![]() |
SUBSIM: The Web's #1 resource for all submarine & naval simulations since 1997 |
![]() |
#151 |
Lieutenant
![]() Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 256
Downloads: 322
Uploads: 0
|
![]()
Just to pick a nit - remember the lookouts in the original message are using best estimation by strictly visual clues and experience - like the point system. When you use the Nearest Visual button it is presumed that the WO is now using the UZO (or something similar) to get a more precise reading of the initial contact report. That is for bearing - range is still an estimate as I believe only a periscope view has the markings to get any accuracy - the UZO didn't have any such, nor the binoculars used by the bridge crew.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#152 |
Watch
![]() Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 30
Downloads: 638
Uploads: 0
|
![]()
Will there ever be a demonstration on the 4GB patch .exe?
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#153 |
Sea Lord
![]() Join Date: May 2006
Location: U-73
Posts: 1,638
Downloads: 619
Uploads: 0
|
![]()
There's no problem to patch the exe with the 4 GB patch after doing h.sie's lessons.
The other way around it works, too. The 4 GB patch changes only one byte. - Last edited by SquareSteelBar; 09-16-10 at 03:46 PM. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#154 |
Watch
![]() Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 30
Downloads: 638
Uploads: 0
|
![]()
Great thanks! I haven't been paying attention sitting here in the back of the class for this lesson.
Hay whats the answer to question 5 C or D? |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#155 |
Sea Lord
![]() Join Date: May 2006
Location: U-73
Posts: 1,638
Downloads: 619
Uploads: 0
|
![]()
5c: RTFT
5d: RTFT |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#156 |
Admiral
![]() |
![]()
@Draka: If I understand you right, you say that Nearest visual contact should be equal or more exact than the normal "ship spotted" messages? That's what I think, too.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#157 | |
Hellas
![]() |
![]() Quote:
i tested today the mod and it is working as intended ! VERY good work H.Sie ![]() @H.Sie, can you confirm this ^^ ??
__________________
Knowledge is the only thing that nobody can ever take from you... ![]() Mediafire page:http://www.mediafire.com/folder/da50.../Makman94_Mods |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#158 |
Admiral
![]() |
![]()
Yup. 4GB patch works, but must be applied AFTER patch V15A (or later ones from this coourse).
Last edited by h.sie; 09-17-10 at 02:12 AM. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#159 |
Lieutenant
![]() Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 256
Downloads: 322
Uploads: 0
|
![]()
Yes, the initial "Ship Spotted" is actually being called out by the appropriate lookout - just Ubi made the WO repeat it instead of having to write a routine to have the correct lookout facing that ship being the one animated (Crew Member 13,14,15 or 16 as opposed to the WO number 0)- and the voice files to go with it! The followup "Nearest Visual" is you as commander asking the WO for a detailed report. So the first one is resonably accurate while the latter is more exact - again as to bearing. It is up to you whether you think his estimate of the range is better than the other lookouts.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#160 |
Admiral
![]() |
![]()
Thanks, Draka. I'll let bearing untouched. I think the effect on gameplay is too small and does not excuse the effort reqired to fix. range will be fixed as described
Last edited by h.sie; 09-17-10 at 02:29 AM. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#161 |
Admiral
![]() |
![]()
Regarding 4GB patch.
In this point I have to disagree with Squaresteelbar who wrote that the patching sequence does not matter. The sequence IS IMPORTANT:
h.sie Last edited by h.sie; 09-17-10 at 02:59 AM. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#162 |
Sea Lord
![]() Join Date: May 2006
Location: U-73
Posts: 1,638
Downloads: 619
Uploads: 0
|
![]()
You're not quite right, mate.
The sequence doesn't matter. The result is always the same, since the 4GB patch changes only one byte from 0F to 2F. Just checked it out. ![]() ![]() Related to step 2 of your lesson you're right - the checksum will differ though it's possible to apply V15A patch and you'll get the same 4GB sh3.exe [byte for byte]. Prerequisite is the non-sf sh3.exe 1.331.200 bytes sized, Timestamp Tuesday, June, 14, 2005, 11:54:24. ------------------------------------------------------------- Maybe that improves confusion so I recommend to follow h.sie's advices. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#163 |
Admiral
![]() |
![]()
@SSB:
I am aware that the 4GB patch only changes a single BIT in the PE header of the executable. But: After applying the 4GB patch, you cannot continue to patch your exe file with bspatch+V15A. Try it. It will result in a file that cannot be executed. it's simply shredded. h.sie I also recommend to follow my advices :-) |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#164 |
Sea Lord
![]() Join Date: May 2006
Location: U-73
Posts: 1,638
Downloads: 619
Uploads: 0
|
![]()
Tried it already, identic exe, not shredded.
It works since your patch depends on the correct file size not on the correct checksum, right? |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#165 |
Admiral
![]() |
![]()
ups. that surprises/confuses me, because I also tried that a week before without success. so maybe it (always? sometimes?) works to change the patch sequence. funny.
but in spite of that: I recommend to use the following sequence: 1) V15 2) 4GB-patch. simply because that's the way I create and test the files. I do not support the other way around to make my life easier. h.sie |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|