Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'SimulatorsAFV design'.

More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • The Outer Rim
    • Open Discussion
    • Aviation
    • Elon Musk: Making Space Great Again
    • Naval Discussion
    • Mechanized Warfare
    • Ballistics Science Discussion
    • Infantry Tools & Tactics
    • Dr. Strangelove's Nuclear Palace
    • Biosciences
    • History, Culture, and Archaeology
    • Fiction & Entertainment
    • Computers, Software, and Tech Support
    • Historical Warfare
    • Sturgeon's Contests


  • Of IS-7s and Other Things
  • Archive Awareness
  • Unstart's Blog
  • The Sherman Blog
  • U-47

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start





Website URL







Found 1 result

  1. I am not sure if this should be posted in the software section or here. So I chose this section since I found it the most relevant. But on point: Collecting data. AFV designs are based on data right? These are usually battle reports, which some times may be misleading, but has helped shape AFV design. For example: *The frontal 30 degree section of a tank will take 50% of the hits. Thereby, lets up armor the front 30 degree to resist the threat the vehicle is designated to stop, which in the case of a MBT, is AT-rounds. *The turret is going to be hit the most. That's why we are going to armor it the most. *The UFP and the Lower section of the turret is hit the most, therefor let's have them as the most armored parts. So I was wondering, does developers of games like Steel Beasts collect information on the areas the AFV has been hit, the range the shot was fired from, and the type of ammunition used? This information could be given/sold to AFV developers for them to further enhance their designs. The data could be separated into two groups: Military. Civilian. The military group would be data from actual AFV crews training in a simulator, while the Civilian group would be data collected to anyone playing the game outside training, where skill, proper training, or seriousness may lack. A example here is how WT players will often pick the KV-2 for shits and giggles simply because it has a giant cannon, disregarding how useful this actually is. Further, the two groups could be separated by country, as well as if they are conscripts or not. To increase the variety of data, the civilian version at least could include a "deathmatch mode" and the usual game modes where battles are often and intense. A more experimental way could also be used. Using neural networks, we could have a AI evolving to adept perfectly to the opposition. This could be done via Steel Beasts. You simply load up a scenario, and hook either one AI to all of the AFVs or even one AI for each crewmember. After several "evolutions" the AIs would have figured out the perfect way to take out the enemy opposition. This would also be a excellent way of finding bugs in the game, since neural networks will use any advantage they can. Hook this up with a AFV building program, with limiters of course, the neural network could also develop the perfect design to counter the threat. Repeat this over several, if not all scenarios and it could come up with a lot of interesting designs. But note, I am not saying we should let a neural network design a AFV all by itself, it should rather serve as a guideline or a reference for what AFV designers can improve. Here is a example of neural networks: Mvh Xoon
  • Create New...