiA-_L9BRBQEiwA-bm5fp4E3KPz0CpMph4–v0_yYNay_zkHf7J57eLfHEvhAzOJeQaQ5KWxBoC0PcQAvD_BwE&gt; [Accessed 7 January 2021].

1. Offences Against the Person Act

The Offences Against the Person Act 1861 (OAPA) protects children in-utero by making abortion a criminal offence in England, Wales and Northern Ireland in these sections:

Section 58: A woman is guilty of an offence if she unlawfully procures her own miscarriage

Section 59: Anyone who supplies drugs or instruments to be unlawfully used to procure abortion is guilty of an offence

Section 60: Anyone who secretly disposes of a child who died before, at, or after birth is guilty of an offence

2. Infant Life (Preservation) & Criminal Justice Acts

The Infant Life (Preservation) Act 1929 of England and Wales makes it illegal to intentionally “destroy the life of a child capable of being born alive” (fetal viability was set at 28 weeks).

Section 25 of the Criminal Justice Act 1945 independently upholds the same law in Northern Ireland.

3. Abortion Act

The Abortion Act 1967 states: ‘a person shall not be guilty of an offence under the law relating to abortion’ [i.e. sections 58 and 59 of the OAPA] if the following conditions are satisfied: Up to 24 weeks: to reduce the risk of harm to the physical/mental health of the mother or any of her existing children.

Up to birth:

to prevent grave harm to the mental/physical health of the mother;

to reduce the risk to the mother’s life;

if the baby will be ‘seriously handicapped’.

In-text: (Abortion, 2021)

Your Bibliography: nhs.uk. 2021. Abortion. [online] Available at: <https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/abortion/&gt; [Accessed 7 January 2021].

Most abortions in England, Wales and Scotland are carried out before 24 weeks of pregnancy.

They can be carried out after 24 weeks in very limited circumstances – for example, if the mother’s life is at risk or the child would be born with a severe disability.

Most abortion services will ask to perform an ultrasound scan to work out how many weeks pregnant you are. The length of pregnancy is calculated from the first day of your last period.

Abortions are safer the earlier they’re carried out. Getting advice early on will give you more time to make a decision if you’re unsure.

Deciding to have an abortion.

The decision to have an abortion is yours alone. Some women may be certain they want to have an abortion, while others may find it more difficult to make a decision.

All women requesting an abortion can discuss their options with, and receive support from, a trained pregnancy counsellor if they wish.

Impartial information and support are available from:

your GP or another doctor at your GP practice

a counselling service at the abortion clinic

organizations such as Brook (for under-25s), BPAS, Marie Stopes UK and NUPAS

You may also want to speak to your partner, friends or family, but you do not have to. They do not have a say in your decision.

If you do not want to tell anyone, your details will be kept confidential.

If you’re under 16, your parents do not usually need to be told. The doctor or nurse may encourage you to tell a parent, career or other adult you trust, but they will not make you.

There are organizations, usually known as crisis pregnancy centers, that offer counselling around pregnancy. They do not refer people for abortion, and may not offer balanced or accurate advice.

If you go to a place that offers pregnancy counselling and you’re not sure if they will refer you for an abortion, ask if they refer people for an abortion.

What happens during an abortion:

Before having an abortion, you’ll have an appointment to talk about your decision and what happens next.

Whenever possible, you should be given a choice of how you would like the abortion to be carried out. There are two options:

Medical abortion (abortion pill) – you take two medicines, usually 24 to 48 hours apart to induce an abortion.

Surgical abortion – you have a procedure to remove the pregnancy and normally go home soon afterwards.

After an abortion, you’ll probably need to take things easy for a few days. It’s likely you’ll have some discomfort and vaginal bleeding for up to two weeks.

Risks of an abortion. Abortion is a safe procedure. Abortions are safest, and happen with less pain and bleeding, when carried out as early as possible in pregnancy.

Most women will not experience any problems, but there is a small risk of complications :

Infection of the womb (uterus)

Some of the pregnancy remaining in the womb

Excessive bleeding

Damage to the womb or entrance of the womb (cervix)

If complications do occur you may need further treatment, including surgery.

Having an abortion will not affect your chances of becoming pregnant again and having normal pregnancies in the future.

[venugopalseo]

IT Department and Vehicle Tracking System By Chandrababu Naidu.

The Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation has led the way in implementing information technology (IT) to enhance both internal productivity and the quality of service provided to the company's valued customers. Bus passes and effective ticketing services may be made available to passengers thanks to information technology. Projects are being done to increase internal efficiency in the major functional areas, such as ticket accounting, vehicle maintenance, financial accounting, payrolls, provident fund accounts, personnel management, inventory management, etc. The IT department supplied the required TIMs, OPRS, and DCP assistance for transporting pilgrims during Krishna Pushkarams in 2016. The TDP Government had ruled the state for more than a decade under the presence of the founder NTR and is continued by Nara Chandrababu Naidu with a vision for the future of the state and made it possible for the future generations with the help of many Top TDP Leaders and Best TDP MLA Candidates.

The Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation is putting into practice the VT project to address the crucial problem of traffic congestion by implementing cutting-edge technologies and attractive, practical, comfortable, value-added services to promote the use of bus services rather than individual personal vehicles. By raising the perceived value of its services, APSRTC hopes to effect this modal shift. The Hyderabad-based M/s CMC Ltd. received the project. For future reference, employees could see through TDP live updates. The five-year design, development, testing, installation, commissioning, training, operations, and administration of facilities will make up the implementation's total scope. An incident and emergency management system, a data center, control centers, passenger information systems, communication subsystems, and a vehicle tracking system for around 3502 buses are all envisaged for this project. These TDP Contributions done for the IT Department and Vehicle Tracking System have become Top TDP Achievements.

The buses are outfitted with GPS-based vehicle tracking equipment. The vehicle tracking system records the geographic positional coordinates (Latitude and Longitude) and sends them through GPRS, using a SIM card inserted in each vehicle tracking unit, to the central data centre at specified intervals.

The application that will be deployed in the Data Center will determine the projected time of arrival of the bus at all future stages based on the route that the vehicle takes and its present location. The public can access the collected data via a mobile app and a web page (www.apsrtclivetrack.com). The Google Play store is where the mobile app may be downloaded. All OPRS services include coverage for the project.

[madisonexteriorsandremodeling]

Now Is The Time To Invest In Energy-saving Windows

The latest in high-tech windows enhances your decorating styles while saving year-round energy dollars.

When the winter winds whistle around your home it is easy to think about energy-saving windows. During a steamy Madison WI summer energy-efficiency is just as important. Unfortunately, it is not as obvious. Studies show windows impact as much as 30% of your home’s annual heating and cooling costs. Heat lost in winter and gained in summer translates to dollars spent. The older the house, the higher the impact of heat exchanged through windows is on your energy bills. Modern, high-efficiency replacement windows not only lower energy bills, they provide added comfort all year around.

Older windows may look to be in excellent condition. Looks are deceiving. No matter how well maintained, old windows do not match up to the technology of today’s energy-saving windows.

Take a closer look at older windows. Inspect them for:

Air-tight seals – to prevent air leaks, windows must seal tight at both top and bottom. And when they lock the mechanism should pull both parts together firmly.

Weather-stripping – almost all windows have some kind of weather-stripping around the edges (or should have). Double-hung windows have it between the two parts, too. Worn or missing weather-stripping allows air to leak in and out.

Caulk – caulking seals out both air and water. Older windows need caulking after years of expansion and contraction during changing seasons cause cracks around frames. Check for open cracks, gaps or missing sections of caulk.

Each of these elements relates directly to the installation process as well. Another reason proper installation is so critical.

If your inspection turns up any deficits, consider all your windows are probably the same age. Therefore, if one has a problem the others are prime candidates, too.

Measure The Value Of Energy-saving Windows

Do you have a variety of shapes, sizes and styles to consider? No problem – modern windows are engineered for every challenge.

Windows come with an assortment of labels. What does it all mean? Is there a way to quickly determine how a new window will impact your energy bills?

The most common reference is an Energy Star® rating. Salespeople like to point it out. But, what does it mean?

Energy Star is a government-sponsored symbol of energy efficiency. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulates evaluations and determines what it takes to get an Energy Star rating. Energy Star certified products are estimated to save American households and businesses more than $450 Billion annually.

To obtain top ratings, windows are tested for:

Air Leaks (AL) – the rate air passes through window joints. Measured in cubic feet of air going through one square foot of window area per minute. The lower the AL value, the less air is leaking. Most of today’s building codes have a maximum allowable level.

Condensation Resistance– water on window frames leads to mold, mildew and rot. Condensation resistance is scored on a scale of 0 to 100 – the higher the number the better a window resists condensation.

Solar Heat Gain Coefficient (SHGC)– measures the amount of solar energy transferred from outside in and tells how well a window blocks the heat from sunlight. Recorded on a scale of 0 to 1. Common window values range from .25 to .80 – the lower the number the less solar heat enters through the glass.

U-Factor– measures the rate of heat transferred and tells how well a window insulates. U-Factor values range from .025 to 1.25. The lower the U-Factor the better a window insulates.

Visible Transmittance (VT) – measures the amount of light passing through a window. Also measured on a scale of 0 to 1, the higher the VT, the more light entering through the window.

Technology Boosts Lifestyle

You don’t have to sacrifice style and design to accommodate the latest technology. The latest windows are engineered to incorporate all the advances in energy saving with popular architectural styles. Energy-saving windows meet all the requirements for a wise investment. Not only are they environmentally-friendly, they contribute:

Style and performance – open up your home with larger, design-friendly windows. Change the appearance of your home inside and out. Lifestyle influences the windows you choose and the windows you choose impact your lifestyle. There are so many shapes, sizes and configurations from which to choose – double-hung, casement, bay or bow expansions, etc.

Let there be light – high-tech windows enhance your life beyond saving money. Natural light is a valuable commodity in today’s lifestyle. New energy-saving windows create an all-new curb appeal and open up vistas so you can appreciate your surroundings.

Installation Pros Vital To Energy-saving Windows

Not all window installations are equal. High-tech windows get top performance when installed by trained, experienced professionals. Not only do pros do it right the first time, certified window installation teams stand behind their workmanship. A replacement window is only as good as its installation. Sims fields skilled, experienced and factory-trained installation teams.

Call Sims Exteriors and Remodeling at 608-825-4500, or email us for the latest window styles and high-quality energy-saving windows for your Madison WI home.

https://madisonexteriorsandremodeling.com

[pacificeagles]

https://pacificeagles.net/coral-sea-action-report/

Coral Sea: After Action Report

Famously, the Battle of the Coral Sea was the first naval action where the opposition ships never saw each other. All of the offensive action was carried out by aircraft, particularly the carrier bombers of each side, with ships relegated to purely defensive anti-aircraft gunnery. Aircraft were also required to provide all of the reconnaissance services for both sides. The scout role was one that had been long envisaged for carriers and their aircraft, but at Coral Sea they proved strangely poor in the role – both sides failed to find each other despite sailing in the same confined seas for four days. When enemy forces were discovered they were misidentified, and both Admirals Fletcher and Hara flung strike groups at the wrong target. In answering why these circumstances occurred, it is instructive to more closely examine some of the issues brought to light by the experience of Coral Sea.

Scouting

In the inter-war years, both the US Navy and the Imperial Japanese Navy had regarded carriers as primarily a tool for scouting and reconnaissance. Doctrine called for scout aircraft to locate the enemy fleet and carry out harassing attacks until the main battle line arrived, and specialist scout aircraft were procured, such as the American SBD Dauntless and the Japanese cruiser-launched E13A Type 0. However, during the Battle of the Coral Sea scouting on both sides had been somewhat lacking.

On the 7th of May, both sides were let down by faulty search reports. An American SBD discovered two cruisers from the MO Support Force but a coding error by the crew resulted in a report of two carriers being received by Admiral Fletcher, causing him to launch his initial strike against the wrong target. Although this was an honest error, the incident reveals a number of problems that would plague the Americans throughout the war. Scout aircraft like the SBD and its successor SB2C were quite short-ranged, being able to fly searches at a maximum of around 250 miles from home base. This meant that if they located an enemy carrier force, that force was already within range and had to be attacked quickly before it could launch a first strike of its own. Carrier commanders could not afford to hesitate and wait for more definite information, even if it was more accurate. Coding errors code be reduced by more rigorous training, but short search radii would plague American carriers throughout the war.

Japanese had likewise been let down by their scouts, who had misidentified the Sims and Neosho as carriers leading to their strike of the 7th of May being dispatched against the wrong target. This error was a failure of recognition rather than communication, with the crew of the B5N misreporting the oiler as a carrier. Part of the problem may have been that Coral Sea saw the first time that Japanese carrier-based aircraft were used in the scouting role – the Kido Butai’s two specialist reconnaissance cruisers, Tone and Chikuma (each equipped with 8 scout floatplanes), were at the time in Japan with the rest of the Combined Fleet. Less capable cruisers based in the Louisades attempted to fill the gap, and their second string E7K and E8N floatplanes did provide useful information, but were necessarily far removed from the highly mobile MO Striking Force.

On both sides, land-based searches proved more reliable. These were typically conducted by larger aircraft that were longer ranged, and typically had more sets of eyes to find, identify and verify surface ships. It was a report by an American B-17, flying out of Port Moresby, that identified the presence of the Shoho, allowing Admiral Fletcher to re-direct his strike of the 7th of May to a more valuable target. Japanese H6Ks of the Yokohama Kokutai were less successful in keeping tabs on Task Force 17, having to run the gauntlet of American combat air patrols. Three of the big Kawanishis were shot down by F4Fs during the battle.

Aircraft Performance

On the American side the most severe issue was the lack of available fighter aircraft. Authorised strength for the two carrier based VF squadrons was only 18 F4F Wildcats each, and attrition over the preceding few days meant that just 31 Wildcats were available for the crucial exchanges of the 8th of May. This limited pool was simply not adequate to effectively protect both outbound strike groups and Task Force 17 itself. The fixed-wing F4F-3 would soon be replaced by the folding-wing F4F-4, allowing an increase in fighter strength to 27 aircraft per carrier during the upcoming Battle of Midway and 36 aircraft per carrier by the time that the Guadalcanal offensive opened. However, the F4F-4 would prove an unpopular aircraft, being heavier than its predecessor.

The obsolescent TBD Devastator had arguably its finest performance at Coral Sea. During the Tulagi Raid, a single Mark 13 hit had been enough to sink the destroyer Kikuzuki, whilst both VT-2 and VT-5 had delivered successful attacks on the Shoho on the 7th which doomed her. Both TBD squadrons had escaped loss during the attack on MO Striking Force, having received effective escort from the few F4Fs available to provide close support – however, the poor weather near the Japanese fleet also played a significant role, allowing the bombers to remain hidden until the last moment. The torpedo squadrons had also managed to co-ordinate their attack with the dive-bombing attack, which split the few Japanese fighters. this fortunate set of circumstances would notably not be repeated at Midway.

The Mark 13 torpedo had turned in an indifferent performance, giving hints of problems with the weapon. TBDs in the first wave of the Tulagi raid dropped a total of 11 torpedoes against three ships, scoring just a single hit on the Kikuzuki. The transports Azumasan Maru and Koei Maru escaped damage, with some of the Mark 13s launched at them appearing to run deep. The second wave of VT-5 bombers dropped 11 more Mark 13s on the Okinoshima without scoring a single hit. On the 7th of May, at least 7 torpedo hits were scored from 19 drops against the Shoho, but the following day the faster Shokaku was able to avoid 20 torpedoes – the carrier’s top speed of 34 knots being 1 knot faster than that of the Mark 13. In total between 4th-8th of May, 61 torpedoes were dropped with 8 confirmed hits – a 13% success rate. The failures – deep or erratic runs – would prove to be common complaints with the Mark 13 until engineering ‘fixes’ finally produced a reliable weapon in mid-1944.

The TBD’s stablemate, the SBD Dauntless, showed signs of the rugged dependability that would become its hallmark. Several Japanese ships were hit and damaged by SBD bombs on the 4th of May, and Dauntless squadrons scored several hits on the Shoho on the 7th of May. With the TBDs failing to hit the Shokaku on the 8th, it was left to the SBDs of both the Lexington and Yorktown air groups to score the three hits that took the carrier out of the battle, and led to her spending several weeks under repair in Japan. These successes were achieved despite some material defects with the aircraft, principally the problem with bombsights that fogged up during dives from high altitude. As a temporary workaround the SBDs were restricted to dives from under 14,000ft to prevent this issue, but later versions of the SBD would be equipped with heaters that eliminated the problem entirely.

Less successful was an initiative to use SBDs as fighters, particularly in the anti-torpedo plane role. Using SBDs in this manner was the brainchild of Lexington’s Capt Frederick C. Sherman, who realised that there was a severe shortage of F4Fs on American carriers. He believed that the SBD was fast enough to deal with the low- and slow-flying torpedo bombers. On the 8th of May it was found that this tactic was unworkable – SBDs on anti-torpedo patrol were sitting ducks for higher flying Zeros, which shot down several Dauntlesses. Thus engaged, the SBDs were ineffectual in dealing with the B5N torpedo planes which went on the deliver the attack which ultimately sank the Lexington. In future battles, with more F4Fs available, this tactic was abandoned.

The Japanese A6M Zero had again proved itself to be superb fighter. Zeros had conducted a vigorous defence of the strike force that sank the Lexington and damaged the Yorktown, shooting down the SBDs used as makeshift fighters that attempted to interfere with the torpedo attack. Other escorts protecting the higher-flying dive bombers kept F4Fs away, forcing them to assume a defensive Lufbery Circle in order to protect each other from the more manoeuvrable Zeros. However, lacking radar and fighter direction support, Zeros proved less able to protect their own carriers despite their rapid climb rate.

In terms of bombers, the D3A reaffirmed its position as the premier ship-killer in Japanese carrier air groups. The by now highly experience crews successfully scored hits on the Neosho, Sims, Lexington and Yorktown, sinking the former pair outright and contributing to the loss of one of the American carriers. The B5N torpedo element had likewise done well, benefiting from superb fighter protection before landing two fatal hits on the Lexington. However, losses during the strike on Task Force 17 were very high, with 21 bombers failing to return from the 51 despatched. This was an early indicator of the fragility of Japanese aircraft, which proved unable to stand up to the increasing firepower installed on American ships and aircraft.

Electronics

Coral Sea was the first major test of US Navy air-search radar. The CXAM had already proved its worth during the ill-fated Japanese attack on the Lexington in February 1942, and it again proved a major asset. The CXAM sets installed on the carriers Yorktown and Lexington, and the cruiser Chester, had performed well, identifying bogeys near Task Force 17. Yorktown’s CXAM had picked up a snooping H6K on the morning of 5th May, which had been dispatched from Rabaul to find the Americans following the Tulagi raid. F4Fs were promptly despatched and subsequently shot down the flying boat – the first of several snoopers that would be destroyed during the battle. The CXAMs of both the Lexington and Yorktown briefly went off line during the attacks of the 8th of May, but the third set aboard Chester was able to take over fighter direction, albeit in limited fashion. Mistakes were made by American Fighter Direction Officers, including not giving the pilots enough information about the anticipated target – on the 8th of May, one CAP section believed it was hunting for torpedo planes, when in fact the contacts they sought were higher flying dive bombers.

In contrast, the only air-search radar fitted to a Japanese warship in May 1942 was a Type 21 set aboard the battleship Ise, which was not present at Coral Sea. Lack of early warning radar allowed VB-5’s SBDs to orbit near the MO Striking Force for 20 minutes on 8th May, hidden in cloud and entirely undetected. It was not until a lookout finally spotted the bombers that CAP Zeros could be alerted to go after the intruders, but too late to prevent the Shokaku being severely damaged in the ensuing attack. Type 21 sets would be added to the repaired Shokaku and battleship Kirishima in August 1942, just before the Battle of the Eastern Solomons.

One drawback of early-1942 vintage radar was an inability to ascertain the identity of aerial contacts. IFF (for ‘interrogate friend or foe’) sets, which responded to radar interrogation by responding with a pulse which clearly identified the aircraft, were beginning to reach the Pacific Fleet by the time of Coral Sea. These devices were known as ABE, which was designed to be compatible with the British Mark II IFF system. ABE responded to the emissions of CXAM such that friendly aircraft were clearly identified on the radar’s A-scope display. Unfortunately these devices were available only in very limited numbers – at the start of the battle only six F4Fs of VF-42 were fitted with the ABE, and two of these were lost when they ditched following the Tulagi raid. None of the SBDs, TBDs or cruiser-launched SOCs were equipped with IFF, which required CAP fighters to continually chase down and visually identify contacts.

Another electronic gadget which saw widespread use by the Americans at Coral Sea was the YE-ZB homing device. A rotating transmitter aboard the American carriers, called YE, sent out coded transmissions which could be decoded by the ZB receiver aboard aircraft. The pilot of the aircraft heard a Morse letter in his earphones that told him the bearing back to the carrier. YE-ZB was a revelation, particularly to fighter pilots who did not have dedicated radiomen to help them with navigation. Several lost pilots relied on their ‘Zed Baker’ to guide them back to home plate, but it was not without its flaws. To tune in to the YE transmission, pilots had to tune their single receiver away from their carrier’s fighter direction circuit. Since FDOs transmitted sparingly and radio sets of the time lacked an autotune capability, it was very difficult for pilots to tune back in to the frequency to receive instructions. Several pilots found themselves unable to retune their radios, leaving them able to transmit but not receive messages. YE-ZB often worked best when pairs of aircraft split responsibility for communications, with one listening for YE directions and the other tuned to voice channels. YE-ZB was also much less reliable close to the carrier, which could be a problem if poor weather concealed the ship from pilot.

The lessons of this experience were acted upon, albeit in limited fashion. The Americans had already begun the process of beefing up fighter strength, but different weather conditions and lack of a co-ordinated escort effort meant that the venerable TBD would finally be exposed as being completely unfit for frontline duty. For the Japanese, Midway would prove the absolute necessity of providing radar for early warning of incoming strikes, something that had been hinted at by the Coral Sea experience. For both sides, there was very little time to absorb lessons of Coral Sea before the climactic Battle of Midway began less than a month later.

[equinoxts2]

OK... I need support and advice.

I'm really loving writing up my loreposts, and they always get me fired up about the (still WIP) rebuild of Kulo Sena... until I get to the actual, y'know, rebuild part.

As anyone familiar with my personal posts knows, I loathe building and associate it with soul-crushing despair. I am not exaggerating in the slightest. But I'm at a point where everything needs setting up again, and no other downloaded or pre-built lots actually suit my needs or my sims', so... building.

I have forty-five lots in four subhoods (and that's just the residential lots!) to do, and I've been back to square one for this or that reason so many times over the last three weeks. I can't stand it.

I know I can build, but I despise doing it. I also know that if my lots aren't "good enough" - if I slop through building to get to playing faster - I'll get dissatisfied and scrap it within the first three households. It's a vicious cycle, and it's depressing.

What can I do to make it less of an uphill struggle?

[equinoxts2]

After a day of testing, including TWO clean reinstalls, I think there's something messed up in my DL folder or possibly from some kind of setting somewhere. It's really bugging me that I can't work out what though!

So, what's going on, you ask? When I create a hood with nothing in my Downloads folder, then add a mod that summons sims (like Sim Blender or Inge's teleporter) and reload the hood, the summon menu is fine, albeit full of useless townies. When I create a hood with those mods present... the only options, and I have tested this repeatedly, are: "Summon Default.../" (Father Time or Santa) and "Summon $Family.../" (Toddler New Year).

Nothing has messed with my objects.package files with the exception of me making it read-only before I even started playing... I have had this issue exactly once before, two and a half years ago, suddenly it's back. Can anyone help?

[equinoxts2]

I can't take it any more. Kulo Sena (including the subhoods) has grown way too big, and I don't have the heart to cut anyone from the cast - not even any of the "nobodies" I introduced as townies or as settlers in the newer subhoods. And that means so much building.

I also feel like Kulo Sena and I are outgrowing each other... but I don't have a concept for a new hood, other than: - I don't want to play to any challenge ruleset - I want to start smaller, much smaller, but not legacy-style - I have a few vague ideas for a brighter, quirkier aesthetic and it's just hard to start from nothing. I'd have to make a new download cut, recolour hairs, build a different style of houses, make sims, name sims... you have no idea how much I actually struggle with TS2 setup.

Any advice or suggestions, simblr friends?

[equinoxts2]

It's official. I am retiring from blogging.

You see, I think Kulo Sena and my TS2 playstyle have outgrown each other. I'm converting the Senaverse into a solo RPG setting, and I'm planning on starting a new hood in TS2 - one that works with, not against, the limitations of the game, while still being escapism and self-expression for me.

Here's the thing: it can't truly be that liberating feeling of getting to do anything I want with my game if I'm sharing my stories. Not while I still suffer from PTSD. I feel like when I share what I do, I'm censoring my own gameplay because "I have a blog!" and although I'm not wanting to be Evil in my game, I do want to create different ways of living for my sims, and I hold back on that when I blog for fear of triggering my readers.

Solo roleplaying, on the other hand, is the best thing I've done as a creative project since before I discovered the TS2 community! So I'm taking a step back from simblr, and from discussing my game with the wider simming community, and I'll be playing solely for me for the foreseeable future.

I wish all my friends and followers the same fulfilment with their own games and projects as I'm starting to discover with my solely personal ones. Take care, all of you, and I might see you around again someday!

[equinoxts2]

Successfully solved my problem!

So, that glitch with unsafe NPCs and the teleporter cat? Solved!

Thanks to a sudden brainwave and the moral support of my mum, I figured out that I need to leave at least one stealth hood enabled (as in, not rename the NeighborhoodTemplate folder so the stealth hood gets skipped when creating a hood) and that for some reason fixed my problem. I've replaced them with empty versions, which also fix the issue, and although I hate useless hoods and NPCs, I'm willing to put up with one for the sake of a functioning game.

Just throwing this out there in case anyone else has the same issue.

[equinoxts2]

I need motivation

I can't take any more setup.

You see, my CC-heavy game and very specific requirements for how I want things to look and feel... they don't make picking the contents of my Downloads folder easy. I hate setup so much - it depresses me, and as someone who has actually lived through ten years of depression, I don't use that term lightly. Setup to me genuinely equals major existential despair and losing the will to live.

That's why I've been putting it off by playing in my solo RPG adventure, which doesn't need me to build lots or resolve mod conflicts or wrangle purple soup. It's also taught me a lot about how I like to play, what I enjoy and what I don't, and what I can actually handle playing out (which is more than I originally thought I could!) But I want Kulo Sena back as a TS2 hood, and that means setup.

And I can't face it, honestly I can't. Help...

[equinoxts2]

Hiatus Announcement

I'm going dormant for a while, because I need to curate a whole different selection of downloads for a completely new hood in a world that is not the long-established Senaverse. It will be more in keeping with what my playstyle and attitude to life is now, trying to manifest love, as opposed to my angsty teen/early twenties self that just wanted to see the 21st century burn.

Additional personal issues under the cut.

I am also grappling with an identity crisis - I've just got used to being Quin, and now I find that I'm constantly calling myself by the name of my solo RPG's main character (and they're not called Quin.) I almost feel like I'm becoming this character and the demons in my head are trying to convince me that I'm going bananas.

In addition, I'm struggling with mixed feelings about my aroace nature - I want to say I'm proud to opt out of all that romance and woohoo nonsense, but there is a part of me that resents it, mostly because (apparently) when I was born, my dad said something about how "no man will ever come near me" and my primally spiritual mindset can't not see that as a curse.

And that's not even mentioning the species dysphoria - I want to love myself and how I look, too, but... I feel like I don't want a gender, or an ethnicity, or even particularly a body, and certainly not a human body. In other words, I don't want to be defined by any neurotypical, heteronormative labels. In my heart, I've always been a little floaty glowy wisp of starlight that embodies universal love. But every time I look in the mirror and see a bearded lady with a very large frame and lingering anger issues from school, I die a little.

So I'm taking time away from simblr, because I need space to work through these problems I'm grappling with, without the bizarre temptation to jump back into blogging and dig my simblr chameleon skin out of storage.

And I am not crazy. Deal with it.

[equinoxts2]

Picking clothing is my arch-nemesis. I'm moving away from the uniform-like Parsimonious bear tunics, which means I have to find something else for my sims to wear... and it's near-impossible to find stuff that meets all my needs, including:

Very obviously not-modern, preferably not overtly Some Other Earth-History Era inspired

Available for Maxis and Androgyny bodyshapes, TU-EU

Maxis elder shapes

Not overly revealing

A nice degree of variety, preferably more colours and patterns than the several shades of green, brown and grey I currently have with the tunics

Blockfeet meshes for under/swim/sleepwear

Consistent with everything else about Kulo Sena, such as the hide tents

Properly made fat morphs (no need for pregmorphs, since my sims attune to eggs)

Female clothing is as practical for Doing Stuff as male clothing, if not more so

I can't mesh or texture to save my life - I try, and I get terrible headaches every single time. I'm so so stuck, and this from a simmer with over 7,000 subfolders under "Clothes" in vir download hoard. Very few of them work for me, the ones that do are either AF only or have, like, three textures max or both, and I seriously can't take slogging through any more folders. It's so frustrating... sorry for the complainy post, but I had to vent. (Done now.)

[equinoxts2]

So... I don't know if I'll come back to blogging about Kulo Sena. I'm back to playing TS2, but it's the solo-RPG spinoff hood that I won't be sharing pics or gameplay from, where I'm testing out some of my new ideas. And since that's just for me, it's making me rethink whether I want to share my KS gameplay on simblr.

My reasons for stepping away include: less pressure on my worldbuilding, stoytelling and landscaping skills; reconnecting with what I actually want to do with the Senaverse rather than what I think will get me likes; not having to pause and take screenshots every five seconds, then spend ages sorting and editing them; not feeling obliged to protect particular sims from bad ROS because I downloaded them from a simblr friend.

Maybe one day I will come back to blogging. Maybe not. But for now, I'm hanging up my screenshot program and just playing for me. I'll still be around to like and comment, but don't expect any gameplay updates. There may, however, be a few zany worldbuilding posts now and again - I keep thirteen scrapbooks and counting, some dating back to 2011, full of inspirational screenshots and gameplay ideas I've collected, and who knows, maybe my ideas on how to use game mechanics in a different way will be useful for someone.