[REQ] Pre JANAC Tonnage

[clayton]

Wouldn't it make more sense to list wartime tonnage results, as opposed to JANAC tonnage when viewing the list of top aces? I believe that JANAC has been discounted by most people anyway.

It also seems that the award system might be tied to the JANAC tonnage, as it seems quite easy to get high awards like the MOH with 40,000+ tonnage.

Due to 60+ years of hindsight, it's quite easy to rack up scores that high, but listing actual wartime tonnage might make those high awards a little harder to get. Not only that, but may keep you from the top of the list with only one or two patrols under your belt...

I think Blair's book compares wartime claims to JANAC claims.

Thoughts?

[McHibbins]

/signed :up:

[tedhealy]

So have inflated war time claims used on the leaderboard, but the tonnage we actually sink will be lesser JANAC 'esque tonnage?

Seems like you'd have to do one or the other for both and then you wouldn't really be changing much with regards to the leaderboard as they'd both be inflated then.

If worried about medals, can the requirements for earning them be adjusted on their own like they were in SH3?

My answer was just to go through and reduce the tonnage awarded for most merchants. I cut a lot of of the small and mediums in half but left most of the larger ones as they were.

[clayton]

Though I agree with your inflated comment, i.e. Davenport's claims without actually seeing the ships sink, one finds numerous examples of crewmembers watching a ship go down, yet JANAC discounts it. Maybe reducing tonnage might be a happy medium, but if one is looking for realism with the game, those 'inflated' claims would be what was published during the War regardless. Not only that, awards would be 'compared' against those inflated claims also.

Just my 2 cents...

[clayton]

Rereading your post Ted, I forgot that another piece of the puzzle was the inaccurate estimation of ship tonnage sunk.

Rather confusing no matter how you look at it!

[tedhealy]

I think I agree that the leaderboard should be based on war time claims....but the sticky question is what should your own claims be based on? Would the ship tonnage need to be altered?

When I sink a ship, should there be a 'fudge estimation' factor built in? It sort of could be done in that the displacement value has a random value that can alter the displacement up or down with an upper and lower limit. So you might have a ship listed as 2000 tons in the recog. manual, but you actually get credit for a ship anywhere from 1500 to 2500 tons anytime you sink one.

Or maybe I'm overcomplicating something.

While I don't 100% trust JANAC numbers, I don't put my faith in war time claims either.

[clayton]

I think I agree that the leaderboard should be based on war time claims....but the sticky question is what should your own claims be based on? Would the ship tonnage need to be altered?

When I sink a ship, should there be a 'fudge estimation' factor built in? It sort of could be done in that the displacement value has a random value that can alter the displacement up or down with an upper and lower limit. So you might have a ship listed as 2000 tons in the recog. manual, but you actually get credit for a ship anywhere from 1500 to 2500 tons anytime you sink one.

Or maybe I'm overcomplicating something.

While I don't 100% trust JANAC numbers, I don't put my faith in war time claims either.


I like the idea of random displacement values. I thought that was implemented in the game. If not, it should be.

Looking at the Leaderboard and seeing 50,000 or 60,000 for the top aces has never sit well with me, especially when I can best it in one or two patrols.

[FIREWALL]

Randomized tonnage :hmm:

Gee wouldn't it be nice to have a SHC4 ;)

[tedhealy]

I like the idea of random displacement values. I thought that was implemented in the game. If not, it should be.

Looking at the Leaderboard and seeing 50,000 or 60,000 for the top aces has never sit well with me, especially when I can best it in one or two patrols.
Yeah, it's implemented. In my own personal random tonnage mod, I use it.

It's in the data/sea folder in the cfg for each ship.

[Unit]
ClassName=KSQ
3DModelFileName=data/Sea/NKSCS_Taihosan/NKSCS_Taihosan
UnitType=102
MaxSpeed=13
Length=80.77
Width=11.58
Mast=24
Draft=5.48
Displacement=610
DisplacementVariation=70 ********* This is the value**********
RenownAwarded=70
CrewComplement=16
SurvivalRate=70
SurvivalPercentage=50


So when you sink that ship, you could get anywhere from 540 tons to 680 tons.

edit: Was right the first time, tonnage range would be 540-680 in this example.

[clayton]

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=113585

It seems that this was discussed some time ago.

[tedhealy]

Nice find, I'll definitely install that and see how the leaderboard plays out.

[Mav87th]

Displacement variation (called D.W. - Deadweight tonnage is the difference between light and loaded displacement measured in tons 2240 lbs and indicates the carrying capabilities of a vessel) is listed in the ONI manuals as well.

Gross tonnage in the ONI-208-J is the cubic capacity of a **** in "tons" of 100 cubic feet.

So why not simply grab it from there?

I have the 208-J if needed.

I have even made a 1.4 patch for my self (there are so many doing the same) that has the merchants lenght, wide, draft, displacement etc. listed according to the ONI value. Thats what the skippers used....thats what im using.

Example: http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=134767

Last image shows the ONI-209-J page for the MANSEI MARU with a listed Gross tonnage of 7.770 and a Deadweight tonnage of 12.136 tons