Plus no TVI to cause others!
73 John AF5CC
Sent with Proton Mail secure email.
On Monday, August 11th, 2025 at 3:13 PM, Barry W2UP <w2up.co@gmail.com> wrote:
> We don't need RF. Let's just contest online. Then we won't have horrible
> band condx like we did (at least in the west) this past weekend in WAE.
>
> Barry W2UP (/0)
>
> On Mon, Aug 11, 2025 at 12:05 AM David Gilbert ab7echo@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > A friend of mine (Bob, K7ZB) just sent me a link to a recent video
> > interview of Tom, W2SC (aka 8P5A) done by W1DED. In addition to
> > descriptions of his station and approach to contesting, Tom speculates
> > on where ham radio and contesting in particular might go in the future.
> > He pointed out that whatever happens will most likely be determined by a
> > younger generation that isn't bound by what ham radio is to those of us
> > who have been at it for a while.
> >
> > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ck-RMIyjSfI
> >
> > His view of the future is very interesting, and I agree that if ham
> > radio survives to any significant extent it will have to change ... and
> > it will likely be changed by a younger generation that comes up with a
> > way to adapt ham radio to something that is more interesting to them.
> >
> > Personally, I've always thought that contesting should figure out how to
> > become more like an online video game:
> >
> > 1. Integrated computer graphics that display participants on a playing
> > field ... Earth or maybe even some simulated world. You could zoom in
> > or zoom out, but the part of the world available to be seen on your
> > screen could be determined by the real time propagation at that moment.
> > To make a contact you'd have to zoom in far enough to see the station
> > you're trying to contact, and the display would show their current
> > frequency. Real time propagation could be derived from actual contacts
> > being made if everyone's computer was connected to a common server ...
> > just like is done with video games. And before anyone says that real
> > time internet connectivity is an issue, keep in mind that it isn't at
> > all problem for the demographic we'd be trying to reach.
> >
> > 2. Multiplayer .... where every participant shows up on the screen at
> > their actual (or simulated) QTH.
> >
> > 3. ACTUAL COMPETITION! Instead of just trying to make the most
> > contacts and finding out at the end how you did, make each contact some
> > sort of competition that gets displayed on the screen ... and have some
> > way of preventing others from making a contact. How that happens would
> > depend upon the context of the particular game, just like there are
> > different video games. But the idea would be to contest each contact in
> > some manner that requires either an offensive action or a defensive one.
> >
> > 4. "Contacts" (whatever the game required for a point) would still
> > purely come via RF ... station to station. The video display and
> > central server would only provide the environment for making the
> > contacts, albeit a hopefully more elaborate and richer environment than
> > whatever we currently picture in our minds while making contacts now.
> >
> > Some people might say that this is actually no different than a video
> > game and that video games have the advantage of a level playing field
> > since most computers don't hinder your play. And that's precisely why I
> > think a ham radio version might be more interesting. Propagation,
> > antennas, choice of times and bands would all make the game more complex
> > than the typical online video game. The play style would be enriched by
> > the variables of ham radio and the technical side of the hobby would be
> > retained.
> >
> > The biggest problem I see with something like this is getting the
> > programming done. Successful video games can take years and lots of
> > money to develop, although there are games like Valheim that didn't ...
> > at least not by comparison. However, I strongly suspect that it won't
> > be too long before AI could do something like this, or at least most of
> > it. We wouldn't need the complexity of a top tier video game, and
> > graphics engines are becoming increasingly accessible for simple
> > environments. Station wise, I don't think it would be any different
> > than it is now to use a logger for rig control and score tracking ...
> > just different software.
> >
> > I realize that the actual game mechanics are missing here. That's
> > because I'm not smart enough to come up with the specifics. But I am
> > convinced that something like this could be done ... it's really just a
> > simple visual interface with an RF connection for the points instead of
> > data packets. The number of made contacts would be MUCH fewer than it
> > is now for a typical contest, but each contact could potentially require
> > more thought and focus. Think in terms of catching fish instead of
> > hammering out CQ's.
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >
> > Dave
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > CQ-Contest mailing list
> > CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|