Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Hey guys a while back i saw a video about students who built a touch screen table top for 40k it had data and movement ranges and everything, i cant seem to find it anymore, anyone got the link

I think this is what your after

HOLY HELL!!! can you imagine if it was like a quicker reaction to the pressing down and it was a full table that worked with an entire army... the power of the dark gods are upon us O.o

Video loading much too slow....

Sign me up for for the full scale, full army edition, this is outstanding. Demand GW to introduce these to their stores for noobs and just for awsomes sake!!

thats impressive! Wow if they ever did full tables like that i think it'd be beyond amazing

*waits until he gets home so he can watch the video*

:(

epic....i want a big one

With a microsoft surface and a bit of keen programmaing it should be possible to make...

Goes way above my programmers skill though.....

That is at least a few thousand dollars worth of table right there lol

considering the GW realm of battle is £150...i dread to think how much a 6'x4' board thats as amazing as that would cost
but still, i'd just like to see it done just for the sheer awesomnuss if it!

Thats a cool table

Pretty cool, very well done, if GW did these tables that could fit full armies, that would be very neat to see. Definitely a great way to introduce the game to new people.

All they need is holographic terrain and the ability of sound effects

Squig_herder wrote:All they need is holographic terrain and the ability of sound effects

Star Trek 40K for the win!

I actually looked into making a table similar to this at one time. To do it cheaply, you use a high res projector and an infared camera mounted under the table. The table itself is generally a wood frame with plexiglass for the actual "screen". Typically above or below it you will have a semiopaque screen for the projected image to bleed through. There are infared LEDs that you have to have project light in through the edges of the plexiglass. The touch effect occurs when you place something against the plexiglass to diffuse the light, causing a visible change to the camera below. I considered building one of these at one time and figured I could do it for about $500 USD (excluding the computer to power it). The problem I ran into was that I could not come of up a solid enough means of instantly identifying whatever piece is placed upon the table. The above method would work well for determining the shape of the base, but without having some sort of symbol on the underside of the base (a model code) or some similar technology, there is no fast way to assemble the army. I imagine setup for theirs was a slow ordeal involving selecting the unit from a menu and then placing it, rather than just being able to throw models out there on the board. The movement and shooting radius was a nice effect however. My guess is to how it can determine where the activation marker is pointing is through the fact that it is smaller than an actual base. All in all a cool concept, and I would love for someone to write up a how-to on making one that is useful for practical gameplay.

cannot wait to get home and this is not blocked to look at. Sounds cool.

That is excellent, no questions about measurement or are they in range or not. Very cool concept. Now a 4x6 in local game store would be excellent and in constant use.

Another problem I would see occuring would be that continual use would result in scratching up the plexiglass service, which would distort the light patterns and result in long term degradation of the touch screen portion of it. You'd almost either have to have some sort of soft felt bases or you would have to periodically resurface the tabletop. I suppose maybe a uncolored car wax might do the trick, but then again, that might just be delaying the inevitable. There is a reason why almost all touchscreens use either a specially made stylus or a fingertip. I'm not sure how exactly Microsoft's very pretty solution works, but I'm sure it's much more top dollar that could be constructed under a reasonable budget with consumer grade materials. (capacitive lcd panel maybe? I don't think that would account for full unlimited point multitouch though. Even the iPhone has a limit to how many fingers you can use.) If anyone actually tries to attempt this, I would _LOVE_ to hear about their experiences.

daedalus wrote:Another problem I would see occuring would be that continual use would result in scratching up the plexiglass service, which would distort the light patterns and result in long term degradation of the touch screen portion of it. You'd almost either have to have some sort of soft felt bases or you would have to periodically resurface the tabletop. I suppose maybe a uncolored car wax might do the trick, but then again, that might just be delaying the inevitable. There is a reason why almost all touchscreens use either a specially made stylus or a fingertip. I'm not sure how exactly Microsoft's very pretty solution works, but I'm sure it's much more top dollar that could be constructed under a reasonable budget with consumer grade materials. (capacitive lcd panel maybe? I don't think that would account for full unlimited point multitouch though. Even the iPhone has a limit to how many fingers you can use.) If anyone actually tries to attempt this, I would _LOVE_ to hear about their experiences.

Problem 1, Model Identification: RFID FTW.
Problem 2, Screen Preservation: Clear plastic sheets, slightly sticky on one side. Sticky side down to screen. Replace sheets when scratched. Idea is commonly used with iPhones, iTouch, smart phones with touch screens, etc.

grizgrin wrote:
Problem 1, Model Identification: RFID FTW.
Problem 2, Screen Preservation: Clear plastic sheets, slightly sticky on one side. Sticky side down to screen. Replace sheets when scratched. Idea is commonly used with iPhones, iTouch, smart phones with touch screens, etc.

RFID tags are a brilliant idea. You could tag each mini and then just index the tags to whatever the corresponding miniature was. The clear plastic sheets would probably work well also, though my experiences with using them on touchscreens is limited. For pressure sensitive ones, such as a Nintendo DS or a conventional smartphone, I could see that working, but do they actually work for capacitive screens like the iPhone? I thought one of the whole reasons for why pressure from your leg from it being in your pocket didn't set it off was because it was dependent on actual skin contact. I don't have one, so I'm a little in the dark on that. I know a few people with them; I'll have to ask. Also, I could see making a 6x4 size one somewhat out of a hobbyist budget. For the infrared camera idea, if you could get the sheet to seal well enough with the bottom layer I think it could work well. Personally, I've had enough problems getting one of those to not get air bubbles on my DS, let alone a screen more than 10 times it's size. Also, it would have to be a single sheet, otherwise you would get uneven light diffusion.

Sadly, this is all just speculation and cursory research on my part. I've spent a lot of time thinking about making one, but not had the budget and time to actually follow through with it. From the 6x4 dry erase tables I've built though, I know for a fact that scratching would be a concern after using it just a couple times. You'll end up with a small divot the first time you drop a metal mini. It's toward the expensive side, but you could probably get away with some sort of scratch resistant glass surface as a solid compromise.

*Edit* Just watched the video again. The models do seem to automatically identify when they place them on the board. My guess is it's either RFID or creative hard coding the order and unit type for the purposes of the demo. I don't like the whole move/shoot/activation marker thing. It seems like it would feel unnatural and awkward. There's gotta be an easier way to do that. Still gives me a tingly feeling to watch it though.

In the future, gamers will be thinking "Imagine if we could do all this with red swishy sticks and transparent plastic templates"

daedalus wrote:...Sadly, this is all just speculation and cursory research on my part.

Stomp that mindset right now, m'fren. The most important advances in human history, whether scientific or any other realm, were daydreams at some point. At the very least, if our mind continually comes back to an idea for an invention, it's worth following up on a bit.

Iron Priest wrote:In the future, gamers will be thinking "Imagine if we could do all this with red swishy sticks and transparent plastic templates"

"And thus keep our costs down!" lulzy.

grizgrin wrote:

daedalus wrote:...Sadly, this is all just speculation and cursory research on my part.

Stomp that mindset right now, m'fren. The most important advances in human history, whether scientific or any other realm, were daydreams at some point. At the very least, if our mind continually comes back to an idea for an invention, it's worth following up on a bit.

Agreed.

I've done a few things that people told me cant/shouldnt be done (mostly with respect to cars) but it never stopped me whenever I had a crazy idea.

It was worth it 100% every time. Even if the idea didn't pan out, I became more wise through its failure.

Yea a litte more work to make it respond faster would be just badass. Man that would be SO cool playing on that. You wouldnt have to think about anything lol. Dammit now I want the lazy man version lol

daedalus wrote:

grizgrin wrote:
Problem 1, Model Identification: RFID FTW.
Problem 2, Screen Preservation: Clear plastic sheets, slightly sticky on one side. Sticky side down to screen. Replace sheets when scratched. Idea is commonly used with iPhones, iTouch, smart phones with touch screens, etc.

RFID tags are a brilliant idea. You could tag each mini and then just index the tags to whatever the corresponding miniature was. The clear plastic sheets would probably work well also, though my experiences with using them on touchscreens is limited. For pressure sensitive ones, such as a Nintendo DS or a conventional smartphone, I could see that working, but do they actually work for capacitive screens like the iPhone? I thought one of the whole reasons for why pressure from your leg from it being in your pocket didn't set it off was because it was dependent on actual skin contact. I don't have one, so I'm a little in the dark on that. I know a few people with them; I'll have to ask. Also, I could see making a 6x4 size one somewhat out of a hobbyist budget. For the infrared camera idea, if you could get the sheet to seal well enough with the bottom layer I think it could work well. Personally, I've had enough problems getting one of those to not get air bubbles on my DS, let alone a screen more than 10 times it's size. Also, it would have to be a single sheet, otherwise you would get uneven light diffusion.

Sadly, this is all just speculation and cursory research on my part. I've spent a lot of time thinking about making one, but not had the budget and time to actually follow through with it. From the 6x4 dry erase tables I've built though, I know for a fact that scratching would be a concern after using it just a couple times. You'll end up with a small divot the first time you drop a metal mini. It's toward the expensive side, but you could probably get away with some sort of scratch resistant glass surface as a solid compromise.

*Edit* Just watched the video again. The models do seem to automatically identify when they place them on the board. My guess is it's either RFID or creative hard coding the order and unit type for the purposes of the demo. I don't like the whole move/shoot/activation marker thing. It seems like it would feel unnatural and awkward. There's gotta be an easier way to do that. Still gives me a tingly feeling to watch it though.

That activator thing is a crime against the game. No way would it work in game. Ways around it.

Dual tag each model. The two point sources can be used, by measuring the relative signal strangths of their input to your RFID readers, for facing. Problem is, either you need some kind of base that is pre-constructed for exactness for each model; or you have to calibrate each model each game. Not hard to figger out which one of those ideas would fly, and which would die.

As far as sheeting the surface for protection, you wouldn't even need a sticky plastic since this thing will be facing up all the time (don't know many people playing 40k on the cieling. Just a single, large sheet of clear plastic will do it. Can buy similar items at Home Depot, but you will want it thin so can't REALLY use that, maybe. That's just a sourcing problem, easy pickins.

As far as capacitive screens, they sell those screen protectors for iPhones. If it wont work, could possibly replace the entire top plexi layer. Who says it has to be hard mounted in; it's just a media to channel the light. Pop old one out, pop new one in, have table calibrate new screen, blam. I would also consider covers for the table, possibly a seperate dice rolling area (hey, it's touch sensitive and you want people throwing casino dice at it? Really?), might just do away with dice altogether; it would speed things up.

I would go with voice commands. Used all the time. Hell, I pay my bills via voice command over the phone. Tech is there, easy easy. You say "Terminator Squad Jerkyboy fires at the Tau Firewarrior Squad Homegirl, 3 stormbolters and a reaper autocannon." or whatever. The computer knows where everyone is and which way they are facing (only really important with vehicles, I guess. Makes the calcs, spits up the results on the table top and waits for the Tau player to take his girls off the table. It's a computer; lean on it's processing power.

Movement. Ditch the activation toggle. Verbally tell the computer when each squad has been moved, it records current position of each model in that squad in that turn. With multiple RFID readers, you can measure the relative signal strengths and determine through some trig to each reciever when each model has been lifted from the table top. Dont even have to tell it when you are moving a squad; when you start to move it and the trig from the RFID readers returns a solution that indicates it has left the board; then you are "Moving" that fething squad. Simple. Tell it when the squad has moved, and you are done. Who needs the activation toggle?

Demogerg wrote:

grizgrin wrote:

daedalus wrote:...Sadly, this is all just speculation and cursory research on my part.

Stomp that mindset right now, m'fren. The most important advances in human history, whether scientific or any other realm, were daydreams at some point. At the very least, if our mind continually comes back to an idea for an invention, it's worth following up on a bit.

Agreed.

I've done a few things that people told me cant/shouldnt be done (mostly with respect to cars) but it never stopped me whenever I had a crazy idea.

It was worth it 100% every time. Even if the idea didn't pan out, I became more wise through its failure.

feth. Yeah.

This sounds like something I would really enjoy coding if I had the time to spare.

If done properly, this setup could do away with the horrors of "I just looked away for a second and next thing I knew Rover was running off with a landspeeder that I don't know where it was exactly", but as a professional developer, I can't imagine what the comments around that logic would look like...

if(event.Type == event.ModelRemoved && event.Validation == Validation.NotLegal)
{
//System: "Hey! That's not a Swooping Hawk! Put it back!"
Audio.Warn("Invalid move, please return " + event.SourceModel + " to " event.SourceModel.LastCoord + " or provide a reason for removal before continuing."
//Player 1: "Bad Fluffy! Bring back my Crisis Suit! Fluffy! Noooooo!"
}

I now have mental images of a table screaming at a dog. In most cultures this is considered a strong sign of hard drug use. Pardon me as I excuse myself to the corner for a while for a spat of dribbling and knashing of teeth.

Been lurking for a while, and this topic made me register so that I could comment on it. So hello dakkaites.

I think you could get away with this with out having to use RFIDs or special bases, provided you deploy carefully. Let me explain what I'm thinking:
<short version>
when you deploy you tell the system where each individual model is. As they are moved the system keeps track of where they are based on where it started. For example,
you put down terminator A at point X. System remembers A at X. Later you pick up A, system sees that something disappeared at X and looks up what was there and realizes
you picked up A. It then watches for something new to appear that is roughly the same size and shape as A. When it sees something that fits the bill it stores that as the new location of A.
</short version>

<likely wall-o-text version>
Take a system like what is described by daedalus. Assuming that the frustrated total internal reflection provides enough resolution, I imagine you would be able to tell where individual bases and terrain pieces are.
DEPLOYMENT:
*At deployment time both players load their list into the system, and then figure out who goes first (I'm imagining that the system has a reasonable knowledge of the rules, and can do dice rolls)
*The system will display a list of the deploying player's unit in some free space where the deploying player can have handy access to it.
*The deploying player selects a unit, and the models in that unit are displayed.
*The deploying player would then select a model from the list and place it in their deployment zone. Now here's the trick, the system knows exactly where this model is, and what it is because it's been told that info.
*Deployment would proceed in this fashion with the system providing helpful cues such as where your deployment zone is, and where you could place a model and still have it be in coherency and so on.

MOVEMENT:
*The system would be able to tell when a given model is picked up. It knows what model it was because it is storing what it was told when deploying, not because it is actually identifying the model.
*When a model is lifted the system could show you where it could be placed, as in the video.
*If you move a whole unit of identical models at once (like Necron Warriors) it could try to figure out if the move is valid by paring each model's new position (position b) by trying to match it with a an old position (position a). If the system can find a position a that is as far away as possible, but still within movement range of, a position b position, then it's a valid move. If not, then the system could show you what region of the board is a valid move.
*The above wouldn't work for mixed units unless you moved groups of identical models at once. This is because the system wouldn't be able to uniquely identify models at their destination if more than 1 is off of the board at once.
*this would get tricky with terrain, but you could just tell the system that the models are in the terrain, and re-identify the models once the come back on the board from the terrain. Same technique could be used for both
transports and deep striking.

SHOOTING:
*Each unit would have a radius that you could tap within to designate it. You would choose a unit to shoot with, and then choose a unit to shoot at, and the system would again behave much as show in the video.
*Remove casualties by taking off of the board, the system know what's where and then removes them from play.
*Assaults would proceed in much the same way.
</likely wall-o-text version>

The thing this wouldn't have that the demoed system does is a knowledge of the facing of the models. I have to say though, thinking about this makes me nostalgic (you can be nostalgic after 5 months, can't you?) for grad
school where I would have had access to the equipment to try it with

iPwned wrote:Been lurking for a while, and this topic made me register so that I could comment on it. So hello dakkaites.

Welcome to Dakka! I hope you enjoy your stay.

iPwned wrote:
I think you could get away with this with out having to use RFIDs or special bases, provided you deploy carefully. Let me explain what I'm thinking:
<short version>
when you deploy you tell the system where each individual model is. As they are moved the system keeps track of where they are based on where it started. For example,
you put down terminator A at point X. System remembers A at X. Later you pick up A, system sees that something disappeared at X and looks up what was there and realizes
you picked up A. It then watches for something new to appear that is roughly the same size and shape as A. When it sees something that fits the bill it stores that as the new location of A.
</short version>

I like this idea. With a verbal input, you could tell the computer exactly what each model is, with all options. That would get to be a PITA, having to recite an army list to the coputer every time you want to deploy. try that with my guard army. Ugh. With RFID's you could program a piece once and be done with it, the computer would be able to read all stats for every model placed, and recognize it as deployed as soon as it hits the table top. Would also enforce a "no take backs" mentality that might take some getting used to in casual play, but would be a good good-habit-building exercise for the game as you would have to think about it. Could always get around that with a little creative programming and maybe some interaction, if you want. Not a big issue. Also, I think that this idea would kick ASS for vehicles, especially custom jobs. However, TLOS in general would make things a HUGE PITA, as you would damn near need a full 3D scan of each model in order to determine what kind of TLOS it has to target and from a shooter. Ditto for terrain. Unless we leave that interaction completely to the humans (possible, the system should be a value-add to the game, but does it really need to wipe your butt for you as well? Cmon, we can still do SOME things with it!! lol), which would eliminate most of the 3D element. Sure, we could talk 3D laser scanners, but that is just taking things out of the realm of reality I think. Might as well start talking about adding a V-8 for power, lol.

iPwned wrote:
<likely wall-o-text version>
Take a system like what is described by daedalus. Assuming that the frustrated total internal reflection provides enough resolution, I imagine you would be able to tell where individual bases and terrain pieces are.
DEPLOYMENT:
*At deployment time both players load their list into the system, and then figure out who goes first (I'm imagining that the system has a reasonable knowledge of the rules, and can do dice rolls)
*The system will display a list of the deploying player's unit in some free space where the deploying player can have handy access to it.

Really, need a seperate readout screen for this for both players. Taking up gameplay space that would otherwise be occupied with terrain or models is breaking the system down a bit. I see that as a bit of a flaw in the original we saw in the clip.

iPwned wrote:
*The deploying player selects a unit, and the models in that unit are displayed.
*The deploying player would then select a model from the list and place it in their deployment zone. Now here's the trick, the system knows exactly where this model is, and what it is because it's been told that info.
*Deployment would proceed in this fashion with the system providing helpful cues such as where your deployment zone is, and where you could place a model and still have it be in coherency and so on.

MOVEMENT:
*The system would be able to tell when a given model is picked up. It knows what model it was because it is storing what it was told when deploying, not because it is actually identifying the model.
*When a model is lifted the system could show you where it could be placed, as in the video.
*If you move a whole unit of identical models at once (like Necron Warriors) it could try to figure out if the move is valid by paring each model's new position (position b) by trying to match it with a an old position (position a). If the system can find a position a that is as far away as possible, but still within movement range of, a position b position, then it's a valid move. If not, then the system could show you what region of the board is a valid move.
*The above wouldn't work for mixed units unless you moved groups of identical models at once. This is because the system wouldn't be able to uniquely identify models at their destination if more than 1 is off of the board at once.
*this would get tricky with terrain, but you could just tell the system that the models are in the terrain, and re-identify the models once the come back on the board from the terrain. Same technique could be used for both
transports and deep striking.

Would begin to breakdown in a minor fashion with non-6" movement models. Necron Destroyers, jetbikes, bikes, jump troops, jump packs. A lot of those can't always be precisely identified by the base size; there would always be some overlap. Positively IDing each model solves this handily as well. Admittedly, it will also drive costs UP, but hey this is a mental exercise not a R&D lab, lol!

iPwned wrote:

SHOOTING:
*Each unit would have a radius that you could tap within to designate it. You would choose a unit to shoot with, and then choose a unit to shoot at, and the system would again behave much as show in the video.

Again, range and stats/rules of weapons would have to come from positive ID, not just recognizing a base on the tabletop. This again would put game mechanics back onto the players (not necessarily a terrible thing; after all we do it all now anyway!), but too much of that begins to erode the use of a board like that at all. Is it a neat-o playing surface, or does it take the mechanics out of play?

iPwned wrote:
*Remove casualties by taking off of the board, the system know what's where and then removes them from play.
*Assaults would proceed in much the same way.
</likely wall-o-text version>

The thing this wouldn't have that the demoed system does is a knowledge of the facing of the models. I have to say though, thinking about this makes me nostalgic (you can be nostalgic after 5 months, can't you?) for grad
school where I would have had access to the equipment to try it with

Hell yeah you can be nostalgic about it! I know I was, and still am.