[TEC] SH5.exe patches to fix bugs and add functionality

[gap]

thanks for sharing this gap, very interesting to read, especially the failure rates at the beginning of the war and all the reasons for the failures :yeah:

yep, in my opinion that's a very good reference. I am glad that you like it too! :DL

[flostt]

When using TDW's Generic Patcher remember his note at the bottom of post #1 :

NOTE: DISABLE ALL PATCHES WITH OLD PATCHER BEFORE APPLYING NEW PATCHES WITH NEW PATCHER! THIS APPLIES ONLY TO PATCHES RELATED TO SHSIM.ACT AND SHCOLLISIONS.ACT

I read it and forgot about it......and it took me quite a while to get everything fixed again.....

[Deepsheep]

I have a steam version of the game. I'm sad the current patch will not work with my version, but it sounds like applying the fix at runtime would solve this issue as well.

[TheDarkWraith]

v1.0.31.0 released. See post #1

This version adds the ability to attach to a process and inject/remove DLLs.

To attach to a process selected File-->Attach. To detach from the process select File-->Detach.

To inject a DLL/ACT file click Inject button. To remove a DLL/ACT file from the process select the file you want to remove from the Loaded modules listview. Then click Remove.

Everything else should be pretty self-explanatory.

If it's unable to inject/remove it's probably because you have older version of kernel32.dll on your computer. Currently I have the offsets for LoadLibraryA and FreeLibrary hard-coded. I have to add code that will read the IAT to get it's address yet.

This can be run on 32bit or 64bit OSs. I have it coded to select the appropriate function calls based on whether your OS is 32 bit or 64 bit.

Working on the ability to inject/remove files that are nothing but hex code. Since I can't call LoadLibraryA and FreeLibrary on them (they're not DLLs) I have to code in something to allocate process memory and then dump the contents of those files into the new process memory.

:|\\

[TheDarkWraith]

v1.0.33.0 released. See post #1

This version allows you to inject a file (ANY type of file) into a process. You also have the option of executing the file you loaded :D You can inject ANY file into a process (bmp, hex, txt, etc, dll, exe).

If you elect to execute the file you injected, the last command HAS to be a RETN statement (or a RETN x if you need to pop temp variables off the stack). If you forget this the process WILL CRASH! You don't have to add the RETN statement if you are going to branch to somewhere else in the process but in doing so don't forget to pop the return value pushed onto the stack by the stub!

The execution will begin at the first byte found in the file. I'll add a way for you to specify beginning execution point in next version.

I've included a little file (TestFile(retn).hex) that you can inject into the SH5 process. When it asks if you want to execute it say yes. SH5 will never know anything every happened! The file is just one command, RETN, which means return to caller. Here's how the inject file works:
- the app allocates memory in the process in a multiple of pagesize to fit the file being injected
- the file contents are copied into this memory
- if the user selected execute then:
- a stub is made that will branch execution to the injected file. The first thing the stub does is push the EIP to the stack. This way when the injected code issues a RETN statement execution goes back to it's original place :D

There are two new buttons - Inject file and Remove file. They do just as they sound. To remove a file select the file from the Injections listview and then press Remove file.

Working on dumping process memory and reloading it now so user can modify it. Also adding a way to set watches on memory and letting you define the update time interval on them :DL

The LoadLibraryA and FreeLibray offsets are still hardcoded for kernel32.dll. If you get failed to inject or failed to remove it's probably because you have older version of kernel32.dll installed on your computer. I should have these hard codes removed in next version.

:|\\

[quink99]

v1.0.33.0 released. See post #1

This version allows you to inject a file (ANY type of file) into a process. You also have the option of executing the file you loaded :D You can inject ANY file into a process (bmp, hex, txt, etc, dll, exe).

If you elect to execute the file you injected, the last command HAS to be a RETN statement (or a RETN x if you need to pop temp variables off the stack). If you forget this the process WILL CRASH! You don't have to add the RETN statement if you are going to branch to somewhere else in the process but in doing so don't forget to pop the return value pushed onto the stack by the stub!

The execution will begin at the first byte found in the file. I'll add a way for you to specify beginning execution point in next version.

I've included a little file (TestFile(retn).hex) that you can inject into the SH5 process. When it asks if you want to execute it say yes. SH5 will never know anything every happened! The file is just one command, RETN, which means return to caller. Here's how the inject file works:
- the app allocates memory in the process in a multiple of pagesize to fit the file being injected
- the file contents are copied into this memory
- if the user selected execute then:
- a stub is made that will branch execution to the injected file. The first thing the stub does is push the EIP to the stack. This way when the injected code issues a RETN statement execution goes back to it's original place :D

There are two new buttons - Inject file and Remove file. They do just as they sound. To remove a file select the file from the Injections listview and then press Remove file.

Working on dumping process memory and reloading it now so user can modify it. Also adding a way to set watches on memory and letting you define the update time interval on them :DL

The LoadLibraryA and FreeLibray offsets are still hardcoded for kernel32.dll. If you get failed to inject or failed to remove it's probably because you have older version of kernel32.dll installed on your computer. I should have these hard codes removed in next version.

:|\\

TDW, I was wondering if you might have a Child's Garden-type explanation of your revised MOD above of what this revision is and what it does spoken slowly and using small words for those computer poster children among'st us.

Thanks

[BIGREG]

:salute:

To see this is great :yep:, but it is beyond my knowledge :oops:

What this mean in concrete :06:

The possibility of adding what ?

- Contollers for. SIM? (Dials, lights ....)

- Otherwise to open other programes eg: Enigma, sextant ...

- :88) .....

[volodya61]

TDW, I was wondering if you might have a Child's Garden-type explanation of your revised MOD above of what this revision is and what it does spoken slowly and using small words for those computer poster children among'st us.

Thanks

Absolutely agree :up:
I would say the same thing, but couldn't find the right words.. my poor English..:oops:
I don't understand it myself (my poor English), and I can't explain this in sukhoi.ru..
TDW! Maybe you can make a simple version for children, please!

[Endroo]

Oh my! I can't seem to find the older patches, but the CO2 fix in the latest asks for it. What do I do?

[TheDarkWraith]

:salute:

To see this is great :yep:, but it is beyond my knowledge :oops:

What this mean in concrete :06:

The possibility of adding what ?

- Contollers for. SIM? (Dials, lights ....)

- Otherwise to open other programes eg: Enigma, sextant ...

- :88) .....

Absolutely agree :up:
I would say the same thing, but couldn't find the right words.. my poor English..:oops:
I don't understand it myself (my poor English), and I can't explain this in sukhoi.ru..
TDW! Maybe you can make a simple version for children, please!

In laymen's terms I'm giving you the tools to add/expand/change a process. If you're not familiar with what a process is it's a Windows term - once again, in laymen's terms, think of it as the encapsulation of everything needed to run an application in windows.

DLL injection let's you write code in some editor (Visual Studio for instance), compile that code into a DLL, and then inject that into a process to either change it's functionality, override a functionality, and/or add new functionality. Now simply injecting a DLL isn't going to do much. Yes, the DLL is now part of the process but it's never being 'called'. You need to add hooks into the existing code so that your new code is called.

If you're really computer saavy you can replace an existing DLL with your own. That lets you do things the app never intended to do (DLL injection/code injection does also but this way is easier for some)

Injecting a file is just as it sounds - taking the contents of a file and placing it inside an active process. What does this do for you? I can think of many things! You all are familiar with my patches - you load up the patch file and then you enable the patches you want. Think of those patches as files being injected into the SH5 process (I actually write new data to existing files but it should help you understand the concept).

Now for those of you, like me, who love assembly (long live DOS!) injecting a file is the way to go. You can write your 'code' in an assembler, take the hex file generated and inject it into the process. Once I code in the ability to dump and replace process memory then you will have an easy way to add your hooks to call your new code.

I'm working on the ability to add watches currently. If your familiar with Visual Studio then you know what watches are already. If not I'll try to make it a little clear: say you have an application that displays a value on a screen and you'd really like to change that value and/or monitor it. We have no idea where this value resides so we have to do a little exploring inside the active process. We pick an area of memory and set a watch on it - the watch will monitor that area of memory for any changes. When it detects changes it can either suspend the process or just update the app with the new value. This allows you to see what that memory is doing in real time. By setting many different watches (and changing what they are monitoring) you will eventually find where the variable is located so you can manipulate it.

I made the app generic in nature so that it can be used on anything. It's not fixed to any particular app or process.

This app now let's you 'play' in my favorite playground...process memory. You are limited only by your imagination/skill level :up:

:|\\

[quink99]

In laymen's terms I'm giving you the tools to add/expand/change a process. If you're not familiar with what a process is it's a Windows term - once again, in laymen's terms, think of it as the encapsulation of everything needed to run an application in windows.

DLL injection let's you write code in some editor (Visual Studio for instance), compile that code into a DLL, and then inject that into a process to either change it's functionality, override a functionality, and/or add new functionality. Now simply injecting a DLL isn't going to do much. Yes, the DLL is now part of the process but it's never being 'called'. You need to add hooks into the existing code so that your new code is called.

If you're really computer saavy you can replace an existing DLL with your own. That lets you do things the app never intended to do (DLL injection/code injection does also but this way is easier for some)

Injecting a file is just as it sounds - taking the contents of a file and placing it inside an active process. What does this do for you? I can think of many things! You all are familiar with my patches - you load up the patch file and then you enable the patches you want. Think of those patches as files being injected into the SH5 process (I actually write new data to existing files but it should help you understand the concept).

Now for those of you, like me, who love assembly (long live DOS!) injecting a file is the way to go. You can write your 'code' in an assembler, take the hex file generated and inject it into the process. Once I code in the ability to dump and replace process memory then you will have an easy way to add your hooks to call your new code.

I'm working on the ability to add watches currently. If your familiar with Visual Studio then you know what watches are already. If not I'll try to make it a little clear: say you have an application that displays a value on a screen and you'd really like to change that value and/or monitor it. We have no idea where this value resides so we have to do a little exploring inside the active process. We pick an area of memory and set a watch on it - the watch will monitor that area of memory for any changes. When it detects changes it can either suspend the process or just update the app with the new value. This allows you to see what that memory is doing in real time. By setting many different watches (and changing what they are monitoring) you will eventually find where the variable is located so you can manipulate it.

I made the app generic in nature so that it can be used on anything. It's not fixed to any particular app or process.

This app now let's you 'play' in my favorite playground...process memory. You are limited only by your imagination/skill level :up:

:|\\

A thing of beauty, TDW, You were able to explain it in such an elegant manner that even a complete computer retardo is beginning to grasp what your talking about..............Thanks so much, Quink

[TheDarkWraith]

v1.0.34.0 released. See post #1

You can now add watches :D Click the watches button to open the watches window. Use Watches-->Add to add watches. Should be pretty self-explanatory :yep:

Still working on the dumping/reloading of memory

Same thing still applies to the kernel32.dll as I haven't gotten around to coding that either.

[Endroo]

Hey TDW! Where can I find the older patches, like the first one? They don't appear to be in the latest patch's files.

[TheDarkWraith]

Hey TDW! Where can I find the older patches, like the first one? They don't appear to be in the latest patch's files.

All the patches are included with each new version. When you unzip the package you'll find (currently) three s5p files. These s5p files are the patch files.

I'm assuming when you say older patches like the first one you are referring to the hydro fix and map color changes. Those can be found in the TDW_SH5_Patches.s5p file.

[TheDarkWraith]

v1.0.35.0 released. See post #1

This version adds a new patch to the sh5.exe that fixes the broken resupply system while at sea

There's no way I could test for the full impact of this change so you all will have to let me know anything odd. All the change does is remove the check that determines the number of resupplies available (thus allowing you to resupply as long as a resupply point is shown on the map)

[volodya61]

It's great! Thanks TDW! :woot:

[Endroo]

All the patches are included with each new version. When you unzip the package you'll find (currently) three s5p files. These s5p files are the patch files.

I'm assuming when you say older patches like the first one you are referring to the hydro fix and map color changes. Those can be found in the TDW_SH5_Patches.s5p file.

Why thank you! Good work, and I'm glad to see that someone is still taking care of this game to this day!

[THE_MASK]

Could we have the patcher remember the path to the sh5.exe or is that not allowed . Set path to sh5.exe rather than select path to sh5.exe .

[TheDarkWraith]

Could we have the patcher remember the path to the sh5.exe or is that not allowed . Set path to sh5.exe rather than select path to sh5.exe .

I can do that. I can have it write the last path you selected for the file being patched to the patch file :up: Good idea :yeah:

[THE_MASK]

I can do that. I can have it write the last path you selected for the file being patched to the patch file :up: Good idea :yeah:Thankyou sir :salute:

[TheDarkWraith]

Finally found the function that adds the kiddy factor to the player's ordered depth so they cannot actually put their sub on the ocean's bottom. I have removed the kiddy factor and now you can order your sub to the bottom (or greater) and it will go to the bottom :rock:

Currently the sub will not incur damage if you order depth > ocean bottom so I'm trying to fix that now :yep:

[mouseno4]

Generic Patcher crashes with a big error when opening the s5p files. "Error reading patch file" along with a whole lot of jargon and ends with ''The system cannot find the file specified."

[TheDarkWraith]

Generic Patcher crashes with a big error when opening the s5p files. "Error reading patch file" along with a whole lot of jargon and ends with ''The system cannot find the file specified."

Sounds like you need to download the latest version at post #1 of this thread :yep:

Sub will now incur damage from the ocean bottom if you ram into it :rock: New patch coming here very soon!

[THE_MASK]

Its like chridtmas .

[mouseno4]

Sounds like you need to download the latest version at post #1 of this thread :yep:

Sub will now incur damage from the ocean bottom if you ram into it :rock: New patch coming here very soon!

That is where i got the file from. I didnt know there were different download locations.

http://img198.imageshack.us/img198/9518/46384692.png

[volodya61]

Finally found the function that adds the kiddy factor to the player's ordered depth so they cannot actually put their sub on the ocean's bottom. I have removed the kiddy factor and now you can order your sub to the bottom (or greater) and it will go to the bottom

Sub will now incur damage from the ocean bottom if you ram into it :rock: New patch coming here very soon!

Great news TDW!
However as always!

[TheDarkWraith]

v1.0.37.0 released. See post #1

This version adds support for the sub on the bottom problem in stock SH5. Now you will be able to place the sub on the bottom :D

[THE_MASK]

This should really be called
SH5 patch 1.3 by TheDarkWraith

[CaliEs]

v1.0.37.0 released.

Now you will be able to place the sub on the bottom

If it really works then this is a major improvement.

[Echolot]

Thank you, TDW.

:sunny:

[Trevally.]

Thank you, TDW.

:sunny:

:agree:

[TheDarkWraith]

If it really works then this is a major improvement.

It works for me with DVD version of game. How does it work for you?

[TheDarkWraith]

I stumbled upon the code that automatically shuts the Door_CT_EXT when diving yesterday. Not only does it shut the door the game also locks it :DL I found that interesting that you can lock doors via code.

The real interesting part of that code is that they cycle through every door in the sub looking for Door_CT_EXT. One could copy and modify this code to shut (but not lock) every door when battlestations is given...:hmmm:

[Kentrat]

Hi TDW,

I've deactivated the earlier mods using the 1_0_35_0 patcher but cannot see any new entries in 1_0_37_0 to do with the 'sub on bottom' patch; have I missed something here?

Thanks

[TheDarkWraith]

Hi TDW,

I've deactivated the earlier mods using the 1_0_35_0 patcher but cannot see any new entries in 1_0_37_0 to do with the 'sub on bottom' patch; have I missed something here?

Thanks

The sub on the bottom is in SH5 and SHSim patches.

[mouseno4]

v1.0.37.0 released. See post #1

This version adds support for the sub on the bottom problem in stock SH5. Now you will be able to place the sub on the bottom :D

Sorry, did not work for me. Exact same error. Only difference is, the program has a 7 in it instead of a 5.

[TheDarkWraith]

Sorry, did not work for me. Exact same error. Only difference is, the program has a 7 in it instead of a 5.

What error?

Are you looking at the entries under Patches?

[mouseno4]

http://img198.imageshack.us/img198/9518/46384692.png

The exact same error i already mentioned. Except, it now has 37 instead of 35 in the program's name and location.

[TheDarkWraith]

http://img198.imageshack.us/img198/9518/46384692.png

The exact same error i already mentioned. Except, it now has 37 instead of 35 in the program's name and location.

You need to install .NET version 3.5 or re-install it if already installed :yep: The app is built on .NET framework 3.5.

[mouseno4]

I see. I did not know what it was built on. I shall now re-enable .Net framework again.

[TheDarkWraith]

I see. I did not know what it was built on. I shall now re-enable .Net framework again.

I code using Visual Studio 2008 and in mainly C# so everything is a managed app (thus has CLR and needs .NET framework). I usually compile against .NET version 3.5 as it has everything that I need. I've been looking into .NET 4.0 as it has support for 'variants' - basically it allows for dynamics vice strongly-typed types :DL

[Bono1239]

I would like to ask you about this patch. Can I use this patch, when i have patch 1.2 on my game ?

[volodya61]

I would like to ask you about this patch. Can I use this patch, when i have patch 1.2 on my game ?

You can use this patch only if you have patch 1.2 of Ubi..

[dcb]

v1.0.37.0 released. See post #1

This version adds support for the sub on the bottom problem in stock SH5. Now you will be able to place the sub on the bottom :D


Now this is what I call a breakthrough!!!:salute:

CONGRATS, TDW:rock:

[TheDarkWraith]

Now this is what I call a breakthrough!!!:salute:

CONGRATS, TDW:rock:

Wait till you see what I have coming in the future ;) :rock:

[Obelix]

Wait till you see what I have coming in the future ;) :rock:
:o
Well, why do not you work in ubisoft, when they did SH5! :rock:

[radcapricorn]

Wait till you see what I have coming in the future ;) :rock:

Wait... SH6?

[TheDarkWraith]

v1.0.39.0 released. See post #1

adds support for automatic closing/opening of sub's internal compartment doors when battlestations ability (key F7) is enabled/disabled - Note: There are 2 doors I haven't got working correctly yet but all the others work excellent.

This version will also increase the file size of sh5.exe in order to accomodate needed code and future code

Still working on getting the 2 doors that don't want to play to behave :DL

This was exceedingly difficult to make happen but man was it fun figuring it out!

:|\\

[BIGREG]

:yeah::up: Great job TDW :yep:

[THE_MASK]

I noticed that the symbol for battlestations using the F7 key is diffrent than if i go to the Officers and Orders Bar and click on battlestations . The Officers and Orders Bar battle stations command doesnt close the hatches though , only the F7 key .
Also what does this do
Silent Hunter 5\data\Cfg\Basic
[DAMAGE]
OpenComp=1
PartiallyOpenComp=0.5
EnclosedComp=0.1

[BIGREG]

:hmmm: Hum ?

When i see that :

OpenComp=1 -> all doors open
PartiallyOpenComp=0.5 -> is that not the 2 doors you search TDW :06: (There would be parts of doors with another address ?)
EnclosedComp=0.1 -> all doors close

[NONONO]

This version will also increase the file size of sh5.exe in order to accomodate needed code and future code


needed for Real Uboat or am I mistaken, once the closing / opening of sub's internal compartment doors already.?

[TheDarkWraith]

needed for Real Uboat or am I mistaken, once the closing / opening of sub's internal compartment doors already.?

Don't understand what you're asking :06:

If the patcher has to increase the file's size it's because it has to add new code to a section (or add an entirely new section) and that section doesn't have enough space in it for the new code :yep:

[NONONO]

Don't understand what you're asking :06:

If the patcher has to increase the file's size it's because it has to add new code to a section (or add an entirely new section) and that section doesn't have enough space in it for the new code :yep:
Understand.I am asking you working for mod Real Uboat Crew?
And Waiting new version patcher.

[TheDarkWraith]

Understand.I am asking you working for mod Real Uboat Crew?
And Waiting new version patcher.

You are inquiring about my Real UBoat crew mod? It's being worked on slowly as I develop the GR2 Editor/Viewer :DL

New version of the patcher is available at bottom of post #1 of this thread :up:

[NONONO]

You are inquiring about my Real UBoat crew mod? It's being worked on slowly as I develop the GR2 Editor/Viewer :DL

New version of the patcher is available at bottom of post #1 of this thread :up:
Waiting new version patcher 1.0.40.0 all working door :rock:

[TheDarkWraith]

Waiting new version patcher 1.0.40.0 all working door :rock:

I'm hoping I can figure out why I can't open one of them when I close it and can't close one on them when I want. Trying to figure out what all these pointers are is very challenging :D

[NONONO]

I'm hoping I can figure out why I can't open one of them when I close it and can't close one on them when I want. Trying to figure out what all these pointers are is very challenging :D
yes HEX editing is hard work.Last year it was considered not at all possible :up:

[mobucks]

I noticed that the symbol for battlestations using the F7 key is diffrent than if i go to the Officers and Orders Bar and click on battlestations .


Some of this redundancy being removed would be most appreciated.

[quink99]

TDW,

Every time I try to use the new Generic File Patcher, v1.0.390, I get an error message which says;

EXE version error

File is different version
than expected

I'm sure that I've made some new and exciting blunder but I'm not sure what it might be as I've been using the patcher for quite awhile now through several different versions with no problem. This occured while changing from the prior version.

Your help would be most appreciated......Thanks

[TheDarkWraith]

TDW,

Every time I try to use the new Generic File Patcher, v1.0.390, I get an error message which says;

EXE version error

File is different version
than expected

I'm sure that I've made some new and exciting blunder but I'm not sure what it might be as I've been using the patcher for quite awhile now through several different versions with no problem. This occured while changing from the prior version.


Your help would be most appreciated......Thanks


That means you left some patches enabled with the old patcher. If you still have the patcher version that patched your files use it to ensure all patches are removed. If not you'll need to replace the files you want to patch with unmodified backups.

[THE_MASK]

The CO2 stays at zero % while submerged . I can stay under indefinately . Using the latest patch . I am not sure what patch this changed as i havnt checked it for a while .

[TheDarkWraith]

The CO2 stays at zero % while submerged . I can stay under indefinately . Using the latest patch . I am not sure what patch this changed as i havnt checked it for a while .

I believe you are seeing the stock game bug of when you start the game submerged you will never increase CO2. If you surface and then submerge you'll see the CO2 increase. I'm still trying to track this stock bug down :yep:

Are you sure you have all the patches enabled for the CO2 bug? There are patches for it in SH5 and SHSim.

[THE_MASK]

I believe you are seeing the stock game bug of when you start the game submerged you will never increase CO2. If you surface and then submerge you'll see the CO2 increase. I'm still trying to track this stock bug down :yep:

Are you sure you have all the patches enabled for the CO2 bug? There are patches for it in SH5 and SHSim.I will keep testing , give me a couple of days .

[TheDarkWraith]

I will keep testing , give me a couple of days .

I made the patch for this default to no CO2 increase just in case the user doesn't install all the patches or somehow installs the patch incorrectly :yep: Just some FYI

[THE_MASK]

I made the patch for this default to no CO2 increase just in case the user doesn't install all the patches or somehow installs the patch incorrectly :yep: Just some FYI I dont know what happend , when i went to open the patches it came up with an error . I reverted to the backups and patched again . I will try the CO2 again ingame . CO2 still doesnt increase , all are True in the patches . I have never had the CO2 bug . I disabled the CO2 patch and will try again . I disabled the CO2 fix and the CO2 works . I have had the game for over 2 years and the CO2 has never kept rising when surfacing , but i bought the game so i dont expect it to .

[gap]

That means you left some patches enabled with the old patcher. If you still have the patcher version that patched your files use it to ensure all patches are removed. If not you'll need to replace the files you want to patch with unmodified backups.

another reson for injecting code, instead od physically modifying the exe.
My two cents opinion, indeed ;)

[TheDarkWraith]

another reson for injecting code, instead od physically modifying the exe.
My two cents opinion, indeed ;)

Code injection is great for testing purposes. For long term changes I prefer physically modifying the file(s) :yep:

[gap]

Code injection is great for testing purposes. For long term changes I prefer physically modifying the file(s) :yep:

Why?
Don't take is as a rhetorical or polemical question. I am just curious :DL

[TheDarkWraith]

Why?
Don't take is as a rhetorical or polemical question. I am just curious :DL

When you use code injection you cannot specify where the memory created will be placed. This makes it very hard to put commonly used functions in one place and call them from another place. With code injection you have code duplication because all the support functions needed for that chunk of code has to be included in that chunk of code.

With the way I have my new code setup I have commonly used functions placed in the first 0x2000 bytes of the new code sections. All the other functions fall after this 0x2000 bytes. I know the exact address of every support function (and every other function) - this means I can call a support function in SH5 from SHSim or vice versa if need be :yep: It's next to impossible to do this with code injection (it can be done but it's very messy)

[gap]

When you use code injection you cannot specify where the memory created will be placed. This makes it very hard to put commonly used functions in one place and call them from another place. With code injection you have code duplication because all the support functions needed for that chunk of code has to be included in that chunk of code.

With the way I have my new code setup I have commonly used functions placed in the first 0x2000 bytes of the new code sections. All the other functions fall after this 0x2000 bytes. I know the exact address of every support function (and every other function) - this means I can call a support function in SH5 from SHSim or vice versa if need be :yep: It's next to impossible to do this with code injection (it can be done but it's very messy)

I understand now. Thank you! :up:

[quink99]

That means you left some patches enabled with the old patcher. If you still have the patcher version that patched your files use it to ensure all patches are removed. If not you'll need to replace the files you want to patch with unmodified backups.

Still no joy, TDW. Here's what I've done up to this point;

1) Using JSGME I disabled New_UIs_TDC_6_9_0_ByTheDarkWraith.

2) Using the previous Generic File Patcher I disabled all the previously selected options.

3) I then deleted all the files associated with the previous patch.

4) Next I installed Generic File Patcher v 1.0.39.0

5) It was at this point, on trying to open the new Patcher, that I got the first ERROR message that I sent you prior to your above quoted message.

6) The next time I tried the new patcher after running CCleaner and Registry Booster and doing a shutdown and restart I got the following ERROR message upon trying to open the new Patcher again;

Error

X File to patch not specified in patch file

7) Using Notebook, I opened the file, TDW_SH5_pPatches.s5p file, and, sure enough, on the first two lines, [EXE] and then Path=, there is no file to patch specified.

Any ideas as to what I might try next?

Thanks, Quink

[THE_MASK]

You should have backed up the exe shcollisions and shsim files before applying the patch . Too late now . Uninstall all the mods . Reinstall the game but choose to keep the saves . Patch to 1.2 . Backup the files then apply the patches .

[volodya61]

To quink99

Maybe you should try to reinstall the game?

EDIT: Sober said it before me :D

[TheDarkWraith]

Still no joy, TDW. Here's what I've done up to this point;

1) Using JSGME I disabled New_UIs_TDC_6_9_0_ByTheDarkWraith.

2) Using the previous Generic File Patcher I disabled all the previously selected options.

3) I then deleted all the files associated with the previous patch.

4) Next I installed Generic File Patcher v 1.0.39.0

5) It was at this point, on trying to open the new Patcher, that I got the first ERROR message that I sent you prior to your above quoted message.

6) The next time I tried the new patcher after running CCleaner and Registry Booster and doing a shutdown and restart I got the following ERROR message upon trying to open the new Patcher again;

Error

X File to patch not specified in patch file

7) Using Notebook, I opened the file, TDW_SH5_pPatches.s5p file, and, sure enough, on the first two lines, [EXE] and then Path=, there is no file to patch specified.

Any ideas as to what I might try next?

Thanks, Quink

If the filename is missing in the s5p file then the s5p file is corrupt. The Path= being blank is ok - that means the app will prompt you for the path to the file.

If you have a corrupt s5p file then I would say your download of the patcher was corrupt. I'd try redownloading it again.

[volodya61]

Hi TDW!

Your last two patches are not working correctly .. I'm still get the damage to the hull at the depth of 7-8 meters

and the doors don't close/open also..

Sorry pour English..

[THE_MASK]

Hi TDW!

Your last two patches are not working correctly .. I'm still get the damage to the hull at the depth of 7-8 meters

and the doors don't close/open also..

Sorry pour English..Doors open = F7 .

[volodya61]

Doors open = F7 .

Thanks Sober..
I'm not so stupid Russian.. I can read..
It's not working at my game..
F7 working.. but the doors are not close/open..

I will try to do it more time..

Thanks anyway :up: :salute:

[TheDarkWraith]

Hi TDW!

Your last two patches are not working correctly .. I'm still get the damage to the hull at the depth of 7-8 meters

and the doors don't close/open also..

Sorry pour English..

You have to enable/disable the battlestations ability (F7) in order for the doors to close/open

What do you mean by still get the damage to the hull at the depth of 7-8 meters? Where was this occurring at (what place on map)? Your sub was in very shallow waters of 7-8 meters and you were taking damage to the hull?

[Fidd]

is this patch still relevant for stock 1.2 version of the game?

(incredible work btw)

[volodya61]

What do you mean by still get the damage to the hull at the depth of 7-8 meters? Where was this occurring at (what place on map)? Your sub was in very shallow waters of 7-8 meters and you were taking damage to the hull?

No.. Not in shallow waters..
I mean, when I going to the bottom from the surface (it was 100-150 meters under the keel) and the distance to the bottom is 7-8 meters, I'm starting to get damage like before the patch..
I hope you could understand what I mean..
Sorry my English again..

EDIT: is this patch still relevant for stock 1.2 version of the game?

Yes, it is..

[TheDarkWraith]

No.. Not in shallow waters..
I mean, when I going to the bottom from the surface (it was 100-150 meters under the keel) and the distance to the bottom is 7-8 meters, I'm starting to get damage like before the patch..

I'll have to fire up OllyDebug and see what's going on. Can you give me approximate map coordinates of where you were?

[volodya61]

Yes, sure I can..
It will take a little time .. something happened with my network..
I'll post it in this post like "EDIT:"

EDIT: These are some screens (patch Sub on bottom fix) - http://www.gamefront.com/files/21810160/To+TDW.7z

EDIT2: Patch Close/open sub doors on Battlestations activated/deactivated works fine.. it was a problem with my PC.. (something wrong with F7-button)

[THE_MASK]

Thanks Sober..
I'm not so stupid Russian.. I can read..
It's not working at my game..
F7 working.. but the doors are not close/open..

I will try to do it more time..

Thanks anyway :up: :salute: But i am stupid or drunk aussie :haha:

[quink99]

If the filename is missing in the s5p file then the s5p file is corrupt. The Path= being blank is ok - that means the app will prompt you for the path to the file.

If you have a corrupt s5p file then I would say your download of the patcher was corrupt. I'd try redownloading it again.

As usual, the Gospel according to St. TDW is correct! It was, indeed, a corrupt download of the patcher. Afer downloading a new one all now works perfectly.

My sincere thanks

[THE_MASK]

I have had big TC slowdowns running all the patches . The game slows down to 7 TC or so anywhere on the map when running at 256 TC . I disabled the patches and the game runs normal again . Any ideas :hmmm: . Thankyou sir .

[volodya61]

I have had big TC slowdowns running all the patches . The game slows down to 7 TC or so anywhere on the map when running at 256 TC . I disabled the patches and the game runs normal again . Any ideas :hmmm: . Thankyou sir .

I had the same problem.. disabled two last patches (sub on bottom fix and sub doors on Battlestations fix) and the problem went away..

[SilentOtto]

I want to ask TDW, is there any possibility to get a patcher exe that doesnt require .NET 3.5? like, requiring just .NET 2.0?

The reason is, 3.5 can't be run on linux, I know most people won't care about this, but if you have a chance I'd love to be able to use it.

Kudos to you sir! :salute:

[TheDarkWraith]

I want to ask TDW, is there any possibility to get a patcher exe that doesnt require .NET 3.5? like, requiring just .NET 2.0?

The reason is, 3.5 can't be run on linux, I know most people won't care about this, but if you have a chance I'd love to be able to use it.

Kudos to you sir! :salute:

I should be able to build against 2.0. I'll see

[SilentOtto]

Oh that would be awesome! You see, I can run the app, and choose file->open, but as soon as I choose a patch and try to open it, I get an error complaining it can't open the file since it can't load System.Core Version=3.5.0.0 etc,etc.

Thanks for caring! ;)

[radcapricorn]

Can't you install .NET 3.5 via winetricks?

[SilentOtto]

It's not fully supported yet, and I tried everything I found but to no avail. Can only install up to 2.0 sp1

[Burstar]

I had the same problem.. disabled two last patches (sub on bottom fix and sub doors on Battlestations fix) and the problem went away..

I too suffered from lag as a result of these patches, but found that just disabling the sub-on-bottom fix worked for me.

Edit: my mods list

Generic Mod Enabler - v2.6.0.157
[C:\Program data\Silent Hunter 5\MODS]

RemoveLogoIntroTheDarkWraith
sobers green spinning thing SH5
Accurate German Flags
smaller flags for Warships 1_0b
Speech fixes and additions (english version)
FX_Update_0_0_19
NewUIs_TDC_6_9_0
EQuaTool 01.01 by AvM - Large Style
NewUIs_TDC_6_9_0_alt_officer_wounded_by_Torpedo
Trevally Tutorial - All v0.2(for OHIIv1.3)
Trevally Automated Scripts v0.6
Trevally Harbour & Kiel Canal Pilot v2.9
gap - HD 1 deg Scope Bearing v 1.0
Church's Compass Dials Mod v2.2 - Option Two
IRAI_0_0_37_ByTheDarkWraith
Dynamic Environment _Basemod (realistic version) V2.1
Dynamic Environmental Colors (realistic) V2.1
Dynamic Environment Sleet For Winter Campaigns V2.1
Dynamic Environment Atlantic Floor V2.1
Dynamic Environment Skycolor Hotfix #1 V2.1
Dynamic Environment Undersea (tropical) V2.1
Dynamic Environment Undersea (temperate and polar) V2.1
Dynamic Environment Undersea (mediterranean) V2.1
sobers NO water drops V1
sobers best ever waves V4 SH5
sobers see thru wake fix
sobers darker ship bow spray
sobers 3D deck spray mod V7
sobers best ever fog V12 SH5
Window_Lights_Redone_V1
Pascal-Crew-Uniforms. 12.2011
MightyFine Crew Mod 1.2.1 Alt faces
MCCD_1.04_MFCM_1.2.1_compatible
SteelViking's Interior Mod V1.2
SteelViking's Interior Mod V1.2.2 Patch
SteelViking's Sky Banding Mod
Fuel Gauge WoGaDi_SteelViking's Interior
NOZAURIO'S SKIN (No Emblem) v-1.0.0
Hull wetness for U-Boats
TDW_AI_sub_crew_1_0_2
Cerberus62 Corrected Depth Charge Projector 1.0
DC_Water_Disturbances_v2_0
sobers bad weather deck gun V1 SH5
Stormys DBSM SH5 v1.3 Basemod
Stormys DBSM SH5 v1.3 HOTFIX 3
Stormys DBSM SH5 v1.3 optional always shouting WO in normal mode
Stormys_DBSM_additional_creaks_and_noises_1.0
Stormys DBSM SH5 v1.3 optional scary creaks
NewUIs_TDC_6_9_0_New_radio_messages_German
sobers talking conning crew mod
OH - Harbour_Environment_Enhancement v0.5
OPEN HORIZONS II_full v1.9
OHII Higher Tonnage Objectives for v1.9
OHII_traffic_speed_Fix_v2
OHII TDW_Mines_Subnets_Detectable_in_hydro v19
OH II Minefield map for TDWs Ui
sobers green crew training V3 SH5
Reworked Morale and Abilities v.1.01
IRAI_No_Hydrophone_On_Surface_No_Aircraft_Spotting _1_1_0
Critical hits 1.1 Torpedos
Real_Sink_1.0_OHII
NewUIs_TDC_6_9_0_Real_Navigation
Shadow Improvement Mod
TDW FX Fix for Sobers chimney smoke
Fix clock rear torpedo room VIIA
Speech Recognition_MiTons_NewUI_Editon_v0.4.1_english
Small_trees_SH5_V1
OHIIv1.9_Patch1
sobers Lights Cfg V4 SH5

[TheDarkWraith]

I too suffered from lag as a result of these patches, but found that just disabling the sub-on-bottom fix worked for me.

I don't understand why the sub on bottom fix would be causing such problems :hmmm: I don't experience this problem. I'll give it another look over though.

[volodya61]

I too suffered from lag as a result of these patches, but found that just disabling the sub-on-bottom fix worked for me.


You're right :yep:
It was the Sub on bottom fix only..
Close/open sub doors on Battlestations works fine..

[THE_MASK]

I don't understand why the sub on bottom fix would be causing such problems :hmmm: I don't experience this problem. I'll give it another look over though.What happens with the AI subs when they dive in shallow waters ?

[limkol]

I installed the patches without problem. Soon as I press F7 i get an instant CTD. What have I done wrong?

Mods:
Generic Mod Enabler - v2.6.0.157
[C:\Ubisoft\Silent Hunter 5\MODS]

goodbye pacman
No Damn Bubbles, No Damn Halo Mod
NDB,NDH OM#1 - No Dialog Indicator
FX_Update_0_0_19_ByTheDarkWraith
IRAI_0_0_30_ByTheDarkWraith
IRAI_0_0_30_No_Aircraft_Spotting_At_Depth
IRAI_upgrade_to_v_0_0_31
NewUIs_TDC_6_9_0_ByTheDarkWraith
No Logo Intro Menu_Animation v. 01.00 by AvM
WoGaDi Mod BetaSix
Naights Submaine Textures v1.2 (PUV)
stoianm pitch&roll for SH5 V1 (normal)
MightyFine Crew Mod 1.2.1 Alt w beards
MCCD_1.04
MCCD_1.04_MFCM_1.2.1_compatible
Dynamic Environment SH5 Basemod (realistic version) V2.1
Dynamic Environmental SH5 Realistic Colors V2.1
Dynamic Environment SH5 Undersea (temperate and polar) V2.1
Dynamic Environment SH5 Waves (hurricane version) V2.1
Dynamic Environment SH5 DarkerNights V2.1
Dynamic Environment SH5 Sleet For Winter Campaigns V2.1
German U-Boat Crew Language Pack
Stormys DBSM SH5 v1.3 Basemod
Stormys DBSM SH5 v1.3 additional crew sounds beta6
Stormys DBSM SH5 v1.3 optional remaining orig sounds converted to 22Khz
Stormys DBSM SH5 v1.3 optional -6db damped Sonarguy
Stormys DBSM SH5 v1.3 optional louder engine sounds
Stormys DBSM SH5 v1.3 optional scary creaks
sobers talking conning crew mod
KarlKochs fix for Bearing Sound (German)
Nauticalwolf's_Damage_and_Torpedo_UI(g)_Mod_v1.1
sobers 3D deck spray mod V7
sobers best ever waves V2 SH5
SteelViking's Bunker Fixes V1.0
KZS Hull wetness for U-Boats + co tower and deck_revised_by_TheDarkWraith
Critical hits 1.1 Torpedos
Critical hits v 1.2
Harbour_Addition_Environment_Enhancement MOD v0.5
OPEN HORIZONS II_full v1.8
OHII Higher Tonnage Objectives for v1.8
mtns - more traffic, nations and ships 1_8e
mtns - OHII&HarbourAdditon_Fix_1_8a
TDW_Mines_Subnets_Detectable_in_hydro (OH II v1.8)
mtns - Enhanced FunelSmoke1.2_by HanSolo78 (recommended)
IO_MapCourseLine_normal pencil_mod
IO_StrategicMap_4_6_for_TDWv690
Accurate German Flags
Wordeees' Thunder
SH5Lifeboats_by_Rongel_TDW_stoianm_v2.1
gap - A Few More Felix the Cat Emblems for SH5 - crossbones
NewUIs_TDC_6_9_0_New_radio_messages_German
Equipment_Upgrades_Fix_v1_4_byTheBeast
Equipment_Upgrades_Fix_v1_4_Patch_1
#Equipment_Upgrades_Fix_v1_4_Patch_1_HotFix
R.E.M_by_Xrundel_TheBeast_1.2
sobers Lights Cfg V3 SH5

Any ideas?

[TheDarkWraith]

For those using Linux I've posted a download of the app that is compiled against the .NET framework 2.0. You can find it at post #1 under 'For those using Linux:'

[limkol]

Still getting crashes when I hit the F7 button (see my post above).

Any ideas?
Thanks for any help:up:

[0rpheus]

I had the same problem.. disabled two last patches (sub on bottom fix and sub doors on Battlestations fix) and the problem went away..

Just confirming it's the sub on bottom fix - enabling it causes mega slowdown. Shame as I was looking forward to that one! :har:

[Tonci87]

Still getting crashes when I hit the F7 button (see my post above).

Any ideas?
Thanks for any help:up:

Same thing happens to me, as soon as I press F7 I get an instant CTD.

[TheDarkWraith]

Could we have the patcher remember the path to the sh5.exe or is that not allowed . Set path to sh5.exe rather than select path to sh5.exe .

v1.0.42.0 released. See post #1

This version remembers the path you last used to the file mentioned in the patch file. It will prompt you if you want to use the path found or select a new one

This version (and all subsequent versions) are Linux friendly (compiled against .NET 2.0)

[StinkiePoep]

Thanks TDW :),

I wish i had half ur skills in this ...

[Tonci87]

I can confirm problems with the Sub on buttom fix.
Time compression doesn´t work like it should (much slower!)
Lots of "Camera out of sectors" Bugs when using the external camera.
Disabling the fix solved the problem.
Regarding CTD when ordering battlestations via F7:
Disabling this fix and reenabeling it again fixed this problem.

[limkol]

Thanks for your help regarding F7 problem Tonci. I just remove the close doors fix and activate it again and the problem is solved?:up:

[Tonci87]

Thanks for your help regarding F7 problem Tonci. I just remove the close doors fix and activate it again and the problem is solved?:up:
That worked for me, simply set all the F7 related fixes to false, exit the launcher, open it and enable them again.

[TheDarkWraith]

That worked for me, simply set all the F7 related fixes to false, exit the launcher, open it and enable them again.

Why did you get errors the first time you enabled it then :06:

[Tonci87]

Why did you get errors the first time you enabled it then :06:
Very good question, thee were no errors, just a immediate CTD.
I was experimenting with mods at that time and maybe enabling the fix and installing or deinstalling some mods afterwards is not a good idea.

[Timix81]

Nice thx....

[null8fuff10]

TDW_GenericPatcher_v_1_0_42_0.zip

I can't extract GenericPatcher.exe
Avira Free Antivir reports Trojan TR/Dropper.Gen virus.
Someone else with same problem?

[Madox58]

Your getting a False Positive.
Disable your AV software or tell it to ignore the files.

[flostt]

null8fuff10, I had the same message over the weekend...
You can do as privateer suggested, I've had no problems....

[null8fuff10]

Thought so ... thx for update.

[Madox58]

Many patch programs show a False Positive because of the way they work.

Some lesser AV programs look for this signature in files.
I always use 2 or 3 AV programs I have proven to check things on downloading.

Avira does not even make the top 10 I'd use.

[TheDarkWraith]

Never knew my patch program had a 'signature' that was recognizable and interpreted as possibly malicious :hmmm: It's horribly simple the way it works which is why I find it odd that it has any signature at all. It's not based on any existing code - it was all 100% original :shifty:

[Madox58]

AV programs look for any type injection signature.
"Signature" is a known way to inject code into an existing file.

Lesser AV programs are not very tolerant of the known injection methods.
:nope:
They also freak on anything they don't know.
:haha:

Hacking lesson 0.0.1 how to bypass any AV program when you WANT to infest a system.
:D

Not that I'd have much knowledge of such nasty things.
:03:

[hanx91]

The windows on the instructions dont seem to load, the generic patcher doesn't load either, windows doesn't know what program to use to open it
God knows what to do with it. a free hex editor doesn't show that address in the exec file. The only thing I'm sure of is this is a pilot error, and I'm the pilot

[TheDarkWraith]

The windows on the instructions dont seem to load, the generic patcher doesn't load either, windows doesn't know what program to use to open it
God knows what to do with it. a free hex editor doesn't show that address in the exec file. The only thing I'm sure of is this is a pilot error, and I'm the pilot

Did you unzip the file? I'm pretty sure Windows knows how to run an .exe file or Windows itself wouldn't work.

[Burstar]

I've tried the newest patch and the sub-on-bottom fix still slows the game down :(

It appears the S-O-B fix causes a memory leak as my game's memory use slowly grows to about 3350MB and promptly crashes. With the fix disabled there is no leak.

It seems that the seabed textures are loading but not being released, and the faster the TC, the faster the textures are demanded/loaded. That's how I see it at least. :hmmm:

On the bright side, I've never seen the game use more than 2400MB despite having the >2GB patch enabled so that's good to know.:O:

[TheDarkWraith]

I've tried the newest patch and the sub-on-bottom fix still slows the game down :(

It appears many are having problems with the sub on bottom patch. I'll be revisiting the patches here soon :up:

[TheBeast]

I am experiencing a problem where Avira Antivirus is reporting this downlaad contains the TR/Dropper.Gen Trojon Virus.

[Madox58]

See post #610

:D

[TheDarkWraith]

v1.0.43.0 released. See post #1

:|\\

[Sartoris]

Very cool, thank you for the new option, TDW!:woot:

[Hinrich Schwab]

Just tested magnetic pistols. Well done, good sir.

Now if only the hydrophone kept the e-machine noise in the boat's baffles, like it is supposed to...:hmmm:

[Trevally.]

v1.0.43.0 released. See post #1

:|\\

:woot:

[Paco]

Great work, thanks a lot :up:

Paco.

[TheDarkWraith]

I noticed that when submerging the hydrophone operator doesnt sit at the hydrophone station anymore . Before the crew wakeup patch he did .

If i look in the latest save game file (ActiveUserPlayerUnits) Benno has
CurrentStatus=OFF_DUTY

If i look in save game file (UPCInitial\ActiveUserPlayerUnits) Benno has
CurrentStatus=ON_DUTY

The patch doesn't change anything that would affect this. All it does is remove a compare that was testing for 0 for contact already detected or not. By removing it I force the game to always check to see if the contact was detected by a sensor or not.

This CurrentStatus entry is a good find. I've never noticed this before and is possibly a reason why this crew member doesn't wake-up. I'll play around with this entry for him and other crew members to see what affect they have :up:

[TheDarkWraith]

v1.0.44.0 released. See post #1

Removed hydrophone volume patch
Added patch that fixes CTD in single missions after some period of time
Revised Crew wakeup patch

The settings in \data\Cfg\Contacts.cfg will have a huge impact on the ability of the crew to detect contacts (and for sounds/messagebox entries on re-acquires)

:|\\

[THE_MASK]

Testing new patch v1.0.44.0 with a new campaign .

[TheDarkWraith]

Testing new patch v1.0.44.0 with a new campaign .

I'm doing the same with all my (current) patches enabled and all the snorkels enabled :yep:

[TheDarkWraith]

I installed the game again and patched to 1.2 . When i run patcher 1.0.44 click on TDW_SH5_Patches.s5p i get the File is diffrent version than expected error . I havnt been able to use the 1.0.44 patch yet because of this error .

Did you disable all patches with the old patcher first? If not you'll get this error.

[TheDarkWraith]

I might have mucked it up so i tried to patch with a new install and i get the error . Not sure what i am doing wrong .

Are you sure you're patched to version 1.2 of the game? Run the game updater to be sure.

The patcher reads the existing data and if what it reads doesn't match what it expects then it throws this error.

[TheDarkWraith]

I did that , it says version 1.2 . I will reupload the patcher . I dont know why i can update the exe !

Don't fret over it. I'm updating the patcher again because in campaign the new crew wakeup patch doesn't work. I had to run the debugger in campaign to see why and now I know what needs to be done :up:

[TheDarkWraith]

Ok :up:

The reason you and dogfish are having problems patching the exe is because I based one of the new patches on my special exe :o I'll have it corrected here in a few :up:

[TheDarkWraith]

I dont wanna know about the "special exe" .

Oh you'd be interested in it I bet :03:

I revised the patcher app so that when it does throw this error it tells you which patch was the problem, which change of the patch was the problem, what bytes it read were, and what bytes it expected to see :) This way you get a little more info to give to me when this happens :up:

Testing the change now...

[TheDarkWraith]

Benno's alive in campaign :huh: :rock: (actually the whole crew is)

v1.0.45.0 released. See post #1

Revised Crew wakeup patch so that it works in campaigns
Removed single mission CTD patch

[TheDarkWraith]

Now the only thing to fix is the TC penalty for the crew. Anything over TC 32 it's a random chance if they 'see/hear' something or not. If you have TC no higher than 32 they 'see/hear' everything...

[THE_MASK]

Testing the patch now .

[BIGREG]

Benno's alive in campaign :huh: :rock: (actually the whole crew is)

v1.0.45.0 released. See post #1

Revised Crew wakeup patch so that it works in campaigns
Removed single mission CTD patch


:yeah: :woot:

[TheDarkWraith]

v1.0.46.0 released. See post #1

Crew will detect radar signals with the updated Crew wakeup patch
Changed broken hydro patch

YOU HAVE TO REMOVE ALL PATCHES WITH OLD PATCHER FIRST!

[THE_MASK]

Enabled the latest patch with no problems .
On a side note , if i enable the CO2 patch then my CO2 stays at 0% while submerged . Its no problem , i just dont enable the CO2 patch .

[TheDarkWraith]

Enabled the latest patch with no problems .
On a side note , if i enable the CO2 patch then my CO2 stays at 0% while submerged . Its no problem , i just dont enable the CO2 patch .

That's a stock bug that happens when you start out submerged. Surface then dive and you'll 'remove' that bug.

[gap]

v1.0.46.0 released. See post #1

Crew will detect radar signals with the updated Crew wakeup patch
Changed broken hydro patch

YOU HAVE TO REMOVE ALL PATCHES WITH OLD PATCHER FIRST!

Though not taking part into it, I am following with interest the discussion going on the other section of the forum.

Simply amazing! :yeah:

[TheBeast]

Enabled the latest patch with no problems .
On a side note , if i enable the CO2 patch then my CO2 stays at 0% while submerged . Its no problem , i just dont enable the CO2 patch .

That's a stock bug that happens when you start out submerged. Surface then dive and you'll 'remove' that bug.

I am also experiencing the problem with Co2 staying at 0% after enabling the Co2 Patch.
I thought it might be the stock bug at first but I am unable to get get it working correctly.
Checked my Documents\SH5\data\cfg\SaveGames\<blah>\GameplaySetting.CFG and LimitedO2=true.

[TheDarkWraith]

Been doing a lot of travelling lately for work so I haven't had time to sit down in front on my main system and 'work'. To kill time on the airplanes I've been looking into the .exe and .act files for 'problems'. One thing that I had a hunch of being a problem was when a shell/torpedo impacted a unit the game was incorrectly calculating which zones (boxes) were affected. That hunch turns out to be correct - the game has a serious problem in this area.
In order to explain why we have to take two steps back and state one fundamental difference between SH5 and all the previous versions: The Granny file system. The Granny file system includes a unit of measure in the Art Tool Info of every GR2 file. This value let's the game know what the scaling factor is of the data it contains. For SH5 this scaling factor is 0.1 in every GR2 file (that I've looked at). This scaling factor seems to have caused much confusion to the programmers programming SH5.
After weeks of chasing down the routine that is called that calculates the distance from each zone (box) to the impact point I finally found it. The game calculates this distance and then compares this distance to the MinRadius and MaxRadius of the shell/torpedo that impacted the unit. There is a HUGE problem in a subroutine that is called from this routine. The subroutine iterates over every zone (box) and compares the distance from impact to it to the MaxRadius. If less than MaxRadius then game says no damage is done to that zone. Herein is the problem: the radius is unscaled, the MaxRadius is scaled (i.e. say distance calculated was 3.42 and MaxRadius was supposed to be 7.0 but the game is using 0.7 instead). Thus the game is not inflicting damage to nearby zones :nope: This explains why the ships do not list/sink like they should when hit by shells and torpedoes :shifty:
The solution is easy: use the unscaled value for MaxRadius. The fix is not so easy as I have to find the pointer that points to this value. Once I find this pointer I'll be releasing another patch to fix this blaring oversight on the devs :dead:

[gap]

Brilliant find TDW :up:
Please keep us informed on any progress you will be doing on this matter!

[quink99]

Everytime I think I've just flat run out of amazement you do it again TDW! Will wonders never cease.

I'm sure everyone joins me in offering our sincere thanks for this find as well as all your other matchless contributions to SH5.

[Echolot]

I'm sure everyone joins me in offering our sincere thanks for this find as well as all your other matchless contributions to SH5.

:up:

[Sartoris]

Thank you for your hard work, TDW!:woot:

[Txema]

Yes, thank you very much !!

We really appreciate your work !!

:salute:

Txema

[Scurvy Dog]

Here, here!

[sirbum69]

So is it possible to use the new sonar man fix patch with your no sonar above water mod. I really hate the fact that he calls out things now while i am on the surface.

Of course i can live with it, if it means he will actully call something out now

[TheBeast]

So is it possible to use the new sonar man fix patch with your no sonar above water mod. I really hate the fact that he calls out things now while i am on the surface.

Of course i can live with it, if it means he will actully call something out now

Should work fine. The Sonar Man Fix is in the SH5.exe file. The No Sonar on Surface MOD is in the UBoot_Sensors.sim file.

[sirbum69]

i thought i read in the post in the other fourm that people had to disable that mod tho. Which is why i was asking if it would be possible to get it to work sometime.

[TheDarkWraith]

i thought i read in the post in the other fourm that people had to disable that mod tho. Which is why i was asking if it would be possible to get it to work sometime.

should be no problem enabling the no hydro on surface mod with the crew wakeup patch :up:

[TheDarkWraith]

I found this interesting: the game determines the maximum depth for each unit based on it's location. It samples 4 different areas to determine the maximum depth for the unit's location. This maxiumum depth is NOT the depth at which the terrain is rendered though :shifty: If I let the unit descend to the maximum depth it can bump into the terrain even though the terrain is not really there :dead:

[TheDarkWraith]

v1.0.47.0 released. See post #1

Adds a new version of sub on the bottom
Adds a new patch called Collateral Damage (SHCollisions.act). This patch works like this:
when a unit (even player's sub!) experiences a collision with anything the game will determine the distance from impact to each zone (box). If the distance is <= MaxRadius of the item impacting the unit then damage is incurred to that zone (box). If distance is > MaxRadius of the item impacting the unit then a random number is 'rolled'. If the random number is <= 10.0 then that zone (box) receives collateral damage (the amount of damage is dependent upon another random number and a formula involving distance) :rock:

Why collateral damage? It really irked me how the damage was being calculated for a unit when say a torpedo impacted it. The game never took into account that maybe steam pipes ruptured in another compartment (zone) that causes a fire or the thickness of the metal in a compartment was severely rusted and degraded and thus ruptured from the shaking of the ship due to impact, etc. etc. You can think of many things that would be collateral damage when something gets hit HARD. So what can cause collateral damage? ANYTHING. Torpedo hit, shell hit, colliding with land, ocean bottom, another unit, pieces of the unit hitting it (mast breaks and falls on unit) :D

This is the first version of this. I have plans to further enhance it in the future. :up:

The sub on the bottom fix allows the sub to descend to the maximum depth calculated by the game for the sub's current position. It doesn't mean the sub will 'sit on the bottom' graphically necessarily. It all depends on the surrounding terrain. It's complicated how the game determines max depth for unit's current position (in a nutshell it takes the average from 4 places).

:|\\

[THE_MASK]

I just had to read this 3X to believe what i was reading , fantastic :rock:

[volodya61]

Thanks TDW!
That's great! :woot::Kaleun_Party:

[gap]

Thank you very much TDW :yeah:

on a side note: did you manage to understand why your previous version of sub on bottom patch was causing a performance hit?

[Burstar]

v1.0.47.0 released. See post #1


Wow! Thanks again man :rock:

[TheDarkWraith]

Thank you very much TDW :yeah:

on a side note: did you manage to understand why your previous version of sub on bottom patch was causing a performance hit?

It appears that what I did before allowed the AI units to exceed the max depth for their given location which caused the collision routine to be called continuously which caused the event routine to be fired continuously. Multiply that by x units exceeding max depth and it could bog down not so powerful systems (I never experienced the problem).

[TheDarkWraith]

I'm feeling very ambitious and already started working on my next patch: AI crew damage control. This irks me also about the game: an AI unit takes damage and they don't invoke any damage control to minimize the damage. This is not right. No one in their right mind would let their ship just sit and burn and flood and eventually sink into the abyss. I'm in the planning stages of this patch currently :D

There are many things I have to 'find' first. I have to figure out the memory structure of a unit so I can read it's type, depth, speed, etc. I already know how to get to the zones (boxes) of the unit so that part is good. I know how to invoke a random number generator in SHCollisions so that part is covered. Need to find the frame rendering time so that I can count time...

[BIGREG]

:yeah: Super ! :yep:

[gap]

I'm feeling very ambitious and already started working on my next patch: AI crew damage control. This irks me also about the game: an AI unit takes damage and they don't invoke any damage control to minimize the damage. This is not right. No one in their right mind would let their ship just sit and burn and flood and eventually sink into the abyss. I'm in the planning stages of this patch currently :D

There are many things I have to 'find' first. I have to figure out the memory structure of a unit so I can read it's type, depth, speed, etc. I already know how to get to the zones (boxes) of the unit so that part is good. I know how to invoke a random number generator in SHCollisions so that part is covered. Need to find the frame rendering time so that I can count time...

In a nut shell, after allowing wild fires to sweep on the whole ship, and shells to damage several compartments, you are now providing crews with fire extinguishers, patches, spanners and welding machines :06:

That's insane TDW, and you know it! :D :haha:

PS: is there a way to connect unit's speed with flooding rates, i.e. the faster ship's speed, the more water it will take on?

[TheDarkWraith]

In a nut shell, after allowing wild fires to sweep on the whole ship, and shells to damage several compartments, you are now providing crews with fire extinguishers, patches, spanners and welding machines :06:

That's insane TDW, and you know it! :D :haha:

PS: is there a way to connect unit's speed with flooding rates, i.e. the faster ship's speed, the more water it will take on?

You don't like my AI crew damage control idea? I think it's a great idea! How cool would it be to see a burning ship and some minutes later see one of the fires extinguished? Or better yet see the unit stop increasing in list because the AI crew patched or minimized the hole that was causing flooding? Would give new meaning to the word simulator...

That's an idea I'm toying with in the back of my mind. I just located the code that iterates over all the unit's zones (boxes) last weekend. I now have to sit down and decode the memory structure for these zones (where the critical floatation value resides, where the zone's current HPs resides, etc.) and I have to find the code that calculates and updates the flooding 'level' for that zone (box). Once I find all the key elements then it a simple (relatively) matter of writing new code to use those elements in a way to increase fllooding based on speed :)

[NONONO]

You don't like my AI crew damage control idea? I think it's a great idea! How cool would it be to see a burning ship and some minutes later see one of the fires extinguished? Or better yet see the unit stop increasing in list because the AI crew patched or minimized the hole that was causing flooding? Would give new meaning to the word simulator...

That's an idea I'm toying with in the back of my mind. I just located the code that iterates over all the unit's zones (boxes) last weekend. I now have to sit down and decode the memory structure for these zones (where the critical floatation value resides, where the zone's current HPs resides, etc.) and I have to find the code that calculates and updates the flooding 'level' for that zone (box). Once I find all the key elements then it a simple (relatively) matter of writing new code to use those elements in a way to increase fllooding based on speed :)
looking forward, it will really fight for survival boat, just like the movie Das Boot or real life and will be in the game.keep up the good work

[Sartoris]

Love the new idea, TDW!

I wonder if one day you will discover a way to bring back crew management in some form... I certainly hope so!:D

[0rpheus]

It appears that what I did before allowed the AI units to exceed the max depth for their given location which caused the collision routine to be called continuously which caused the event routine to be fired continuously. Multiply that by x units exceeding max depth and it could bog down not so powerful systems (I never experienced the problem).

Aha, good you figured it out! You must be running a monster machine not to notice! :O:

[Haukka81]

TDW, can you make something to this : http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=197296 or it is just config file edit :hmmm:


Way more important broblem than rest (imho) :/\\!!

[TheDarkWraith]

TDW, can you make something to this : http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=197296 or it is just config file edit :hmmm:


Way more important broblem than rest (imho) :/\\!!

You need to play with the Visual settings in data\cfg\Sensors.cfg:

;Visual.
Visual range factor=0.5 ;[>=0]
Visual fog factor=1 ;[>=0]
Visual light factor=1 ;[>=0]
Visual waves factor=0.8 ;[>=0]
Visual speed factor=0 ;[>=0]
Visual aspect=0.9 ;[>=0]
Visual enemy speed=0.2 ;[>=0]
Visual noise factor=0 ;[>=0]
Visual sensor height factor=0.5 ;[>=0]
Visual already tracking modifier=600 ;[detection probability modifier], most accurate, once a contact is detected it will lose it very hard
Visual decay time=250 ;[>0] already tracking bonus decay, in seconds
Visual uses crew efficiency=false ;[true or false]

Those highlighted in bold you should experiment with. To be honest I don't know what happens when you increase/decrease each value (I don't know the impact it has - does it make it more sensitive or less sensitive?) Experiment and let us know :up:

[TheDarkWraith]

Aha, good you figured it out! You must be running a monster machine not to notice! :O:

It's a custom build based on an AMD X6 1100T :cool:

How's the new collateral damage patch working? Is it too aggressive or not aggressive enough? Do I need to increase the % chance for collateral damage? Or do I need to keep the % chance the same but change the amount of damage inflicted (more or less)? :06:

[Trevally.]

v1.0.47.0 released. See post #1




:Kaleun_Party:

[gap]

You don't like my AI crew damage control idea?

Quite the reverse, I love it... insanely! :yeah:

[Haukka81]

You need to play with the Visual settings in data\cfg\Sensors.cfg:

;Visual.
Visual range factor=0.5 ;[>=0]
Visual fog factor=1 ;[>=0]
Visual light factor=1 ;[>=0]
Visual waves factor=0.8 ;[>=0]
Visual speed factor=0 ;[>=0]
Visual aspect=0.9 ;[>=0]
Visual enemy speed=0.2 ;[>=0]
Visual noise factor=0 ;[>=0]
Visual sensor height factor=0.5 ;[>=0]
Visual already tracking modifier=600 ;[detection probability modifier], most accurate, once a contact is detected it will lose it very hard
Visual decay time=250 ;[>0] already tracking bonus decay, in seconds
Visual uses crew efficiency=false ;[true or false]

Those highlighted in bold you should experiment with. To be honest I don't know what happens when you increase/decrease each value (I don't know the impact it has - does it make it more sensitive or less sensitive?) Experiment and let us know :up:


Looks like irai already did:

;Submarine player sensors detection parameters

[SensorParameters]

;Visual.
Visual range factor=0.30 ;[>=0] was 0.5, decreased by 25%
Visual fog factor=0.75 ;[>=0]
Visual light factor=1 ;[>=0]
Visual waves factor=0.65 ;[>=0] was 0.8, decreased by 25%
Visual speed factor=0 ;[>=0]
Visual aspect=0.9 ;[>=0]
Visual enemy speed=0.2 ;[>=0]
Visual noise factor=0 ;[>=0]
Visual sensor height factor=0.5 ;[>=0]
Visual already tracking modifier=600 ;[detection probability modifier], most accurate, once a contact is detected it will lose it very hard
Visual decay time=250 ;[>0] already tracking bonus decay, in seconds
Visual uses crew efficiency=false ;[true or false]




Maybe it needs more tuning, must test my self :06::wah:

If numbers go down, will spotting distance go down or up ?

[TheDarkWraith]

I have the complete collision routine and all it's subroutines mapped out and decoded :D Now I can really have some fun!

Let me pose this interesting question:

Given a zone (box) of a unit has an AP value of 100. The player fires a shell at the unit and hits said zone (box). The AP value of the shell is 10. By the game's calculations no damage is done to this zone (box). I would agree since it's AP value of 100 (100cm) protects against a shell with an AP value of 10 (10cm). But what if this shell impact stresses the zone (box) and degrades it some? Would this happen in real life? :06:

If it would happen in real life then I could have the game 'roll' a % chance to see if the zone (box)'s AP value degrades. If the result of this is it does then come up with some formula to reduce the AP value of this zone (box).

This would only apply to the impact point and not to any adjacent zones (boxes). Thoughts :hmmm:

My creative mind is having a hay day right now. I see/know everything that goes on during a collision and I have the ability to make it do whatever I want it to do :D


A patch I think I'm going to release will add some 'variety' to the shell/torpedo collisions. If you look at the AmmoDamageInfo controller attached to a shell/torpedo you'll notice MinEF, MaxEF, AP, MinRadius, MaxRadius, etc. These are hard coded values - they do not change anytime a collision happens. It just doesn't seem right thinking about it in real life terms. Manufacturing tolerances and different qualities of materials in each batch of x weapon made will have different values of these parameters. Thus I'm going to have the game randomize these values to reflect this.

[THE_MASK]

Does cargo type carried or cargo weight come into it . DisplacementVariation found in Silent Hunter 5\data\Sea\******\CFG

If other ships are nearby does chance of extinguishing fires increase ?

Time to extinguish fires would depend on size of zone box etc ?

"When the damaged hull allowed sufficient sea water to rapidly rush inside , the fires seemed to extinguish immediately " Is the zone box % underwater .

Throw this into the mix
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RrRwl5qrNTk

[TheDarkWraith]

So if i hit a zone box with 100 AP with a torp of 10 AP then that should reduce the zone box a random % so that the box is now anywhere between 100 AP and 80 AP . A torp with 20 AP would reduce the box randomly from 100 AP to 60 AP . I just make the random damage double the torp AP .

Does cargo type carried or cargo weight come into it . DisplacementVariation found in Silent Hunter 5\data\Sea\******\CFG

If other ships are nearby does chance of extinguishing fires increase ?

Time to extinguish fires would depend on size of zone box etc ?

"When the damaged hull allowed sufficient sea water to rapidly rush inside , the fires seemed to extinguish immediately "

Regarding the AP: currently here's what the game does (we'll use a torpedo in this example):

torpedo hits ship. Game calculates damage that can be inflicted by torpedo. Subtracts this damage from ship's HPs. Now iterates over all boxes: is AP value of torpedo > AP value of box? If yes incur damage to box. If not check next box. If all boxes checked then done.

Now where in that routine does it decrease the AP value of the box? IT DOESN'T! So you're telling me that a box that just suffered a torpedo hit and incurred damage still has the same AP value? I don't think so. So here's what I'm adding: if box incurs damage from collision then calculate damage to AP also (formula yet to be determined) and update box's AP value to reflect lower value.

You have some great ideas there. Whether they can be implemented or not time will tell :yep:

[TheDarkWraith]

version 1.0.48.0 released. See post #1

This version adds a new patch for SHCollisions.act. This new patch will reduce the AP of the zone (box) when it receives damage (applies to collateral damage also!). This new patch REQUIRES COLLATERAL DAMAGE PATCH TO BE ENABLED OR GAME WILL CTD!

The zone (box) has to incur damage in order for it's AP to be reduced (this means the AP value of the item impinging on the unit has to be higher than the AP of the zone (box) - i.e. a torpedo or (most) shell impacts or a DC)

Why is this AP value important? Because it plays a BIG factor in the amount of damage a zone (box) incurs. In a nutshell the AP of the zone (box) in subtracted from the AP of the item causing the damage, this value is then used in a formula to figure out the amount of HPs damage to the zone (box). Even though the zone (box) may be repaired eventually the next time it is subjected to damage it will incur more damage due to having a lower AP value (you'll notice this with your sub! Being depth charged now is a BAD move - even close bomb explosions from airplanes are not good!)

There is much room for improvement of this patch. This is the first version of it.

I'll add the randomization of the AmmoDamageInfo parameters tomorrow :up:

:|\\

[Trevally.]

Thanks TDW - this sounds great:yep:

I had always ensured that when I fire torps at a ships - they would hit different parts - spread the damage.

With this - is it correct to think that placing a torp in the same hole as the one before will now do more damage:06:

I will start testing shortly:)

[gap]

As far as I know, a shell inpacting on a metal plate would damage anyway its structure -no matter if shell's AP are lesser than box AP- by means of deformation and micro-creaks.

These factors would affect the armour level by decreasing it, and they should be cumulative with an exponential trend. In other words, the more stress a metal structure had previously suffered, the bigger the effect of further stresses, until the critical point is reached and a mechanical overload (sudden collapse of the structure) is occurring.

I suppose as well that any improvised damage repair could restore the original armour only in minimal part.

[TheDarkWraith]

Thanks TDW - this sounds great:yep:

I had always ensured that when I fire torps at a ships - they would hit different parts - spread the damage.

With this - is it correct to think that placing a torp in the same hole as the one before will now do more damage:06:

Yes it will. It will do considerably more damage.

One thing I have to add to the AP damage patch is damage to the unit's AP. If you look in the .zon file for the unit you'll see that it has an AP defined. This value is used when a zone (box) has an AP value < 0. When the zone (box) has AP value of < 0 the game takes the absolute value of the zone (box) AP and mutliplies the unit's AP value with it to get the zone (box)'s AP value. This unit AP value is also used when the shell/torpedo first impacts the unit. At first impact the game takes the AP value of the shell/torpedo and subtracts the unit's AP value from it and then uses this result in a formula to calculate the number of HPs to subtract from the unit. As you can see when the unit's AP value decreases the number of HPs sustained increases. Just as it should. I hope to add this to the AP patch today.

As far as I know, a shell inpacting on a metal plate would damage anyway its structure -no matter if shell's AP are lesser than box AP- by means of deformation and micro-creaks.

These factors would affect the armour level by decreasing it, and they should be cumulative with an exponential trend. In other words, the more stress a metal structure had previously suffered, the bigger the effect of further stresses, until the critical point is reached and a mechanical overload (sudden collapse of the structure) is occurring.

From what the service taught me about metallurgy I thought the same. I'll try and model this :up:

[Dogfish40]

Been doing a lot of travelling lately for work so I haven't had time to sit down in front on my main system and 'work'. To kill time on the airplanes I've been looking into the .exe and .act files for 'problems'. One thing that I had a hunch of being a problem was when a shell/torpedo impacted a unit the game was incorrectly calculating which zones (boxes) were affected. That hunch turns out to be correct - the game has a serious problem in this area.
In order to explain why we have to take two steps back and state one fundamental difference between SH5 and all the previous versions: The Granny file system. The Granny file system includes a unit of measure in the Art Tool Info of every GR2 file. This value let's the game know what the scaling factor is of the data it contains. For SH5 this scaling factor is 0.1 in every GR2 file (that I've looked at). This scaling factor seems to have caused much confusion to the programmers programming SH5.
After weeks of chasing down the routine that is called that calculates the distance from each zone (box) to the impact point I finally found it. The game calculates this distance and then compares this distance to the MinRadius and MaxRadius of the shell/torpedo that impacted the unit. There is a HUGE problem in a subroutine that is called from this routine. The subroutine iterates over every zone (box) and compares the distance from impact to it to the MaxRadius. If less than MaxRadius then game says no damage is done to that zone. Herein is the problem: the radius is unscaled, the MaxRadius is scaled (i.e. say distance calculated was 3.42 and MaxRadius was supposed to be 7.0 but the game is using 0.7 instead). Thus the game is not inflicting damage to nearby zones :nope: This explains why the ships do not list/sink like they should when hit by shells and torpedoes :shifty:
The solution is easy: use the unscaled value for MaxRadius. The fix is not so easy as I have to find the pointer that points to this value. Once I find this pointer I'll be releasing another patch to fix this blaring oversight on the devs :dead:

Sorry for keeping the whole quote in but it was so interesting, I had to say, PLEASE TDW, for the love of... Keep us posted on any patch for this. It's another one that will really bring up the "real" factor in the game.
Cheers D40 :up:

[TheDarkWraith]

Sorry for keeping the whole quote in but it was so interesting, I had to say, PLEASE TDW, for the love of... Keep us posted on any patch for this. It's another one that will really bring up the "real" factor in the game.
Cheers D40 :up:

I have the whole collision routine and it's supporting routines decoded. From those I can see everything that goes on during a collision. I'm now questioning my original evaluation of this. Even though I can see everything doesn't mean I understand the whys of it. Herein lies the problem:

the game calculates the distance from the zone (box) to the impact point. It then does a 'lazy' square root to get the square root of that distance. It then compares that result to the MinRadius and MaxRadius values. Now the MinRadius and MaxRadius values are scaled to game units (multiplied by 0.1 - i.e. MinRadius in sim file is 3 but in game it's 0.3). I can't for the life of me figure out why they are taking the square root of the distance :06:

[volodya61]

Hi TDW!

The new Sub on bottom fix have a new third-party effect.
The sub is dive lower than required in the Uboat.cfg file..
For example:
PeriscopeDepth
in the file - 12m, when Sub on bottom fix enabled - 14m
SnorkelDepth
in the file - 14m, when Sub on bottom fix enabled - 16m

[gap]

I have the whole collision routine and it's supporting routines decoded. From those I can see everything that goes on during a collision. I'm now questioning my original evaluation of this. Even though I can see everything doesn't mean I understand the whys of it. Herein lies the problem:

the game calculates the distance from the zone (box) to the impact point. It then does a 'lazy' square root to get the square root of that distance. It then compares that result to the MinRadius and MaxRadius values. Now the MinRadius and MaxRadius values are scaled to game units (multiplied by 0.1 - i.e. MinRadius in sim file is 3 but in game it's 0.3). I can't for the life of me figure out why they are taking the square root of the distance :06:

No idea :06:

during this afternoon I've been playing with a possible simplified model for armour/damage.

Given AP(S): shell's armour points and AP(B0): box's starting armour points, both >= 0, box's armour points after shell's impact is calculated as follows:

AP(B1) = MAX [AP(B0)* [1 - [C1 * AP(S) / AP(B0)] ^ C2); 0]

where C1 and C2 are two arbitrary positive constants we can use for "finetuning" the formula. Specifically:

C1 is the lower AP(B0) / AP(S) ratio at wich a shell would be enough to wipe out boxe's armour points with one single inpact (graph's gradient when C2=1).

C2 is the "exponential factor" of the formula. 1 for a linear hits number / Box armour points graph.

Every time a shell inpacts a box, the game should update its armour points, and when they are zeroed the box should start taking damage.

I have prepared a spreadsheet for changing the above mentioned parameters and seeing how they would affect the exponential curve. If you want to have a glance at it, I've uploaded it here:

https://rapidshare.com/files/210382227/AP calculations.xls

[SilentOtto]

I have the whole collision routine and it's supporting routines decoded. From those I can see everything that goes on during a collision. I'm now questioning my original evaluation of this. Even though I can see everything doesn't mean I understand the whys of it. Herein lies the problem:

the game calculates the distance from the zone (box) to the impact point. It then does a 'lazy' square root to get the square root of that distance. It then compares that result to the MinRadius and MaxRadius values. Now the MinRadius and MaxRadius values are scaled to game units (multiplied by 0.1 - i.e. MinRadius in sim file is 3 but in game it's 0.3). I can't for the life of me figure out why they are taking the square root of the distance :06:

Hey TDW, this intrigued me (love numbers too!) so I did some magic googling ;) and came out with something called Square Root Scaled Distance, related to... guess what? BLASTING! I found some formulae and long readings, but it seems on first read that it's used in blasting calculations, mining, etc. So it looks like that's the reason for the scaled distances and the sqr! Seems like blast effects diminish with sqr of distance, didn't get to the part of why the scaled distance but there it is!

These are a few examples of what I found, it's a bit late here, I can give it a second look tomorrow.

http://www.iseegoldenwest.org/tech.htm

http://www.sustainableaggregates.com/sourcesofaggregates/landbased/blasting/blasting_blastingandenergy.htm

http://www.sustainableaggregates.com/sourcesofaggregates/landbased/blasting/blasting_monitoring_p2.htm

[TheDarkWraith]

No idea :06:

during this afternoon I've been playing with a possible simplified model for armour/damage.

Given AP(S): shell's armour points and AP(B0): box's starting armour points, both >= 0, box's armour points after shell's impact is calculated as follows:

AP(B1) = MAX [AP(B0)* [1 - [C1 * AP(S) / AP(B0)] ^ C2); 0]

where C1 and C2 are two arbitrary positive constants we can use for "finetuning" the formula. Specifically:

C1 is the lower AP(B0) / AP(S) ratio at wich a shell would be enough to wipe out boxe's armour points with one single inpact (graph's gradient when C2=1).

C2 is the "exponential factor" of the formula. 1 for a linear hits number / Box armour points graph.

Every time a shell inpacts a box, the game should update its armour points, and when they are zeroed the box should start taking damage.

I have prepared a spreadsheet for changing the above mentioned parameters and seeing how they would affect the exponential curve. If you want to have a glance at it, I've uploaded it here:

https://rapidshare.com/files/210382227/AP calculations.xls

gotta love math and numbers :D I'll post the whole damage equation that SH5 is using here soon so you can see what they are doing :up:

Hey TDW, this intrigued me (love numbers too!) so I did some magic googling ;) and came out with something called Square Root Scaled Distance, related to... guess what? BLASTING! I found some formulae and long readings, but it seems on first read that it's used in blasting calculations, mining, etc. So it looks like that's the reason for the scaled distances and the sqr! Seems like blast effects diminish with sqr of distance, didn't get to the part of why the scaled distance but there it is!

These are a few examples of what I found, it's a bit late here, I can give it a second look tomorrow.

http://www.iseegoldenwest.org/tech.htm

http://www.sustainableaggregates.com/sourcesofaggregates/landbased/blasting/blasting_blastingandenergy.htm

http://www.sustainableaggregates.com/sourcesofaggregates/landbased/blasting/blasting_monitoring_p2.htm

Interesting :hmmm: Will have to read over and see if it applies :up:

On another note I found the main rendering loop in the exe file. I'm making a 'Render' patch that will allow you to:
- remove posteffects
- remove water droplets effects
- remove water leaks effects

These would mainly be used for troubleshooting but Sober may have an interest in the water droplets one. Maybe it will cure his smoke problem :06: If it does it will be some good feedback so I can poke around more in PostEffects act file and maybe see why.

[TheDarkWraith]

v1.0.49.0 released. See post #1

This adds a new patch to SH5.exe that allows certain items from ever being rendered in the game.

@Sober - try enabling the water droplets one and see if your smoke problem stops

:|\\

[TheDarkWraith]

You just made my day :haha:

It worked :06:

[TheDarkWraith]

Mostly , the smoke has stopped resetting IE: dissapeares when the water drops appear . The problem of the smoke rendering at the wrong spot still happens though . Ok well , it seems better than it was . I am sure if you open up the file FX_Update_0_0_19_ByTheDarkWraith\data\Library\TDW_ FXU_Zone_Smokes.dat with Goblin you can see the problem .

Excellent. At least the resetting has been fixed (for the most part). I'll mark that down to look into much later as to maybe figuring out why it happens when that render is enabled :up:

[TheDarkWraith]

Mostly , the smoke has stopped resetting IE: dissapeares when the water drops appear . Ok , it still dissapears a bit , it seems better than it was

Try adjusting the max particles number to a larger value and see if that helps :hmmm:

[TheDarkWraith]

I dont think the problem is the smoke particles . I think the problem is the game doesnt like the way the file is structured . If i open the file TDW_FXU_Zone_Smokes.dat with goblin then it is red (something wrong ) . If i open TDW_FXU_Interior_Smoke.dat you can see that it opens correctly in Goblin . The GDS scene tree looks diffrent in the Smokes.dat compared to the TDW_FXU_Interior_Smoke.dat .

I'll take a look at it :up:

[TheDarkWraith]

Anything look different in this screenshot :06:

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/picture.php?albumid=669&pictureid=5798

Hmm....crew is on deck while sub is decks awash...well yeah that would be a new patch I'm working on :D Appropriately named decks awash. You can take the sub down to ~7m depth before electric engines engage and crew disappears. The only thing I have left to do on it is 'unlock' the external hatch when decks awash so you can open/close it (so game doesn't always force it closed and locked).

[Magic1111]

The new Sub on bottom fix have a new third-party effect.
The sub is dive lower than required in the Uboat.cfg file..
For example:
PeriscopeDepth
in the file - 12m, when Sub on bottom fix enabled - 14m
SnorkelDepth
in the file - 14m, when Sub on bottom fix enabled - 16m


Hi TDW!

I notice the same...??:hmmm:

The PeriscopeDepth from my VIIA Sub is now (after Fix enabled) 13m, and this is too short for my Obs-Periscope (I use CSP MaGUI from Dr.Jones). The Obs-Persicope does not raise over the water surface, it is too short (fully raised)! With Attack-Periscope is all okay!

Have you a solution for that problem?

And 2nd question: I´ve patched my .exe with the v1_0_48, and then I began the patrol. Now I´m during mid-patrol. Can I patch my .exe with the new v1_0_49 Patch during Mid-Patrol and then load a savegame to continue the patrol, or must I wait until I´m back in port? :hmmm:

Best regards,
Magic

[gap]

gotta love math and numbers :D

More or less. All I know about maths dates back to my university years, when I was a student of science. Now I am forgetting a lot of notions, but I mostly retain the method :know:

I'll post the whole damage equation that SH5 is using here soon so you can see what they are doing :up:

do it, I'll look at it and see if I can understand anything :up:

On a side note:
I see you like random variables as much as I do :)
I guess you're currently using pseudo-random numbers coming from an uniform distribution, since most programming languages got quick functions for generating them. Nevertheless normal distribution is by far the most common distribution as far as physics and natural events are concerned. Have you ever thought of using it?
There are some methods for converting "uniform" random numbers into "normal" ones. For example, here's a really easy method for doing it:

http://www.protonfish.com/random.shtml

In this example, the mean (Mu) would be the result of your formula before randomization, while you should choose wisely a realistic standard deviation value (Sigma) based on the amount of variation from the mean you want for the event you try to simulate.

Another conversion method, a bit more complex:

http://www.taygeta.com/random/gaussian.html

[TheDarkWraith]

On a side note:
I see you like random variables as much as I do :)
I guess you're currently using pseudo-random numbers coming from an uniform distribution, since most programming languages got quick functions for generating them. Nevertheless normal distribution is by far the most common distribution as far as physics and natural events are concerned. Have you ever thought of using it?
There are some methods for converting "uniform" random numbers into "normal" ones. For example, here's a really easy method for doing it:

http://www.protonfish.com/random.shtml

In this example, the mean (Mu) would be the result of your formula before randomization, while you should choose wisely a realistic standard deviation value (Sigma) based on the amount of variation from the mean you want for the event you try to simulate.

Another conversion method, a bit more complex:

http://www.taygeta.com/random/gaussian.html

I'm using a kernel function that is present in the game to get the random number. I'll have to 'open up' this kernel function and see how it's getting the random number.

I'll post the zone (box) damage routine calculations when I get back from a job this morning :up:

[TheDarkWraith]

The PeriscopeDepth from my VIIA Sub is now (after Fix enabled) 13m, and this is too short for my Obs-Periscope (I use CSP MaGUI from Dr.Jones). The Obs-Persicope does not raise over the water surface, it is too short (fully raised)! With Attack-Periscope is all okay!

Have you a solution for that problem?

And 2nd question: I´ve patched my .exe with the v1_0_48, and then I began the patrol. Now I´m during mid-patrol. Can I patch my .exe with the new v1_0_49 Patch during Mid-Patrol and then load a savegame to continue the patrol, or must I wait until I´m back in port? :hmmm:

As far as the periscope depth I'll look into it more closely when I get back from a job today.

I don't see why you couldn't patch the exe mid patrol but then again I'm not 100% sure what the effects of it are. You should be fine :yep:

[Magic1111]

and this is too short for my Obs-Periscope (I use CSP MaGUI from Dr.Jones).


Sorry TDW, I meant "too deep" for my... NOT too short...13m Periscope Depth is too deep...(my bad english...) :oops:

As far as the periscope depth I'll look into it more closely when I get back from a job today.


Okay, thx, I´m looking forward...! :yeah:

[gap]

I'm using a kernel function that is present in the game to get the random number. I'll have to 'open up' this kernel function and see how it's getting the random number.

Try and see: I think that knowing the routine devs have put in place for generating random numbers is worth the time you would have to spend for discovering it! :up:

Using gaussian distribution would allow us to model a wider range of outputs for some random events, keeping in the same time the probability of unlikely events reasonably low.


I'll post the zone (box) damage routine calculations when I get back from a job this morning :up:

okay :up:

[Sepp von Ch.]

crew is on deck while sub is decks awash....

Fantastic news! Many thanks! Looking forward to this fix!!!

[volodya61]

Yes, 1.0.49, I'm loading tonight. Just to make sure... I will disable all patchs before I load this one.
Can I keep my currant patrol or should I start the patrol over once again? :hmm2: I ask, because I saved in a good place to test the damages I inflict with a torpedo and the deck gun. If I start over I'll have to wait for the next opportunity.:D
Thanks
D40

I enabled it in the middle of the patrol and now I'm in base and everything still ok..

[Dogfish40]

I enabled it in the middle of the patrol and now I'm in base and everything still ok..

Great, thanks for that. Exciting patches, can't wait to get home and get this installed.
:up:

[TheDarkWraith]

Great, thanks for that. Exciting patches, can't wait to get home and get this installed.
:up:

oh there's so much more to come :cool:

[Sartoris]

oh there's so much more to come :cool:

Very exciting! Do keep us updated!:woot:

[volodya61]

Hello, TDW, sir!
What about new Sub on bottom fix issue?

EDIT: I ask because you didn't answer my previous question..

[TheDarkWraith]

Hello, TDW, sir!
What about new Sub on bottom fix issue?

EDIT: I ask because you didn't answer my previous question..

I'm looking into it :up: I see what I have to do now it's just finding the right pointers :shifty:



Collision routine (and supporting functions) in a nutshell for torpedo:

Iterare over every unit:
-clear flag
-check bouding box of item with bounding box of potential collidee
-if intersection found then:
--iterate over every 3D node in collidee:
---test for intersection of item's bounding box to 3D node bounding box
---if intersection flag it and EXIT
---if no intersection found keep checking 3D nodes
--if flag not set then check next unit
-if flag not set check next unit
-if flag set EXIT

if flag not set: EXIT - no collision

if flag set:
Iterate over every unit:
-Check for collision with magnetic detonator:
--Check magnetic detonator installed and active
--Check magnetic detonator range
--Get pointer to collidee (item torpedo collided into)
--Iterate over each zone (box) of collidee:
---get the closest x,y,z points of the box to the impact point
---calculate distance from impact point to points found above (D sub i)
---get magnetic detonator range and square it MDR2
---compare D sub i to MDR2
---if less than keep checking
--if no collision found exit
-convert magnetic detonator range into real units
-breakdown unit's lattitude and longitude into it's component parts
-get collidee's max depth for it's location
-compare component parts to magnetic detonator range (in real units)
-if magnetic detonator range (in real units) > all component parts range then no collision - EXIT

if not flagged: no collision found - EXIT

if flagged:
- iterate over every zone (box) of the collidee
--get axis values of the zone(box)
--calculate distance from impact point to zone (box)
--square zone (box) axis value
--compare calculated distance to square of zone (box) axis value
--if before or equal then check next zone (box)
--if after:
---take lazy square root of calculated distance
---subtract lazy square root of calculated distance from square of magnetic detonator range and store this value on stack
---flag this zone (box)
---check next zone (box)
when done checking all zones (boxes):
-compare magnetic detonator range to value saved on stack
-see if value saved to stack was flagged or not
--if flagged:
---normalize all the zone (box) coordinates
---save pointer to item collided with to stack
---EXIT
--if not flagged: EXIT

if pointer to item collided with not null:
-get distance from collider to item
-get zone (box) coordinates and subtract collider's bounding box coordinates from it
-normalize the result

To be continued....

[TheDarkWraith]

Finally found the routine that updates all the zones (boxes) damage level, flooding level, and checks to see if damage level >= critical floatation value (when flooding starts) :rock:

For a little test I set the damage greater than value for critical floatation level in some zones. I fully expected flooding to start increasing in these zones.....but no, the flooding level was constantly being reset to 0....:hmmm: Houston, we have a problem! :D

[Magic1111]

As far as the periscope depth
...


Hi TDW!

In regarding to the Periscope Depth problem a little bit feedback...:hmm2:

Yesterday I did a test with disable the function "Sub on bottom fix" and then I load my savegame.

I set ingame "Periscope depth" and all works fine (Type VIIA)! The Periscope depth is 12m as in .cfg File! And with this depth I can now use my Obs-Periscope too! :up:

But when I enable the function "Sub on bottom fix" and go into game and set "Periscope depth", the periscope depth is now 13m and with this depth I can´t use my Obs-Pericope, because it is for this depth too short; or vice-versa 13m is too deep for use the Obs-Periscope!

I hope you can fix this! :yep:

Best regards,
Magic

[THE_MASK]

Order 12 mts depth :O:

[Magic1111]

Order 12 mts depth :O:

It´s not a really good solution...! :timeout:

The sub must dive to 12 m as in .cfg File, when I press the key for "Periscope Depth"! All other solutions are not practicable! :smug:

[Dogfish40]

Just my report in about the 1.0.49 patch set. Everything seems very good. Nothing broken, no problems with mid-patrol patch enabling.
I only have one comment about the ship explosions. On my first ship torpedoed I had to dumb down one of the mods I use as the ship took off into the air about 20ft, so I knew something has definitely changed. After adjusting the mod by using the secondary folder, the next ship torpedoed sank slowly, naturally, and ship fires appeared forward, then seemed to stay forward for some time. I was wondering if I was going to see it go out when another secondary explosion hit midships. Once this happened it wasn't long before I got the "fireworks explosion" that blows all the masts down.
Note; I haven't had those big ship-wide explosions for awhile now, and was kinda' glad they were gone. I'm going to sack the torpedo mod completely as I don't think it's needed any longer but, I was wondering if anyone else was having these huge ship-wide explosions. It may be ok once in a while, I just can't see it happening every time.
Other than that, Man, what a patch. Crew is outstanding especially sensors, with or without realistic sensors, both settings are working great.
I'm still checking this out but for now, this is just great!
TDW!!:salute: Again!
D40

[TheDarkWraith]

v1.0.51.0 released. See post #1

starting with v1.0.51.0 add a new patch for SH5.exe: ability to run decks awash (~7.5m) with crew on deck and using diesel engines

[Magic1111]

v1.0.51.0 released. See post #1


Hi TDW!

Is this what I´ve reported in post #696 & 700 now fixed with this new version? :06:

[TheDarkWraith]

Hi TDW!

Is this what I´ve reported in post #696 & 700 now fixed with this new version? :06:

Not yet...still looking for correct pointers

[volodya61]

Thanks! :yeah:

[Sepp von Ch.]

v1.0.51.0 released. See post #1

starting with v1.0.51.0 add a new patch for SH5.exe: ability to run decks awash (~7.5m) with crew on deck and using diesel engines

Merci beaucoup monsieur!:up:

[THE_MASK]

Fantastic , will we get a decks awash icon on the depth control hud for new UI mod .

[TheDarkWraith]

Fantastic , will we get a decks awash icon on the depth control hud for new UI mod .

Great idea! I'll have to add it :up:

[TheBeast]

I think Storm Condition should be considered for Decks A wash. Stormy weather should prevent running at 7.5m

Remember (Rigging boat for Decks A wash) data\Sound\Speech\ChiefEngineer\Normal\MC_CR_CHIEF _04.ogg

[volodya61]

It works fine and has a good view

http://s19.postimage.org/a4n0sta7z/SH5_Img_2012_08_05_02_02_14.jpg (http://postimage.org/image/a4n0sta7z/)

[THE_MASK]

I like 8 mts . Thankyou for this mod .

[Dogfish40]

Hi TDW. Wondering? I looked to see if this was mentioned since the release.
Did we find that adjustment to keep the hatch open with decks awash but to close it while diving? :hmmm:
Can't wait to load this. OH, I guess I could find this out on my own but for the sake of anyone else who may want to know; when we run decks awash, is it deep enough for a hydrophone check??:hmmm::hmmm:
Thanks Loads for these, I can't tell you how much they improve this... :sunny:
PS: Is there a hotkey for the Decks Awash order, or do we specifically order 7.5m depth

D40

[volodya61]

..when we run decks awash, is it deep enough for a hydrophone check??..

No.. it's not enough deep to start hydrophone check..

.. Is there a hotkey for the Decks Awash order, or do we specifically order 7.5m depth..

Not yet..

[TheDarkWraith]

Hi TDW. Wondering? I looked to see if this was mentioned since the release.
Did we find that adjustment to keep the hatch open with decks awash but to close it while diving? :hmmm:

Works just like it's supposed to - hatch will not lock closed during decks awash (iirc it does close when a new depth is ordered though) so you can reopen it. When diving it will lock closed so it cannot be opened.

[Dogfish40]

Works just like it's supposed to - hatch will not lock closed during decks awash (iirc it does close when a new depth is ordered though) so you can reopen it. When diving it will lock closed so it cannot be opened.


Great! :up: So cool.
Now, Do I just order 7.5 depth? As volodya says, no hotkey yet, right?:D
Thanks
D40

[TheDarkWraith]

Great! :up: So cool.
Now, Do I just order 7.5 depth? As volodya says, no hotkey yet, right?:D
Thanks
D40

Yep, just order some depth <= 7.5m. I can't make a hotkey for it until I figure out how to add new commands to the exe :03:

I will be able to add a new icon to the depth bar in my UIs mod though that will order decks awash :up:

OFFTOPIC:

For those of you who own a GTX690 and have Win7 Ultimate 64bit DO NOT INSTALL EVGA's LED controller! It will cause your system to ALWAYS reboot the first time it tries. Now I have to reinstall Win7 because removing the software doesn't remove the problem. It leaves behind some files!! This really pisses me off....

OFFTOPIC EDIT:

Problem was due to old BIOS! Stranger things have happended before. Upgraded the Crosshair V BIOS from 0404 to 1402 and no more problems.

[Mikemike47]

OFFTOPIC:

For those of you who own a GTX690 and have Win7 Ultimate 64bit DO NOT INSTALL EVGA's LED controller! It will cause your system to ALWAYS reboot the first time it tries. Now I have to reinstall Win7 because removing the software doesn't remove the problem. It leaves behind some files!! This really pisses me off....

OFFTOPIC EDIT:

Problem was due to old BIOS! Stranger things have happended before. Upgraded the Crosshair V BIOS from 0404 to 1402 and no more problems.

I was always curious if a company allowed you to update graphics BIOS. I never made it my highest priority or did not dig deep enough on ATI forum sites. Has anyone found a link on how to update BIOS, and the download file link to update BIOS on an ATI 4670 video graphics card or similar?

[TheDarkWraith]

I was always curious if a company allowed you to update graphics BIOS. I never made it my highest priority or did not dig deep enough on ATI forum sites. Has anyone found a link on how to update BIOS, and the download file link to update BIOS on an ATI 4670 video graphics card or similar?\

I didn't update the video card BIOS, I updated my motherboard BIOS

[TheDarkWraith]

Been working dilligently on my next work of art - AI crew damage control :D I have code in place that will cause the AI to start pumping out water from damaged zones (boxes) :rock: I'm working on the code that will have them putting shoring and patching in place (to fix the damage). Even though the AI crew will patch and shore and pump out the flooding they will not regain the HPs lost from the unit. Those are gone forever. They will regain the HPs to the zone (box) though.

If a zone (box) has > 50% flooding:
- if less than 65% flooded and zone (box) damage is > 25% then they will let it flood completely (but they seal it off from other compartments).
- if less than 65% flooded and zone (box) damage is <= 25% then they will continue to try pumping out the water
- if >= 65% flooding then crew abandons pumping and will let it flood completely (but they seal it off from other compartments).

You can actually watch a unit rise out of the water (or recover from listing) from the AI crew pumping out the water :rock:

This will be a first for any of the Silent Hunter series :D

[Deke]

Is there someone who have tried to patch the steam version?

[Sartoris]

Great news, TDW! Absolutely spectacular progress!:woot:

Yesterday I used your latest patcher, and it works perfectly, so I'm wondering if we will have to first disable all of the patches before applying the new one (once it comes out)? I know it says so on the first page, but just checking.:up:

[volodya61]

Been working dilligently on my next work of art - AI crew damage control :D I have code in place that will cause the AI to start pumping out water from damaged zones (boxes) :rock: I'm working on the code that will have them putting shoring and patching in place (to fix the damage). Even though the AI crew will patch and shore and pump out the flooding they will not regain the HPs lost from the unit. Those are gone forever. They will regain the HPs to the zone (box) though...

Your work approaches this game to reality more and more! And I think eventually will make it the best in the Silent Hunter series! :yeah:

Is there someone who have tried to patch the steam version?

Unfortunately it's impossible..

[gap]

Outstanding work, TDW :rock:

[Dogfish40]

Great news, TDW! Absolutely spectacular progress!:woot:

Yesterday I used your latest patcher, and it works perfectly, so I'm wondering if we will have to first disable all of the patches before applying the new one (once it comes out)? I know it says so on the first page, but just checking.:up:

Hello Sartoris, Yes. You have to disable 'em.
Disable all patches from the old patcher. TDW told me an easy way to do this.
Go into one of the Patch files ex; TDW_SHCollisions_Patch.s5p , then right click on "Patches" the menu will ask Enable all patches/Disable all Patches.
It's the easy way to do the whole process in about a minute.
Cheers
D40

[Kalleblom]

I didn´t tested the new patch. But about this info i thought, too.

Thx for that!

Edit:
I´ve forgotten one important thing

Great thx and all my respect to TDW for this work! :salute:

:yeah::yeah:

[Sartoris]

Hello Sartoris, Yes. You have to disable 'em.
Disable all patches from the old patcher. TDW told me an easy way to do this.
Go into one of the Patch files ex; TDW_SHCollisions_Patch.s5p , then right click on "Patches" the menu will ask Enable all patches/Disable all Patches.
It's the easy way to do the whole process in about a minute.
Cheers
D40

Thank you!:yeah:

[SilentOtto]

Go into one of the Patch files ex; TDW_SHCollisions_Patch.s5p , then right click on "Patches" the menu will ask Enable all patches/Disable all Patches.
It's the easy way to do the whole process in about a minute.


:up: x 100 !!!

[TheDarkWraith]

Hello Sartoris, Yes. You have to disable 'em.
Disable all patches from the old patcher. TDW told me an easy way to do this.
Go into one of the Patch files ex; TDW_SHCollisions_Patch.s5p , then right click on "Patches" the menu will ask Enable all patches/Disable all Patches.
It's the easy way to do the whole process in about a minute.
Cheers
D40

You can also do the same for each individual patch. Right click on it and select Enable/Disable all changes :up:

I'm working on a new version of the patcher app coming with the next new patch (crew damage control). There are some things I need it to do that it currently doesn't do :)

[TheDarkWraith]

Like I said I have code in place that has the AI crew pumping out flood water. That code was just a theory to practice to ensure the idea/code was sound. Now being of sound nature I can add the changes necessary to make it complete.

Here's my thinking: The pumps onboard the units will be able to pump equivalent to 20-30% damage (a random function will determine the % on every frame update thus giving some randomness to the pump amount). This will allow a compartment to accumulate flood water (allbeit at a lower rate than it would without pumps) until the crew fixes the damage to the compartment. The damage to the compartment is used in the formula by the game to determine amount of flood water to add to the compartment per frame update (it's actually per flood water timer update which is set at 5 seconds by the game). If the flood water level is > 65% of the compartment the crew abandons trying to pump out the water and lets the compartment flood full (sealing it off from other compartments).

The crew will try and fix the damage to the compartment every frame update. A random function will determine whether they (crew AI) successfully decreases some damage to the compartment every frame update. If they are successfull then the max the crew can repair damage per frame is 0.003%. A random number will be generated (0-1.0 in value) and multiplied by 0.003 to get the amount of damage reduced in that frame update.

These changes will allow flood water to accumulate in the compartment if damage is > 20-30% (random number). Once the crew manages to get the damage to the compartment repaired to a level that the pumps can remove the water then the flood water level will decrease in that compartment. This all together will give a nice curve of flooding versus time (starts out high and exponentially decreases over time as crew repairs damage). Say the damage to the compartment is 55% and the game calculates that the flood water level increase in that timer update is 0.17. Since the pumps can remove 20-30% of the water I'll take 0.17 * ( 1 - 20-30% random number) to get the amount of flood water to add in that timer update. Same applies to if damage is say 12%. Since 12% is < 20-30% random number then I'll take whatever the game calculates as the flood water level increase and negate it and pass it onto the function to update compartment water level thus decreasing the water level in that compartment.

Now the game keeps track of the flood water level in the compartment at all times. Thus if the water level in the compartment gets to the water level at the hull flooding stops (as it should). This gives the crew the possibility of not exceeding the 65% damage threshold before having to quit trying to remove flood water.

If you have any ideas for this please speak up. We can make this do just about whatever we want it to do :D

[NONONO]

Like I said I have code in place that has the AI crew pumping out flood water. That code was just a theory to practice to ensure the idea/code was sound. Now being of sound nature I can add the changes necessary to make it complete.

Here's my thinking: The pumps onboard the units will be able to pump equivalent to 20-30% damage (a random function will determine the % on every frame update thus giving some randomness to the pump amount). This will allow a compartment to accumulate flood water (allbeit at a lower rate than it would without pumps) until the crew fixes the damage to the compartment. The damage to the compartment is used in the formula by the game to determine amount of flood water to add to the compartment per frame update (it's actually per flood water timer update which is set at 5 seconds by the game). If the flood water level is > 65% of the compartment the crew abandons trying to pump out the water and lets the compartment flood full (sealing it off from other compartments).

The crew will try and fix the damage to the compartment every frame update. A random function will determine whether they (crew AI) successfully decreases some damage to the compartment every frame update. If they are successfull then the max the crew can repair damage per frame is 0.003%. A random number will be generated (0-1.0 in value) and multiplied by 0.003 to get the amount of damage reduced in that frame update.

These changes will allow flood water to accumulate in the compartment if damage is > 20-30% (random number). Once the crew manages to get the damage to the compartment repaired to a level that the pumps can remove the water then the flood water level will decrease in that compartment. This all together will give a nice curve of flooding versus time (starts out high and exponentially decreases over time as crew repairs damage). Say the damage to the compartment is 55% and the game calculates that the flood water level increase in that timer update is 0.17. Since the pumps can remove 20-30% of the water I'll take 0.17 * ( 1 - 20-30% random number) to get the amount of flood water to add in that timer update. Same applies to if damage is say 12%. Since 12% is < 20-30% random number then I'll take whatever the game calculates as the flood water level increase and negate it and pass it onto the function to update compartment water level thus decreasing the water level in that compartment.

Now the game keeps track of the flood water level in the compartment at all times. Thus if the water level in the compartment gets to the water level at the hull flooding stops (as it should). This gives the crew the possibility of not exceeding the 65% damage threshold before having to quit trying to remove flood water.

If you have any ideas for this please speak up. We can make this do just about whatever we want it to do :D
possible to implement tools for fire management and
Allowable concentrations of toxic gases (harmful substances) in case of fire,
Effect of water temperature and air personnel,and when the sub sank from damage to the critical depth is not on the ground, the crew will try and fix the damage all try to come up with a lot of emergency submarine

[DelphiUniverse]

The end patrol button not working (after every second patrol), is this something that you can work out in a future patch?

[Trevally.]

This is for ships that we have attacked:06:
Not our u-boats:06:

[gap]

Thinking out loud...

What was the maximum water pumping rate for WWII bilge pumps? How were they powered? I guess the most likely answer is through ship's propulsion engines. :hmm2:

In this case pump's power should be a function of unit engine's max power, and consequantly a ship with her engines on flames shouldn't be able to manage her floodings at all.

[Trevally.]

Engine Room Flooding
In the case of engine room flooding; the level of the incoming seawater in the bilges must be controlled in order to prevent it reaching the main power generators. This would be catastrophic, leading to the loss of main power to pumps and the main engine.


If the torp hit the engine room - no pumping:hmmm:

[mookiemookie]

Thinking out loud...

What was the maximum water pumping rate for WWII bilge pumps? How were they powered? I guess the most likely answer is through ship's propulsion engines. :hmm2:

In this case pump's power should be a function of unit engine's max power, and consequantly a ship with her engines on flames shouldn't be able to manage her floodings at all.

Bilge pumps were electric. (http://www.hnsa.org/doc/fleetsub/trim/chap3.htm)

[gap]

Bilge pumps were electric. (http://www.hnsa.org/doc/fleetsub/trim/chap3.htm)

Thank you for the link mookiemookie, good website that one :up:

It refers to US subs drain system anyway. Indeed I can be wrong, but I doubt battery powered pumps could keep the pace with heavy floodings on larger ships. :hmmm:

[TheDarkWraith]

Thank you for the link mookiemookie, good website that one :up:

It refers to US subs drain system anyway. Indeed I can be wrong, but I doubt battery powered pumps could keep the pace with heavy floodings on larger ships. :hmmm:

I come from a Navy background and our pumps were electrical in nature. We could rig emergency power if needed to power anything.

This is why I thought it was prudent to bring this into discussion. I want to implement something that is accurate (as much as possible) and also realistic :yep:

This AI crew damage control would only apply to AI units - not the player's sub. That means AI ships and subs and Aircraft. I can possibly filter out certain types if I can locate the pointer that points to the unit's type (i.e. 102, 104, 201, etc.). I have seen this pointer before now I just have to remember where I saw it!

[mookiemookie]

Thank you for the link mookiemookie, good website that one :up:

It refers to US subs drain system anyway. Indeed I can be wrong, but I doubt battery powered pumps could keep the pace with heavy floodings on larger ships. :hmmm:

Well you were correct in a way - it was related to the diesel engines, as those were the dynamos for charging the batteries. But in any case, the bilge pumps were electrically operated on U-boats also - here's a description of how they rigged the U-505's bilge pumps to work without having engines or a full battery charge: http://uboat.net/forums/read.php?20,59020,59029