Need help with sub visuals

[Armistead]

Trying to find a better balance with my personal env. and crew sub visuals. I can adjust to where crew has basically to the horizon vision, but they still see too far at night. With all the subvisual nodes, is there one that determines night visuals only. I thought it would be the one with shorter ranges, but doesn't do much.. Basically playing with the sub visuals in library, USSupParts and minor tweaking to Cfg. Last adjustment, I see about 8nms during the day, OK, I can see the ship myself, but crew see 5nms at night when I can't see the ships at all. I could figure it with time, but hoping someone could spare all the testing.

Oh, one other issue, if you increase visuals to basically the horizon, you obviouly get a lock and can ID the ship with TMO's auto ID. I like the long visuals, but don't like being to ID ships I can't make out. How to I cut this feature back off and make it where you have to pick yourself like in stock.

[Armistead]

I figured it out.....

[Bilge_Rat]

so what is the answer? I would be interested to know.

[arnahud2]

Me too...

[Armistead]

You adjust ranges in Library

SH4/Data/Library/USSubParts/SensorData

You'll find 3 visual nodes inside in a row, seems it starts around node 29. Just increase ranges

Also inside the Library itself is another sensorvisualsub.sim where you can adjust visuals.

Then you can tweak with the sh4/data/cfg/sensorscfg to fine tune the above.

The trick is finding realistic ranges that work with the env. mod you use. They're several factors in scene dat and env files that effect visuals for sub and AI. Some env mods have really dark nights with dark horizons and often the enemy sees you before you see him, can even happen during the day that the enemy shoots at you before your crew sees him. I use my own enviroment mod and use a lot of moonlight, so horizon with the moon you can see to the horizon, away from the moon it's fairly dark. IMO your sub crew should spot the enemy before he spots you.

http://i651.photobucket.com/albums/uu235/Armistead1424/SH4Img2012-07-24_011930_843.jpg

[CapnScurvy]

Trying to find a better balance with my personal env. and crew sub visuals. I can adjust to where crew has basically to the horizon vision, but they still see too far at night. With all the subvisual nodes, is there one that determines night visuals only?

Not that I know of.

I looked at this same feature a long time ago and came to the idea that the function of the AI's "day compared to night visuals" were backward to what they should be. I found through testing, that when you set the AI's visuals to give you a fairly realistic night visual capability, the day visual was so far off the enemy couldn't find you, even sitting almost next to the target. Setting the day visuals to work as expected, caused the night observations to be too good to be true! Completely backward of what it should be. It seems the visual parameters are set to just one "default", then the rest of the visual variables (crew competency, target surface size, day/night) are added or subtracted from it. I'm suspecting the same is true with your own subs crew capability.

I've seen this kind of mistake before with the hard coded features of the game (not every feature can be tweaked by us). The game with its first patch gave us the Imperial units of measurements (yards/feet) for an American WWII simulated wargame?! Yea!! They finally got something right. Yet, the hard coded conversion of turning yards into meters when manual targeting (for a player using the Metric system) was incorrect until patch 3. Both Metric and Imperial measurements were in yards shown on the Position Keeper until version 1.3. Some sort of hard coded parameter had to be changed to get the measurements to read as expected. I've felt that the day/night visuals for the AI (and maybe the subs crew) were similar in oversight.

In your last post, you state you may have found a "trick' around this, within the "sensordata" files in a couple of places. If so, that's great news!! I would like to think there is a "work around" to this backward day/night visual issue.

......can ID the ship with TMO's auto ID. How do I cut this feature back off and make it where you have to pick yourself like in stock.

I did a quick look, I couldn't find a keyboard entry for "ID Target" on TMO's keyboard "Data/cfg/Commands.cfg" file. So, I guess there's nothing to change there.

The "ID Target" button appears on the Orders Bar along the bottom in two different stations....the Periscope, and Bridge stations.

To remove this button from the two stations, "deactivate" TMO from the game using JSGME. Find TMO's "Data/Menu/cfg/OrdersBar.cfg" file. Make a copy, then open with NotePad. Go to the [Station3] that's the Periscope Station entries and find the last entry as below:

http://i175.photobucket.com/albums/w132/crawlee/OrdersBarTMO_zpsbfe9c0ad.jpg


"Comment Out" the Button10 entry (add the semicolon {;} to the front of the three lines).

Do the same in [Station4] the Bridge. This time you'll need to change the ButtonNumber system after "commenting out" the "WP_Identify_target" entry. Just move the remainder of the ButtonNumber's count, up one number, to fill in for removing the "ID Target" button. Save your work, and put the TMO OrdersBar.cfg file back in it's place.

[arnahud2]

Thank you Amistead for your explainations. If you're perfectly right, you pointed out a BIG issue, still present despite the last (and now old) patch ?

I always found annoying that enemy merchant could see my "little" sub before my crew can spot them, especially at night time...

So, this could be an horrible bug never fixed ? :down:

[Armistead]

Not that I know of.

I looked at this same feature a long time ago and came to the idea that the function of the AI's "day compared to night visuals" were backward to what they should be. I found through testing, that when you set the AI's visuals to give you a fairly realistic night visual capability, the day visual was so far off the enemy couldn't find you, even sitting almost next to the target. Setting the day visuals to work as expected, caused the night observations to be too good to be true! Completely backward of what it should be. It seems the visual parameters are set to just one "default", then the rest of the visual variables (crew competency, target surface size, day/night) are added or subtracted from it. I'm suspecting the same is true with your own subs crew capability.

In your last post, you state you may have found a "trick' around this, within the "sensordata" files in a couple of places. If so, that's great news!! I would like to think there is a "work around" to this backward day/night visual issue.



Little confused by your statement that " you set the AI's visuals to give you a fairly realistic night visual capability, the day visual was so far off the enemy couldn't find you, even sitting almost next to the target."

Anytime I refer to AI, I mean any jap sensor, but so far I'm only messing with the subvisuals for US. I'm not getting the backward effect, just the same effect. The effect I'm getting is the night visuals match the long range day visuals. I don't mind seeing to the horizon during the day, but don't won't those ranges at night, but maybe it can be resolved somewhat.


In Library USSubparts/SensorsSubUS.sim you have 3 visual nodes. I can't say for sure, but I believe these are connected to each weather type in Env. Testing seems to confirm this. What do you say?

Also in Library you have the sensorvisualsub.sim, that seems to have a general effect on visuals. I've just started comparing the AI enemy, but don't find a file like the one in USSubparts with 3 visual nodes, just the overall visuals and visuals for each ship class. Course then you can tweak numerous values for US with sensors. cfg and AI with sim.cfg and numerous other factors come into play.

If there is any trick, it's basically this, increasing all the ranges for USSubs, then tweak cfg sensor values to increase or greatly decrease other values to get night ranges to tone down, such as light. The real trick is getting your env. settings right for night, mostly with any value that effects light at night, course env. and scene dat have great effect on visuals for all.

The difficult part is getting a realistic env look that seems reasonable with sensors at night. How dark should night be; how far should you be able to see with moon light and how much moon light is reasonable...on and on..?
I'll show some SS's of one of my env looks at night.

Understand I'm not explaining things to you, sure you're aware of all this, more talking to myself and hoping you can clue me in on anything I'm missing.

[Armistead]

Thank you Amistead for your explainations. If you're perfectly right, you pointed out a BIG issue, still present despite the last (and now old) patch ?

I always found annoying that enemy merchant could see my "little" sub before my crew can spot them, especially at night time...

So, this could be an horrible bug never fixed ? :down:

As far as toning down merchant visuals. I haven't messed with the enemy AI much, but each class has a visual range, so you can tone down merchants without effecting escorts. You have to understand they're possibly 100's of values that effect each other.

I agree I've always hated being seen before my crew can see. To a degree the crew should see what you can see, but not really the case. Heck, with some mods like TMO, at night, often the crew can see what you can't. Reasonable night surfact attacks are difficult, often you get blown up by a escort your crew hasn't spotted. I honestly think the fix is there, but it will take a new env mod and a total reworking of all sensors.
I've been playing and working on it for over a year, env work is very time consuming when you're trying to get a realistic look with realistic sensors, so much so I think most just settle for a balance.

[Armistead]

Capt S,

Here are a few SS's for comparison. I probably have 100 different env mods, but these as an example.

This is TMO alone, nights are fairly dark regardless of the moon. My eyes are older, but can barely make out the horizon from water, but can't see ships.

http://i651.photobucket.com/albums/uu235/Armistead1424/SH4Img2004-03-02_182808_468.jpg

Here is some added moonlight to TMO. The overall effect is increased visuals for all.

http://i651.photobucket.com/albums/uu235/Armistead1424/SH4Img2004-03-02_185328_406.jpg

Here is one night look, added moonlight, light on clouds, lighter cloud color near the moon. I also increased width of reflection, lil too much here, but you get the point.
http://i651.photobucket.com/albums/uu235/Armistead1424/SH4Img2012-07-23_204837_187_zps81303f1a.png

Same as above, but going away, horizon is fairly dark and your visuals change.

http://i651.photobucket.com/albums/uu235/Armistead1424/SH4Img2012-07-23_204913_250_zpsa32653a4.png



With more moonlight, one thing I found shocked me. I don't know if angle of moon effects visuals, but I was attacking a convoy with moon behind them, crew got a good long range visual and they didn't seem to notice me. Why setting up the attack, next thing I know I'm getting blasted by a escort behind me that my crew didn't call out about 8000 yards away. I didn't have radar and it was a subkiller group I probably put in the area. It really seems moon position/angle in sky does have effect, but need more testing.

[TorpX]

I can't help you with your project, Armistead, but the screenies look real nice. I especially like the 2nd one. :yep:

[Fifi]

Yeah, awesome shots!

The first one is probably the closer to real life imo.
Regarding the moon position and its light slightly blurred with clouds.
Love it!

Second shot is strange...sub should be not lighted this way with moon behind it :hmmm:

[TorpX]

I think these screenshots will look different to us, because of our differing monitors and settings. I can hardly even see that there is a sub, in the first one. Very dark for me.

[Armistead]

The first SS is TMO alone, many like it as is, but I like more light around the moon and clouds near the moon, plus TMO is a lil blue for me. The nights are a lil dark for my old eyes as well. It's all a matter of personal preference, some like one look, others another. Main thing for me is the visual aspects of light at night. I like planning my attacks with the moon light as a factor regarding what I see. Course no moon, night get dark.

Another sample, more lighting effect on clouds, less halo light and water reflection, but horizon away from moon is still dark. I play with different moon textures, maybe a lil large.

http://i651.photobucket.com/albums/uu235/Armistead1424/SH4Img2012-07-24_012056_578.jpg

Basically same shot as above, only changes are clouds, but has great impact on light.


http://i651.photobucket.com/albums/uu235/Armistead1424/SH4Img2012-07-24_014754_140.jpg

Yet another look

http://i651.photobucket.com/albums/uu235/Armistead1424/SH4Img2012-07-24_234340_562.jpg

Few more
http://i651.photobucket.com/albums/uu235/Armistead1424/SH4Img2012-07-24_022533_328.jpg

Think in this one I started adjusting filter values as well, more constrast and sharpness.

http://i651.photobucket.com/albums/uu235/Armistead1424/SH4Img2012-07-25_161746_625_zps59f507ce.png

You could get 1000 different looks, just got to decide what look best works with sensors.

[TorpX]

They all look pretty good, but I rather favor the first one.

I agree about the moon; when full or near full, it should make a big difference in light and range of vision. :yep:

[CapnScurvy]

Little confused by your statement that " you set the AI's visuals to give you a fairly realistic night visual capability, the day visual was so far off the enemy couldn't find you, even sitting almost next to the target."

Anytime I refer to AI, I mean any jap sensor, but so far I'm only messing with the subvisuals for US.


When I tested for trying to make a difference in day/night visual detection I made a single mission (actually there were two, one for night....the other for day. Both were exactly the same except for time of day). There were 2 enemy DD's to my front (one sitting broadside to my sub, the other facing directly towards my subs profile). Another set of two DD's to my perpendicular (set in the same stance as the two ahead). These 4 were at 2000 yards distance from the sub. I had another pair to my other side at 4000 yards distance, yet another pair at the same distance to my rear. All were the same stock Fubuki Class DD with their sensors diminished to only their visual capabilities.

An easy way of removing the Fubuki's radar/sonar sensors for testing.... leaving only its visual capabilities.... is to remove the following from its "NDD_Fubuki.sns" file:

http://i175.photobucket.com/albums/w132/crawlee/Sensor_zps09541390.jpg

The H01 are the Hydrophones, N01 are its sonar, R01 is its surface search radar. Without these the only detection capabilities are in its [Sensor 1] slot.....its AI_Visuals. Change the [Sensor 10] to [Sensor 2] and further down the remaining list before saving the file.

After making a mod with the two single mission setups (both day and night) and dumbing down the DD's detection capabilities, I set out to tweak the AI visual sensors found in the following "Data/cfg/Sim.cfg" file:

http://i175.photobucket.com/albums/w132/crawlee/Simcfg_zps17678894.jpg

It's these [Visual] figures that allowed me to see that tweaking the "Light factor=xxx" parameter caused the exact opposite of what should be expected from the game for the night test compared to the day.

========

In Library USSubparts/SensorsSubUS.sim you have 3 visual nodes. I can't say for sure, but I believe these are connected to each weather type in Env. Testing seems to confirm this. What do you say?


Sorry, but they don't.

If you run a search on the "Parent ID" of the three visual sensors you'd find they are the "Attack Periscope" visuals as below:

http://i175.photobucket.com/albums/w132/crawlee/AttackPeriscope_zpsc7580479.jpg

The next is the "Observation Periscope" visuals. The third is for the "ST Periscope" visuals (when the ST radar head is in the Observation Periscope):

http://i175.photobucket.com/albums/w132/crawlee/STradarscope_zpsee7d20b0.jpg

All three have the same parameters for visual range, surface area detection size etc. These three nodes are for the subs view through the periscope.

========

Mind you, this is for the AI visual sensors part.....but, when I look at the following stock file (I like comparing stock files rather than TMO of RFB or some other modded file) I see something I hadn't noticed before:

http://i175.photobucket.com/albums/w132/crawlee/AI_sensors_zps5565b5f7.jpg

The Minimum surface size for a detected object is 0.0......in other words the AI is going to detect an object at the smallest size that it could be displayed. This doesn't seem right to me, considering the subs visuals state the following:

http://i175.photobucket.com/albums/w132/crawlee/Sensorsvisualsub_zps42ca747e.jpg

What the subs visuals state is that at the Maximum range (in this case 15,000 meters) a surface area of 100 meters (I'm assuming square area)can be detected. Anything less.....there's no detection. Seems like the AI has an advantage from the start? How this plays out with the night/day comparison, I don't know, but it's worth looking into.

My problem is that I've got enough irons in the fire to keep me busy. But, if someone would like to take a look for themselves by all means do so. Make a couple of test missions as I've done, and time (with a stop watch) the difference in time it takes for the enemy to fire upon the sub when it surfaces. Tweaks to the "Data/cfg/Sim.cfg" [Visual] file seem to make some difference, but not as I expected. Maybe someone will have better luck.

[Armistead]

They all look pretty good, but I rather favor the first one.

I agree about the moon; when full or near full, it should make a big difference in light and range of vision. :yep:


Glad you agree. I certainly mean no slam on any enviroment mod, but most ignore what I feel is proper moonlight, light on clouds, etc. My guess is because all the testing to tweak sensors to yet another env. mod. I can only guess how much time it took Duci to tweak the sensors to existing env. mods.

Anyway, enviroments are easy to make, just time consuming, so that's not really an issue, I've got several looks I like tweaked with sensors fairly well. Still, I think so much more could be done with realistic sensors to env connection. My last peeve is sub visuals, just don't like being spotted and shot at before my crew spots a ship I can clearly see shooting. Plus I never felt the game was realistic regarding night attacks. The more I tweak and test, the more I feel it can be resolved. I've made numerous small mods for individuals, one day I want to get my env done, but properly tweaked. I think I have all the pieces, just putting them together.
I could use some help testing if you're interested...

[Armistead]

When I tested for trying to make a difference in day/night visual detection I made a single mission (actually there were two, one for night....the other for day. Both were exactly the same except for time of day). There were 2 enemy DD's to my front (one sitting broadside to my sub, the other facing directly towards my subs profile). Another set of two DD's to my perpendicular (set in the same stance as the two ahead). These 4 were at 2000 yards distance from the sub. I had another pair to my other side at 4000 yards distance, yet another pair at the same distance to my rear. All were the same stock Fubuki Class DD with their sensors diminished to only their visual capabilities.




Thanks for the detailed response. Yea, I figured today those 3 nodes were as you said when I tested radical ranges. It seems most visual values that have effect is the sensorvisualsub.sim further tweaked by the sensors.cfg connected to the many env/scene dat values. Am I missing any others?


Could you tell me what the following values do?

Visual aspect, seems it may have to do with the profile. If so, is it the visual aspect of your sub or the enemy ship to you? Also the "Visual noise" factor....

Visual range factor=1.5 ;[>=0]
Visual fog factor=1.0 ;[>=0]
Visual light factor=1.5 ;[>=0]
Visual waves factor=1.2 ;[>=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=true

I think you're on to something with the minsurface, I never noticed that, but seems it would have great impact on visuals overall, not sure about day or night.

I can get the crew to spot targets to the horizon on a clear day, basically 10 nms, but still hate they can lock and ID a ship that you can't make out. Still, who wants to have to use the book when they know all ships by heart. At night I'm getting crew visuals up to 6nms depending on moonlight and position.

Course with my env with more moonlight and light around the moon in general, that alone increases visuals for both sides. Still not sure about visuals in relation to moon position. I placed two escorts using TMO values with the moon silhouetting behind them at 6000 yards from me. They didn't see me narrow, but did when I gave them my flank. However, if I place an escort behind me at 6000 yards with the moon silhouetting me, they open up. My crew didn't call out the escort behind me, but I could barely make him out against the dark horizon. In fact, with me in the moon, they saw me to 8000 yards narrow. Now with the moon high in the sky not silhouetting the horizon, ranges stay consistant regardless. All the escorts factors/values were the same, including crew rating. This effect alone about gives me what I want.

You said " It's these [Visual] figures that allowed me to see that tweaking the "Light factor=xxx" parameter caused the exact opposite of what should be expected from the game for the night test compared to the day."

Are you saying when you increased the light value, it increased range during the day, but decreased range at night or the opposite....or something else?

Thanks for your help....

[CapnScurvy]

Could you tell me what the following values do?


Visual aspect, seems it may have to do with the profile. If so, is it the visual aspect of your sub or the enemy ship to you? Also the "Visual noise" factor....

Visual range factor=1.5 ;[>=0]
Visual fog factor=1.0 ;[>=0]
Visual light factor=1.5 ;[>=0]
Visual waves factor=1.2 ;[>=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=true



The "Visual aspect=xxx" does have to do with the modifier for detection depending on the targets profile to the sub. Less of a figure, gives less of a modifier to the detection capabilities....greater the figure an increase in detection capabilities.

The "Visual noise factor=xxx" is used for the other sensors (like the hydrophone or sonar). Why it's even listed here is probably an oversight. Believe me, there are plenty of "oversights" in this game!!

Here's what you need to remember about this game. There are lot's of files that are easily accessible by us to tweak, but do they mean anything to the hard coded system that the developers have running in the background that could possibly use these tweaks?? We don't have a blueprint of what the game uses, or doesn't use, with these figures. Just tweaking them in the direction we think they should go doesn't make it so. As I pointed out a few posts ago, the dev's had the hard coded calculation conversion of yards to meters reversed back in 2007, not getting it right until the 3rd patch. Without seeing for yourself what a particular modification may do (or doesn't do) is only giving you a hint to what the hard coded system really does. We can change some of these figures until we're blue in the face, but it doesn't matter if the coded system doesn't recognize the values, or implements them in reverse to what they should be.


http://i175.photobucket.com/albums/w132/crawlee/SubVisualSensors_zps1c5b3f1e.jpg

You said " It's these [Visual] figures that allowed me to see that tweaking the "Light factor=xxx" parameter caused the exact opposite of what should be expected from the game for the night test compared to the day."

Are you saying when you increased the light value, it increased range during the day, but decreased range at night or the opposite....or something else?



What I found was the values (this is with all the modifiers) seemed to have an effect only within 0.0 and 5.0. Anything less or greater than this margin had no effect at all. The modifier categories either added or subtracted from the games default detection capabilities. As an example, the "Visual fog factor=xxx" decreased the default detection capabilities. The larger the number above >0.0 the greater the decrease in capability. Makes sense. But, when increasing the "Visual light factor=xxx" from 0.0 to 3.0 the enemy didn't respond to my subs surfacing at all. In either night time of day light. I had expected this lack of detection for the night test, but I hadn't expected to have it during the daylight test. I have (I'm surprised I found my notes from these tests) pages of test results that report this same type of behavior. When you get the night detection to work as expected, the day results are non existent...their blind as bats. Lowering the figure gives you daylight detection, but the night time detection stays the same as the day time, or even gets better. Completely opposite to what it should be.

That's why I say the day/night difference in this modifier seems backwards to what it should be. The night time response acts as if it should be daylight, the day time response acts as if it should be night.

By timing when the enemy goes on "alert" (you can hear an alert siren from the DD's....you also see the subs crew bend over a bit in the command room when the crew detects the enemy), then timing when the enemy fires upon your sub gives you a reasonable idea of its detection capabilities and its "Sensitivity=xxx" (the time it takes to respond) to your sub.

http://i175.photobucket.com/albums/w132/crawlee/AIVisual_Simcfg_zps22deba85.jpg

The AI "Sim.cfg" file has this Sensitivity=xxx modifier. The subs "Sensors.cfg" file does not, but I'm suspecting the modifier "Visual uses crew efficiency=xxx" does the same thing.

[Armistead]

I haven't gone that drastic with the light visual to see that effect, but I understand, that does sound backward.

Yep, just through trial and error I've found several values that don't seem to have effect regardless of how radical.

I've got to test more, but your opinion on the moon position in the sky effecting visuals? With added moonlight, etc., it does seem to have great effect.

[CapnScurvy]

I've got to test more, but your opinion on the moon position in the sky effecting visuals? With added moonlight, etc., it does seem to have great effect.

I never got into the possibility of moon light making a difference. As I remember, my tests had no moon at all.....just wasn't the right time of month I guess. Makes sense though. :up:

Again, the factors for the moon making a difference could be in the hard coded aspects of the game. Right off the top of my head I've not seen a modifier for the moon making a difference. That's not to say there isn't one though (least wise on the hard coded side of things). The only way we can tell is by trying different things and making a list on what we observe.

[Armistead]

I've never seen a value for the moon itself, cept in env, at night what values work for the sun, work for the moon as well to create lighting effects. As stated, the more light at night, the visual range increases and it does seem position of the moon also has great effect, as does width of reflection. Course numerous other env/scene dat values effect night visuals as well.

As far as I know most mods use a halo texture and don't add moonlight.

[TorpX]

... The more I tweak and test, the more I feel it can be resolved. I've made numerous small mods for individuals, one day I want to get my env done, but properly tweaked. I think I have all the pieces, just putting them together.
I could use some help testing if you're interested...
For now, I'm busy on my firing solution problem. It's turning out to be more work than I thought. I'm not sure if you are working on anything that is RFB compatible or not. If so, I might be able to help some, after I finish my project.

[Bilge_Rat]

I could use some help testing if you're interested...

If you want to put it up, I am sure some will test it. I will be going back to SH 4 soon and would give it a try. I play TMO 2.5 and agree the visual detection could use some tweaking.