[WIP] Improved Ship Physics

[TorpX]

Originally Posted by swdw

Do you need some engine sounds? I may still have some from when I used to mod Fighter Squadron: SDOE

I'll take a look if you need some

If you would be willing to put them into a usable form for the game, that would be great. I know next to nothing about how sound works in the game.

These are all the engine sounds that are used:

B-24 airplane
Catalina airplane
Hurricane airplane
JU87Stuka airplane
Messerschmitt Bf 109 airplane
Short Sunderland airplane
Swordfish Torpedo Bi-Plane

There are two for each of the above; one normal sound, and one damaged sound, all *.wav files. The fighter area seems skimpy to me. I've put in the Hurricane for every fighter, except any liquid-cooled types like the Bf 109, which are few. The dive bombers have the Ju87, but it sounds weak to me. Of course, I have no idea what they should sound like; that is just my impression.

There is also a JU 87 siren sound, but I don't believe any a/c use it. I don't know if it should be used on any dive bombers.

The 4-engine sounds, and the Catalina, seem ok to me.

If you don't have time for this sort of thing, I understand. I just want to finish this project before the holidays are over, so I am trying to rush all this through.

Originally Posted by Captain Dave

I've been reading your posts about aircraft doing weird things and came upon this on Oahu. Saw an icon that said slow moving so I checked it out. It's a B-24 with its wing tip touching the ground, engines revving, not going anywhere.

Yes, that is the B-24, that looks like a Lancaster.

I don't think these sorts of things are really fixable. For whatever reason, the inputs that work for the ships' files do not work for the a/c. Possibly, the drag parameters were designed to only work for objects in the water. About the only thing I could do was reduce their power, and fix the sound problem.

Really, the game needs a better AI. The ships' crews will do stupid things too (like the constant helming thing), but if you over steer your ship, it doesn't stall, or sink.

[TorpX]

In case anyone is waiting, I am close to finishing this.

I've measured the length and height of the ship models, and am in the process of calculating the mast heights of everything. It is not complicated, but takes time and is very tedious.

Does anyone know how to change the tool tips in the game? I noticed that in the rec manual there is one that states the reference points for the different ships. I need to change that.

[SilentPrey]

CapnScurvy has gone over all of that for OTC. Are you in contact with him?

[ColonelSandersLite]

Originally Posted by TorpX

Does anyone know how to change the tool tips in the game? I noticed that in the rec manual there is one that states the reference points for the different ships. I need to change that.

Where and how? I never noticed such a feature existed!

[xXNightEagleXx]

Originally Posted by TorpX

...the forthcoming version will be for RFB and RSRDC....

I guess there is no way to see a RFB only version?! I'm not the biggest rsrdc fan here in the forum.

[TorpX]

I figured out the tool tip item, but now I cannot get the museum to load. It seems even the smallest thing can crash it.

I am beginning to wonder if I will ever get this done.

[TorpX]

Improved Ship Physics_2.8 has been released!

These are some of the highlights:

Changes for v2.8:
* 'fog' issue corrected
* S-class acceleration slightly reduced
* crew rosters and performance reworked
* torpedo malfunctions/performance reworked
* airborne sensors changed
* map contacts restored
* aircraft physics changed
* rec. manual/stadimeter improved

I'll comment on some of the details later.



This is a RFB and RSRDC version.

I do not recommend using this with an existing non-ISP career, or enabling this at sea. The game is very fussy about crew roster details, and will crash things if you give it an excuse.

MERRY CHRISTMAS!

[xXNightEagleXx]

Originally Posted by TorpX

Improved Ship Physics_2.8 has been released!

These are some of the highlights:

Changes for v2.8:
* 'fog' issue corrected
* S-class acceleration slightly reduced
* crew rosters and performance reworked
* torpedo malfunctions/performance reworked
* airborne sensors changed
* map contacts restored
* aircraft physics changed
* rec. manual/stadimeter improved

I'll comment on some of the details later.



This is a RFB and RSRDC version.

I do not recommend using this with an existing non-ISP career, or enabling this at sea. The game is very fussy about crew roster details, and will crash things if you give it an excuse.

MERRY CHRISTMAS!

Thanks mate, that said I guess there is no chance to see a rfb only version right?!

[TorpX]

Originally Posted by xXNightEagleXx

Thanks mate, that said I guess there is no chance to see a rfb only version right?!

No. I'm not going to be doing multiple versions of this. It takes too much time, and is very frustrating. I didn't want to be working on this X-mas eve, banging my head against the wall, and my graphics card may be on the way out, anyway.

If some enterprising modder wants to make a RFB, or TMO version, they have my blessing.

I'm not sure I'll ever release another mod, tbh. I haven't really played the game that much recently, and modding doesn't really put me in the mood to enjoy the game. If I do work on anything again, it will be to improve something in the game set-up I'm using. Trying to update RFB, TMO, RSRDC, GFO, whatever, is a lot of tedious detail work, without the rewards of achieving anything new. I feel the time would be better spent exploring new possibilities, than doing half a dozen versions of the same thing.

[CapnScurvy]

Merry Christmas to you as well TorpX!!

Thanks for the hard work involved.... Enjoy the holidays!

[TorpX]

Thank-you Cap'n!




I thought I'd take time to comment on some of the details of the mod. Hopefully, I've explained things well enough in the docs, but I'll talk about some of the hows and whys, in case anyone is interested. If any players want to know more detail on this sort of thing, now would be the time to ask. In three months, I'll have forgotten 3/4 of all this.

1. I corrected a fog/visibility issue that creeped into the previous RFB version. Most likely, I used the wrong scene.dat file as a starting point (the pre-patch version). Anyway, I redid that, so we should be able to lock on to ships as well as we could in RFB 2.0. An Odd thing I noticed in the scene.dat file is the large number of 'fog' items. No wonder problems occur here.

2. I made changes to the rec. manual. Mainly just accurate mast heights. I corrected the lengths in the files, but these are not displayed in RFB, so it doesn't really help much. This actually took a lot of time, as I had to measure the hights and lengths of all the ships' game models. I found the RFB concept of using the top of deck, or stack, or mast, depending on the ship, to be unacceptable. I never was sure what I should use.

Along with the above, I relocated the ships' flags to the top masts to make them more visible. Range finding will still be difficult at longer range, but this should be of some help at medium ranges. I was amused to find one IJN carrier has no flag at all. Since it has no island, or mast, there is no place to put it - makes me wonder how they operated on that ship.

3. I would have liked to implement the fixes Cap'nScurvy made in OTC, but am not well enough acquainted with the details, so I settled for dealing with the mast height issue above.

4. I noticed that in the museum, one has rec. manual pages for everything, even the aircraft, so I assume it is possible to put them in the game. If I had a better understanding of that part of things, I would have put them in. I did make some minor changes to types of ships, so the order of things in rec. manual is altered.

5. I toyed with the idea of doing my own version of a damage model, but dropped the idea when I realized how long it would take to do it properly. This is probably the sort of thing one could spend a year on, and still not be finished. I consider the present damage system to be a weak point in the game.

6. I attempted to put a periscope 'splash' effect (as distinct from the 'wake' effect) on the periscopes. Either the idea just won't work, or I didn't do it right. Most likely the later. The idea was that you would have to limit your speed to under 4 kn., if you wanted to have a good view out of your scope.


More later...

[aanker]

Originally Posted by TorpX

More later...

Good read, thanks, and Thank you for 2.8 TorpX

[Rockin Robbins]

Originally Posted by TorpX

I made changes to the rec. manual. Mainly just accurate mast heights. I corrected the lengths in the files, but these are not displayed in RFB, so it doesn't really help much. This actually took a lot of time, as I had to measure the hights and lengths of all the ships' game models.

How many modders are going to fall into the trap that requires postulating that the US Navy rented every ship in the enemy navy, both merchant and warship and fixed up our recognition manual with correct ship lengths and masthead heights for every friggin' ship on the entire ocean?

In fact our historical recognition manuals weren't much help. Not only were ship lengths and masthead heights wrong, but it only contained a minority of ships that would be encountered. It wasn't just a matter of encountering ships with the wrong information, although that happened. For the majority of ships encountered the recognition manual was no help whatever.

Now we have an arcade game that makes a shambles of reality. The game devs at least gave us a manual riddled with errors. That was a better approximation of reality than impossible perfect knowledge can ever be.

My suggestion would be that if you want perfect recognition manuals, make them as a separate mod rather than forcing a deal with the devil in order to use Improved Ship Physics. What does a recognition manual have to do with ship physics anyway? Nothing. What do weather adjustments and visibility adjustments have to do with ship physics? Nothing.

I believe that mods should be historically plausible. Now you've jumped in bed with CapnScurvy to turn history into comedy. Now your mod is just as broken as his.

I also believe that single purpose mods, like Improved Ship Physics, should confine their fixes to their announced areas of concern or call them what they are: supermods.
As a matter of fact, why not merge ISP and OTC into a supermod. Other than damage models, which you've mentioned, you would certainly have all the ingredients.

[CapnScurvy]

Once again RR provides his "comedic" opinion regarding his take on game play.

I'll link one of my previous replies for his long standing criticism of finding corrected measurements in the Recognition Manual.

[Rockin Robbins]

Originally Posted by CapnScurvy

Once again RR provides his "comedic" opinion regarding his take on game play.

I'll link one of my previous replies for his long standing criticism of finding corrected measurements in the Recognition Manual.

Yes I do, and unless you demonstrate the historical plausibility of the US taking precise measurements of every single ship on the ocean and placing a perfect identification manual in our submarines you will remain wrong.

They missed lots of times because of wrong information. And no, they could not sashay over to the aircraft carrier they just missed, call time out, measure the thing (they didn't have a ruler that long, by the way) and then correct their ID manual. The cold, hard fact is that unlike us, they didn't know why they missed. Some lost their commands because they did, for reasons not related to their fitness for command. Life is tough and you get on anyway. They did. Every one of them cursed the name of CapnScurvy because they couldn't have your perfect ID manual. You KNOW they wanted it but you failed them. The truth is they would have killed or died to get such a thing. The truth was that it was impossible to obtain short of calling time out, renting every Japanese ship on the ocean and measuring them in controlled conditions. Wanting and having are very different things and we are often faced with things we want that are impossible to obtain. Therefore your entire logic is non-responsive to my contentions.

Non-response to my challenge is admission that you are doing that for personal reasons not related to quality of the game. This is a simulation. Simulation implies fidelity to the problems of the past and our quest to solve them in a historically plausible way.

OTC and now ISP are implausible. Therefore they are not legitimate historically plausible mods. Just removing the hokey ID manual from each would render them the highest quality work rendered for SH4. Keeping them in is a deal breaker for me unless you can prove that the ID manual aboard our submarines was of comparable accuracy. You can't. They weren't. They were even worse than our stock ID manual. Case closed.

I quote CapnScurvy in the above linked diatribe: "For those that accept the fact that the game limits a single measurement (the only one found in the RM) to be the basis of calculating Range to target when using the Stadimeter, and you accept the reality that this measurement is going to produce an inaccurate Range to target, every time you use the measurement.....then stop here and be content to accept RR's idea of game play reality."

A better statement of my case couldn't be made. That is what happened with stadimeter measurements throughout the war that relied on the ID manual, and with the vast majority of firings where the ID manual was as useful as a comic book and they just had to estimate height based on cabin heights, number of decks and a little hocus-pocus. They missed a lot. When Dick O'Kane lost his radar, he radioed back to Pearl "there goes half my torpedoes, wasted." Why? Read Scurvy's "devastating" attack on the truth. The truth is unacceptable, therefore he changed it. That ruined a masterful couple of mods.

And Capn, there were never a couple of complimentary mods like ISP and OTC. You really should consider pooling your resources with Torpx and release a combo supermod composed of the two mods.