For you that miss the tail on the map....

[vodkavera]

Just run "GWX-Contact Color" in JSGME.
Back to basic with red-blue-green contacts and a tail on the map.

Happy hunting all and a Marry Christmas.

I want to thank the dev. team for GWX.
SHIII would´nt be the same without it. :up:

/VV

[Nerazzurri]

Just run "GWX-Contact Color" in JSGME.
Back to basic with red-blue-green contacts and a tail on the map.

Happy hunting all and a Marry Christmas.

I want to thank the dev. team for GWX.
SHIII would´nt be the same without it. :up:

/VV

Do you mean this?http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=110141&highlight=contact+colour

EDIT - just discovered the Jimbuna one too

[vodkavera]

Maybe.....
It was such a long time ago I downloaded it.
The file name is: GWX-Contact_Color.7z

/VV

[CNemo]

Has anyone tried this? I looked at the files, and the mod includes files for specific units - are these units the same in GWX2.0? I thought they were different.

[danlisa]

Has anyone tried this? I looked at the files, and the mod includes files for specific units - are these units the same in GWX2.0? I thought they were different.

Spot on!

It will not work fully with GWX 2.0, we've added to many new units. There is no 'quick fix' available.

[vodkavera]

Has anyone tried this? I looked at the files, and the mod includes files for specific units - are these units the same in GWX2.0? I thought they were different.

Spot on!

It will not work fully with GWX 2.0, we've added to many new units. There is no 'quick fix' available.

So you say that some contacts still will be in black and witout a tail?
Is that right?

/VV

[TheDarkWraith]

Has anyone tried this? I looked at the files, and the mod includes files for specific units - are these units the same in GWX2.0? I thought they were different.

Spot on!

It will not work fully with GWX 2.0, we've added to many new units. There is no 'quick fix' available.

well how about helping us out then and telling us what's missing?? :hmm:

[Nerazzurri]

I think it would be wise to give GWX a chance (as Kpt. Lehmann suggests) before we add any mods on the basis of someone saying it's 'compatible' after using it for two patrols.

That is unless the creator of the mod OK's it for compatability, possibly after confirmation from the GWX team.

I think, Racerboy, that's what you're intending with your other thread?

I may have it all wrong. Just my tuppence worth. :doh:

[TheDarkWraith]

I think it would be wise to give GWX a chance (as Kpt. Lehmann suggests) before we add any mods on the basis of someone saying it's 'compatible' after using it for two patrols.

That is unless the creator of the mod OK's it for compatability, possibly after confirmation from the GWX team.

I think, Racerboy, that's what you're intending with your other thread?

I may have it all wrong. Just my tuppence worth. :doh:

sorry to hijack for a moment :oops:
That is part of my intentions, yes. If we all posted ideas and mods there then maybe GWX would take a look at them and say yes or no. And hopefully they will also say Why if they say no so we can fix them to work :up:

thread returned.

[Realplayer]

I would like to have the tails but no contact colour, only black but WITH tail. Like in GWX 1.03. How can i do this?

[Schwuppes]

I would like to have the tails but no contact colour, only black but WITH tail. Like in GWX 1.03. How can i do this?

Yes indeed, I would very much like that aswell. Good old GWX 1.03 style. :up:

[Jimbuna]

Just run "GWX-Contact Color" in JSGME.
Back to basic with red-blue-green contacts and a tail on the map.

Happy hunting all and a Marry Christmas.

I want to thank the dev. team for GWX.
SHIII would´nt be the same without it. :up:

/VV

Do you mean this?http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=110141&highlight=contact+colour

EDIT - just discovered the Jimbuna one too

This was not intended for GWX 2.0 therefore it will not change the 40 or more new units in the mod.
It should be safe to use becuse it is only a tga.
As danlisa has already stated "There is no 'quick fix' available".
I think it is best to give people a chance to get a 'feel' for the mod first.
However, if someone is impatient enough, let them dabble into it themselves.
My advice if you really want to see tails and colour, would be to try the mod and decide for yourself if it's what you want, until somebody comes up with a better fix/solution/mod :up:

[danlisa]

Tell you what guys, try it like it is for now and when more people have had a chance to adapt/adjust to this small change we will visit this issue again.

Remember:

1) The tails will return at higher zoom levels. Ship & direction of travel will be shown.
2) You have a large/accurate compass that shows your direction of travel.
3) You can click on any contact (minus tail) and it will tell you direction of travel.

With this in mind, next time you get a contact report, click on it to get the direction of travel, then use the ruler tool + bearing tool to plot the approx course of the vessel and then adjust your course/waypoint accordingly. Just put yourself in the Navigation Officers boots for awhile and see how it sits with you.

Seriously, when we removed this tiny tga file (tail) we increased the immersion factor exponentially, which is all we have ever tried to do with GWX. You guy's have got to believe that you are actually in a U-Boat & at war, or we have not done our job.

Give it a little time.;)

[Von Manteuffel]

You guy's have got to believe that you are actually in a U-Boat & at war, or we have not done our job.


And therein, IMHO, lies the kernel of the dissent and unpleasantness which so unfortunately accompanied the release of GWX2: Some players want an immersive experience which is as close to the real thing as the limitations of a computer-game allow. This is what the GWX Team have provided and what, I believe, has always been their stated aim; and they've done it superbly.

Others want to sail around the oceans, making kills with lots of explosions and without too much of the math and uncertainty a realistic simulation entails. They want to find targets ( relatively easily ) fire torpedoes ( or their deck gun ) with a fair certainty of a hit; see and hear big explosions ( we all love pyrotechnics ) and earn lots of renown.

Both are perfectly acceptable ways of playing the game. The heart of this Community is the broad spectrum of playing styles and the mods they give rise to. Thanks to that we can all modify SH3 to give us the playing experience which most suits us, from hardcore realism to almost arcade-style submarine warfare and everything in between. It's entirely up to each of us.

What we should not do, I believe, is condemn a modder - or team - for not delivering precisely what we want from the game. The GWX Team have delivered an astonishing piece of work - but designed to meet their objectives and to fulfil their ambitions for and vision of SH3.

Generously, they decided to share the fruits of their massive labours with the rest of us, but unfortunately, some players, who do not find their preferred style of play is supported by the GWX concept, immediately start to complain and talk about "bugs," "glitches" and omissions.

The message is simple. If GWX2 doesn't deliver the kind of gaming experience you want from SH3 - leave it alone, or, if you wish, modify it yourself so that it does suit you better. I'm sure the GWX Team won't mind if you modify their work, but what they can - and do - object to is criticism based on gaming needs and expectations which aren't and never were part of their vision.

No one should ever carp, criticise or condemn people for achieving what they set out to achieve.

[Dustyboats]

You guy's have got to believe that you are actually in a U-Boat & at war, or we have not done our job.


And therein, IMHO, lies the kernel of the dissent and unpleasantness which so unfortunately accompanied the release of GWX2: Some players want an immersive experience which is as close to the real thing as the limitations of a computer-game allow. This is what the GWX Team have provided and what, I believe, has always been their stated aim; and they've done it superbly.

Others want to sail around the oceans, making kills with lots of explosions and without too much of the math and uncertainty a realistic simulation entails. They want to find targets ( relatively easily ) fire torpedoes ( or their deck gun ) with a fair certainty of a hit; see and hear big explosions ( we all love pyrotechnics ) and earn lots of renown.

Both are perfectly acceptable ways of playing the game. The heart of this Community is the broad spectrum of playing styles and the mods they give rise to. Thanks to that we can all modify SH3 to give us the playing experience which most suits us, from hardcore realism to almost arcade-style submarine warfare and everything in between. It's entirely up to each of us.

What we should not do, I believe, is condemn a modder - or team - for not delivering precisely what we want from the game. The GWX Team have delivered an astonishing piece of work - but designed to meet their objectives and to fulfil their ambitions for and vision of SH3.

Generously, they decided to share the fruits of their massive labours with the rest of us, but unfortunately, some players, who do not find their preferred style of play is supported by the GWX concept, immediately start to complain and talk about "bugs," "glitches" and omissions.

The message is simple. If GWX2 doesn't deliver the kind of gaming experience you want from SH3 - leave it alone, or, if you wish, modify it yourself so that it does suit you better. I'm sure the GWX Team won't mind if you modify their work, but what they can - and do - object to is criticism based on gaming needs and expectations which aren't and never were part of their vision.

No one should ever carp, criticise or condemn people for achieving what they set out to achieve.

Thank you for this!. I began to worry about the TAIL. I even posted a little good-humoured billy do.
For those of you who are finding things difficult without the tail....punch into your search engines "images" either...."Marine Compasses or Boxing the Compass".....you can take your pick from there. You can then "copy/paste" into Word etc. and print off a card giving you 16 points of the compass which will cover all the courses of all contacts in GWX 2. For your own heading......well youve got a compass in-game.
E.G. Contact course NNW =337 degrees approx. My heading can be 247 degrees (337-90) or 067 (337+90), depending on wether I am N or S of the contact. The closer you get to your quarry so tweaking your boats course to give you that 90 AOB is a doddle.
It really makes for a super game!

[danlisa]

@ Von Manteuffel

That is a very good synopsys of the issue at hand. Thank you for the very well thought out post.:up:

@ Dustyboats

Damn. You've just confused me with all the math.:lol: I guess I maybe lucky in that I can calculate these things in my head without actually consciously trying to. I can usually plot my interception course by just judging the angles which present themselves on the plots. I suppose this comes from years of playing Snooker/Pool, hmm I guess that would be geometry:hmm:. However, from your post I can certainly see how this new addition can be quite daunting for some players.

[Canovaro]

What most of us do I think is extending the tail from the bow of the contact and so drawing it's track. Then plot a course so you can ambush it on its course.
No tail makes it harder as you will need a second contact mark to draw the track more precise.


Could be more fun. I will definately try it without tail.

[melnibonian]

To tell the truth I'm one of the GWX Testers that voiced my disagreement with the lack of tails in the ships and subs. Nevertheless I agree with Dan's post as this new development in GWX gives the oportunity to players to be less lazy and try to get a second contact to plot an intercept course. As it was stated above the whole idea of GWX was to create a relativelly realistic experience while still keeping the gaming aspect of the game. My suggestion to everyone is to give the new contact icons a chance. Try to play for a while as the game was initially intended before changing to a more "simplistic" version. So far during the Beta Testing and my private gaming in WaW had no problems plotting intercept courses and finding targets without the tails and at the same time I had absolutelly no reduction of the pleasure the game gave me. In the future I will probably change back to the tailed version of the contact icons but I have to say that playing without them made me a better player and gave me the chance to learn how to plot better and more accurate intercept courses.

So until the tailed version is ready ience and have a Very Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year :up:

[Carotio]

data\Menu\Gui\ContLine.tga seems chanced since GWX1.03 ;)

[i_b_spectre]

While the tails were handy in making a quick estimate of the target's course, I find it only slightly more involving to use the marking tool to tag the position of the initial contact, then sample it over several minutes, placing marks at each interval. Then I use the ruler tool to connect the dots...er, marks to derive their course. My first GWX was 1.03 and that was back in September, so I am certainly not a very knowledgeable or experienced player, but this method works for me.

Having come from the flight sim community, scalability is a big deal there. To be successful, it must be able to appeal to the novice and seasoned veteran alike. GWX has not removed this, but it has constricted the parameters somewhat. You can still set whatever level of realism you prefer, but GWX is not the vanilla SH3 nor should we wish it to be. It might have appealed to the masses if the tails on targets were an option. I fly with target icons off, but many people refuse to play that way. I prefer the immersion of having the cockpit "on", others prefer the "wonder woman view". The game lets us have it both ways. The IL-2 series I played for years is hard coded and remained basically tamper-proof for a long time. The downside is, aside from skins and mission builders, there are no modders like we see with SH3. The biggest difference with IL-2 is the developer supported expansions and improvements throughout the life of the series whereas SH3 would not be where it is today were it not for the modding community. Good on all o'you.

[jimmie]

Folks, try to play with map off. Tails don't matter really. The navigator couldn't update a dozen ship on the map. Sound guy couldn't report a dozen contact at a time.

No-map update gives you much more fun and accomplishment, really ;)

[HEMISENT]

The message is simple. If GWX2 doesn't deliver the kind of gaming experience you want from SH3 - leave it alone, or, if you wish, modify it yourself so that it does suit you better. I'm sure the GWX Team won't mind if you modify their work, but what they can - and do - object to is criticism based on gaming needs and expectations which aren't and never were part of their vision. No one should ever carp, criticise or condemn people for achieving what they set out to achieve.

You couldn't have said it any better than this. :up:

[Hakahura]

Congratulatons to the GWX team on their sucessful launch of 2.0.

Like others posting here on this thread, I miss the grey tails. C'est la vie, you can't please all the people all the time. The GWX team have modified SH3 as they saw fit and have done it well.

This is not meant as an afront to the GWX team or in anyway to demean their efforts. However I have found that if you insert the "contline tga" file from data/menu/gui GWX 1.03 the tails reappear in GWX 2.0. I have used this on 2 patrols so far with no apparent problems. I have certainly not conducted extensive testing and by no means encountered all the new units in GWX 2.0.

Should anyone else care to try this I would strongly recommend you backup you GWX 2.0 contline tga file before replacing it.

This file is solely the work of the GWX team and is extracted directly from GWX 1.03.

http://files.filefront.com/GWX20+GreyTails7z/;9279474;/fileinfo.html

Once again I wish no insult to any member of the GWX team, only to permit people to play SH3 the way they choose.

[Gezoes]

Smashing, I'll give it a try as well :up:

[vodkavera]

Congratulatons to the GWX team on their sucessful launch of 2.0.

Like others posting here on this thread, I miss the grey tails. C'est la vie, you can't please all the people all the time. The GWX team have modified SH3 as they saw fit and have done it well.

This is not meant as an afront to the GWX team or in anyway to demean their efforts. However I have found that if you insert the "contline tga" file from data/menu/gui GWX 1.03 the tails reappear in GWX 2.0. I have used this on 2 patrols so far with no apparent problems. I have certainly not conducted extensive testing and by no means encountered all the new units in GWX 2.0.

Should anyone else care to try this I would strongly recommend you backup you GWX 2.0 contline tga file before replacing it.

This file is solely the work of the GWX team and is extracted directly from GWX 1.03.

http://files.filefront.com/GWX20+GreyTails7z/;9279474;/fileinfo.html

Once again I wish no insult to any member of the GWX team, only to permit people to play SH3 the way they choose.

Amen to that!

That was not the intention with this thread to insult any of the great people in the dev.team. I just thought that some would like the tail back and since it worked for me.
I have now played 5 patrols with color and tails and so far it works just fine.
No problem yet with the new ships.
Let you all know if I encounter any problems.

And those of you that like to play it like it should be played. You do that.
No worries.


/VV

[Jimbuna]

You guy's have got to believe that you are actually in a U-Boat & at war, or we have not done our job.


And therein, IMHO, lies the kernel of the dissent and unpleasantness which so unfortunately accompanied the release of GWX2: Some players want an immersive experience which is as close to the real thing as the limitations of a computer-game allow. This is what the GWX Team have provided and what, I believe, has always been their stated aim; and they've done it superbly.

Others want to sail around the oceans, making kills with lots of explosions and without too much of the math and uncertainty a realistic simulation entails. They want to find targets ( relatively easily ) fire torpedoes ( or their deck gun ) with a fair certainty of a hit; see and hear big explosions ( we all love pyrotechnics ) and earn lots of renown.

Both are perfectly acceptable ways of playing the game. The heart of this Community is the broad spectrum of playing styles and the mods they give rise to. Thanks to that we can all modify SH3 to give us the playing experience which most suits us, from hardcore realism to almost arcade-style submarine warfare and everything in between. It's entirely up to each of us.

What we should not do, I believe, is condemn a modder - or team - for not delivering precisely what we want from the game. The GWX Team have delivered an astonishing piece of work - but designed to meet their objectives and to fulfil their ambitions for and vision of SH3.

Generously, they decided to share the fruits of their massive labours with the rest of us, but unfortunately, some players, who do not find their preferred style of play is supported by the GWX concept, immediately start to complain and talk about "bugs," "glitches" and omissions.

The message is simple. If GWX2 doesn't deliver the kind of gaming experience you want from SH3 - leave it alone, or, if you wish, modify it yourself so that it does suit you better. I'm sure the GWX Team won't mind if you modify their work, but what they can - and do - object to is criticism based on gaming needs and expectations which aren't and never were part of their vision.

No one should ever carp, criticise or condemn people for achieving what they set out to achieve.

Very well put sir.....IMO, an excellent, detailed and informative post http://www.satellites.co.uk/satellite/images/smilies/palmas2maosfn8.gif

http://www.itsnature.org/forums/images/smilies/wolfmoon.jpg


http://i224.photobucket.com/albums/dd320/pasquarade/wolf-38.gif

[bigboywooly]

IIRC Hakahura that is indeed the file that needs to be changed :up:

[Realplayer]

I think it is more realistic WITH the tail. The contacts on the map simulate a radio report from another u-boat. These other u-boats have for sure in reality radioed the course of the contact very precisely and not only "north west" or something like that. They watched the convoy for hours and days and radioed other u-boats to build a wolfpack. After many hours of watching a convoy, they knew the course exactly.

GWX-Devs should not be offended, i am sure your mod is great, but i prefer contacts with tails. Should not be a problem to anybody. I would like to play GWX 2 with tails. Is this possible? Would be wonderful!

OK, "data\Menu\Gui\ContLine.tga seems chanced since GWX1.03" This solves the problem? I will try it, thank you.

[Hakahura]

Thanks Bigboywooly.

Thanks Carotio for the original pointer.

Three patrols completed now with no apparent problems.

[WeeBubba]

who wants the big hollywood-style explosions anyhow?

this is a sim.

go play unreal tournament or something like that.

and losing the tails was a great move.

[Carotio]

Thanks Carotio for the original pointer.


You're welcome!

It all comes to personal taste of gameplay, so for those who want realism, I think it was a fine move and solution to solve it.
I just thought I would tell, since I know "a little" about SH3 file structure, how to remove it for casual players. So let's accept each others differences.

Happy hunting :up:

[Paajtor]

data\Menu\Gui\ContLine.tga seems chanced since GWX1.03 ;) That's indeed the file that I keep in backup, from GWX1.03 that is still on my machine. :D
I didn't have the chance to try GWX2.0 (not even to download it), because I'm to busy with my job (postman LOL...need to say more?:()1:)...but I will try the new map-style first, and eventually use the backup I made.
Anyway, I'm used to taking multiple readings on contacts, from sonar- or radar-lines, so I guess the new map contacts are just my cup of tea.:up:

[poor sailor]

@Von Manteuffel
Very good post.:up:

@Realplayer
I think totally different then You, but of course this is only my personal thought and way of playing this game, I think that's the more realistic to play with "No map update" option checked. In that case you will get the contacts on map as radio reports from other U-boats, but only that contacts will be visible on map, any other contacts are not visible on map until you discover the target (visual or by hydrophone) and when you mark the contact and take measures on your navmap, that's realistic! Of course they had a radio reports but they didn't had a GPS, yes I know it's only a game but as soon you try to feel like real U-boat captain, you will feel better with this game, trust me.:arrgh!: Anyway, if you want to play with tails ON no problem but just want to say that with that possibility it's not more realistic, it's more easier.;) Option included in GWX v.2.0 for loosing tails is a great compromise for new players and players which played before but the option "No map update" is too hard for them. It's add a realism in fine and well balanced level.:up:

[Realplayer]

@ poor sailor: I play without map update, because it's more realistic, i agree with you. So only the radio reports from other u-boats appear as contacts on the map.

But: These other u-boats did in reality report the exact course of the convoy. You're right, they had no GPS, so they maybe did not know the position of the contact exactly. But what they knew exactly, because all you need is a periscope, a compass and time, is the exact course of the contact. So the tail is more realistic.

To simulate the missing GPS it would be necessary to make the position of the contacts inaccurate, but this is probably hardcoded.

@ Carotio, Hakahura: Thank you!

[Carotio]

because I'm to busy with my job (postman LOL...need to say more?

So just curious: do you bring many letters to Santa Claus into the post office? :lol:

Could you bring one for me too?

Dear Santa,

for Christmas I want this car!
http://www.rinspeed.com/pages/content/frames_e.htm
(concept cars -> Rinspeed sQuba)
Thank you

PS: :lol:

[poor sailor]

@ poor sailor: I play without map update, because it's more realistic, i agree with you. So only the radio reports from other u-boats appear as contacts on the map.

But: These other u-boats did in reality report the exact course of the convoy. You're right, they had no GPS, so they maybe did not know the position of the contact exactly. But what they knew exactly, because all you need is a periscope, a compass and time, is the exact course of the contact. So the tail is more realistic.

To simulate the missing GPS it would be necessary to make the position of the contacts inaccurate, but this is probably hardcoded.

Interesting, I didn't think about It in that way because I use manual targeting and when intercepting target for example I use information which I have for contact, for example heading NW (north-west) with new big compass I easy may find that It's 315 degrees and other side is 135 and I know the course. Maybe too much calculate but I like that.:) In that way I feel like I'm real captain.:arrgh!: But anyway and your story have a sense.;)

[KeptinCranky]

because I'm to busy with my job (postman LOL...need to say more?
So just curious: do you bring many letters to Santa Claus into the post office? :lol:

Could you bring one for me too?

Dear Santa,

for Christmas I want this car!
http://www.rinspeed.com/pages/content/frames_e.htm
(concept cars -> Rinspeed sQuba)
Thank you

PS: :lol:

:roll:...... :o :doh: :stare: being a part time postman in the same country let me give you some advice about postmen, :D

Listen well, a postman does NOT, EVER, joke about Christmas, Christmas is NOT funny, :x Christmas, to a postman, is HELL, getting up extra early, in cold weather, with double the usual load, and double-extra-thick junkmail, and double the people complaining about letters delivered wrong...

I don't mind the Holiday itself but the 3 weeks before that inspired my nickname, and I only work saturdays, I have it easy, imagine what fulltime postmen must feel....

<off topic rant over :oops: sorry about that>

As to tails, I'm over those, made intercepts too easy, I always managed to get into perfect 90 degree firing position with single ships.
It's just proper application of the time/knot charts, plotting a course setting the proper speed and BOOM 1 eel one sinking...

I like the uncertainty of having to draw the course yourself and maybe missing a juicy intercept because of your own ineptness or bad estimation

[NealT]

Not trying to hijack this thread or anything...

BUT...

It IS the Christmas season...and I DO work for the Post Office...so I can say for certainty...

NO car for you being delivered. It is in excess of the 70 lbs package limitation we have. Sorry...

NealT

[HEMISENT]

Listen well, a postman does NOT, EVER, joke about Christmas, Christmas is NOT funny, :x Christmas, to a postman, is HELL, getting up extra early, in cold weather, with double the usual load, and double-extra-thick junkmail, and double the people complaining about letters delivered wrong...


And by the time the postman does get the mail to the house he finds out that half the mailboxes on his route were ripped out of the ground and destroyed by the moron driving the snowplow the night before. So now he's got to lug all that crap back to the post office...or...

Better idea! :up: -stuff it all in the trunk of someone else's car and forget about it. There'll be lots more tomorrow. At least that's how it works here in Illinois.

[KeptinCranky]

heheh, thankfully I'm a bit more conscientious than that, and I've never seen enough snow here for snowplows to be necessary :D

and if there was that much snow here, I wouldn't work at all...nor would anyone else if they could avoid it.

Heck the trains stop running when there's an inch of snow...
<I'm picturing a Norwegian going :rotfl: here>

[Paajtor]

for Christmas I want this car!
http://www.rinspeed.com/pages/content/frames_e.htm
(concept cars -> Rinspeed sQuba)
Thank you

:stare:That sub has no roof....I don't trust a sub with no roof.:arrgh!:

Kpt.Cranky, don't bother to much. ;)
Xmas is a busy time for many people, including postmen.
In 1week, all will be forgotten.

[KeptinCranky]

Heheh, yes, until next year...:D but for now there's ships to sink...

busy busy busy :D