Realism- and gameplay-related hardcode fixes for SH3.EXE

[KarlKoch]

when you say that is less noticeable in gwx what exactly do you mean H.Sie ? becuase i have set my boat (a type viib at torpedo training mission) at PD for three days (72 hours) and depth was always 12m .
you confused me a little bit with this ''If the difference between the Uboats depth and the player-set-depth is bigger than a certain value, the diving tanks automatically begin to fill a little bit and thus compensate and so bring back the boat to the player-set-depth'' .in my install it doesn't move at all or do i have to follow a procedure(order some depth and then order to PD)in order to see this little possitive bouyancy that your tool is showing to you ?

bye

He is talking about oscillations in the range of milimeters. Therefore, it is not noticeable in GWX.

[h.sie]

@Makman, KK: No, I didn't mean oscillations. Because of the positive buoyancy, the boat goes up (above the player-set-depth) very slowly for some centimeters, until the moment, the difference between current depth and player-set-depth gets bigger then a certain value. Then, diving tanks automatically begin to fill very slowly, what compensates the positive buoyancy effect, the boat lies stable at a certain depth some centimeters away from player-set-septh. That can be seen as an inertial mechanical system with a high damping factor, thus no oscillations occur, the boat asymptotically converges to a final and constant depth, that differs a little bit from the player-set-depth. I can only notice that effect in my debugger, but not in-game.

[KarlKoch]

@Makman, KK: No, I didn't mean oscillations. Because of the positive buoyancy, the boat goes up (above the player-set-depth) very slowly for some centimeters, until the moment, the difference between current depth and player-set-depth gets bigger then a certain value. Then, diving tanks automatically begin to fill very slowly, what compensates the positive buoyancy effect, the boat lies stable at a certain depth some centimeters away from player-set-septh. That can be seen as an inertial mechanical system with a high damping factor, thus no oscillations occur, the boat asymptotically converges to a final and constant depth, that differs a little bit from the player-set-depth. I can only notice that effect in my debugger, but not in-game.

Sorry, i then misunderstood you. To me it sounded like some kind of oscillation within centimeters around the depth the player sets.

[h.sie]

when i talked about oscillations, I meant slow oszillations forced by program code in order to model LI depth-keeping problems. the boats depth does - fortunately - not oscillate by itself without external "force", e.g. caused by waves.

[makman94]

@Makman, KK: No, I didn't mean oscillations. Because of the positive buoyancy, the boat goes up (above the player-set-depth) very slowly for some centimeters, until the moment, the difference between current depth and player-set-depth gets bigger then a certain value. Then, diving tanks automatically begin to fill very slowly, what compensates the positive buoyancy effect, the boat lies stable at a certain depth some centimeters away from player-set-septh. That can be seen as an inertial mechanical system with a high damping factor, thus no oscillations occur, the boat asymptotically converges to a final and constant depth, that differs a little bit from the player-set-depth. I can only notice that effect in my debugger, but not in-game.

thank you for replying H.Sie ....all 'cleared' now !:up:

[h.sie]

Current work:


Include / adapt Stieblers U-Tankers Fix.



Little fix that randomly causes damage to the diesel-engines if on flank-speed for longer time-periods, maybe with some warnings "engines running hot, sir" or similar. Idea: LGN1.



More fuel comsumption for flank speed.


@Hitman: Thanks for your detailed description regardig buoyancy. Currently I still don't like buoyancy, but maybe later!

h.sie

[LGN1]

Great work, h.sie! I'm looking forward to testing the new version!

The idea with the diesel warning sounds very good. Maybe a good idea would be to have also always a small probability that a diesel breaks down (random damage) when running flank. In addition to this one might have a warning after two hours and an increasing probability for failure :hmmm: What do you think?

@the old Kaleuns: I think something similar was modeled in Aces of the Deep. Does anyone remember how it was done there?

Cheers, LGN1

[h.sie]

The next step in sh3.exe modding is manipulating the damage status and other system variables using pointers. That is very effective and opens new possibilities.

But for this I need help from some testers.

On my system all pointers work well, but I want to make sure they work under all circumstances and for ALL users (32/64 bit OS, different supermods, different Uboat types and so on).

How you can support my work with testing:

1) Download the following mod.

http://www.mediafire.com/?66397w8b7yagla7

(The mod contains an already patched sh3.exe (which is only useful for this test but useless for playing), some dll's as well as blank campaign files for fast game loading process and two menu.txt files for new messages).

2) Install this mod via JSGME. No patching necessary.
3) Start Sh3
4) Load a single mission or career and wait for some seconds.



After 10 Seconds the port diesel must be destroyed
After 20 Seconds the starbord diesel must be destroyed
After 30 Seconds the diesel supply must be completely emptied
After 40 Seconds the Hull must take medium damage
After 55 Seconds a message must be displayed.

That's all.

5) Please test with different Uboat types.
6) Please inform me, if the above events do not happen or an CTD occurs.

Thank you very much!
h.sie

[Salvadoreno]

Thought u were taking a break from this mod but good to hear you back HSIES!!!!

WHat about those of us who couldnt dl the patch? Because of the checksum error? I heard there would be a fix for that, is this true?

[h.sie]

@Salvadoreno: What version of sh3.exe do you have? Please send it to me, so I can see if I can support it in the future.

[Wolfstriked]

Hey H.sie,I have been diving deep into the uboat physics and have stumbled upon a problem with the dive performmance of the Uboats that maybe just maybe you can fix.I am not sure about this but I think that when the dive crash command is given in real life the planesmen do not instantly start turning the planes instead wait for the command from the Dive officer who controls the ballast.This is because if you instantly turn the diveplanes the uboat will nose down but since the ballast tanks are still filled with air the sub will just bob in place as happens in SH3.

This is bad since it slows the uboat down and thats the last thing you want.I would imagine a proper procedure is for the ballast tanks to reach a certain fill level where in the command is then given to rotate the diveplanes.This keeps the speed up and when the boat is ready to dive allows for smooth entry as much speed as can be taken along.

So I am asking if its possible to mod in a time delay of the command from when the ballast tanks start flooding to when the diveplanes start to turn?If a standard amount can be modded in we can then adjust dive speeds with the amount of bite the diveplanes have per boat....though a delay time independent for each boat would be optimal.

[PL_Cmd_Jacek]

May I send you my file too ? This is only version available in Poland.

@Salvadoreno: What version of sh3.exe do you have? Please send it to me, so I can see if I can support it in the future.

[h.sie]

@Wolfstriked: Didn't you find a solution to adjust times needed for diving???

@PL_Cmd_Jacek: Yes

[Salvadoreno]

@Salvadoreno: What version of sh3.exe do you have? Please send it to me, so I can see if I can support it in the future.


Im sorry i wasnt clear. Your patch works fine. Steiblers patch is the one with the checksum error.

[Wolfstriked]

@Wolfstriked: Didn't you find a solution to adjust times needed for diving???



Yes its the ballast speed.The problem is that the boats are lurching forward and slowing down due to diveplanes turning before the ballast has had time to fill.Makes for a funny looking dive sequenceas the boat slows down and then bobs around waiting for the tanks to fill.I have tried lowering the bite of the dive planes but they are already at 0.2 to 0.1 and when lowered it seems to affect the dive angle.I am pretty sure but I will test some more if they do indeed lower the dive angle.

[Wreford-Brown]

After 10 Seconds the port diesel must be destroyed
After 20 Seconds the starbord diesel must be destroyed
After 30 Seconds the diesel supply must be completely emptied
After 40 Seconds the Hull must take medium damage
After 55 Seconds a message must be displayed.
h.sie,

Installed and tested in 1939 in a type VIIB:
10s - port diesel destroyes
20s - starboard diesel
30s - diesel gone
40s - 60% damage taken
55s - blank yellow message box pops up with 'OK' symbol at the bottom to clear it. No message received in radio room and no text in the message box.

XP SP 3, 3GB P4, 3GB RAM, NVIDIA GeForce 9800 GT (if this rig will run it it virtually anyone can!).
Running a heavily modded GWX with no conflicts in the mod list except your own mods.

I don't know what you've done, but it seems to be working! :up:

[h.sie]

@WB: Great to see it works for you. Thank you very much. Your help is very much appreciated. The empty message box isn't that important. I programmed a little "Thank you" text for that box, but that problem can easily be solved (problem with empty entries in en_menu.txt).

What I did? I manipulated the damage and diesel fuel counter and the hitpoints of the boat. This is needed for the forthcoming mods:

1) Stieblers U-Tankers mod
2) Random diesel damage when flank speed for a long time.

[h.sie]

@PL_CMD_Jacek: You have the starforce contaminated sh3.exe. There is an easy way to get the starforce-removed sh3.exe. Can be found somewhere in the WWW. Can anyone please explain how to get that file, since I don't know.

@Wolfstriked: If diving times can be adjusted using your method there is no need for a hardcode-fix, since from a gameplay perspective all is fine. If only the diving-procedure doesn't look nice - this is eye-candy in my opinion.

[SquareSteelBar]

@ PL_Cmd_Jacek


@PL_CMD_Jacek: You have the starforce contaminated sh3.exe. There is an easy way to get the starforce-removed sh3.exe. Can be found somewhere in the WWW. Can anyone please explain how to get that file, since I don't know...Read this:

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=160118

[makman94]

good morning H.Sie,

made some tests with your testing .exe and here is my results :



After 10 Seconds the port diesel must be destroyed ( ok)
After 20 Seconds the starbord diesel must be destroyed (ok)
After 30 Seconds the diesel supply must be completely emptied
After 40 Seconds the Hull must take medium damage (ok)
After 55 Seconds a message must be displayed. (ok)

i don't know what you mean at step 3 . if you mean the crew left in the room then in NONE of the boats i tested saw it get emptied after 30 secs

the .exe was tested with type iia(1940),iid(1940),viib(1940),viic(1940),ixb(1940 ),ixc(1940),ixd2 and xxi

in all the diesel room were left with two men after the port diesel destruction(between step 1 and 2) till the end of test.
EXEPT at ixb(1940) and ixc(1940) in which the room was completely emptied by crew after the port diesel destruction

ps: win7 64-bit

[KarlKoch]

- Hydrophones useless when diesels are working.


I installed your exe-fixes (and the JSGME-part, too), but when i command the hydrophone officer to follow a target when submerged and then surface the boat, he will continue reporting the target. Is that known? Or did i install something wrong?

[h.sie]

@Makman94: Thanks very much for testing. No, don't look at the crew. I meant the diesel supply (the fuel) must be empty. The boat shouldn't be able to use their diesels. No fuel. The fuel gauge should show empty fuel tanks.

@KarlKoch: I'll never seen that behaviour, but I'll look into that !!! Thanks for reporting! What patch version did you use? V15E3 or V15F2 or the Pointer-Test we are currently talking about?

h.sie

[makman94]

@Makman94: Thanks very much for testing. No, don't look at the crew. I meant the diesel supply (the fuel) must be empty. The boat shouldn't be able to use their diesels. No fuel. The fuel gauge should show empty fuel tanks.

.....

oh...ok ...i will report back

[KarlKoch]

@Makman94: Thanks very much for testing. No, don't look at the crew. I meant the diesel supply (the fuel) must be empty. The boat shouldn't be able to use their diesels. No fuel. The fuel gauge should show empty fuel tanks.

@KarlKoch: I'll never seen that behaviour, but I'll look into that !!! Thanks for reporting! What patch version did you use? V15E3 or V15F2 or the Pointer-Test we are currently talking about?

h.sie
Actually, its V15E3. I try to test the pointer-test later today.
Oh, and the patch itself is working for me, because the IWO is moving to the bridge automatically, great work! :)

[makman94]

@Makman94: Thanks very much for testing. No, don't look at the crew. I meant the diesel supply (the fuel) must be empty. The boat shouldn't be able to use their diesels. No fuel. The fuel gauge should show empty fuel tanks.

h.sie

ok H.Sie ! everything is 'working' as you described

[h.sie]

@Makman: Thanks for helping! Much appreciated

[NGT]

Hello h.sie

I confirm from my side, that everything go like you expected.

Test with NYGM heavily moded.

But I can see the text in the little window in the end: "Thanks for testing. h.sie"

I would like to mention, obviously you know already, that the en_menu.txt is different for every supermod, so the other testers must remember that.

Thanks for your job, again. :salute:

[PL_Cmd_Jacek]

Hi H.sie.

I tested your patch (h.sie Pointer Test) and on all boats except of IIA and IID everything was ok.

On IIA and IID, instead of medium damage I received a message "uboat lost". :hmmm:

Checked on pure SH3 and with SH3+Uboat Total War.

I have also a question regarding your periscope fix. When the boat is at above 7kts speed, it's automatically going down - good. However, it is possible also to force lowering when the sub for example below 30 m of depth ? It would prevent against searching for DDs coming to attack.


Once again thank for help with SH3.exe, now I can patch the file :D.

@SquareSteelBar: Thank you for the link :yeah:

[h.sie]

@NGT: Thanks, mate, for your help. Without the help of you and the other testers, I could not guaranttee that the forthcoming mods will run under all conditions. yes, the empty message is a problem regarded to menu.txt, but the Pointer-Test contained such a file.

@PL_CMD_Jacek: Nice to read that you can finally use the patches. Hope you like it. Tell your polish kaleuns about the no-starforce version.

Regarding periscopes: Have you tried to reduce water clarity using SH3-Commander. This should have the same effect. You should not see far under water....

Regarding "Uboat lost": That's okay, I have the same in stock sh3. all works as desired.

[h.sie]

@KarlKoch: I tried to reproduce your reported bug, but some time after diesels have switched on (and hydrophones off), I get the message "Contact lost" - even if the enemy is very close.

[Wolfstriked]

@Wolfstriked: If diving times can be adjusted using your method there is no need for a hardcode-fix, since from a gameplay perspective all is fine. If only the diving-procedure doesn't look nice - this is eye-candy in my opinion.

Copy that....maybe on your rapidly growing future list.:O:

[zj1985]

I patch the exe,and start the game but it says 0xc0000005,the game can't start.I ues the Silent Hunter 3 Update 1.4b fix-exe instead,it works fine.I don't know why.ps:the fix-exe is 2.22 MB and after patch is 1.28 MB.

[KarlKoch]

@KarlKoch: I tried to reproduce your reported bug, but some time after diesels have switched on (and hydrophones off), I get the message "Contact lost" - even if the enemy is very close.
Okay, maybe i didn't wait long enough, will test again.

edit: I expected it to lose contact as soon as the diesels were running. So maybe i have to wait a bit longer.

[h.sie]

@zj1985: Reduction to 1,28MB is as desired. Some unecessary memory filled with zeroes are removed.

You must also install the "Supplement to V15xxz" mod via JSGME.

[KarlKoch]

@KarlKoch: I tried to reproduce your reported bug, but some time after diesels have switched on (and hydrophones off), I get the message "Contact lost" - even if the enemy is very close.
Hm, i just checked again, and this is not the behaviour i experience.

So, let me tell you exactly what i am talking about, maybe its just a misunderstanding.

I load the torpedo-practice mission, order my sonarofficer to follow the next contact. He will report the bearing to the next contact. After a few seconds, i order "ahead slow" and surface the boat. IWO moves to the bridge, everything fine. But my sonarofficer will continue to report the bearing to the next contact. I then ordered "all stop" and again "ahead slow" (always surfaced), but he continued to report the bearing. He stopped reporting it at a bearing of about 200 degrees, because of the dead angle behind the sub.

Running the game on Windows7 64-bit, if that is of any help.

Of course, if i switch my sonarofficer to normal mode, he will not report the contact when at surface, even if i order him to do so. But this is stock behaviour, at least as far as i know.

[h.sie]

@KK: thanks again. I'll try to reproduce that situation this evening.

[KarlKoch]

I would be very thankful for any other users, that are using this mod, to write down if they can verify or disprove my observation. :)

[NGT]

I tested your patch (h.sie Pointer Test) and on all boats except of IIA and IID everything was ok.

On IIA and IID, instead of medium damage I received a message "uboat lost". :hmmm:

Checked on pure SH3 and with SH3+Uboat Total War.



Hello captains,

I did again the test, but, I am not able to reproduce the above problem with IIA and IID.

For me, like for Makman, IIA and IID works fine, as expected. [Windows 7 64bits, NYGM moded]

@h.sie: my English is not so good and you misunderstanding me: I am able, I can see perfectly the message, the entire message, not only the OK. But I can not see how much damage the U-boot takes, because there is not "hull integrity" value (because of your en_menu.txt, entry 589 is empty, like in GWX)

Thanks again :salute:

[h.sie]

@NGT: Ok, now I understand.

It does not matter weather a boat is immediately destroyed or only damaged. It is only important that the hitpoints are decreased.

The test seems to be sucessful so far, since no critical problems have been reported. All minor problems reported are not caused by wrong pointers.

Stiebler and me are currently trying to improve his U-Tankers mod.

And with the pointers for diesel damage it will not be a big problem to program random diesel engine damages when on flank speed for longer times, maybe with some warning messages "diesels running hot" or similar.

@LGN1: With "engines running hot" I did not mean a sound output but a console message.

[h.sie]

@KarlKoch: I was able to reproduce the problem and I'm slightly optimistic to fix it in the next patch version. Thanks for reporting!

[Buck_O]

hi all

I'm going to give VF15F2 a try but I'm slightly confused as to the install of the supplement VF15 via JSGME. I'm fearful of corrupting my install. I do use NYGM and MaGui F. , both give conflict errors with the "menu.txt" files.

Hsie says in the instructions to

1) Copy the last lines of the files, beginning with "h.sie sh3.exe patch" (entries 4815 to 4827) from these files into the files of your GUI and
2) Delete these two files from the Supplement mod and
3) Activate the Supplement mod (without any file conflicts).

So my question is ...
1. Do i perform this task on the last mod I enable before enabling supplement VF15, that has a these two files in it? in my case it would be the MaGui_F_FIX_for_NYGM3.4?
2. Or do I perform this task on all files im my Mods folder that have these files in it?

I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around all this, forgive me...

[h.sie]

Hi Buck_O:

It is of course sufficient to append these message lines to the appropriate files of the LAST mod you installed before the supplement, since JSGME always completely overwrites files of earlier mods with the files of later mods. So only the files of the last mod are active.

I don't like this fiddling around with files, but I see no other chance to add new messages to the game.

h.sie

[irish1958]

hi all

I'm going to give VF15F2 a try but I'm slightly confused as to the install of the supplement VF15 via JSGME. I'm fearful of corrupting my install. I do use NYGM and MaGui F. , both give conflict errors with the "menu.txt" files.

Hsie says in the instructions to

1) Copy the last lines of the files, beginning with "h.sie sh3.exe patch" (entries 4815 to 4827) from these files into the files of your GUI and
2) Delete these two files from the Supplement mod and
3) Activate the Supplement mod (without any file conflicts).

So my question is ...
1. Do i perform this task on the last mod I enable before enabling supplement VF15, that has a these two files in it? in my case it would be the MaGui_F_FIX_for_NYGM3.4?
2. Or do I perform this task on all files im my Mods folder that have these files in it?

I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around all this, forgive me...

When you have a conflict in a file, you can isolate the files and compare them. Some times the difference is minor and you can merge the files for your install. There are several files which frequently will have conflicts, especially the menu files and the config files.
By using WinMerge, (http://winmerge.org/) you can see where the conflict is and ofter merge the files to suit your install
The camera.dat file is often in conflict but it is almost impossible to merge these into a new file (using different editors).
When I have the new merged file, I usually make a JSGME structure mod and install it last, leaving the conflicted files intact in the original mods.

[h.sie]

@Hitman: Currently working on the bouyancy mod. Positive bouyancy works, but needs some parameter fine-adjustment.

http://img836.imageshack.us/img836/4660/clipboard01clp.jpghttp://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/41/clipboard01vqk.jpg/http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/41/clipboard01vqk.jpg/http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/%3Ca%20target=%27_blank%27%20title=%27ImageShack%2 0-%20Image%20And%20Video%20Hosting%27%20href=%27http ://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/41/clipboard01vqk.jpg/%27%3E%3Cimg%20src=%27http://img41.imageshack.us/img41/1782/clipboard01vqk.jpg%27%20border=%270%27/%3E%3C/a%3E%20%20Uploaded%20with%20%3Ca%20target=%27_blan k%27%20href=%27http://imageshack.us%27%3EImageShack.us%3C/a%3E

[Magic1111]

@Hitman: Currently working on the bouyancy mod. Positive bouyancy works, but needs some parameter fine-adjustment.

http://img836.imageshack.us/img836/4660/clipboard01clp.jpghttp://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/41/clipboard01vqk.jpg/http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/41/clipboard01vqk.jpg/http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/%3Ca%20target=%27_blank%27%20title=%27ImageShack%2 0-%20Image%20And%20Video%20Hosting%27%20href=%27http ://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/41/clipboard01vqk.jpg/%27%3E%3Cimg%20src=%27http://img41.imageshack.us/img41/1782/clipboard01vqk.jpg%27%20border=%270%27/%3E%3C/a%3E%20%20Uploaded%20with%20%3Ca%20target=%27_blan k%27%20href=%27http://imageshack.us%27%3EImageShack.us%3C/a%3E

:haha::haha::rotfl2::haha::haha: ---------> :up:

[irish1958]

:haha::haha::rotfl2::haha::haha: ---------> :up:
Hitman sometimes overdoes it a bit:D

[Buck_O]

Hi Buck_O:

It is of course sufficient to append these message lines to the appropriate files of the LAST mod you installed before the supplement, since JSGME always completely overwrites files of earlier mods with the files of later mods. So only the files of the last mod are active.

I don't like this fiddling around with files, but I see no other chance to add new messages to the game.

h.sie

Thanks Hsie & Irish, I understand now

[Hitman]

@Hitman: Currently working on the bouyancy mod. Positive bouyancy works, but needs some parameter fine-adjustment.

OMG the destroyers will need to attack us now with their AA guns :har:

BEEERRNNNAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRDDDDDD!!! Keep your fingers away from the buoyancy tank controls :arrgh!:

[Fish In The Water]

http://img836.imageshack.us/img836/4660/clipboard01clp.jpghttp://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/41/clipboard01vqk.jpg/http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/41/clipboard01vqk.jpg/http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/%3Ca%20target=%27_blank%27%20title=%27ImageShack%2 0-%20Image%20And%20Video%20Hosting%27%20href=%27http ://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/41/clipboard01vqk.jpg/%27%3E%3Cimg%20src=%27http://img41.imageshack.us/img41/1782/clipboard01vqk.jpg%27%20border=%270%27/%3E%3C/a%3E%20%20Uploaded%20with%20%3Ca%20target=%27_blan k%27%20href=%27http://imageshack.us%27%3EImageShack.us%3C/a%3E

New secret weapon? :haha:

Hide out in the open, they spend so much time listening below they'll never look up! :D

[frau kaleun]

:rotfl2:

Captain's Log: "In hindsight, giving the crew Red Bull instead of coffee was probably a bad idea..."

[OberstDanjeje]

@KarlKoch: I was able to reproduce the problem and I'm slightly optimistic to fix it in the next patch version. Thanks for reporting!

I think this is a stock bug.
I have it too with a vanilla GWX.

h.sie, thanks for your hard work, it's a great mod!!!

[h.sie]

@OD: Thanks for kind words. Have fun with the patch. You are correct: It's a stock sh3 bug, that becomes more visible with my hydrofones mod. But I'll fix that in the next patch version. Easy job.

@REST: No paintshop was used in the pic above. I only changed the Uboats Z-position. Unfortunately (or, let's better say fortunetely) they didn't know about that trick during the war.

[Hitman]

Captain's Log: "In hindsight, giving the crew Red Bull instead of coffee was probably a bad idea..."

:haha:

[Jimbuna]

:rotfl2:

Captain's Log: "In hindsight, giving the crew Red Bull instead of coffee was probably a bad idea..."

Nice one :DL

[frau kaleun]

Later that day, at a top secret meeting in Berlin...

Hitler: You had something you wished to tell me, Herr Admiral?
Dönitz: Jawohl, Mein Führer... you remember that idea you had about mounting rockets on our u-boats?
Hitler: Of course I remember. What about it?
Dönitz: Well, I don't think we're going to need the rockets.

[bojan811]

Can i use this patch with my current mod setup and my career save game?

[h.sie]

Small update V15F3 for beta testing available.

Changes:



Bugfix: In "Follow nearest contact" mode, the Sonar Operator continues to report the nearest contact even if hydrophones are switched off (this was a stock sh3 bug). Thanks to KarlKoch for reporting that issue.



New optional gauges for Oxygen supply by SqareSteelBar. Thanks, SSB.

h.sie

[h.sie]

It's also a very good idea to put the patched sh3.exe into the Supplement-Mod (same directory where the DLLs are). Then one can activate/deactivate the whole packet using JSGME without risking to harm the sh3 - installation.

Thanks to frau_kaleun for that idea.

[irish1958]

"And on the Seventh day HE rested!"

[fitzcarraldo]

Small update V15F3 for beta testing available.

Changes:



Bugfix: In "Follow nearest contact" mode, the Sonar Operator continues to report the nearest contact even if hydrophones are switched off (this was a stock sh3 bug). Thanks to KarlKoch for reporting that issue.



New optional gauges for Oxygen supply by SqareSteelBar. Thanks, SSB.

h.sie

Downloading and testing now...

Many thanks :yeah:

Fitzcarraldo :salute:

[Buck_O]

hello Rubini,

there is no problem with CameraBehavior.act
look at your cameras.dat ....you are ,just, using a cameras.dat that has the blur effect at the node for free camera.
go at the node for free camera and in there find and delete the ''CameraEffects'' and all its child nodes...then save and you are ready to go

bye


Markman

What is the path to this "cameras.dat" file so that I can amend it too? I assume I can do it through explorer, yes?

[zj1985]

@zj1985: Reduction to 1,28MB is as desired. Some unecessary memory filled with zeroes are removed.

You must also install the "Supplement to V15xxz" mod via JSGME.

I do install the supplement mod,and do all the readme says.I also use different versions and they are all oxcoooooo5 wrong.So I doubt my PC OS,I use winxp sp3 chinese simplified.DO I need to insall something netframe work3,4 etc.Or someone can send me the files they work on other PC?:O:

[h.sie]

@zj1985: Please send me your sh3.exe for me to find the reasons for your problems.

[h.sie]

Weeks ago, LGN1 inspired me to model random diesel damages when on flank speed for longer time periods. I like that idea very much, and my own idea was to also add some warnings from the LI like "diesels running hot, we must slow down" or similar.

Does anyone have historical information, how long diesels were able to do flank speed, or more concretely:

How long must diesels do flank speed to have a probability of 50% for some damage?

Thanks.
h.sie

[TorpX]

I imagine that this sort of specific info will be hard to come by.

Perhaps you could make it so there is a 1% chance/ hr. at start with a 2%/ hr. after the engines get "hot" (say 2 hrs.). I don't think the warning makes sense though. There really is no way to predict exactly when any engine would break down.

This is certainly a great idea though; after all submarines were noted for being very high maintainance weapons systems.

[h.sie]

@TorpX: Thanks for your answer. The warnings were for "ear-candy" only and not really necessary.

I think the probabilities for engine damages should highly depend on the speed.

slow - standard: low (maybe avg. 1 damage per 3 missions) ???
full: medium (maybe 1 damage per 1 mission) ???
flank: very high (maybe 1 damage per day) ???

these values can of course be converted into chance per hour.

[TorpX]

The warnings were for "ear-candy" only and not really necessary.

Ok, I misunderstood.



I think the probabilities for engine damages should highly depend on the speed.


I didn't know you intended to model breakdowns for anything other than 'flank'. Of course, speed should be very important. As far as flank speed is concerned, I presume we would be talking hours instead of days. No one would be going flank for days, would they?

[LGN1]

Hi h.sie,

I found these old threads about the diesels:

http://uboat.net/forums/read.php?20,61238,61260#msg-61260

http://uboat.net/forums/read.php?20,60974,61000#msg-61000

Both are about the diesels in the IX, but I think most things apply also to the VII boats.

In both threads it's mentioned that the highest possible power output was restricted to 0.5hours (I guess the '24hrs' means once per day :06:) and the second highest power output to 2hours. Unfortunately, the texts do not mention the corresponding max. speed. In addition, SH3 does not include these settings (the values in the sim files are a weird mixture) :-?

Maybe a rough guide could be:

Flank => hour time scale
Full => day time scale
Rest => patrol time scale

Cheers, LGN1

[h.sie]

@TorpX: I had in mind to also model random damages for speeds lower than flank, but I did not mention it so far (sorry!) because flank is the most important one. my problem now is the fine-adjusting of probabilities - depending on speed. instead of assumptions I would prefer historical exact empirical data, but I must agree with you, that it will be hard to find some. But maybe we have luck, since here are guys around with a huge historical knowledge. If we don't have luck, I have to use some acceptable assumptions (we have to discuss about) as basis for the programming.

[h.sie]

@bojan: the patches should be compatible with 99% of the mods.

regarding old savegames look here:

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=1653970&postcount=1185

[irish1958]

I would suspect that the information about breakdowns would be classified and any leak would not be pleasant for the "leaker". (Hello, Uncle Joe; is it always so cold here?).
Running cars at 100% RPMs is not usually recommended (20% above the red line). I suspect running the sub diesels is not a good idea for hours on end.
For game play, I would suggest engine failure after perhaps 1 hour.

[zj1985]

@zj1985: Please send me your sh3.exe for me to find the reasons for your problems.

sh3.exe in the file too,Thanks for help.:yeah:

[h.sie]

@zj1985: please delete that link. Only I need to inspect your exe, but not the whole world.

[h.sie]

@irish: Thanks. Your suggestion agrees with my estimation and LGN1's findings and assumption regarding time scales.

Since I work with chances / probabilities, I'll have to assume a timespan called T50%, after that the probability is P = 50% for a diesel damage (at flank speed).

The chance P(T) for a damage after a certain time T at flank speed can be calculated using the formula:

P(T) = 1 - 0,5 ^ (T/T50%).


So if I e.g. choose for Flank Speed T50% = 1/2 Hour = 30 Minutes:



a damage will occur after 1 minute with a chance of 2%
a damage will occur after 5 minutes with a chance of 11%
a damage will occur after 15 minutes with a chance of 29%
a damage will occur after 30 minutes with a chance of 50%
a damage will occur after 1 hour with a chance of 75%
a damage will occur after 2 hours with a chance of 94%
a damage will occur after 5 hours with a chance of 99,9%


So I'll use T50% = 30 minutes for the first version of the forthcoming diesel damage mod.

EDIT: After some discussions I'll use a longer timespan for T50%.

[NGT]

Hello h.sie,

Please let me say my point of view about flank speed in SH3.:)

The difference in speed between flank speed and the high speed ---8212;at least inside SH3---8212; is around 2 knots in some cases/U-Boots/mods.

By introducing 30 % chance for damage with only 15 minutes use, is clearly obvious that a reasonable captain/player will prefer to keep high speed instead of flank, because the benefit is too weak for the risk.

For escape, anyway, the destroyers are much faster with 35 knots in average. So, were the benefits to risk 30 % damage, just to use flank speed for 15 minutes?

Why to choose flank speed under these conditions, (in game) and under witch circumstances?

I can't believe that a German diesel engine was implemented inside U-boots with so bad final gear (flank speed).

The data from uboot.net are not clear at all.

I can confirm you about modern German diesel running in the line just before red area in rpm, for more than one hour (like mine). OK, are modern, 3 liters cars, not u-boots, but under 20 times more pressure by common rail turbo, than inside u-boot, witch were a war machine. Flank speed was implemented for war use, not for fan between red lights in the highway, no?

I like the idea of damage after long period with flank speed, so, for example, is not easy to screen a fast task force, but not so early.

Minimum 1 hour without problem. And after, damage should be progressive: example 1% every 1 minute.

By introducing this option/mod, we will have other reality conflict: in SH3, damaged motors runs as well as no damaged motors, until no more hit points. Personally, I noticed that speed drop down only underwater with flooding, or, of course, with motor destroyed.

The scenario is well know from now: flank speed until first damage, down to high speed and begin of reparations (because in SH3 you can repair AND run in high speed in same time, no?), end of reparations, again flank speed. . . .


And, yes, you are right, damage can occur with any speed, for every type of motor.

Thank you very much for hosting my point of view.:DL

Thank you again for the new game you offer to us.:yeah:

[WH4K]

For me, the increased fuel consumption has always been sufficient "punishment" for using flank speed.

[h.sie]

Hi NGT,

thanks for your reply.

The difference in speed between flank speed and the high speed ---8212;at least inside SH3---8212; is around 2 knots in some cases/U-Boots/mods.

That's right, but the engines must produce a lot more power to be 2 knots faster. the relation between speed and required power is not linear. for doubeling his speed, a swimmer e.g. needs 2^3 = 8 times more power. ships don't behave totally different I guess. and this higher power is correlated with a higher risk of failure.

By introducing 30 % chance for damage with only 15 minutes use, is clearly obvious that a reasonable captain/player will prefer to keep high speed instead of flank, because the benefit is too weak for the risk.

You are right, I'll enlarge the times and lower the probabilities for damage. my original values from some posts above were too hard. by the way: The main intention of this mod is not to model in detail what happens when a diesel is damaged. The intention is to prevent the player from using FLANK speed as the standard speed, e.g. when hunting a convoy for hours or days (a situation where 2 knots can be important). With this mod he has to think twice before ordering FLANK, because of the risk.


And after, damage should be progressive: example 1% every 1 minute.

Nice idea, I'll keep that in mind.

By introducing this option/mod, we will have other reality conflict: in SH3, damaged motors runs as well as no damaged motors, until no more hit points. Personally, I noticed that speed drop down only underwater with flooding, or, of course, with motor destroyed.

In this point you are wrong. If I set a diesel engines damage to >50%, the engine is no more working but repairable in some hours. the speed dropped from 14kt to 11kt (full ahead) with only one engine working.

The scenario is well know from now: flank speed until first damage, down to high speed and begin of reparations (because in SH3 you can repair AND run in high speed in same time, no?), end of reparations, again flank speed. . . .

this can be omitted by setting both engines damage to > 50%, maybe 80%. Your speed will go down to 0 kt until damage is < 50%, what can take some hours (using the realistic repairtime fix).

h.sie

[TorpX]

Hello h.sie,


Since I work with chances / probabilities, I'll have to assume a timespan called T50%, after that the probability is P = 50% for a diesel damage (at flank speed).

The chance P(T) for a damage after a certain time T at flank speed can be calculated using the formula:

P(T) = 1 - 0,5 ^ (T/T50%).



This seems like a sensible approach. I would suggest a median time to failure of at least 8 hours or more, however. This would still give a 8% chance of failure after 1 hr. (which seems pretty risky to me). I think your formula is better than a progressive chance, unless detailed data justifies such an approach.



If little can be found in historical documents, this in itself suggests the engines were petty good. If frequent breakdowns were a big problem, there would likely be a lot more written about them. The U.S. H.O.R.'s were notorious for breaking down and much has been written about this.

[h.sie]

@TorpX: I agree. As I told to NGT, I'll increase the median time-to-damage. The first version of that fix will be a test version for interested people as a basis for further tests and fine-adjustments of the parameters.

@W4HK: I know that not everybody will like this specific fix. but one can easily switch it off using Stieblers OptionsSelector.

[h.sie]

@zj1985: The sh3.exe you sent me has been correctly patched to V15F3 but I don't know why it does not run under your OS and I cannot reproduce your problem since I have no chinese localised system. Sorry to say, but I fear I cannot help you.

h.sie

[zj1985]

@zj1985: The sh3.exe you sent me has been correctly patched to V15F3 but I don't know why it does not run under your OS and I cannot reproduce your problem since I have no chinese localised system. Sorry to say, but I fear I cannot help you.

h.sie

It's a pity that I can't use your mod.I'm very interested in your work.Thanks for answer again.

[h.sie]

@zj1985: If the unpatched sh3.exe works on your PC but the patched one doesn't, maybe a virus protection mechanism hinders the execution?

For my patches, I use code injection mechanism to apply my new code to the executable. This mechanism is also used by viruses. So there is a chance that the executable is wrongfully identified as a virus and thus blocked.

maybe this is the reason. By the way: Thanks to all for trusting me that my intention is not to do any destructive and harmful things.

I also discovered that the last-modified timestamp of all DLL's and ACT's of your supplement folder files differ by some hours from those contained in the Patch-Kit. For this I have no explaination.

h.sie

[zj1985]

I use ESET for protection,I will try to patch the exe in safe mode or unistall it.:hmmm:
And I edit menu.txt to make it compatible with other mods,but the DLLs are not changed.

[h.sie]

@zj1985: as I already mentioned: the file is patched correctly. but you must execute (start) sh3.exe without virus protection / or with lower sensibility of your AV protection. if it then works, we have found the reason.

[SquareSteelBar]

Maybe there's an exception list in ESET where you have to enter sh3.exe... :hmmm:

[Volk2]

Are there problems with Stiebler u-tankers fix? Or is there something wrong with it, a bug oder etwas?

[h.sie]

Are there problems with Stiebler u-tankers fix? Or is there something wrong with it, a bug oder etwas?

I don't think so. Stiebler & me are currently working on V2 of his U-Tanker fix. V1 modelled repairs and refuelling

V2 also models loading of 1-4 (random) air torpedoes.

Why do you ask???

[Volk2]

Why do you ask???

I didn't know why it was not added to your fixes to this day - now we have two possibilities: to use your new fixes and lose the Stiebler fixes (eg. great u-tanker fix), or use Siebler fix and lose your new fixes - it is a sad choice. Or maybe I do not understand something, and we can use them both together?

[h.sie]

@Bonk: When I needed a rest from modding some months ago, Stieber decided to continue to work, because he didn't know how long my rest would take. So he continued with his own project, based on my V15E3. After 1 month, I restarted modding and now I will include his fixes one by one, besides my own modding ideas.

But I have to adapt his fixes to my programming system and personal taste, and that takes time. Currently I have only 2 hours of free time a day. Also I try to add some enhancements (in cooperation with Stiebler) like torpedo reloading when "pseudo"-docking at a U-Tanker.

[OberstDanjeje]

I don't know why but I have some problem loading saved files after I have installed the V15E3 NOSF. (it was the first time I used your mod).
I'm stuck in the same patrol from 1 month.
Every time I try to load the saved files I got CTD, I have some 7 or 8 saved point and got the same CTD for all of them except the first one.
I restarted the patrol a couple of time but to no avail.
It's just me or someone else got the same problem?
I installed the mod before start a new patrol.
Before save I'm used to go at max TC and if the FPS don't drop I'm sure there are no other ship near me.
Even tried to load without V15E3 but got the same CTD.
Any clue?

Thanks

[h.sie]

Even tried to load without V15E3 but got the same CTD.

This should be a strong enough indication that the CTD isn't caused by my patch.

To be 100% on the safe side, I recommend to load savegames with the same sh3.exe version which has been used to create/save the savegame. Or in other words: Do not patch during a career.

A possible cause for CTD is a different mod configuration between saving and loading savegames.

[OberstDanjeje]

So I should restart my entire career before instal your mod?
Don't get me wrong, I'm not complaining ;)
Your mod it's so wonderful I can't live without :(
Today I will restart the patrol and don't stop till the end ;)

[h.sie]

...or finish your old patrol with original sh3.exe, as an alternative.

But as you said: this also crashes. so I recommend to first find the reason for that. there are a lot of possible reasons for CTD during savegame reload.

* save when submerged
* save when near convoy

(please use the search function for more causes).

and hopefully have fun with the patches.
greetings to italy!

[OberstDanjeje]

Yes, I know all this thing and I try to avoid them.
today I finshed the 24 patrol and the next saturday I will see if I will get the same issue.
Thanks for your help.

[Magic1111]

Hi h.sie !

After play a while with patch V15F3 I must say, all works perfect, especially the Fog Warning and the Text-Message "4818=Nebel zieht auf." and then return to TC16 ! :up:

Now my question: Is it possible, that we become a Text-Message, when the Fog is over and/or the weather is improving. For example "Der Nebel ist vorbei", or "Das Wetter verbessert sich", or similar !

Is it possible ?

Best regards,
Magic

[Adour]

Hi all,

Running V15F3 and everything works as advertised. Thank you.

I have read all the comments and science on the O2 functionality and I love the added dimension to the game, however, travelling submerged to avoid air patrols before snorkels means that I am down to 50% O2 before reaching the patrol area. I am happy to be told this is as it was, but I have not read any KTB where this issue was raised.

I know it has been said that a couple of hours is insignificant with respect to convoy attacks and evading escorts, but summer travel with long periods of daylight is causing me all sorts of problems. I have so far got around this by surfacing as required, to refresh the air.

My question is, am I doing it right? Does anybody have any knowledge of how this was managed by the U-Boats?

LJ

[Hitman]

I know it has been said that a couple of hours is insignificant with respect to convoy attacks and evading escorts, but summer travel with long periods of daylight is causing me all sorts of problems. I have so far got around this by surfacing as required, to refresh the air.

My question is, am I doing it right? Does anybody have any knowledge of how this was managed by the U-Boats?

Yes IIRC Kaleuns only used the ordinary oxygen in the boat before resurfacing so as not to exhaust quickly the other (bottled) supply. Think that once the diesels are started, the boat can be ventilated in just 5 minutes, and anyway they had to recharge batteries for a longer period usually :up:

[Aces]

Great stuff,

I'm very much looking forrward to trying the latest version, V15e worked flawlessly for me. I just ordered up another copy of SH3 for £2.99 from Amazon UK so that I have the no starforce v1.4 patched version as my version is the original purchassed when the game first came out and any stability improvement are always welcome although I haven't had too many problems really. I also took the opportunity to buy the U-boat add on for SH4 and also Battle Stations Pacific both at a reasonable price. I bought SH4 when it came out but have never installed it and Battle stations midway lived on my pc for about 2 days before I un-installed it. I wish I'd just bought SH5 for £8 rather than what I paid when it came out as I've only launched it about three times and it hangs about on my hard disk not getting used along with 99.99% of my other games. In fact I've virtually given up buying and playing games now as they just don't do it for me anymore but at these prices then I can at least try 'em cheaply and don't get agrieved at watching them gather dust un-used :).

Fantastic work chaps, much appreciated, can't wait for what might come next.

Kind regards

Aces

[h.sie]

@Adour: As Hitman said: Just surface from time to time to recharge batteries and let new oxygene flow into the boat. after some minutes you'll see the message "oxygene back to normal 21%". Doing so, you'll not consume the oxygene supply.

@Magic: I like your idea and have already programmed it. In forthcoming V15G you'll have two messages "fog sighted" and "fog disappearing".

@Aces: Thanks, mate. Glad you like it.

[sharkbit]

I am assuming V15F is still in beta since I don't see on the first page? :hmmm:

:)

[h.sie]

@sharkbit: 80 downloads of V15F3 and no reported problems so far for more than 3 weeks. I think V15F3 is stable, it's just that I'm too lazy to update the 1st page of this Fred.

[Magic1111]

@Magic: I like your idea and have already programmed it. In forthcoming V15G you'll have two messages "fog sighted" and "fog disappearing".


Hi h.sie !

Glad you like my idea ! :up:

Many thanks and best regards,
Magic:salute:

[LGN1]

Hi,

now that Stiebler has modded BDU's reply to status reports, it might be possible to further improve the radio traffic. E.g., improving the status reports by adding further information: fuel status, damage status, crew status,... Random answers from the BDU would be great, too. For instance, orders to return home, orders to change position (Patrol further south/north/east/west), or just some more generic answers.

Some more varied answers on contact reports might also be great. E.g., orders to not attack but shadow the convoy for x hours and send status reports every y hours...

Cheers, LGN1

[h.sie]

@LGN1: I had the same idea, but I think, random messages are only "ear-candy" and thus not of highest priority. In my opinion the messages must be really gameplay- and patrol-relevant and must agree (and may not conflict) with the main order one gets at the start of a mission.

To collect all relevant data (crew morale and health, damage status, course of enemy convoy?) is maybe possible but very code intensive and it's also a lot of work to generate the correct BDU response from that. Is it worth the effort? Are there things of higher importance?

My gameplay experience is too low (equal to zero to be honest), so I wouldn't even know how to start to mod these messages, so I need CONCRETE ideas in pseudo-code how to mod messages (e.g my only idea so far and already programmed for Stieblers BDU-Messages V2):

en_menu.txt:
4197=Message received. Continue patrol ....

Idea in pseudo-code:

If (HullIntegrity < 50%) THEN
4197=Return to base
ELSE
4197=Message received. Continue patrol ....
ENDIF

-----

I often see myself thinking about what we have so far: We have Sergbutos Wolfpack Uboats, and we can now change BDU messages. Maybe it is possible to clone and modify the AI of Sergbutos Wolfpack Uboats?? I think you know what I mean: A huge project, maybe without any success.

h.sie

[h.sie]

During my jog I had an idea, but I still cannot say if it's a good one or not. If I'm informed right, wolfpack Uboats didn't see each other (with one exception: "Thooomsen, mensch Leute, das ist Thooomsen!").

So we don't need any visible AI-Uboat models at all. So what is required to simulate a virtual wolfpack attack?



We must be able to apply damage to surface ships in render range (maybe possible) in order to simulate torpedo hits.
We must be able to send special BDU-messages at any time (maybe possible) in order to simulate BDU coordinating an attack.
We must be able to analyse the contact report of the player Sub (maybe possible) in order to inform the BDU of an convoy.
We need to program an (simple) AI for the BDU to coordinate the attack and for some virtual wolfpack subs sending some random success- or contact messages.

This is just an idea. None of those 4 points above is impossible if one is able to modify the sh3.exe. I don't want to make anyone hungry. But I'm very much interested to start to see what is possible and what is not.

[coronas]

So we don't need any visible AI-Uboat models at all. So what is required to simulate a virtual wolfpack attack?


Escorts searching and attacking virtual-Uboats?

[h.sie]

Good point. I suspected that I've forgotten somthing very important.

[Magic1111]

During my jog I had an idea, but I still cannot say if it's a good one or not. If I'm informed right, wolfpack Uboats didn't see each other (with one exception: "Thooomsen, mensch Leute, das ist Thooomsen!").

So we don't need any visible AI-Uboat models at all. So what is required to simulate a virtual wolfpack attack?



We must be able to apply damage to surface ships in render range (maybe possible) in order to simulate torpedo hits.
We must be able to send special BDU-messages at any time (maybe possible) in order to simulate BDU coordinating an attack.
We must be able to analyse the contact report of the player Sub (maybe possible) in order to inform the BDU of an convoy.
We need to program an (simple) AI for the BDU to coordinate the attack and for some virtual wolfpack subs sending some random success- or contact messages.
This is just an idea. None of those 4 points above is impossible if one is able to modify the sh3.exe. I don't want to make anyone hungry. But I'm very much interested to start to see what is possible and what is not.

All this sounds very interesting....! :up:

I´m looking forward to more information and maybe Test-Results !

Best regards,
Magic

[Hitman]

During my jog I had an idea, but I still cannot say if it's a good one or not. If I'm informed right, wolfpack Uboats didn't see each other (with one exception: "Thooomsen, mensch Leute, das ist Thooomsen!").

So we don't need any visible AI-Uboat models at all. So what is required to simulate a virtual wolfpack attack?



We must be able to apply damage to surface ships in render range (maybe possible) in order to simulate torpedo hits.
We must be able to send special BDU-messages at any time (maybe possible) in order to simulate BDU coordinating an attack.
We must be able to analyse the contact report of the player Sub (maybe possible) in order to inform the BDU of an convoy.
We need to program an (simple) AI for the BDU to coordinate the attack and for some virtual wolfpack subs sending some random success- or contact messages.

This is just an idea. None of those 4 points above is impossible if one is able to modify the sh3.exe. I don't want to make anyone hungry. But I'm very much interested to start to see what is possible and what is not.

This idea was discussed long ago, I remember that :up:

The main problem is that the good part of wolfpack tactics wass that when an UBoat attacked a convoy, it inmediately triggered a response from the escorts and as such opened a gap for the other Uboats in the screen. While not always were there several Uboats around the convoy attacking at the exact same time (Only rarely in fact, as BDU coordination and the slow nature of sailing couldn't amount to that), escorts also couldn't afford to stay for so long keeping submerged boats under and had to race again to the convoy.

Sergbuto already managed to add AI Uboats to some convoys, which provide contact radio reports and appear and engage the convoy when the player gets near. The main problem is still that the UBoats do not submerge, they are always at peri depth.

The real breakthrough for this game would be therefore to add some kind of submarine AI. Do that and all other things will come by themselves ...

And idea (which I already suggested some time ago):

1) Somehow modify the airbases to allow them to spawn AI Uboats, which would mean wolfpack support based on your contact report :up:

2) Start from the AI/code of the airplane (Maybe clone the AI in the memory and duplicate it but modified??) and invert the heights to negative values, so that altitude is changed for depth. With some studying, we could probably make the "inverted airplanes" come at high speed to the convoy and submerge (Instead of making an air dive) to shoot, then surface (instead of climb) to head away at high speed.

[LGN1]

IIRC, Iambecomelife worked on AI U-boats, but never made any comment about it. He just showed pictures in the screenshot thread :cry: It would be great if he could share some of his findings.

As others have pointed out, the crucial thing about AI U-boats is that they should attract/distract the escorts. Not necessarily sink ships.

My rough idea would be:

1. You make contact with a convoy and shadow it until you know the course.

2. You send a contact message which contains your guess of the convoy's course (not the course that is sent in-game currently.) This could be done via the torpedo dials.

3. Depending on time, your position, and a random factor, BDU answers:

a) Go ahead and attack.

b) Shadow convoy and resend message later.

c) Shadow convoy. BDU also orders U-xxx to intercept convoy.

In case of c) an AI U-boat from Sergbuto is put at a position in front of the convoy (based on your current position and the course you sent). If your guess was right the convoy will meet the AI sub and it will draw the attention of the escorts.

In case b) you continue shadowing and after sending the message after x minutes again, BDU will answer again with a) - c).

In case a), well, you try to attack :D

I guess this would be a good solution. The player can influence the appearance of AI U-boats and he/she has an incentive to shadow convoys and not just attack as soon as possible.

What would be required:

- Pointers to your position and maybe the in-game date.

- Pointers to the AOB and target speed dial (for sending the convoy's course and speed).

- A method to identify and move a specified unit in the campaign.scr file.

- A way to allow the player to send more than one contact message for the same contact (if that's not possible one has to omit option b) ).

Cheers, LGN1

[LGN1]

Concerning status reports:

You are right, h.sie, that it's mainly ear-candy. However, I think it would add quite a bit to the game. In my opinion a status report should at least contain the current information plus:

- Wind speed (indicating weather)
- Fuel status
- Rough damage report based on hull status (minor damage, medium damage, severe damage)

A possible response would be:

if (hull < xx% or fuel < y%)
return home
else
- a few different messages with the meaning 'Carry on...'. Just to avoid the same reply. Players can later change the phrases according to their taste.

- with a small probability a message: 'After finishing your current orders, continue your patrol further north/south/east/west.

As already mentioned, it's mainly ear-candy and it's up to each player whether he wants to obey these orders. Nevertheless, I think it would add a bit more immersion to the radio traffic.

Cheers, LGN1

PS: I'm aware that you can achieve something similar with SH3 Commander, however, in this case you always get the same message again and again when you send a status report during the same playing session.

[Stiebler]

NYGM already incorporates AI Sergbuto's AI U-boats, spawned randomly from some convoys, and they provide an excellent diversion for the escorts. As the player closes a convoy which is being attacked, you see constant flashes, and the escorts are all over the place, frequently damaged. In fact a lot of the damage seems to have been caused by convoy ships firing on each other(!), and you see burning and sinking merchant ships.

This part of a wolf-pack attack, then, is already complete. The only real problem is that it is not always possible to reload a game that has been saved after a wolf-pack attack.

Any further contribution to the game can really only be eye/ear-candy.

Stiebler.

[h.sie]

Concerning Stieblers post above:

For my private GWX installation, I have replaced most of the GWX surfaced submarines by Sergbutos AI-Submarines. Unfortunately, I have no time to see if that works in a mission. I only tested it in a single-mission and the result was great - see Stieblers description above. What a battle.

But that's a static solution I think. Every time a convoy (with AI-Subs scripted into) comes in render range, the AI-subs begin to attack, independent of your contact report or any BDU coordination. They always find the convoy, because they are scripted into the convoy.

I will look into airbases and see if it is possible to spawn AI-Subs instead of aircraft. These airbases could be placed in the ocean there where all the wolfpack subs have been during the war.

[h.sie]

@LGN1: The problem by considering fuel level for BDU messages is that I also have to consider the presence/non-presence of U-Tankers and suppliers. This seems to be trivial from the players point of view, but not from the programmers point of view.

Random messages like "patrol further south" would only make sense if I also test, if there currently is ocean (and not an island) in the south of the Sub. This is also not trivial from the programmers point of view, and in my opinion too much effort for some ear-candy.

To be honest: If I really find time to play in the future and read a command like "patrol further south" - knowing that it is ear-candy only without any further meaning, I would not follow this command. So it is useless for me.

[irish1958]

@LGN1: The problem by considering fuel level for BDU messages is that I also have to consider the presence/non-presence of U-Tankers and suppliers. This seems to be trivial from the players point of view, but not from the programmers point of view.

Random messages like "patrol further south" would only make sense if I also test, if there currently is ocean (and not an island) in the south of the Sub. This is also not trivial from the programmers point of view, and in my opinion too much effort for some ear-candy.

To be honest: If I really find time to play in the future and read a command like "patrol further south" - knowing that it is ear-candy only without any further meaning, I would not follow this command. So it is useless for me.

I would think that the presence of the U-tankers would not be a significant problem, as they were infrequently near an area where wolf-packs engaged convoys, only present for a brief time, and usually sunk anyway.

SH3 CMDR already allows for random responses from BDU to your radio messages. For example, one can have the response of "Good work; redeploy one grid South," or anything else you wish, generated when you send a patrol report of a successful sinking.
I am not sure what is possible with a convoy report, however, of if it can be correlated with the idea of the AI subs.

[NGT]

NYGM already incorporates AI Sergbuto's AI U-boats, spawned randomly from some convoys, and they provide an excellent diversion for the escorts. As the player closes a convoy which is being attacked, you see constant flashes, and the escorts are all over the place, frequently damaged. In fact a lot of the damage seems to have been caused by convoy ships firing on each other(!), and you see burning and sinking merchant ships.

This part of a wolf-pack attack, then, is already complete. The only real problem is that it is not always possible to reload a game that has been saved after a wolf-pack attack.

Any further contribution to the game can really only be eye/ear-candy.

Stiebler.

Indeed, yesterday, I was close to a convoy (NYGM) and every ship was shooting against something, I supposed a periscope (?), I don’t know, it was somewhat dark.

Indeed, there were about 6 destroyers going to that direction, leaving me space to go on and attack.

The problem is, an SH3 bug, that every ship fires against the enemy without taking care about the rest of the ships of the convoy, so every ship between the guns and the target, suffers damages, indeed collateral damages, and above all, too heavy…

It is like if they start shooting against me. I use this; I go close to a merchant ship, or behind it, and they shank they own merchant by trying to sink me.

________________

@h.sie I see you are open for doable modifications / ideas.

I don’t ask anything; just I say what I consider it as being a problem:

Few days ago, in Biscay Golf, I was in combat with a destroyer. Suddenly, a Condor (German plane) appeared and started bombing the destroyer. On above, a British Sunderland came and started bombing ME —while submerged in periscope depth—, BUT, there was no fight engaged between the two airplanes, the one completely ignoring the other.

This is a problem for me; the airplanes do not enter in conflict between them… (Very stupid situation, especially when allies are bombing the French ports, by that making the Messerschmitts useless…)

Other problem, we can not order heavy flak to shoot against ships… We must do that personally.

Other problem is, the Radar, switching on / off. During (while in) strong winds and waves, the U-boot goes inside and out of the waves but the Radar stays off, thus we need to switch it on after every loop diving in the high waves. (…but the electric / diesel engines go on / off automatically whether diving or surfacing, without any special order to switching on/off. The same as well for hydrophone etc.)

Finally, the biggest ever problem of this game, mainly after the apparition of supermods, is the inability for saving under various circumstances. In fact, with my moded NYGM (just by adding more airplanes and ships, and Wide MaGui) it is impossible to save in mid patrol. I have to organize my life so that I find 2 hours for playing a patrol till the end as it is impossible to recuperate any saved game.

If it is virtually impossible to solve the "save bug", in the other hand, I ask myself whether if it would be possible to be warned whenever the saved game can't be playable, before quitting definitely the patrol.

Thank you for hosting

[h.sie]

@irish: Thanks. I meant that I have to check via programm code if there is an U-Tanker near the Sub. If so, the message should be "refuel at the U-Tanker". Otherwise: "Go back to harbour". So far I don't know how to determine the presence of an U-Tanker via program code. Or......do you mean that I should not consider U-Tankers at all because they are rare and/or already sunk?

@NGT:A lot of problems, only a few solutions:

Destroyers shooting at own merchants: Changing this would require to change the destroyer AI. This is not possible for me at the moment. Yesterday I located AI routines in SH3Sim.act, but that finding is by far not sufficient. Easy solution: Don't look at that battle behaviour in detail (with external cam?). In RL a kaleun surely looked through a peri only for a short timespan for aiming purposes. I think he didn't see details.....

Aircraft ignoring each other: Also an AI change (see above).

Heavy flak against ships: Maybe possible -> Added to Todo-List!

Radar on/off. This is maybe possible. -> Added to Todo-List!

Savegame CTD: I never had any CTD, but the reason might be that I never played a serious career so far. But since I plan to do so in the next time, I try to avoid CTDs (related to Sergbutos AI-Subs) using the following workaround: I installed a boot manager on my PC and installed a second Windows only for playing SH3. When I pause a career, instead of saving it and shutting off the PC, I switch the PC into hibernation state (while sh3 runs) and reboot, in order to use the other system for working, surfing, modding. When I continue to play, I reboot and wake the system from hibernation. No savegame reload necessary. A whole career without saving and risking CTD, even when submerged or during a battle or near a convoy. Disadvantage: SH3-Commander RandomizedEvents won't work, so maybe a compromise is the best solution: Saving in non-critical situations and hibernating/freezing the system in critical situations (e.g. battles).

[LGN1]

Hi,

the main limitation, and for me it's a crucial one, of the present wolf packs is that I have no influence on them. As h.sie has mentioned, they are just there, attack and vanish. I think it would add a lot if YOUR behavior/report had an influence. With the idea described above you would even get a rough idea when to expect the AI attack (if you correctly predict the convoy's course ) :up:

Concerning the status reports:

- BDU might give you an order to return even when close to a milk cow. Maybe it's out of fuel :D How can you judge BDU's eternal wisdom :03:

- It was my intention not to write 'grid further south'. You can always go further south, except on the south pole :D

- Currently, I use SH3 Commander to give new orders. However, as I mentioned earlier, it has quite some limitations.

As h.sie has pointed out, it's anyway up to the player to obey these orders. But that's the case with most things in-game.

Cheers, LGN1

[LGN1]

Other problem is, the Radar, switching on / off. During (while in) strong winds and waves, the U-boot goes inside and out of the waves but the Radar stays off, thus we need to switch it on after every loop diving in the high waves. (…but the electric / diesel engines go on / off automatically whether diving or surfacing, without any special order to switching on/off. The same as well for hydrophone etc.)



This issue annoyed me, too. However, some time ago I asked myself whether the radar on a u-boat actually COULD work during high waves :hmmm: I don't have a definite answer, but if I look at the construction and see how a submarine tower moves during a storm, I have doubts that the radar could be used efficiently during storms.

Cheers, LGN1

[Aces]

@h.sie,

Hi mate,

If you ever stumble upon in passing how/where the game stores the current bearing of the attack peri, obs. peri and UZO and how this information might be read and utilised then please let me know.

Thanks and kind regards

Aces

[h.sie]

@Aces: I already tried that some months ago without success, but I'll inform you of course if I find the appropriate code segment.

[Aces]

Thank you mate,

Much appreciated.

Kind regards

Aces

Edit: Please forgive my ignorance but is possible to trace code excution to find out what's being stored where?. EG. to see what happens when one moves the scopes or UZO in game. If one could just find the sol.bearing gauge and where it get's its bearing from.

[h.sie]

I found a solution for the radar problem. With my fix the radar is still switched off when the boat dives in a high wave, but it's immediately switched on automatically when the boat comes out of the wave. This could be interpreted as an temporary dysfunction due to water. If the boat is at periscope depth or deeper once, radar is switched off definitely. My fastest mod ever: Took 5 minutes.

This will be a nice addition for forthcoming V15G, which also will contain:



Stieblers U-Tanker Mod with a small addition by me: Pseudo-docking at an U-Tanker now allows reloading of 1-4 air torpedoes (besides refuelling and repairs of pressure hull).
Stieblers BDU-Congratulations, also with little addition and extra BDU messages and congratulations.
Stieblers WarNews Mod
The WatchOfficer now also reports if fog disappears.

[fitzcarraldo]

I found a solution for the radar problem. With my fix the radar is still switched off when the boat dives in a high wave, but it's immediately switched on automatically when the boat comes out of the wave. This could be interpreted as an temporary dysfunction due to water. If the boat is deeper than 10 meters once, radar is switched off definitely. My fastest mod ever: Took 5 minutes.

This will be a nice addition for forthcoming V15G, which also will contain:



Stieblers U-Tanker Mod with a small addition by me: Pseudo-docking at an U-Tanker now allows reloading of 1-4 air torpedoes (besides refuelling and repairs of pressure hull).
Stieblers BDU-Congratulations, also with little addition and extra BDU messages and congratulations.
Stieblers WarNews Mod
The WatchOfficer now also reports if fog disappears.


Great, Hsie! Will it overwrite the V15F or will we need the SH3.EXE not-patched for application? I like a BAT installer "updater" from previous versions :03:

Many thanks and regards!

Fitzcarraldo :salute:

[Magic1111]

I found a solution for the radar problem. With my fix the radar is still switched off when the boat dives in a high wave, but it's immediately switched on automatically when the boat comes out of the wave. This could be interpreted as an temporary dysfunction due to water. If the boat is deeper than 10 meters once, radar is switched off definitely. My fastest mod ever: Took 5 minutes.

This will be a nice addition for forthcoming V15G, which also will contain:



Stieblers U-Tanker Mod with a small addition by me: Pseudo-docking at an U-Tanker now allows reloading of 1-4 air torpedoes (besides refuelling and repairs of pressure hull).
Stieblers BDU-Congratulations, also with little addition and extra BDU messages and congratulations.
Stieblers WarNews Mod
The WatchOfficer now also reports if fog disappears.



Sounds wonderful h.sie, can´t wait to test V15G....! :D:ping::ping::ping:

[h.sie]

@fitzcarraldo: There will be no updater. To patch from

V14b (stock sh3.exe) to V15G

takes the same time for you (about 4-5 seconds) as to update from

V15F to V15G.

For me it takes hours to configure the updater. Should I also make an updater for V15B? :wah:.

[Aces]

Hi mate,

I receieved my £2.99 SH3 CD yesterday so that I'd have the no-starforce no -cd version. When I ran the V15F batch file it reported that it couldn't find any suitable exe. I ran the v15E batch and it worked just fine without any other changes!.

Kind regards

Aces

[h.sie]

@Aces: You can only patch once. The basis of patching must always be the original unpatched file. So you can patch from V14b (original, unpatched) to V15E or V15F, but not from V15E to V15F. So make sure you use the unpatched file. Even applying the 4GB patch changes the checksum so that the patcher script won't be able to find a compatible version.

If this doesn't help you, please send me your exe. I'll look into it.

[SquareSteelBar]

What's the MD5 checksum of your unpatched sh3.exe?

Is it identic to this one?

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=1490506&postcount=59

[Aces]

Hi mate,

I only did patch once. I copied over the sh3.exe from a fresh install of the new cd-rom. I ran the patch program downloaded with v15f and got the error. I then ran the v15e patch program and that ran just fine with the same sh3.exe!.

Previously and in a different game install I ran the v15e on a starforce remopved and no-cd fixed original game exe and that ran fine but I waited for the new cd install to try v15f.

Although I'm at work I'm sure that it's the purple hills version. The bizare thing is that v15e worked and v15f didn't with the same sh3.exe.

Regards

Aces

[JeromeHeretic]

I have the same problem, patch can't find correct version. I have DVD version, for EMEA region. DVD is already with 1.4 patch.
Md5sum is the same, as Squaresteelbar linked, but it is DVD version and he in this post write, that it is problem. But it doesn't matter in my opinion, because md5sum is right, so where can be problem?

EDIT: Solved, just write quicker as thinking :-) I tried to run the batch in dosbox, because i see it is batch. When i look into and try first coomand, i seen, that it can run in dos mode, so i try it again in wine and this way it works well.

[Gerald]

:up:

[SquareSteelBar]

Sometimes anti virus progs prevent patching. In this case you have to switch it off temporarily.

[Luno]

I don't know if this was covered earlier (this is a long thread) but I'm experiencing some problems with this update.

I installed and updated to 1.5E from stock 1.4. One of the fixes mentioned was that the periscope view would blur at high speeds, and eventually lower.

The scope lowers at 8kts but the image is still crystal clear up until that point.

Everything else that I've tested seems to work just fine. Thanks for the patch!

[frau kaleun]

I don't know if this was covered earlier (this is a long thread) but I'm experiencing some problems with this update.

I installed and updated to 1.5E from stock 1.4. One of the fixes mentioned was that the periscope view would blur at high speeds, and eventually lower.

The scope lowers at 8kts but the image is still crystal clear up until that point.

Everything else that I've tested seems to work just fine. Thanks for the patch!

Did you copy the files in the Supplement folder to your SH3 game folder? There should be three "Supplement" files: CameraBehavior.act, EnvSim.act, and SH3Sim.act. I expect it's the CameraBehavior one that gives you the blurred periscope effect, but I'm not sure... anyway I had the same thing happening as what you describe until I realized I had to replace those three files with the versions h.sie provides. Now the view thru the 'scopes blurs if I go over a certain speed, and then the 'scopes lower by themselves if I exceed the maximum allowed. It's quite noticeable so if you don't notice any blur at all as your speed increases then the effect is definitely missing.

[h.sie]

frau_kaleun is right (thanks!): you need the camerabehavior.act file.
otherwise no blur effect.

the other files from the supplement folder are also required. simply install them via jsgme.

[SquareSteelBar]

...Md5sum is the same, as Squaresteelbar linked, but it is DVD version and he in this post write, that it is problem. But it doesn't matter in my opinion, because md5sum is right...I never wrote that.
If the checksum matches the patch should work...
...and it does on my side. :yep:

[NGT]

I found a solution for the radar problem. With my fix the radar is still switched off when the boat dives in a high wave, but it's immediately switched on automatically when the boat comes out of the wave. This could be interpreted as an temporary dysfunction due to water. If the boat is at periscope depth or deeper once, radar is switched off definitely. My fastest mod ever: Took 5 minutes.

This will be a nice addition for forthcoming V15G, . . . . . . . . . . .

Thank you very much h.sie. :rock:

Really, after all that, I can't find how to give you back some of all this satisfaction you offer to us.

V15G. . . a new game, again. . .

Don't hesitate to ask me any help I am able to give you.

[h.sie]

@NGT: No problem mate. I mainly do it for me. I just share it with others.

@Aces: Did you get it to run in the meantime?

[Anvart]

Main radar requirements.
When the game/scene is initialized and the submarine is on the surface, the radar must be switched off.
When the submarine emerges to the surface from deep, radar not should be switched on automatically.

[h.sie]

@Anvart: Thanks. My fix will fit these requirements.

EDIT (1 hour later): Oh, now I understand you, Anvart. I discovered that it's a stock sh3 behaviour to automatically switch ON the radar when one loads a mission, but I already could fix that, so that with my radar fix V2 the radar is switched off at game start.

Only negative side-effect: When one has radar ON and saves a game, the radar will be OFF when one reloads that game. but that isn't a problem I think.

[Anvart]

@Anvart: Thanks. My fix will fit these requirements.
And I would like, that during execution of commands Radar_view and Toggle_radar_view not occur reinitialize of radar (radar antenna angle). :haha:
...
Only negative side-effect: When one has radar ON and saves a game, the radar will be OFF when one reloads that game. but that isn't a problem I think.
i think too... it's good.

[Hitman]

Made room on the top and stickied this thread :up:

[h.sie]

In V15G, a status report to the BDU will have more than the 2 (?) well-known monotonous responses. Based on Stieblers BDU-Congratulation mod, I added some more responses and also some randomness, so that it will be as follows:


You get 6 different congratulations depending on the amount of tonnage sunk.
If you have negative tonnage (neutrals sunk), you get a warning.
If you have no tonnage sunk, with a chance of 50% you get a motivation to be more aggressive. With a chance of 50%, you get a random BDU-response (see below).
If the pressure hull is heavily damaged, with a chance of 50% you'll be ordered to home base. With a chance of 50%, you get a random BDU-response.
If fuel is lower than 33%, with a chance of 50%, you'll be ordered to home base. With a chance of 50%, you get a random BDU-response.
If you have less than 5 torpedoes, with a chance of 50%, you'll be ordered to home base. With a chance of 50%, you get a random BDU-response.
If none of the above conditions is true: You get one of 8 random BDU-responses.


I will put 8 random BDU-responses into en/de_menu.txt, but these can be edited by you if you prefer different BDU-responses.

These random BDU-responses have no function, they are "ear-candy" only. Ideas so far are:

"U-(randomnumber) is lost"
"Give a weather report as soon as possible"
"Patrol further south/east/west/nord"
"Patrol further course (randomnumber)!"
"Keep up"
"Return to base as situation permits" (???)

Any other ideas for messages that fit any situation?

[Magic1111]

Made room on the top and stickied this thread :up:

Thanks for "sticky" Hitman !!! :yeah:

[LGN1]

Hi h.sie,

sounds great :up: I will look whether I can find some additional messages.

There is just one thing I don't understand. It is the statement:

'If none of the above conditions is true: You get one of 8 random BDU-responses.'

I think one of the conditions must be true. Either I have sunk something or I haven't sunk anything or I sunk something neutral. What else could be :hmmm:

So, my question is: If I have sunk an enemy ship and my fuel and damage is fine, do I always get congratulations from the BDU? I think this would be quite annoying because getting congratulations more than once for the same thing would be boring.

Anyway, I think this is great work that allows player to mod a more variable radio traffic! Thanks a lot!

Cheers, LGN1

[h.sie]

@LGN1: Ok, my fault - inexact explaination.

Lets assume you sunk 20000t and send a status report. For that you get a congratulation once.

Now lets assume you send a second status report but didn't sink any ship in the meantime. The fix prevents from a second congratulation for the same tonnage (the next step for a new congratulation is 30000t).

If now hull integrity, diesel and torpedoes are okay, a randomly chosen ear-candy message will be sent.

h.sie

[h.sie]

@LGN1: The algorithm for BDU responses to status report is as follows:

If ((Hull Integrity < 50%) OR (Fuel < 33%) OR (Torpedoes <= 4)) THEN


with a chance of 50% a "Return to base" - Message is sent.



Otherwise:

If (Tonnage sunk < 0) THEN:


with a chance of 75%: a warning ("sink no neutrals") is sent.
with a chance of 25%: one of 8 random ear-candy messages is sent


If (Tonnage sunk = 0) THEN:


with a chance of 50%: one of 4 random motivation messages (e.g. be more aggressive) is sent



with a chance of 50%: one of 8 random ear-candy messages is sent


If ((Tonnage sunk > 0) AND No_Congratulation_so_far) THEN:


with a chance of 75%: a congratulation according to tonnage is sent
with a chance of 25%: one of 8 random ear-candy messages is sent

ELSE: one of 8 random ear-candy messages is sent

[LGN1]

Excellent, h.sie!

Just one thing I noticed: the 'return home' message because of torpedoes might be problematic for the type II and XXIII which have only a few torpedoes.

Cheers, LGN1

[h.sie]

@LGN1: Thanks. I forgot about that point. I cannot differ between a Type XXI and a XXIII from code perspective in an easy way, since the XXIII is a XXI from code view, so I think I use the test for torpedoes only for types VII and IX (which are the most important ones).

[Aces]

Hi mate,

Yes, thank you, for some reason better known to its self it worked when I tried it again with v15f and, although I'll probably never get to experience many of the new features as I don't actually play the game, the mod is excellent!.

Kind regards

Aces

[h.sie]

I (hopefully) had a good idea: To program a certain chance (5% to 10%?) that a status report coudn't be received (completely) by the BDU. That would cause the BDU to response with "Transmission error, please repeat last status report!" or similar.

Arguments pro/contra this idea?

[NGT]

I (hopefully) had a good idea: To program a certain chance (5% to 10%?) that a status report coudn't be received (completely) by the BDU. That would cause the BDU to response with "Transmission error, please repeat last status report!" or similar.

Arguments pro/contra this idea?

Don't complicate your life. . . :lol:

...but if you like...

[Wolfstriked]

H.sie,any chance to make the view instantly move when you move to new view.What I mean is that right now say you Rclick into the command room and now have to move cursor around to find a spot that doesn't highlight/then press Lmouse and you now have control of the view.Seems backwards to me....when I click to look thru the binos I do not want to then have to click the Lmouse to move the view around....and then when I R,mouse out I have to then make sure I am not highlighting anything and then have to press Lmouse.

[h.sie]

@Wolfstriked: Sorry to say, but I wuldn't even know how to start modding that. Graphical stuff is very hard for me in Assembler. Maybe Interior-Modders like DivingDuck can help?

[h.sie]

Now I need some suggestions for:

1) Some random Motivation messages like "be more aggressive".

2) Some random "ear-candy" messages that suits to almost all situations.

Thanks!

If there are many ideas, it would be very easy to expand the random "ear-candy" messages to ,say, 16 instead of currrently 8.

[Hitman]

Are the messages stored in an external file, or is there still a need to edit one own's SH3 text files to add them?

[SquareSteelBar]

You have to edit en_menu.txt or de_menu.txt

It's no big deal - you only have to append h.sie's messages to the end of file...

Have a look into 'Supplement to V15F3 (JSGME).7z'...

[h.sie]

yup, all messages will be in en_menu.txt, so that everybody can change them to fit personal taste.

[Kaleun Cook]

edit: nvm.

[SquareSteelBar]

...
2) Some random "ear-candy" messages that suits to almost all situations...Messages from BdU:

"An Kaleun - U-Boot mit Sehrohr angekommen - Mutter und Kind wohlauf - Herzlichen Glückwunsch"

"An LI - U-Boot ohne Sehrohr angekommen - Mutter und Kind wohlauf - Herzlichen Glückwunsch"

;)

http://www.taz.de/1/archiv/print-archiv/printressorts/digi-artikel/?ressort=hi&dig=2010%2F04%2F17%2Fa0021&cHash=3efad1f164

[Hitman]

yup, all messages will be in en_menu.txt, so that everybody can change them to fit personal taste.


Any chance of storing them in a dedicated file? This is one thing that interferes with many GUI mods; many people can understand how to edit it, but other won't. And besides, an external file would allow much better aditions and editings, such as Steve did for the MFF with his ships names :up:

[h.sie]

@Hitman: Currently not, sorry. But if I find a way, I'll do that. People only need to APPEND some new lines to their en_menu.txt file.

@SSB: Hepp weh lacht!

[SquareSteelBar]

...@SSB: Hepp weh lacht!Jau - ik ook. :rotfl2:

[Philipp_Thomsen]

H.Sie

I think I asked this from you before, like 1 year ago, lol, but I'll ask again.

I've been away from SH series since I got married, 1.5 years ago, but from time to time I check subsim.

In your travels thru the sh3.exe code, did you ever came across any controller for the internal submarine ambient sound? The way it is right now, we have one single sound for all 3 states: surfaced, submerged and silent running. If it was possible to assign 3 different sound files for those 3 different states, I could do my magic on the sound editing and we would make sh3 a LOT more immersive.

[Hitman]

I've been away from SH series since I got married, 1.5 years ago, but from time to time I check subsim.

I thought you were on a trip to discover the world, now I know why you returned ... BDU called you back :haha:

[Wolfstriked]

Speaking of sound as Thompson pointed to,I think it would be great to have different interior ambient sounds as well....especially one to play when your damage control team is at work.

Also,is there a way to change the volume of the diesel sound from exterior towhen you enter the interior of the sub?I searched in SH3.sdl file but there is no setting that controls the sound lowering of the exteriordiesel engine sound when you enter the sub.Anyone??

[h.sie]

@Wolfstriked, PT:

Graphics and sound are hard for me to change in Assembler without SDK. These things are very complex and thus nearly impossibe to identify in the code, at least for me. So I have to restrict on easy-to-fix things: change one gameplay-relevant variable (e.g. speed) in dependency on other gameplay variables (e.g. wind, diesel-damage). More I cannot do at the moment, but my experience is rising, so maybe later!

h.sie

[Volk2]

I don't remember if this behaviour of sh3 was already discussed:

When you are on periscope depth the hydrophone works and shows a line on F5 map to sound contact - and this is correct. But when you raise the periscope, the contact lines on F5 map from hydrophone dissapears :hmmm: So if you wish to see sound contact on map you must lower the periscope... Is it a bug, or I don't understand something?

[Philipp_Thomsen]

I don't remember if this behaviour of sh3 was already discussed:

When you are on periscope depth the hydrophone works and shows a line on F5 map to sound contact - and this is correct. But when you raise the periscope, the contact lines on F5 map from hydrophone dissapears :hmmm: So if you wish to see sound contact on map you must lower the periscope... Is it a bug, or I don't understand something?

Doesn't show the line anymore cos now (with periscope) you can actually see the targets, you don't need the sonar anymore. Still, if you want to head distant contacts, you can still go do the sonar station and listen to it yourself.

I thought you were on a trip to discover the world, now I know why you returned ... BDU called you back :haha:

Yeah, in my trips to discover the world I ended up finding Alcatraz... :damn:

@H.Sie Hope never dies.... But unfortunately, SH5 is about to surpass SH3 in all aspects, in the next months. So goodbye to sh3 for me. But if people can do for sh5 what you have done for sh3, man, we're in for a TREAT!

[Wolfstriked]

SH5 is about to surpass SH3 in all aspects, in the next months. So goodbye to sh3 for me. But if people can do for sh5 what you have done for sh3, man, we're in for a TREAT!

Have you checked out the HAHD SH3 thread?

[Blaz]

I have a problem.

I can`t patch my sh3.exe - wrong checksum error. Patch_sh3.bat can`t find compatibile version od sh3

I use Polish/German Box SH3 1.4 version (sh3.exe has 1.4.0.1 version).

Any ideas what to do? I would really love to use Your mod..

[Fubar2Niner]

Speaking of sound as Thompson pointed to,I think it would be great to have different interior ambient sounds as well....especially one to play when your damage control team is at work.

Also,is there a way to change the volume of the diesel sound from exterior towhen you enter the interior of the sub?I searched in SH3.sdl file but there is no setting that controls the sound lowering of the exteriordiesel engine sound when you enter the sub.Anyone??


Have you thought to try Thomsens superb sound pack shipmate ? In my estimation the best that's been released to date :yep: I've been using it for ages, the earblowing beneath decks diesels won't bother you any more :up:

Best regards.

Fubar2Niner

[Fubar2Niner]

@PT

Long time no see you ol' sea dog, welcome home mate :salute:

Best regards.

Fubar2Niner

[Wolfstriked]

Have you thought to try Thomsens superb sound pack shipmate ? In my estimation the best that's been released to date :yep: I've been using it for ages, the earblowing beneath decks diesels won't bother you any more :up:

Best regards.

Fubar2Niner

Yes I have tried them all.I really like theGWX diesel sound so I use that.I just have it set louder in SH.editor and also raised the actual file volume.

[h.sie]

@Blaz: Send me your sh3.exe file, so I can look into it. Please upload exe and send me the link via PM.

[SquareSteelBar]

I have a problem.

I can`t patch my sh3.exe - wrong checksum error. Patch_sh3.bat can`t find compatibile version od sh3

I use Polish/German Box SH3 1.4 version (sh3.exe has 1.4.0.1 version).

Any ideas what to do? I would really love to use Your mod..Welcome aboard! :salute:


What's the MD5 checksum of your sh3.exe? To get the checksum you need a tool like this (http://www.paehl.de/cms/dpasha_deutsch)


Cheers,
SquareSteelBar

[Stiebler]

It is desirable to introduce the option of ‘surrender’ of the U-boat when conditions are sufficiently severe. This was a feature of the old Aces of the Deep, which gave a small chance of being rescued by U-boat and returned to active service. SH3 lacks this feature, and other players in the past have requested this option as a mod.

Currently, whenever the U-boat is sunk in SH3, all the crew is killed, and players who play ‘Dead is Dead’ might as well remained submerged and take their chances when a real crew would certainly surface in order to try to save their lives. So it would be desirable to introduce this feature, partly to encourage the ‘dead-is-dead’ players to surface in the hope of being ‘rescued by another U-boat’, and partly to save some or all of the crew.

So what actually is required from this mod?
1. The U-boat must have suffered sufficient hull damage to want to surrender.
2. The U-boat must be on the surface.
3. It is not necessary that the U-boat be under attack when it surrenders. For example, several commanders had to abandon their U-boats after an air attack caused serious damage, even though the aircraft had long departed.
4. There must be a way of communicating the surrender to the program code.
5. The program code must then compute a chance (say 20%) that you will be rescued and returned to active service. (I.e., you can legitimately start a new career a few months after your U-boat was sunk, with a new boat and a new crew.) Otherwise, the program will compute how many crew are killed and how many survive.

I tried the idea of intercepting the ‘Pressure’ message when the U-boat is sunk, in deep diving tests when U-boat is ‘destroyed by pressure’, but the code which calls the text ‘pressure’ is obviously a general purpose message handling piece of code centred around two consecutive subroutines, of which the first begins at 0x0050DCC0. This code is called very frequently, so not much hope for using it.

It seems to me, however, that most of what is needed in already in place for coding:
1. Must have sufficient hull damage to surrender. H.sie and I have already found a way of including hull-damage in our other code (eg, for the U-tanker repairs).
2. Must be on the surface. This is a tricky problem, and I haven’t been able to find the flag (there must be a simple flag, and it seems to be only one or two bytes judging by my trials to locate it.) But see (3) below.
3. Must be able to communicate the surrender to the program code. Now here there is a solution. Status messages sent to BdU from the U-boat can be intercepted, so the program just has to make one test: Is hull damage sufficiently severe? If so, set a ‘Surrender’ flag to true. And the great attraction of this method is that status messages can only be sent when you are on the surface, and it does not matter whether or not you are under attack! I have now implemented and tested this part of the code completely. Also this is realistic! The ocean is large! If you want to abandon ship and be rescued, you really had better send a message about it.
4. And now the tricky bit. When you finally sink, the code must intercept the message in the code around 0x0050DCC0 that ‘U-boat destroyed by ...’ and substitute the message ‘U-boat abandoned at sea with heavy damage’. At the same time it can calculate how many crew survived (a random figure related to degree of hull damage), and whether the 20% probability of being rescued applies. (If so, supply the message ‘U-boat abandoned at sea, crew rescued’.) This last part, I am attempting now.

In summary then, what I am proposing is this:
a) When your U-boat is severely damaged, then you can send a distress signal - but you must be on the surface to do it.
b) Then you sink your U-boat deliberately. It is called ‘scuttling your boat’ to prevent it from falling into enemy hands.
c) Finally you get a message saying that you and some/most of your crew have survived, and there is a 20% chance that you will be rescued by another U-boat. Otherwise you become a prisoner-of-war.

All OK? Does anyone have any problems with this as a working principle?

Stiebler.

[irish1958]

This would be a great addition to the game; I can't think of anything to improve these ideas.
SH3CMDR does have an option to surrender if on the surface.

[Aces]

Hi mate,

I noticed once in S3ditor that StatemachineClass has a possible value of "Is_Underwater" which might help you find id the u-boat is surfaced, I'm guessing that if "Is_Underwater" is false then the u-boat is on the surface, just an idea.

Best regards

Aces

[JeromeHeretic]

I have problem with V15F3. Everything works well in game, but I can't load saved games, because everytime game crash even if i'm submerged even if not.
When i got save from a port, not at all time, bat often the game crashes on start of new mission too. When i use non patched sh3.exe, everything is OK.

IMPORTANT!
I'm not a windows user! I'm running SH3 on linux in Wine 1.3.19 environment, so it is possible, that this is realy specific problem!

I have in computer 2G RAM and when i want to run game, there is about 1.7G of free memory for wine and the game. What happens in case that game crash is, that ANYTIME the game run out of memory and linux kernel at this moment do OOM kill of that process.
In real it looks as save is loading, i see normaly progress bar, at the end screen starts to be black, it's in the moment, when normaly message "Not so long ago..." is displayed. At this moment, HDD LED start shine continuously, which mean, that in this moment kernel try to free all caches and moving processes in background to swap, because SH3 is requesting more memory pages for alocating and try free more memory to the moment, when there's no more memory and kernel must kill this process.

I can do some closer look for that problem (for example i'm playing with IID submarine, which is surely not often situation) if you want. At this case tell me things TO DO, I'll try and tell you results.

[Hitman]

All OK? Does anyone have any problems with this as a working principle?

But how is SH3 going to recognize that, when you want to continue the career? Currently, when you are killed at sea, you get when you try to restart the career a last save with the description "Gefallen" ("Fallen"? I'm using only german language text) and that save game is locked -although you can reload a previous save-.

How are you going to change that status in the game? Maybe tricking the game into rolling a dice, and if luck strikes, you are set as "returned to base" some months later but with new uboat assigned? And if no luck, then you would still be dead at sea? Is that the idea? :hmmm:

In any case, IIRC you can already simulate that with SH3 Commander, i.e. you might die but Commander allows you to resurrect the Kaleun as if he had abandoned and scuttled the boat, then been rescued.

Aditional note: It could be of interest to increase the chance of being rescued depending on the area, if possible. Near Norway, France and in the Mediterranean a crew had obviously much more chances of surviving.

[Volk2]

I see one problem - what if your radio is destroyed? You cannot send a message then. Beside that, really great idea.

[LGN1]

Nice idea, Stiebler :up:

Just one comment: I don't think that hull damage is a good indicator for surrendering the boat. I guess most players don't know the hull damage, so it's difficult to know when you can give up. I think a proper solution would be if the player could decide on his own when to surrender.

One idea might be that you have to move your crew out of a special compartment, e.g., with an empty radio room (can you still send a radio message in this case :06:) you can surrender or with empty bow quarters and bow torpedo room. Or completely empty engine rooms (usually at least one of them is occupied).

Regards, LGN1

[sharkbit]

Great idea Stiebler! :yeah:

[h.sie]

My BDU messages mod (based on Stieblers BDU congratulation mod) is finished. Instead of 2 well-known messages we now have about 28 messages, depending on the following data:


total tonnage sunk
tonnage sunk since last status report
hull damage
fuel
remaining torpedoes

Harder than programming was to make some phrases (thanks to LGN1 for some ideas). You'll find here my german phrases.

Can anyone (native english speaker?) please translate them into good and military-like english language?

; BDU-Messages
; allgemeines
4835=Keine neutralen Schiffe versenken, Sie Anfänger!
4836=Übertragungsfehler! Wiederholen Sie Ihre letzte Meldung!

; Sprit oder Torpedos alle oder Druckkörper beschädigt
4837=Rückmarsch antreten! Einlaufhafen wie befohlen!

; Gratulationen für das Erreichen einer neuen Tonnage Kategorie
; 20000 - 40000 t
4838=Sehr gute Ergebnisse!
; 40000 - 60000 t
4839=Gratulation. Exzellente Resultate!
; 60000 - 80000 t
4840=Deutschland ist stolz auf Sie und Ihre Besatzung!
; 80000 - 100000 t
4841=Da ist wohl eine Auszeichnung fällig!
; > 100000 t
4842=Gratulation dem neuen Ritterkreuzträger!

; Für das Versenken von >15000t
4843=Gratulation. Das wird den Gegner in die Knie zwingen.
4844=Bravo. Ein exzellenter Schuss.

; Für das Versenken von >10000t
4845=Sehr gute Arbeit! Ein entscheidender Schlag.
4846=Bravo. Nehmen Sie sich vor feindlichen Zerstörern in acht.

; Für das Versenken von >5000t
4847=Saubere Arbeit. Machen Sie weiter so!
4848=Gute Arbeit! Halten Sie Ausschau nach Einzelfahrern.

; Für das Versenken von >2000t
4849=Gut gemacht! Dranbleiben!
4850=Die Versenkung wurde registriert. Überlebende sofort melden!

; Zufällige Mitteilungen
4851=Meldung erhalten. Machen Sie weiter wie befohlen!
4852=Nachricht empfangen.
4853=Kurzsignal empfangen. Erwarte nächste Status- und Wettermeldung in 24h.
4854=Meldung empfangen. Bleiben Sie wachsam.
4855=Nachricht erhalten. Nicht unterkriegen lassen!
4856=Meldung erhalten. Vorsicht vor feindlichen Flugzeugen!
4857=Meldung empfangen. Weiterer Funkverkehr ab sofort über Längstwelle 20,4kHz.
4858=Nachricht empfangen. Funkverkehr bis auf Weiteres über Kurzwelle.

; zur Motivation
4859=Seien Sie aggressiver! Wir brauchen mehr Erfolge!
4860=Seien Sie mutiger! Ran an den Feind!
4861=Kommen Sie ja nicht mit vollen Torpedorohren nach hause!
4862=Angriff! Ran! Versenken!

[Gerald]

Good work,:salute:

[Stiebler]

Thanks very much everyone who made comments on the idea of a U-boat surrendering/being abandoned at sea.

I take the point that one could also roll dice for a similar result, or use SH3Commander's randomising routine, but that is not really the same, is it?

You wait until until you are sunk, and then roll a die (one die, two dice) to see whether you can play again. The problem, as I stated earlier, is that then there is no incentive ever to return to the surface when the position becomes hopeless underwater. You will be sunk either deep or on the surface, you still get to roll your die. So you might as well stay submerged and hope for a miracle.

With a surrender option, you have to be on the surface first. That is an important difference. And if your radio is wrecked, then you cannot signal. That seems realistic to me.

I'm still working on the code.

Concerning hull damage as test:
There has been a lot of debate in the past about how much the crew should know of the boat's damage condition. But, realistically, it would be obvious on the surface, and fairly obvious from the extent of leaks when submerged. Long ago, as one of his first mods, H.sie produced a four-colo(u)r indication of hull-damage, white, yellow, orange. red. This is fitted to NYGM as standard. No reason why users of other mods, including GWX, shouldn't use it too.

@H.sie:
I can do the English translations for you, into naval English.

Stiebler.

[h.sie]

@Stiebler: That would be very kind! Thank you! Doesn't need to be an exact translation. Could also fit your personal taste.

h.sie

[Stiebler]

@H.sie:
Here they are:

; General
4835=Don’t sink neutral ships, you amateur!
4836=Error in transmission! Repeat last message!

; Fuel, Torpedo or hull-damage
4837=Start return! Home base as directed!

; Congratulations for achievement of new tonnage-category
; 20000 - 40000 tons
4838=Very good results!
; 40000 - 60000 tons
4839=Congratulations! Excellent results!
; 60000 - 80000 tons
4840=Germany salutes you and your crew!
; 80000 - 100000 tons
4841=That is worth an award!
; > 100000 tons
4842=Congratulations - new wearer of the Knight’s Cross!

; For sinking >15000t
4843=Great work! That will hurt the enemy!
4844=Bravo! Excellent shooting!

; For sinking >10000t
4845=Very good work! A decisive blow!
4846=Bravo! But next time near enemy destroyers!

; For sinking >5000t
4847=Nice work! Carry on!
4848=Good work! Continue search for single ships.

; For sinking >2000t
4849=Well done! Keep at it!
4850=Sinking registered. Report any survivors immediately!

; Occasional communications
4851=Message received. Continue as ordered!
4852=Signal received.
4853=Short-signal received. Expect next status- and weather- news in 24h.
4854=Signal acknowledged. Stay alert.
4855=Message acknowledged. We have high expectations!
4856=Message received. Beware of aircraft!
4857=Message acknowledged. All further transmissions on long-wave 20.4kHz.
4858=Signal acknowledged. Use short-wave until further notice.

; For motivation
4859=Be more aggressive! We need better results!
4860=Show more courage! Charge at the enemy!
4861=You can’t come home with fully-loaded torpedo-tubes!
4862=Attack! Shoot! Sink!

[Note: RitterKreuz is always translated in English as 'Knight's Cross'. However, there is no general agreement as to whether the apostrophe (') is required. It looks more natural in place, though.]

Good luck!
Stiebler.

[h.sie]

@Stiebler: Thanks very much!

[max-peck]

Outstanding work.

It's impressed me so much I've had to re-install SH3 after a break of about a year just for 'one last go'.

Thanks to all involved in this :up:

[JeromeHeretic]

What means line "4825=;" in both *menus.txt files in V15F3?

[h.sie]

@Jerome: That means: Reserved for later use.

Does it work for you in the meantime? Fortunately, I have no Linux, so I couldn't help to locate the error.

[NGT]

................................................

All OK? Does anyone have any problems with this as a working principle?

Stiebler.

@Stiebler

Hello Stiebler, h.sie and all captains

Obviously, this option of surrender and come back, is useful when ones likes to continue a carrier, even with some time gap (time to go back, recover etc), with some realism, and without "tweaking" the data inside "My Documents".

It is easy to take the same player name and start a new career with the old grad, but, the purpose is to give some more taste of "continuation".

I suggest to calculate how many of our crew will survive, by taking out from them an amount of renown points related to hull damage.

So, for 80 % hull damage, take out 80% of renown points from each one. If the remaining points are less than x [where x the number you suggest] then the sailor will be consider like dead.

Of course the finally alive crew will start next patrol with new U-boot with all the renown points, because the above calculation is virtual.

The logic is, because we like to continue career during the war, to keep some of the best elements. And the more renown one earn, the more chance to survive, because more experience.



An other idea: to ensure that: if surfacing for surrender, the destroyers and other warships should stop shooting against the U-boot. .. .

. . . and in case of scuttling, some lifeboats and debris ---8212;from the well know mod---8212; is not too much, I believe...



I would like to mention, especially after all this tweaks of SH3.exe, that the hull integrity is not the only one factor for surrender: end of oxygen stocks, destroyed hydrophones with 5 destroyers detected before hydrophone destruction, battery life down to almost 0, so we can surface only with blow ballast (but destroyers attacks us and we move at 0 knots---8230;), major crew loss making U-boot impossible to manage, periscopes and pumps and rudders destroyed---8230;



During the war, one U-boot captain committed suicide during depth charging, but the first watch officer managed to take the boat back to the port.

I means by that, it is enough to introduce just a couple of button, and left to the player the decision of surrender, scuttling, dying, etc---8230; (I understand of course, is not to easy, I know...)

Thanks for hosting.

Thank you one more time for all your good will for improving this game :rock:

[JeromeHeretic]

@Jerome: That means: Reserved for later use.

Ah so :har:

Does it work for you in the meantime? Fortunately, I have no Linux, so I couldn't help to locate the error.

I add next 2G RAM and now it works fine. You doing good job, man. :salute:

[Osmium Steele]

H.sie, a question.

Do you know if the propulsion state upon surfacing; lined up for battery charge, is determined by the sh3.exe file? My fear is that it is hardcoded, similar to the "1WO to the bridge".

I'm trying to find a way to make standard propulsion the default state upon surfacing, and am having no luck finding a flag in the .cfg files.

[sharkbit]

Question(s): :hmmm:
How can I use Stiebler's U-Tanker fix he came up with in his continuation of h.sie's fixes with versions of your fixes that are V15F3 or greater??

Will the later versions of your fixes overwrite any of Stiebler's fixes that were compatible with the V15E3 patch?

I love the idea of the U-Tanker fix but it seems that the later versions of h.sie's fixes may overwrite Stiebler's continuation fixes.

Hope that makes sense.
Thanks.

:)

[h.sie]

@Osmium: No, I don't know, but I assume that it's hardcoded. I didn't find the according code yet.

@sharkbit: The U-Tanker Fix from Stiebler will be (besides other mods from him) part of the forthcoming version V15G.

[Hitman]

@H.Sie:

If you want, I can keep the thread title update with a reference to the current version, so users who check briefly or only once every few days can inmediately see if there is a new version. It is a matter of adding "(Current V15F)" to the thread title, but making the rest a bit shorter would probably help :shucks:

[complutum]

I've got the Stiebler's patch installed, which effects i will get if i install your V15F version?, and just in case, wich is the procedure to install it?
I mean, must i delete the Stiebler's patch or can i install your patch over it?
Thanks both of you for this great job.

[Stiebler]

@complutum:

You cannot install a H.sie patch over the Stiebler patch, nor the other way round. But V15G will contain all the patches from the Hsie_Stiebler patch (with improvements by Hsie), so just be patient for a little longer.

@NGT:
Your proposals (that hull integrity affects player renown, and decides who should die and who should survive) are very good ones, but unfortunately difficult to implement.

@Hitman:
You made a proposal some time ago that weather conditions should affect the speed of convoys and individual ships. This was an excellent idea, but neither Hsie nor I have been able to discover the correct code!

I spent a long time trying to discover the correct code, and found that I could make ships and convoys run at quarter-speed in tests. There was just one problem: actually, it was the *reported* speeds that were one-quarter speed. It is no fun being chased by a destroyer when your UZO tells you that it is making 8 kts (and you are making 16 kts), but the lookouts tell you that the distance between the destroyer and the U-boat is closing fast!

So we have had to put your idea aside for a while.

Equally we still have no idea concerning how to tell if a U-boat is close to land (although we can detect its grid), which rules out some of your other suggestions for the present time. Including your suggestion about weather in the other Hsie weather thread, but answered here.

Stiebler.

[Silent Ace]

Nice idea, Stiebler :up:

Just one comment: I don't think that hull damage is a good indicator for surrendering the boat. I guess most players don't know the hull damage, so it's difficult to know when you can give up. I think a proper solution would be if the player could decide on his own when to surrender.

One idea might be that you have to move your crew out of a special compartment, e.g., with an empty radio room (can you still send a radio message in this case :06:) you can surrender or with empty bow quarters and bow torpedo room. Or completely empty engine rooms (usually at least one of them is occupied).

Regards, LGN1

Proper mindset LGN1.
I absolutely support your idea.

[h.sie]

@Hitman: I think that is not easy, since there are always at least 2 different versions: one beta and one or two (hopefully) stable. So for a quick overview I already changed the 1st post of the thread. At the top of the 1st post you see if there are new versions available.

@Stiebler: Up to now I thought, career is finshed if one surrenders a boat...???

[fitzcarraldo]

It seems correct, those are good conditions for surrender.

Is it possible work on the SH3.EXE for this modification?

Best regards.

Fitzcarraldo :salute:

[Wolfstriked]

H.sie....possible to fix the raingear not coming out in storms unless you put each crew member inside the boat and back on deck again.You "could" just do a quick dive and before it has a chance to submerge you surface the boat and the crew will have rain gear on.But that is not fun....just wondering if thats doable?

[h.sie]

@Wolfstriked: Months ago I looked into that issue and already had a working solution. Shortly before release, I discovered that it had an unwanted side-effect which I couldn't solve, so that I put it back on the todo-list.

reminder: The main focus of my work is gameplay related fixes (I know that there are exceptins from that). The problem mentioned above does not belong into that category.

[Hitman]

@Stiebler: Thanks anyway, I'll try to keep thinking about other improvements for the game :up:

@H.Sie: No problem, as you wish. Any other thread maintenance thing you need for me, just call :up:

[Wolfstriked]

The to-do list is good enough,thanks H.sie.

[Crécy]

Hi, I'm not able to patch SH3.exe as my .exe file is 1.4. Is there a way to still enable these realism and hardcore fixes?

[h.sie]

@Crecy: In the next hours/days I'll release a new beta version V15G1. The patcher will now also support starforce contaminated sh3.exe. Try that one, maybe it works for you. If you want to play with it instead of beta testing, just disable the new fixes that came with V15G1, so you quasi have the last stable version V15F3.

it's hardcode fixes, not hardcore

[Crécy]

@Crecy: In the next hours/days I'll release a new beta version V15G1. The patcher will now also support starforce contaminated sh3.exe. Try that one, maybe it works for you. If you want to play with it instead of beta testing, just disable the new fixes that came with V15G1, so you quasi have the last stable version V15F3.

Ok, great! :yeah:


it's hardcode fixes, not hardcore

Haha :DL.

[Wolfstriked]

Hsie,any idea why everything works from the patch but I do not get the scope vibrations from speed?

[frau kaleun]

Hsie,any idea why everything works from the patch but I do not get the scope vibrations from speed?

Did you copy the files from the Supplement folder into your game folder? There should be three: CameraBehavior.act, EnvSim.act, and SH3Sim.act. The first one gives you the blur effect on the 'scopes as you increase speed, if you don't use h.sie's version you will not see the effect.

[h.sie]

ALL files from the supplement folder should be used / copied using JSGME. These files are not optional, they are essential. (the only non-essential is camerabehavior.act - if you don't use it, you don't have the periscope "vibration".).

EnvSim.act is not contained (it was only part of Stieblers edition)

[Wolfstriked]

Did not know that,thanks.

[h.sie]

New version V15G1 available for beta testing!

What's new?

(This is only a short overview of the news - a detailed description of the fixes will be added to the 1st post of this thread during the next days).


Stieblers U-Tanker Fix V2 (reworked by h.sie). Pseudo-docking at an U-Tanker allows partial repairs of pressure-hull and refuelling and - new in V2 : reloading of 1-4 air torpedoes (to the internal fore reserve slots). LI now gives some status reports.



BDU-Messages Mod (based on Stieblers BDU-congratulations mod): Instead of the monotonic 2-3 standard BDU responses to status reports there are now 28 different messages that will be sent, depending on tonnage sunk, fuel supply, hull damage, remaining torpedoes.



Radar Fix. Radar automatically switches back to ON state, when it has been switched OFF in high waves. Additionally, now the default state is OFF when a game is loaded.



Stieblers WarNews Fix (reworked): TC doesn't drop down to 1 when a radio message is received.



Fog Warning: Watch Officer now also reports when fog disappears.



Reworked O2-Gauges by SquareSteelBar.



SilentRunning Fix (by Stiebler and h.sie): I added this fix, although it has some potential for optimizations and I can recommend it only for NYGM players! Thus, it is deactivated per default. If you want to use it, you have to activate it with the OptionsSelector. This fix will be replaced as soon as I find a better buoyancy solution.

Thanks go to:


Stiebler: For his permission to modify his fixes and for message translation into english.



SquareSteelBar: for the gauges.



All the testers and reporters that help to optimise the fixes.

[complutum]

As i have stieblers patch installed, how can i install your V15G version?

I understand i must take the SH3.old file and rename it as SH3.exe again and then i can apply your new test patch, obviously i think i must delete my current SH3.exe wich is patched with stieblers one.

Am i right?

Thanks for your un incredible Job. That Makes SH3 more than a simply Gámez.

[h.sie]

@complutum: your strategy is correct. but make sure to have a copy of your original unpatched sh3.exe somewhere on your HDD, since that file is always the basis for further patches.

[h.sie]

(double post - deleted)

[Crécy]

Does V15G1 work with starforce .exe now?

[h.sie]

should work with starforce now. try it.

[h.sie]

After having spend the last 10 weeks (mod versions V15F and V15G) with predominantly programming, reworking and implementing other peoples ideas, I have totally lost my joy in modding for the second time now. My own mistake!

So I take a rest now to concentrate on real life issues (and at most fix some bugs in V15G).

And after that, in order to make the same mistake not for a third time, I will concentrate on my own ideas. I have a huge list of things that could be programmed.

Any further ideas or even mods are considered by me as non-binding suggestions, which I will implement only if I like.

@Stiebler: I hope that in the meantime you continue to program your own exe patch especially for NYGM, and I also hope that we can continue to help each other in the future as we did in the past. Thanks again.

[Crécy]

Got the same message as before: "no compatible .exe found"

[h.sie]

so upload your sh3.exe and send me the link via PM. I'll look into it ASAP.

[h.sie]

@Crecy: I looked into your sh3.exe. You already applied the 4GB patch. As you can see in the documentation, you must use the original unpatched sh3.exe from your CD.

[SquareSteelBar]

...you must use the original unpatched sh3.exe from your CD.After that it's possible to apply the 4GB patch via HsieOptionsSelector

[Crécy]

@Crecy: I looked into your sh3.exe. You already applied the 4GB patch. As you can see in the documentation, you must use the original unpatched sh3.exe from your CD.

Ah, of course.

Thank you very much h.sie! Superb work with these fixes! Now I can finally start sinking allied shipping! :salute:

[max-peck]

So I take a rest

You deserve it H.Sie.

Great work, thanks :up:


EDIT: Just one question. What does the silent running fix do?
I have read the documentation included in V15G but cannot find anything regarding this.

EDIT AGAIN!
I've just seen that you can only recommend it only for NYGM players.
I don't run NYGM so I guess I'll just leave it turned off.

[h.sie]

@max-peck: The silent-running fix from Stiebler is an attempt to simulate slow sinking when silent-running at slow speed, since pumps are not working. Stiebler developed that fix using NYGM as supermod. In order to make that fix work properly in NYGM, he lengthened the periscopes in NYGM3_5. Since other supermods don't have these special longer periscopes, I cannot recommend that fix for other supermods. In this point Stiebler and me have different views. Instead of lenghtening the periscopes in order to make a fix work properly, I would try hard to change the mod, until it works with normal periscopes, or, if I don't succeed, I would leave that mod out. That's the reason why the silent-running fix is disabled by default - as a compromise.

[max-peck]

OK roger that, thanks mate :up:

[sharkbit]

Thanks again for all of your hard work h.sie! :salute:
It is much appreciated. Without the hard of modders like you SH3 would have been placed in the dust bin a long time ago.

Take a well deserved break.

:)

[h.sie]

1st post updated with detailed information about the new mods of V15G1.

[Wolfstriked]

Yes I agree,thanks Hsie.I really enjoy the realism the hardcode patch brings.Also,I use the excellent NYGM now and modded in realistic lengths for ob and attack scopes not knowing why it had the scopes sticking way out of the subs.:O:

[Magic1111]

1st post updated with detailed information about the new mods of V15G1.

Many thanks h.sie for all your work, W-O-N-D-E-R-F-U-L !!! :yeah:

Best regards,
Magic:salute:

[JeromeHeretic]

Great!

BTW: h.sie, do you know something about astronomical model in SH3? Is it hardcoded in core of game, or is it possible to modify/study it in some easier way? I know about real navigation mod and read some things about troubles with astronomical model in game, but i want to know closer info.
I have a idea, that when i will exactly know, how astronomical model in game is working, i will be able to do some "fake" celestial tables, which will allow to get actual longitude (latitude is not problem, surely on north hemisphere in latitudes where Polaris is visible, what to do on south, it depends on astronomical model, so i don't know answer just now...). Other way is modify astronomical model to work with real celestial tables.
I was looking about some info and didn't find anything. Can you push me a bit, where is it stored and what i'm exactly looking for?

[h.sie]

@Jerome: I fear I cannot help you. Since I never saw any config or dat file of sh3 containing astronomical data, I guess that this stuff is hardcoded. But I've not seen any codesegment dealing with that.

[Robin40]

geezzzz...V15G1 loaded fine!...I will try if there any conflicts

I'm so excited, so pardon me if I ask this (maybe there is an answer in the docs)...but I can't wait:salute:

How can I modify the options?

[Silent Ace]

What do you think of the idea that future patch out the possibility of accelerating the time during the game.

[Aces]

Hi h.sie,

Thank you very much for the latest version. I only had a very short time to fire up the game yesterday evening but it loaded up just fine.

Many thanks an d kind regards.

Leigh

[h.sie]

@Aces: I know this situation very well: No time for playing. Thanks anyway.

@Silent_Ace: I don't understand what you mean.....could you explain?

@Robin: Just use the OptionsSelector.

[Robin40]

@Aces: I know this situation very well: No time for playing. Thanks anyway.

@Silent_Ace: I don't understand what you mean.....could you explain?

@Robin: Just use the OptionsSelector.

just as many times as I wish?

[h.sie]

@Robin: Yes.

[flakmonkey]

Re: war news, in latest v15G beta version, for some reason im still dropping to 1x when messages are received, otherwise all is working as advertised.

*edit* scratch that, issue seems to have fixed itself, first few messages dropped my TC, since then they have been okay, strange... Maybe i should stop messing with the game mid-patrol!

[Sachse]

Moin h.sie and Stiebler

I used the V15F3 mod with all options on. The vanilla game bug fixing is great and i love all new function. Great, great work. :rock:
Thank you.

[Robin40]

Did you copy the files from the Supplement folder into your game folder? There should be three: CameraBehavior.act, EnvSim.act, and SH3Sim.act. The first one gives you the blur effect on the 'scopes as you increase speed, if you don't use h.sie's version you will not see the effect.

In V15G there is no EnvSim.act

[Aces]

Hi folks,

Maybe I read it wrong but I thought the suppliment from V15F works with all mods from V15F onwards so you could use the suppliment folder supplied with V15F with V15G1.

Regards

Aces

[h.sie]

@Sachse: Selber Moin und danke!

@Robin: Right, there is no EnvSim.act.

@Aces: Nooooo. Fatal error! Use

Supplement for V15G1 only for V15G1

and

Supplement for V15F3 only for V15F3.

Otherwise you risk CTD.

[Aces]

Thanks mate,

Regards

Aces

[Salvadoreno]

Hey guys

Why cant the silent running slow sinking be utilized with GWX?