by Leonard "Viking1" Hjalmarson

Q. WWII Online sounds extremely ambitious in scope. Are there any major challenges to be overcome in order for the vision to become reality?

Mo: Not any more (grin).

Dynamic and Interactive

Q. The simulation is described as built on a "dynamic interactive strategic model." Can you interpret that for us, the Klingon dictionary hasn't arrived yet.

Mo: "tlhIngan Hol jIjatlhlaH!!…" oops. As a country's assets get damaged or destroyed, the sim's supply model will automatically route supplies to replace and repair. If, that is, the routes have not been interdicted. Also high ranking players from the three different branches of service (Air, Land, Sea) will be able to respond to situations by altering the flow of supplies themselves.

Snail: The commanders will be able to determine how some of their resources are used, "customizing", in a sense, their country's war footing, and perhaps providing assistance to their allies.

Q. The only thing we can think of that parallels this product is JANE'S World War (or Heisenberg's equations)… is that a fair comparison? Why or why not?

Mo: Nothing parallels this project. In Jane's system players scores are added to a total held separately and combined to determine overall battle flow. In WW2 Online every action done online will have its effect felt in real time, in the same world. It's a true battlefield.

Q. Another product that comes to mind is Total Air War. In some ways this was the first simulation product that really blended strategic control with a real time air/ground war. Is TAW a paternal cousin?

Mo: I never saw TAW actually.

Click to continue

Crazed, Oxygen Starved Visionaries

Q. I'll pretend I didn't hear that!

So, why attempt to do it all? Is Playnet made up of a bunch of crazy visionaries? Why not just do a good boxed simulation like everyone else, and then maybe release add on modules that expand the universe?

Mo: Because that has never worked. In fact I believe that the paradigm you refer to is exactly why real time battlefields have failed in the past. We specifically chose alternate routes from what has come before. The reason to do it all is simply because it's logically the next step in online combat sims…it has been for years and yet no one has attempted it. And yes, Playnet is made up of crazed visionaries.

Q. We love crazed visionaries. Tell us about "Blitzkreig," the first module that will release. What is the scenario?

Mo: It's the Battle of France. We chose this as the starting point because it's really the doorstep of World War 2. It was the boiling point. It will start with the stage set as it was in May of '40, from there, it's totally up to the players as to what's next.

Physics, Pneumatics etc.

Q. One challenge in a product of this scope must be modeling so many vehicles with accuracy. How high are the goals for accuracy and realism in the main components: flight model, avionics, weapon systems, ballistics, physics, cork screws etc.

Mo: Very high. Games like WarBirds, Panzer Commander, and Hidden and Dangerous have set the standard for physics and realism in combat simulations. We're trying to get to the next level. The hardest part is finding that last percentage of physics left to model. Most of this stuff has been done before but never together. That's where we want to excel.

Our flight model was demo'ed at the recent WarBirds conventions and we got a lot of feedback. Robert Shaw (Author of "Fighter Combat: Tactics and Maneuvering") said some very flattering things…now we have to get a vice on Hoof's head . The fidelity that we have achieved in the flight model will be in the ground vehicles, sea vessels, and ballistics as well. Our cork screws are overmodeled right now though…hard to get accurate data on the old ones!

Go to Part III: Physics and FM