I didn't mention any name, so where is the problem? But I did ask everyone of these guys how such a (well-balanced) cooperation could look like in his opinion (which is the least I have to do in this case of a very sensible and time-intensive work like Hex-Coding a 3D game) - without getting ANY concrete answer!!!!! - which indeed made me laugh, because this behaviour I know from my former job: Others talking about progress and success and I did the job. So it's more the situation I laughed about. Not you. So please, FB, don't take it personally. That really was not my intention. Ok, I am a little bit cynical sometimes. If you would know me, you would understand.

Best wishes, FB!

h.sie

By the way: One guy even talked about merging patches to one SuperPatch. I asked, which patches he could contribute. He didn't answer.

By the way2: My cooperation with Stiebler regarding the "Bad weather fix" should indicate that I have no problem to work together with others and share what I know.

As NGT said, I think it's problematic for all people with Win XP 32-bit. So, probably it's not a good idea for many players.


IIRC, reloading torpedoes increases the detection probability in SH3. As a simple fix one could just do exactly the same for repairs (assuming that repairing and reloading creates the same noise level). A more advanced version would be increasing the probability depending on the damaged items (radio, diesel, batteries,... but one has to keep in mind that the crew always repairs all items in one compartment). However, I think this is not necessary.

You are right that it might be problematic if you have damage. However, I think the answer is that you just have to stop repairs by ordering silent-running before. If some items are damaged that you desperately need to repair, well, then you must live with the increased detection probability...like in real life :smug:

I guess this makes it harder, however, the idea to repair diesels/batteries,... during a depth charge attack without any consequences is just too ridiculous for me. I guess the main thing that really requires repairs during a depth charge attack is flooding.

Cheers, LGN1

Hi h.sie,

if you still have it take a look at page 24/25 in the Schiffskunde document. There's a list with how loud different things are, e.g., it says that you can hear the persicope going down at a distance of 250m 'mäßig laut' :o Walking in the boat is considered 'laut', talking 'sehr laut' (like working). So, imagine repairing things without creating any noise at these levels.

Cheers, LGN1

@LGN1: What about delaying the effect of repair noise for detection, lets say about 1 minute. So you have enough time to decide if repairs should be done or not?

Or, one could only consider repairs but not flooding recovery for detection probability??

Phew!

Way to go h.sie... that's a good one. So much for the respect... :shifty:

I gave you an answer. At the time I had not looked around in the code yet, so I couldn't know anything about the potential, could I? I told you that. If that wasn't good enough for you - fine, but don't jibe at me.
I was going to get back to you when I had something going.

I'm sorry that you think that I want to steal your fame here or brag around on your effort. That was not my intention, so stop insinuate that.

oh, then I misunderstood you. I thought you wanted to cooperate NOW. what I didn't understand was, how that should work in practice, if you, as you wrote, "had not looked around in the code yet".

what would you think if you were me in that situation??? isn't my reaction comprehensible?

but now I understand: you meant to cooperate in the FUTURE.

fame isn't my intention. only a good sim. 36 downloads of V15D_BETA4 so far. fame??
if (virtual) fame were my intention, I'd focus on graphical stuff.

I neither want to spam my own thread nor I want to argue maybe because of an misunderstanding, so please don't be angry if I stop to continue this dialog now, but of course I'll answer via PM if necessary.

Well, I meant now from the beginning. I didn't thought you would mind to introduce me to what you've found out. But when I realized that you didn't want to do that, I respected it and had in mind to come back later for a "trade" - or what ever we should call it.

No.

I wouldn't think of it much. I've been in that situation a few times with my open source projects. I don't have a problem with it. People join and leave as they wish. They contribute and they fork too if they wish, (the forks contributes too, you know). You think it's a messy sallad, I think it's progress.

I'll drop this now... but don't deride people with good intentions. No one on this forum can possibly (or - I guess - want to) rip you off this work. Most of us just want to contribute if we can.

Have a nice day.

Hi h.sie,

I don't fully understand why you want to delay the noise :06:

In-game I would do the following: if I think I will get some damage I turn on silent running. When I get damaged I stay in silent running mode, except if I get flooding. In this case I switch off silent running until the flooding is stopped. I think this is realistic :-?

The only advantage I see with the time delay is that it would allow you to check the damage amount (repair times) without increasing the detection probability. You might also argue that it allows you to stop smaller floodings without increasing the detection probability (you can think of this as modeling the effect that when you get flooding from a depth charge the destroyer is deaf for some time because of the explosion). :hmmm:

Anyway, I guess a fix with no time delay would already do a fine job, however, having a small time delay to counter weak flooding might also be a good idea (maybe 30sec. With your longer repair times this small amount does not help you much for doing larger repairs :up:)

Cheers, LGN1

PS: I think the noise from stopping flooding and repairing items is not too different, so I think it's not necessary to distinguish between the two issues.

@H.sie:

To address a number of issues raised recently in this thread:

1. Buoyancy issue.
The NYGM buoyancy with XXIPump was created by Der Teddy Bar, whom I can still contact if necessary.
However, I have examined all the posts that DTB made on the subject of the 'Anti Humming Bird' mod, and it seems likely that a common mod for NYGM and GWX (and others) can be made simply as I have suggested earlier.
When silent running is selected (it seems to be toggled in SH3Sim.Act; that is where the switches are listed), then raise the value of 'Mass'. The value of zero in NYGM for mass means only that the surfaced displacement should be used.
Therefore, for a type VIIC, in NSS_Uboat7c.sim, NYGM has mass = 0 (therefore use surfaced displacement of 761 tons). GWX has mass = 760.8, which gives it a slight positive buoyancy. It seems that a value for mass of around 761.5-762 tons ought to cause a slow sinking, when silent running is selected.

2. The 4GB issue for SH3.exe.
There are two easy solutions to this.
a) Provide an extra patch to install the 4GB value in SH3 after installing the patches for V15D. (I think you have provided this previously.)
b) Provide two different check-sum values for sh3.exe with.without the 4 GB patch before installing V15d.

3. Co-operation with H.sie.
I am happy to confirm that H.sie has given me a lot of help with my work on adjusting windspeeds for the bad weather fix. Both in these threads and by PM. I hope he would agree that I have tried to give a lot back.
I know also from my own experiences with computer programming outside SH3 that, when someone asks for a 'co-operation', what that person really means is 'I will tell you what I want, and you can do all the work, while I give you lots of reasons why I cannot complete the share of the work that I promised.' Unfortunately, this does tend to make one suspicious of other people's motives.

Stiebler.

"Unfortunately, this does tend to make one suspicious of other people's motives."

I couldn't find better words that those, since I am not a native english speaker. My behavior is the result of what I've seen in the past. This could lead to be unfair in some cases. So IF I were unfair, I apologize.

As I said in the Readme of the Bad Weather Fix: That fix wouldn't be there without the co-operation with Stiebler and the help of Hitman.

This is not really an issue...

There's is already a patch that works independently of checksum and file size.

Simply apply it after h.sie's patch...

Yup, one can apply the 4GB patch after V15X. But I thought to make peoples life easier by directly put 4GB patch into V15X. But that seems to be no good idea. h.sie

Please Fader_Berg and h.sie, would you take the conversation to private messaging if there any more issues to resolve? I see you had some sort of misunderstanding, but cluttering the thread and solving it publically is against the customs here,and it will also make the end of your controversy more difficult. Thanks, I'm sure all will be cleared and no harm done :up:

@LGN1: Imagine the following situation: A destroyer hunts you without exactly knowing where you are, so he throws depth charges randomly. one of these depth charges causes a little damage of an unimportant instrument, say, the coffee machine. In real life the crew would NOT start repairs, because this would cause noise. But in sh3, the crew would immediately start repairs, so that your position will be known by the destroyer. My idea was to delay the effect of the repair noise on detection probability, so that you have about 1 minute time to look into the damage screen and decide if immediate repairs are really necessary or not. If not, you have time to order silent running.

Best solution would be a dialog like "System damaged, Sir. Should we start repairs? Yes, No, Cancel". But new dialogs are heavy for me, maybe impossible, because they change program flow.

Released: V15D4 for NYGM.

Same as V15D4, but with repair time fix disabled, for NYGM users who have compatibility problems.

h.sie