[REL] patSH3r - Reborn - Page 2

Anvar1061 · 10-15-15, 06:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fader_Berg

latest-patSH3r.zip is for people who just want to play the game. No more files are needed for that.
latest-patSH3r-source.zip is for people who want to see the code, and is interested in how it's done.

SSS

padi · 10-18-15, 02:40 PM

Could you implement that a ship could use more than one sensor of each type at a time?
This would allow a higher realismn in the ASW part and the visual sensors...

Fader_Berg · 10-18-15, 04:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by padi

Could you implement that a ship could use more than one sensor of each type at a time?
This would allow a higher realismn in the ASW part and the visual sensors...

I don't know. It looks like - the little I have seen - that it should be possible. UBI took this route however, so there might be something that makes itimpossible somewhere.

padi · 10-18-15, 04:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fader_Berg

I don't know. It looks like - the little I have seen - that it should be possible. UBI took this route however, so there might be something that makes itimpossible somewhere.

I have full confidence in yourself that you could make everything possible!

padi · 10-28-15, 10:48 AM

Another idea:
What's about sending and receiving messages in periscope depth if the Antenna was extended before?

Hitman · 10-28-15, 01:29 PM

Fader

do you intend on keeping it as a complementary patch to H.Sie as it is now, or are you considering integrating it all into one?

I'm asking because from the user's point of view, having a single patch thing to deal with is much easier, and now that H-Sie's is open source maybe merguing it with your own one and operating always from the outside without any need of modifying the .exe would be good.

Fader_Berg · 10-28-15, 05:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hitman

Fader

do you intend on keeping it as a complementary patch to H.Sie as it is now, or are you considering integrating it all into one?

I'm asking because from the user's point of view, having a single patch thing to deal with is much easier, and now that H-Sie's is open source maybe merguing it with your own one and operating always from the outside without any need of modifying the .exe would be good.

I'm looking in to it.

I know I'm gonna integrate some of them, but I'm not sure I'll go for all. Comments are few, often in german (Google translate sucks) and H.sie have forgotten much of it. He also don't have time to support the little he remembers.

But we'll see.

LGN1 · 10-29-15, 06:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fader_Berg

I'm looking in to it.

I know I'm gonna integrate some of them, but I'm not sure I'll go for all. Comments are few, often in german (Google translate sucks) and H.sie have forgotten much of it. He also don't have time to support the little he remembers.

But we'll see.

Hi again,

I guess features from version D would be of most benefit. H.Sie never released this version although it has some great additions (e.g., a dynamic response to the players' actions).

If you have specific questions about H.Sie's work, please feel free to ask me. I might be able to support a bit.

Regards, LGN1

Fader_Berg · 10-28-15, 05:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by padi

Another idea:
What's about sending and receiving messages in periscope depth if the Antenna was extended before?

That's a cool idea.

Henri II · 10-29-15, 03:47 AM

Hi,

a quick question. I have your mod enabled on top of h.sie fixes and experienced something mildly strange.
I was hunting a ship in foggy weather, when it was sighted it was at a bearing of about 25° and a range of about 700 m. I didn't have it locked and asked the WO about range to nearest contact, his reply: "nearst contact at bearing 312, range 3400 m".

I repeated the question a few times and his estimates were allway different and never anywhere near correct. When the ship passed out of sight (it was neutral) I asked him again, his reply: "nearest contact at bearing 374, range 76326464 (not the exact number he said but something like this)".

Is this the fog messing with something? In retrospect I think it's possible that the officer did not have a watch qualification, but I'm not sure?

Fader_Berg · 10-29-15, 04:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Henri II

Hi,

a quick question. I have your mod enabled on top of h.sie fixes and experienced something mildly strange.
I was hunting a ship in foggy weather, when it was sighted it was at a bearing of about 25° and a range of about 700 m. I didn't have it locked and asked the WO about range to nearest contact, his reply: "nearst contact at bearing 312, range 3400 m".

I repeated the question a few times and his estimates were allway different and never anywhere near correct. When the ship passed out of sight (it was neutral) I asked him again, his reply: "nearest contact at bearing 374, range 76326464 (not the exact number he said but something like this)".

Is this the fog messing with something? In retrospect I think it's possible that the officer did not have a watch qualification, but I'm not sure?

Hmmm... Very odd.

The algorithm used for wo_experience can't come up with such huge differences. It just alters the SH3 range finding a bit.
My guess is that there is something wrong with the wo_targeting part of it. The memory area where the locked ship is supposed to be, is freed and are being used for something else. The estimates in such case, will seem to be totally random.
Why isn't the locked target cleared, since no ship is locked?

I'll have a look on it tonight.

Thanks for reporting.

Updates

151029:
I can't find the cause of this, or reproduce the problem with the information given. This doesn't mean that the bug doesn't exists.
Further reports regarding this problem are welcome.

160111:
Since this error has not been reported again. It will be removed from the bug list.

LGN1 · 10-29-15, 06:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fader_Berg

That's a cool idea.

Hi,

I think this would be very nice even if it is not connected with any antenna position (for players without moving antenna).

Regards, LGN1

PS: I think it's already possible to receive messages at periscope depth, but not sending

SquareSteelBar · 11-02-15, 09:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fader_Berg

...I'm restarting this project from scratch, since h.sie's project have died out. The first goal is to rewrite the h.sie patches (copy the behaviour, not the code) into this project, and later on extend them further and add new patches....

Fader_Berg · 11-04-15, 04:26 AM

I would like to get in touch with someone that's good with graphics - for a small upcoming patSH3r-feature. Not necessarily 3D-graphics in this particular case.

PM me.

Niedowidek · 11-14-15, 02:44 PM

How is your work going, Fader? It's great work you're doing. I hope we'll see more features in your patch

10-18-15, 02:40 PM	#2
padi Officer Join Date: Sep 2012 Posts: 249 Downloads: 126 Uploads: 0	Could you implement that a ship could use more than one sensor of each type at a time? This would allow a higher realismn in the ASW part and the visual sensors... __________________ My Mediafire Page Join the Real ASW Mod Discord-Server: https://discord.gg/Yg5ZE25

10-28-15, 10:48 AM	#5
padi Officer Join Date: Sep 2012 Posts: 249 Downloads: 126 Uploads: 0	Another idea: What's about sending and receiving messages in periscope depth if the Antenna was extended before? __________________ My Mediafire Page Join the Real ASW Mod Discord-Server: https://discord.gg/Yg5ZE25

10-28-15, 01:29 PM	#6
Hitman Pacific Aces Dev Team Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Spain Posts: 6,099 Downloads: 109 Uploads: 2	Fader do you intend on keeping it as a complementary patch to H.Sie as it is now, or are you considering integrating it all into one? I'm asking because from the user's point of view, having a single patch thing to deal with is much easier, and now that H-Sie's is open source maybe merguing it with your own one and operating always from the outside without any need of modifying the .exe would be good. __________________ One day I will return to sea ...

11-04-15, 04:26 AM	#14
Fader_Berg 中国水兵 Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Uppland, Sweden Posts: 278 Downloads: 48 Uploads: 0	I would like to get in touch with someone that's good with graphics - for a small upcoming patSH3r-feature. Not necessarily 3D-graphics in this particular case. PM me. __________________ patSH3r-developer, (https://fb.tuxxor.net) Type II junkie

11-14-15, 02:44 PM	#15
Niedowidek Bosun Join Date: Jul 2014 Location: Warsaw, Poland Posts: 63 Downloads: 118 Uploads: 0	How is your work going, Fader? It's great work you're doing. I hope we'll see more features in your patch __________________ SH3, GWX 3.0 or NYGM, h.sie/Stiebler hardcoded fixes, patchSH3r, Hitman's GUI, Hide My Sub, Evan82's Uniforms II SH4 TMO

10-29-15, 03:47 AM	#10
Henri II Sparky Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Germany Posts: 156 Downloads: 47 Uploads: 0	Hi, a quick question. I have your mod enabled on top of h.sie fixes and experienced something mildly strange. I was hunting a ship in foggy weather, when it was sighted it was at a bearing of about 25° and a range of about 700 m. I didn't have it locked and asked the WO about range to nearest contact, his reply: "nearst contact at bearing 312, range 3400 m". I repeated the question a few times and his estimates were allway different and never anywhere near correct. When the ship passed out of sight (it was neutral) I asked him again, his reply: "nearest contact at bearing 374, range 76326464 (not the exact number he said but something like this)". Is this the fog messing with something? In retrospect I think it's possible that the officer did not have a watch qualification, but I'm not sure?