I wonder if convoys and ships will zig zig?

[Blood_splat]

http://www.valoratsea.com/ZZ_small.jpg

[GreyOctober]

Haven't they always? :hmmm:

[Blood_splat]

Just when I've blown my cover.:rotfl:

[GoldenRivet]

i would assume their behavior would be SH 4 ish.

what i mean is that while some of the convoy ships are zigging the others will be zagging and it will be a little less predictable and disorganized.

[tater]

Haven't they always? :hmmm:

No, they never have.

When warned, they "constant helm," which is NOT zig zagging.

Real ZZs also do not look like the diagram posted. Real ZZ patterns were actually complex. They do this al the time, not just when detected. With the exception of ships dashing at high speeds, most ships in war zones did this all the time. Large convoys used simpler ZZ patterns with longer time scales to simplify station keeping.

Here are some japanese ones:

http://i121.photobucket.com/albums/o222/tatersw/ZZF-1.jpg

[karamazovnew]

Great find Tater, I had a hunch the merchant boys were not stupid. I consider myself to be an expert marksman. In SH3/4 I never miss, no really, I never miss, because I plan my shots way ahead of time and alway shoot at 000 gyro angle. And yet I tremble when I see those zig-zag patterns. That would make the game uber hardcore. In SH3/4 even a simple turn of the convoy throws me completely off-balance. However, I'd go with uber hardcore any day :rock:.

[difool2]

Ehh-I was able to deal with it in SH1, zig zags would just add some extra spice to the proceedings...

[JU_88]

Doesnt matter if they follow complex zigzag patters or not, Its nearly impossible to hit a zig-zaging target at medium range in SH3 & 4 with Auto targeting.
Might be easier with manual if you are prepared to do some caluclations... I for one am not as I suck a maths. :O:

[Bosje]

it's very easy on manual targeting, the ships still follow a basic course which you can predict and which results in a simple aob and speed for the tdc
all you have to do is shoot at the right moment
zigzag at 9 knots is like a straight course at maybe 6.5 knots. short range and fast torpedo makes it easier

[karamazovnew]

Simple zig-zaging is easy to counter. The speed drops by a few knots and you can decide when to shoot just as the ship starts a turn into you (going for 90 AOB). But that's not what Tater's diagram is about.

You can see there that the entire convoy switches direction by 20 degrees at irregular intervals every 5-10 miles (i don't think it's minutes). That would make shadowing a convoy extremely difficult, the general course of the convoy would need a very long time to "decrypt" and positioning for a perfect 90 shot would be almost impossible. You'd need to rely more on visual observation and less on plotting. For me such a difficulty option would have the same impact on gameplay as "wolfpacks" would. And I believe it's very easy to implement. :up: What do you think Lucian? By the way your name is very familiar to me. Did you study at the Automatics Univeristy here in Bucharest?

[Jimbuna]

I'll simply wait and see....anything close to reality has got to be a bonus.

[nattydread]

Zig-Zags required getting close, not sitting 90 degs of the corse, but instead point a bit at an angle into the direction they coming from...that puts you closer to 90 degs of their zig or zag course.

Get in relativly close, take final firing data just as they finish their latest zig or zag...the fire!...using a speed slightly less than than their actual speed worked a lot too(i tended to hedge my bets and fire one torp using this and actual data).

[Sailor Steve]

But there are several accounts of submarines setting up a convoy or warship, only to have it turn away at the worst possible time. Likewise stories of captains frustrated at not being able to intercept, only to have the target suddenly turn right into the line of fire.

Real zig-zags were unpredictable, and were designed to frustrate submarine attacks. They didn't just make the same turns back and forth every few minutes.

[tater]

US patterns were similar to the jap ones I posted.

No ZZs is profoundly unrealistic.

It is possible to ZZ groups in the patterns shown above in SH4, I've done it.

The number of waypoints, however, becomes ridiculous. I started messing with this, and found that I had to make .mis layers of no more than 4-6 groups of ships, since each group literally made many tens of thousands of waypoints, even for fairly direct runs. More crashed the editor.

Also, and this is critical, the AI simply could not handle it set to the real time intervals. The AI needs to be designed with ZZ stationkeeping in mind

Having ships/convoys ZZ realistically is far more important than useless interior eyecandy, IMO. I say, "useless" for a reason. I realize there is some immersion to be had, but with the player as skipper, there is really little to do. even as crew, what would you do, season the soup better to improve morale? Walk around with an oil can, and lube up the engine?

Proper target dynamics are infinitely more important.

[Webster]

I say, "useless" for a reason. I realize there is some immersion to be had, but with the player as skipper, there is really little to do. even as crew, what would you do, season the soup better to improve morale? Walk around with an oil can, and lube up the engine?

Proper target dynamics are infinitely more important.

well someone needs to replace the toilet paper in the head :salute: it may as well be the skipper because it definately effects crew moral

i agree, lets gets the game fully functioning and iron out those AI issues as the priority and eye candy and stuff can be done later

[Apocal]

A bit of a bringup, but I was wondering if were were going to get dynamic zig-zagging in SH5.

[karamazovnew]

I've played SH3 GWX for many months and had gotten used to the predictable zig zagging of the convoys after an initial attack. Actually the convoy itself didn't zig, every ship did it by itself resulting in very unrealistic behavior. Every attack became more of a chore so in the end I even started using Automatic Targeting to pass the time quicker between 1939-1942. But since playing OM (I was never good at convoys in TMO or RFB) I had to relearn tricks from scratch. It's very realistic and I believe that only once I was able to do an easy attack on a convoy like before.

- convoy formations are irregular
- convoys change course quite often
- zig zagging is made at convoy-level and is much more severe
- ships have different speeds in the same convoy, changing places constantly
- after an attack behavior is more dynamic. Convoys with many escorts will usually continue on their way with only small changes. Convoys less well protected will scatter in all directions.

On my last convoy attack I couldn't believe my eyes. In my initial attack, the convoy changed course twice by almost 30 degrees, a few minutes apart. Ships were shifting positions. A destroyer came in my direction after a radio report (I wanted that extra renown). Slipped by and got myself the biggest cargo and missed a tanker (but hit something else behind it by mistake and sunk a 5k tonner). After a bit of escort dodging I made my way back again and even after 12 hours, the convoy came exactly where I thought. Easy zig-zag I thought.

WRONG. They came from the wrong bearing. I found myself desperately trying to dodge the front escort as the entire convoy was heading at me. I was lucky they changed course again and found myself in the middle of this huge convoy with ships stretched out for miles, with absolutely no discernable form. I expected my tankers to be in the middle, as they were before. They weren't. They had slipped back to the tail and were going slower than the rest of the merchants. But the 5 escorts had also changed tactic and were now viciously guarding the 3 tanker group. I found myself shooting at -310 and +60 degree gyros from up close as I couldn't use my scope for a long time for fear of spotting. I was lucky to get away.

Overall it was amazing. As I said before, besides having a "real" crew, having a "real" enemy can be even more entertaining. Newbies might have a hard time adjusting to dynamic AI, but it's worth every second. I don't know how AI in SH4 works, or if it behaved the same in Vanilla. I don't know if there's AI involved there or just a realistic looking throw of the dice in a simplistic system. But it works :D

[finchOU]

As Steve said...Zig Zagging was to make the convoy/ship less predictable and harder to detect or harder to track. The "ZZ" in SH3 was always post attack...and carried on until you had evaded the DDs for a certain number of mins. I dont have specifics but if memory serves me correctly from readings....ships/convoys could change course every couple of hours to days or even mins depending on threat intel. So complex ZZ would be cool just to throw a wrench in your "easy kill" once you have found course and speed of a ship/convoy...would really make you have to pay attention and take multipule readings=challenge=replayablity.

oh and WOLFPACKS (the mud will continue till we have'em)

[IanC]

God I hope SH5 will have zig zags! I'm still scratching my head at why it wasn't included in SH3. :doh:

[Ducimus]

Zig zags are doable, but you have to be conservative in your waypoint lengths for reasons cited by tater.

Overall, i think i used a 20 or 30 KM leg, with a 10KM random radius on each waypoint, so that the exact course change, and base coarse, was never the exact same, but the zig zags were still in regular and somewhat predictable intervals.

Zig zags should be part of any campaign, as they make you think, and use guesswork. It's part of the hunt to say, "ok they zigged here, then zagged there, so i do an end around and position myself.....right about.... here".

It's satisfying to have predicted a convoys movments and placed yourself in the correct spot anticipating their next zig/zag. Zig zags SHOULD be part of the campaign files out of the box. With the proper script, it takes all but 5 minutes to do, particuarlly for the ATO since theres jack for landmasses to steer random units around.

[IanC]

It's not so complicated really, The Battle of the Atlantic was basically all about U-boats vs Convoys. So lets try to make both U-boats and convoys as realistic as possible. Some things you just can't skip on imho.

[Webster]

It's not so complicated really, The Battle of the Atlantic was basically all about U-boats vs Convoys. So lets try to make both U-boats and convoys as realistic as possible. Some things you just can't skip on imho.

well like a lot of things in AI its easy to do something but it can be a nightmare to get that action to work correctly at the right time and place under the right circumstances.

while many things are easy to do, most of it so interweaved with so many other actions that things you would never think of have the ability to change how it reacts.

im not saying this is or isnt but sometimes the things that sound or appear to be very simple to do can be quite complicated to near imposible to get working correctly in the limited time you have to work on it sometimes

[Ducimus]

It's not so much an issue of complexity, as it is an issue of system resources. Zig zagging convoys double, or even triple the size of a campaign file. For example, a convoy file, before zigzagging may only be 345 KB in size, after running a script to insert zig zags, the same file could become 900+ KB in size. That may not sound like much, but remember the game tracks convoys by waypoints, and all that file size increase, is just pure, raw, waypoints for the game to track.

It's a very fine line you have to walk here, in terms historical accuracy verse system performance. From a file point of view, you have to balance how many zig zags you run (30 to 40KM legs is probably ideal in terms of performance), accross how many random groups, and how often they spawn. Too much, and the game slows down.

[mookiemookie]

It's not so much an issue of complexity, as it is an issue of system resources. Zig zagging convoys double, or even triple the size of a campaign file. For example, a convoy file, before zigzagging may only be 345 KB in size, after running a script to insert zig zags, the same file could become 900+ KB in size. That may not sound like much, but remember the game tracks convoys by waypoints, and all that file size increase, is just pure, raw, waypoints for the game to track.

It's a very fine line you have to walk here, in terms historical accuracy verse system performance. From a file point of view, you have to balance how many zig zags you run (30 to 40KM legs is probably ideal in terms of performance), accross how many random groups, and how often they spawn. Too much, and the game slows down.

But, and coming from a complete dumbass when it comes to campaign scripting, couldn't the dev's script a zig zag behavior for the convoys? I.e. when a convoy travels a "straight line" they do it in a zig zag pattern. All they would need to do at that point is plot the convoys base course waypoints, and all along that path, the convoy would execute the scripted zig zag behavior instead of scripting every single zig and zag waypoint?

Am I off base here?

[Peto]

But, and coming from a complete dumbass when it comes to campaign scripting, couldn't the dev's script a zig zag behavior for the convoys? I.e. when a convoy travels a "straight line" they do it in a zig zag pattern. All they would need to do at that point is plot the convoys base course waypoints, and all along that path, the convoy would execute the scripted zig zag behavior instead of scripting every single zig and zag waypoint?

Am I off base here?

I think you're on the right track. To plan in ZZ's for all convoys for the entire course of their transit is (as pointed out by Duci and tater) ludicrous in the size of the data file involved for each convoy. What seems more reasonable to me is to activate a ZZ pattern for a convoy when the situation becomes tactical--ie when the player comes close enough to the convoy to spawn. The convoy could then select from pre-set patterns to run and simply run that routine over the base course. When contact is lost and the situation returns to "strategic", the convoy no longer follows the tactical ZZ pattern.

Another point to ponder is regarding the difficulty of AI station keeping in very large convoys. Anyone who has played with the editor in SH3 or 4 knows that ships can have a buggar of a time getting into formation after a course change. How to fix? It's a tough one if you want true AI of the convoys ships. A possibility would be that the convoy columns don't have to reform after every course change but that the ships all pivot the same number of degrees to their new heading. They did this historically because turning a convoy 8 miles wide took "a VERY long time" to get organized when maintaining column discipline.

I hope better ZZ's can be implemented...

[Ducimus]

It's my opinion that they could do zig zags as I described with 30 or 40KM legs, if they really wanted to, and not use much system resources. ( Ship station keeping can be fixed somewhat by spacing the colums out farther. Say 700-800 meters instead of 500ish meters.)

But.... i doubt it they will. I suspect the campaign files will be exactly like Sh3 and SH4. 550 meter spacing on convoy columns, and random groups respawning faster then rabbits fornicate, traveling in straight lines with wide random waypoints to spread the traffic out in big 300KM wide shipping lanes.

[IanC]

But.... i doubt it they will. I suspect the campaign files will be exactly like Sh3 and SH4. 550 meter spacing on convoy columns, and random groups respawning faster then rabbits fornicate, traveling in straight lines with wide random waypoints to spread the traffic out in big 300KM wide shipping lanes.

Nooooooooooooo!! :cry:

[Ducimus]

That was sarchasm ya know. :O:

[Alex]

I wonder if convoys and ships will zig zig? No, they will zig zag.

Axis ships ONLY do sieg sieg. :stare:


Sorry. http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a75/Panzer_Kamerad/smileys/uglylaugh.gif

[mookiemookie]

I think you're on the right track. To plan in ZZ's for all convoys for the entire course of their transit is (as pointed out by Duci and tater) ludicrous in the size of the data file involved for each convoy. What seems more reasonable to me is to activate a ZZ pattern for a convoy when the situation becomes tactical--ie when the player comes close enough to the convoy to spawn. The convoy could then select from pre-set patterns to run and simply run that routine over the base course. When contact is lost and the situation returns to "strategic", the convoy no longer follows the tactical ZZ pattern.

Another point to ponder is regarding the difficulty of AI station keeping in very large convoys. Anyone who has played with the editor in SH3 or 4 knows that ships can have a buggar of a time getting into formation after a course change. How to fix? It's a tough one if you want true AI of the convoys ships. A possibility would be that the convoy columns don't have to reform after every course change but that the ships all pivot the same number of degrees to their new heading. They did this historically because turning a convoy 8 miles wide took "a VERY long time" to get organized when maintaining column discipline.

I hope better ZZ's can be implemented...

Exactly! Have the ships in convoy execute a 30 to 50 degree turn left and right at predetermined intervals while they maintain a base course. If they get damaged, have the "convoy member" flag turn off and they straggle behind.

I think this could be done quite easily. But then again, I'm no programmer. :cool:

[IanC]

That was sarchasm ya know. :O:

Don't... sniff... tease me like that!