View Full Version : So, where is the patch ?
Boomer Ang
08-31-05, 03:45 AM
DW box on my shelf is already covered from 2 inchees of dust and its technology is becoming very obsolete but despiting I have already paid the game the patch is still floating in the dark limbo....since months.... :o
I am now pretty sure my elder " issues list " won't never be, neither partially, fullfilled and I think DWX guys have never considered DW an horse to bet on.
My DW copy is on sale,you can spot it also on Amazon starting from tomorrow.
Boomer
P.S. my experience in terms of SA is growing and growing
Bellman
08-31-05, 03:58 AM
:o :huh: :stare: :arrgh!:
Of course you will tell us when you have sold it.........................wont you ? ;)
Kapitan
08-31-05, 04:37 AM
hmmm yeah he might but i doubt it
DivingWind
08-31-05, 05:25 AM
The patch is coming "SOON"! :D
Snakeeyes
08-31-05, 06:54 AM
The patch is coming "SOON"! :D
Who did you hear this from?
Takeda Shingen
08-31-05, 06:54 AM
Good luck with your selling. I suggest starting with 65% of current market value.
mike_espo
08-31-05, 08:42 AM
It is a valid question: :yep:
I cannot play online, never could...major reason I purchased DW is for online play. :cry:
Hopefully, at least , Sonalyst will allow something along the lines of SCX so more drivable platforms can be introduced...
LuftWolf
08-31-05, 08:48 AM
What do you think the patch is going to do? :hmm:
Snakeeyes
08-31-05, 08:57 AM
People can't make DWX without the patch.
While SCS is working tightly with the government right now to train REAL sailors (which is a really cool software job) a release date for the next patch would really be appreciate you know?
Originally the patch (and DWX) was slated for early August. Well... our 8th month has come and gone. I am beginning to wonder if we will see the patch by the end of november and DWX before Christmas. I'll wait no problem without female-dogging but mainly because I don't have much choice you know?
DW box on my shelf is already covered from 2 inchees of dust
...snip...
My DW copy is on sale,you can spot it also on Amazon starting from tomorrow.
...snip...
P.S. my experience in terms of SA is growing and growing
We may conclude this:
1. You live in a very VERY dusty place.
2. Your name is Jeff Bezos, because he's the only guy I could imagine that could use Amazon to sell his private stuff (I guess you meant Ebay LOL)
3. Your "experience in terms of SA" (whatever that means) grows well despite dust gathering on your copy of DW.
Oleg
LuftWolf
08-31-05, 09:03 AM
Why is DWX tied to the patch?
Why don't they release what they have?
Why is DWX tied to the patch?
Why don't they release what they have?
I can't answer in their name (I am not part of the team), but DWX has "traditionally" been very very very slow (perhaps they are just being methodic LOL) in their work.
DWX is project guys do in their free time, and give away for free, so this is *not* meant as criticism, this is just sort of "explanation" for "younger" members of the community.
Thom (Thomasew) is the key person for DWX projects. Its very common of him to disappear from the board for months (I think his last post here was in June or July). So unless he decides to chime in on this thread, you will get no dependable info on DWX (I guess).
They or he (Thom) may be waiting for patch 2 (I don't know) but even if 1.02 is released tomorrow, I would not be expecting DWX anytime soon.
Feel free to correct me if anyone knows more.
I also don't see any reason why anyone would not be playing this great game NOW, regadless of DWX or patch 1.02 etc.
Oleg
DivingWind
08-31-05, 09:25 AM
Thread on the same topic:
http://www.subsim.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=41112&start=0
Snakeeyes
08-31-05, 10:03 AM
Why is DWX tied to the patch?
Why don't they release what they have?
Because they want solid code before they come up with a magical way to transfer SCXIIc models to it and add new stuff as well. It just makes sense. If they don't wait then they'll have to do all the work over again to make it work with the patch. It's delicate work and these guys are dedicated. My hats off to them.
Snakeeyes
08-31-05, 10:10 AM
Why is DWX tied to the patch?
Why don't they release what they have?
I can't answer in their name (I am not part of the team), but DWX has "traditionally" been very very very slow (perhaps they are just being methodic LOL) in their work.
DWX is project guys do in their free time, and give away for free, so this is *not* meant as criticism, this is just sort of "explanation" for "younger" members of the community.
Thom (Thomasew) is the key person for DWX projects. Its very common of him to disappear from the board for months (I think his last post here was in June or July). So unless he decides to chime in on this thread, you will get no dependable info on DWX (I guess).
They or he (Thom) may be waiting for patch 2 (I don't know) but even if 1.02 is released tomorrow, I would not be expecting DWX anytime soon.
Feel free to correct me if anyone knows more.
I also don't see any reason why anyone would not be playing this great game NOW, regadless of DWX or patch 1.02 etc.
Oleg
Yeah... I think Thomas' wife (or one of the crucial DWX staff) is having twins so that alone will definitely curb your "extracurricular activities."
They must all be virgos because they either ship it out to us perfect or not at all.
Boomer Ang
08-31-05, 10:14 AM
1. You live in a very VERY dusty place.
Definetely yes, yestserday I also spotted a bug colony sorrounding the game box so I took the sad decision :-?
Boomer
1. You live in a very VERY dusty place.
Definetely yes, yestserday I also spotted a bug colony sorrounding the game box so I took the sad decision :-?
Boomer
LOL, have you applied liberal amounts of insecticide?
DW has no *box* BTW - perhaps you made one yourself for your copy, as sign of love and affection? :|\
O.
Yeah... I think Thomas' wife (or one of the crucial DWX staff) is having twins so that alone will definitely curb your "extracurricular activities."
They must all be virgos because they either ship it out to us perfect or not at all.
ROFL re virgos. I don't think too many gamers here know anything about astrology but I got your hint (horoscope babble is my favorite girl-talk :oops: )
As for having twins... when my wife was expecting (I have two kids), I stayed home and played games like never before :ping: :rock:
So it's not much of an excuse. :rotfl:
I think Xabba had twins some time ago - is it him you had on your mind in your post? Or are twins endemic to DWX crowd? If that's the case watch out if you think about joining the crew. :arrgh!:
O.
LuftWolf
08-31-05, 10:30 AM
Thanks.
I simply want the game to be better, whether it is under the name DWX matters not to me. I don't think I have a solid grasp on what they are doing, but my feeling is, if you have *anything* that might inspire the DW community to play the game more or to be more positive in working on improving the game to get new players on board, it's a good idea to put it out or give info on it at least.
The silence from SCS and the DWX team is the least productive way of going about things, if your goal is to keep the game alive and growing while the work is being done, IMHO.
Being completely honest, all of the changes that I personally have made in the mod (granted they are gameplay changes rather than bug fixes for the most part, but still, for me, constitude a major increase in game-playability, perhaps simply because of taste) would probably take a DWX person or SCS programmer all of an hour to make (being clear, all of Amizaur's changes were very difficult and took a great deal of work and knowledge on his part), so I really don't know why the "official" stock version of the game is still stuck at 1.01 with no "official" word from anyone.
Boomer my friend I note we joined Subsim board on the same day, almost 4 years ago!
I feel some special closeness to you now... now why this board does not have kissy-kiss smiley face like some others have? LOL :rotfl:
O.
Boomer Ang
08-31-05, 11:06 AM
You are wrong Oleg because I joined here 7/8 years ago ,more or less when 688 was in rough developing stage.
On that time maybe you were still fiddling around with latest Pac-Man versions but I already signed petitions at that time to support the never supported 688 campaign...
( I joined your assist this time..... :P )
You know I 'm the masked hero to bring freedom in this world :) but time goes on and the hero is old and now needs some spare time to have fun with others matters....anyway don't panic, sometimes I'll be back to greet my old friends, nothing of personnel of course :P
Boomer
Jamie said there is BETATESTING going .. any of you knows something about that ? Is anyone here betatester ?
Sonalyst guys are smart enought not to promise anything. And so it is .. they did not. They say the work on it, NOTHING else.
I think most people here believes in the patch because they just want it so badly. I have seen this with many games .. even with 'Pacific fighters' THE patch came in the and .. about 1 year after I quited playing that gama.
LuftWolf
08-31-05, 11:23 AM
It's really frustrating to hear people bemoan the lack of a patch when all of the major bugs left the game with the v1.01 and sound vs. speed hotfix.
The things that seem to prevent most people from playing them game now are just values in a datatable put there for "gameplay reasons."
DW with the v1.01 patch, the sound vs. speed hotfix, finiteless sound mods, and *ahem* me and Amizaur's Mod (shameless plug) is as good as any simulation I have ever played except for Combat Mission. :know: :up: :arrgh!:
Jamie said there is BETATESTING going .. any of you knows something about that ? Is anyone here betatester ?
Sonalyst guys are smart enought not to promise anything. And so it is .. they did not. They say the work on it, NOTHING else.
I think most people here believes in the patch because they just want it so badly. I have seen this with many games .. even with 'Pacific fighters' THE patch came in the and .. about 1 year after I quited playing that gama.
No beta testing yet. :nope:
But there is no doubt in my mind there is one coming. :rock:
DivingWind
08-31-05, 12:07 PM
Eventually....
mike_espo
08-31-05, 12:08 PM
Does the addon fix the blind AI, or the super broandband in Kilo, or being able to detect masts by radar, or created a thermal layer that works. :nope:
These are my "patch" wishes..... :up:
Bellman
08-31-05, 12:16 PM
Plenty to get on with - whats the hurry - enjoy Luft Ams mod /design scenarios/play with DBEditor/Master a new platform.......................
the game is very playable - why not give it a try ?
Go pick your nose, anything but moan. :lol:
Hear endeth rant. ;)
LuftWolf
08-31-05, 12:18 PM
The AI get's its share of kills against me. Maybe I suck.
I don't know what you mean about the Kilo broadband, but it can probably be fixed rather easily. The DB sonar modding is pretty simple aside from the geometry stuff.
In terms of thermal layers, I think it works?
The radar mast issue, i believe was a mistake by the person who posted it, and he later corrected himself because his test scenarios were bugged. :up:
Bellman
08-31-05, 12:27 PM
Kilo BB has faults previously seen in SC ? 'Click to find' fault/cheat ? Also read that range too great
(The two things are the sides of a coin) Think I read this was overlooked in Beta - should be easyish to fix.
Fish knows all about this and he will confirm or correct me.
Does the addon fix the blind AI, or the super broandband in Kilo, or being able to detect masts by radar, or created a thermal layer that works. :nope:
These are my "patch" wishes..... :up:
From Renzie:
Fish wrote:
Is the KILO cheat now taken seriously?
I can wait for a fix, but till now I didn't see it was taken as a serious problem.
I took it seriously and fixed it for the next patch! I don't know when it will come out.......
_________________
Game Developer, Sonalysts, Inc.
"I have my CIWS on full-auto all the time!"
LuftWolf
08-31-05, 12:51 PM
I looked in the DB and the Kilo has pretty much the same sonar parameters as the Akula without a towed array (although some AI Kilos apparently model a Pelamda TA as well), just a few of the ranges shorted a little bit.
Is that the problem?
No LW, this is the problem:
http://home.hccnet.nl/wico.p/Kilo%20bugt2.JPG
http://home.hccnet.nl/wico.p/Kilo%20cheat..JPG
mike_espo
08-31-05, 02:21 PM
Yep, I don't see any effect layer has....either passive or active.
Kilo broadband is another: With audio on, background noise gets louder down bearing contact....way too long a distance...problem is: you can track it....makes it unrealistic. You can just turn audio off, but this should not be. :know:
LuftWolf
08-31-05, 02:46 PM
Doesn't the first picture show that the layer does have an effect?
I'm not sure what the second picture is showing, other than that the detection range might be too far?
DivingWind
08-31-05, 03:08 PM
And how do you know that KILO detection range is too far?
Which source do you refer?
Bellman
08-31-05, 04:05 PM
DW:-
1.Range - Fishs screenie above shows Kilo detection at 18 nm appx.
2. Source - RADM Fish Seawolves Research & Development Dept.
And how do you know that KILO detection range is too far?
Which source do you refer?
Renzie, is a member of the Sonalysts dev team.
And I think it's unrealistic a Kilo, without a towed array, is capable to find a Seawolf while the Seawolf cant find any at the same range in that particular SSP.
Yep, I don't see any effect layer has....either passive or active.
Kilo broadband is another: With audio on, background noise gets louder down bearing contact....way too long a distance...problem is: you can track it....makes it unrealistic. You can just turn audio off, but this should not be. :know:
The layer have a effect, be sure of that. But it is no mirrow reflecting all sound what try to break through.
mike_espo
08-31-05, 08:11 PM
Hmm :hmm: very little, if any..effect should be more pronounced...
LuftWolf
08-31-05, 11:21 PM
Fish,
Have you confirmed this same problem with the Akula Sphere/conformal arrays? In the database, they are virtually the same except for shortened ranges.
If not, then I don't think that this problem is at the doctrine level, most likely interface or even .exe.
As for the detection parameters of Kilo vs. Seawolf, the Kilo improved is listed as being 8 full PSL values below the SW, meaning it is quieter than the SW by almost the same degree the SW is quieter than Delta/Typhoon. Kilo--55, SW-63, Typhoon/Delta-72, Han- 74.
That is, the difference in sensor performance is not as great as the difference in sound level. The line between bug and gameplay issue evidently gets a little blurred here, but I do agree something should be different here, but it's not clear to me what. It's good that SCS has figured it out. :up:
Fish,
Have you confirmed this same problem with the Akula Sphere/conformal arrays? In the database, they are virtually the same except for shortened ranges.
If not, then I don't think that this problem is at the doctrine level, most likely interface or even .exe.
As for the detection parameters of Kilo vs. Seawolf, the Kilo improved is listed as being 8 full PSL values below the SW, meaning it is quieter than the SW by almost the same degree the SW is quieter than Delta/Typhoon. Kilo--55, SW-63, Typhoon/Delta-72, Han- 74.
That is, the difference in sensor performance is not as great as the difference in sound level. The line between bug and gameplay issue evidently gets a little blurred here, but I do agree something should be different here, but it's not clear to me what. It's good that SCS has figured it out. :up:
I think we have a misunderstanding here. I don't mean the Seawolf wasn't able to find the Kilo, while the Kilo was able to so.
I just did a test with two subs at 20 nm, one was a Sewolf and the other was choice of player. With the second sub as Seawolf I was unable to assign a tracker on the other Seawolf ( believe me I know how to do. :) ).
Making the second sub a kilo, there was no problem at all to mark the Seawolf.
I won't believe the cylindrical array of the KIlo is better, in RL, then the TA of the Seawolf.
I would ask for 32bit support, option to set screen refresh rate, option to set volume of passive sonar feedback alone, option to revert mouse view control .
Yet another think .. periscope should leave wake (feather). Sail shoud be detectable by radar.
LuftWolf
09-01-05, 08:49 AM
Sails are detectable by radar. The person who posted that was wrong and corrected himself. :up:
My mouse is reversed (down is up and up is down). I have a touchpad, maybe that's it?
Making the second sub a kilo, there was no problem at all to mark the Seawolf.
Fish, have you tested the Akula in the same manner as the Kilo? I am trying to figure out whether this is in the database or not. Since the Akula and Kilo share very similiar sensors, there is no DB reason why this would be happening to the Kilo but not the Akula. In fact, the Akula should demonstrate the same problem but at even greater ranges.
Also, you did not mention which sensor was detecting the SW, Cylindrical or conformal or both?
LW, yes, teted the Akula too, but only the kilo is bugged.
LuftWolf
09-01-05, 09:13 AM
Thank Fish! :know: :up:
Yeah, sounds like a "genuine" bug in the interface-environmental interaction part of the engine or in .exe itself. Out of the hands of us modders! :x :cry:
Cheers,
David
JamesT73J
09-01-05, 09:14 AM
There's nothing new under the sun. It'll be here when it's here, plenty of DW gameplay to be had in the meantime. There can't be anybody that's bored already - I've only just put myself to task learning the FFG, and having great fun doing it.
To the person having MP problems, what specifically is the problem? The traditional directplay snag is that it doesn't use a set range of ports. There's ways round this.
James
There's nothing new under the sun. It'll be here when it's here, plenty of DW gameplay to be had in the meantime. There can't be anybody that's bored already - I've only just put myself to task learning the FFG, and having great fun doing it.
To the person having MP problems, what specifically is the problem? The traditional directplay snag is that it doesn't use a set range of ports. There's ways round this.
James
James, you know all about routers, ports and connections?
If so you are my guy! :rock:
stormrider_sp
09-01-05, 01:09 PM
WHERE IS THE PATCH?
Bellman
09-01-05, 02:16 PM
:zzz:
LuftWolf
09-01-05, 02:40 PM
I'm guessing the bug with the Kilo is that everything is trackable from BB once it enters the maximum range of the array, whether or not it is actually loud enough to generate a signal that overcomes the ambient noise.
I can correct this by severely limiting the range of the Kilo's sonar to realistic properties, but the side effect would be to make it very deaf, and it would take some time to get it right. There are two parameters I can play with for the two sonar arrays, the ability of the array to filter out background noise from a signal (sensitivity) and max detection range.
If I set the Max detection range to 10nm, you shouldn't be able to hear or track anything over that distance. Period. However, you would have to be very close to basically anything to pick it up and you may get cases of "wall in the water", where a very loud contact comes out of nowwhere on the array as a huge signal.
Something can be done dbwise, but the basic effect would be to make the Kilo sonar either act deaf or act funny. In some ways, that's a choice at this point, but I can probably get rid of the "cheat" per se.
Feedback??? :hmm:
LuftWolf
09-01-05, 03:04 PM
Yes, the Kilo sonar issue can be addressed in the database.
The database workaround:
Start out by tuning the hull array to suitable detection ranges, so that it picks up a narrow band contact at a desirable range. Since it's broadband works fine relative to it's narrow band, it can be left alone after this point. Now on to the problematic cylindrical array.
In real terms, the problem with the array is that its broadband is much more sensitive than it's narrow band. If it displayed narrowband contacts before the broadband, even if it was wildly far reaching, then it's sensitivity could simply be lowered and everything would be fine. However, this is not the case.
So, the cylindrical BB has to take a cue from the Hull sonar. That is to say, set the maximum detection range of the cylindrical array at a range where it is long after low narrow band detection by the hull array. This would make it not so useful, but then again, I think that is what we are going for.
What do you guys want?
Edit: Additional thoughts here http://www.subsim.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=41581&start=125
Amizaur
09-01-05, 03:38 PM
The worst problem with Kilo sonar was, that even if it shows NOTHING in broadbad, you still could hear a elevated noise level on the bearing of a target out to about 20nm. And even mark it. With this bug Kilo can detect everything inside 20nm.
And even if there was a workaround... don't say it !!! Somebody may think that if there is a workaround possible, then it doesn't need fixing ;-)
OK OK I'm joking :-)
This is one of the most frequently raised issues and I think that it's high in priority list. Other high priorities would be torps homing and detonating on wrecks but not detonating on CMs, official Subroc fix and warnings of underwater missile launches... personally I hope also for getting new REAL sonar model, proper AI weapon presets (ceiling or searchdepth) and fixed doctrine language interpreter... and cure for AI ships collisions... and... ;-)
mike_espo
09-01-05, 03:43 PM
Luft: the Kilo broadband problem is audio: I can detect via broadband with audio on contacts that I cannot even detect with narrowband :o And yes, this can be tracked, so even a seawolf can be detected and tracked way beyond realistic ranges..... :nope:
This problem can be "corrected" by turning off audio, but this should not be......
And YES, there is a bug with AI radar and visual. I don't know about MP, but the AI cannot detect partially surfaced subs or the antenna sticking out of the water. They also cannot detect visually a sail, or antenna.
I had many times my snorkel up and a AI P-3 flying right overhead and not attacking or even changing course....I can also have the sail up...about 14m which the sail is above the water and pluck them out of the sky with the portable SAM.....The P-3s never knew what hit them :nope: :down:
totally unrealistic.... :down: :nope:
Luft: I downloaded the other database and looked at the detection freq of the Ohio, I tried to make it the same as the Seawolf, but no change....can still detect a Ohio at unrealistic ranges.....
maybe Im doing it wrong... :hmm: ??
LuftWolf
09-01-05, 03:54 PM
Make sure you save the change from the main interfaced file menu before you quit.
As for the sail antenna bug, were the P-3's generating a radar signal? Sometimes those aircraft are set to EMCON so they are not detected on ESM, in which case, they would not detected anything at all with radar. If they did have their radar on, then it seems they should have detected something.
As for the sail being up and not spotted visually, that may have something to do with environmental factors or a probabilistic factor.
In any case, it is possible that SCS did not enable behavior like that for the same reason they put the SAM launcher on the sail. :hmm: ;)
LuftWolf
09-01-05, 04:08 PM
I had many times my snorkel up and a AI P-3 flying right overhead and not attacking or even changing course...I can also have the sail up...about 14m which the sail is above the water and pluck them out of the sky with the portable SAM
What do you mean by "right over head"?
If the P-3 had flown over you at an altitude where it would have had a good chance of seeing a sail unless you were going quickly and leaving a wake, it would have picked you up on MAD and dropped a torpedo on you.
Please be more specific when you describe your situations. :up:
If you said that you were overflown by a P-3, at a low altitude, generating a strong ESM, and it did not drop a torpedo on you, based on MAD alone, not to mention the radar and visual, that would be enough of a problem right there.
However, to the best of my knowledge, the AI MAD works (and I can say that from experience...) so if you said you were overflown and it didn't attack you, and then you say that you had the sail up, it makes it suspicious that it was even close enough for MAD, let alone visual detection or radar detection of such a small thing from an aircraft going so fast. :hmm:
mike_espo
09-01-05, 04:15 PM
He was within a nautical mile and it was a clear day, he was at 300ft. I was at 14m, where the sail is exposed. I should have been sighted, and destroyed. I was testing AI behavior. Yes, the ROE was hostile. Cannot set EMCON on AI aircraft...is always active. Ishot him with SAM and he still ignored me. Only if I surfaced, or turned on Radar did he detect and attack..... :nope:
This is a known bug with the AI. Try for yourself :up:
LuftWolf
09-01-05, 04:18 PM
Ok. I wanted a clear explanation of the situation. :up:
In any case, we can all guess at the sensitivity of the radars vs. the ability of submarine designers to make sails and mast stealthy to radar. :88)
If you say it's a bug then I'll take your word for it. I don't spend much time fishing for ASW aircraft so I'm not going to worry much more about it and chalk it up to alloys. :lol: :rotfl: :-j
mike_espo
09-01-05, 04:21 PM
did you alter any of the DB sonar detection values?
LuftWolf
09-01-05, 04:24 PM
Not on the end of the submarines themselves. All of the passive sound levels for the submarines are original except for the Akula II Gepard which I set equal to the Vepr.
I only set all of the detection heights to max 10ft for passive sonars.
Previously they had been a mix of 0 and 300ft.
I also set a sensitivity and max speed value for the TB-23 that I added to the 688(i).
mike_espo
09-01-05, 07:42 PM
do you notice any changes?
If so, Ill try to do the same... :up:
Yet another .. doesn't russian active sonars seem to you next to useless ? They dont have time averaging so contact si always sunk in the noise.
There is also one old problem with all active sonars - you always hear returning ping even if the return is so weak it won't display. And you alwas hear it at full volume (you can't hear dim return). By the sound you can have rough range for the target, even if the target is at max active sonar range. You can count targets very far away (well, this can go wrong with bottom bounce). And I always get frustrated when you ping, I hear the return, but I don't see the dot on screen (very common especially with russian subs).
JamesT73J
09-02-05, 03:21 AM
Yet another .. doesn't russian active sonars seem to you next to useless ? They dont have time averaging so contact si always sunk in the noise.
There is also one old problem with all active sonars - you always hear returning ping even if the return is so weak it won't display. And you alwas hear it at full volume (you can't hear dim return). By the sound you can have rough range for the target, even if the target is at max active sonar range. You can count targets very far away (well, this can go wrong with bottom bounce). And I always get frustrated when you ping, I hear the return, but I don't see the dot on screen (very common especially with russian subs).
This goes back to SC, and is common to all platforms. Sonalysts did provide an explanation, I don't recall what it was though.
Amizaur
09-02-05, 08:37 AM
There is also one old problem with all active sonars - you always hear returning ping even if the return is so weak it won't display. And you alwas hear it at full volume (you can't hear dim return). By the sound you can have rough range for the target, even if the target is at max active sonar range. You can count targets very far away (well, this can go wrong with bottom bounce). And I always get frustrated when you ping, I hear the return, but I don't see the dot on screen (very common especially with russian subs).
There is bug in active sonar in DW, it's acknowledged. It always detects everything on it's max range currently. And if you play with your screen contrast & gamma settings, you'll notice that you always (always for GRAM displays, almost always for submarine displays) can completly filter out the returns from the bacground even at max range !!! It's totally bugged :down:
Second bad thing is what you said - always max volume ping return - even when you don't see enything (but I assure you that it's possible to filter it out) you hear the distance and by bcliking on varius bearings at this range eventually you can mark a contact.... totally unrealistic :down:
Contact should appear every time when you click "mark" button, even if there is nothing in fact. This should be player's problem that if he clicks everywhere he would get contacts everywhere.
As for sails not detected by radar - with use of debugoutput it can be cleared if they are detected or not. Debugoutput calls every AI detection in the game. And I can tell you that the Kilo sail at 14m or so (that you can shoot SAMs) is NOT detected by AI units with radar. You can run like that all day completly safe from radar detection. Same for peri and masts - never seen debugoutput message of AI unit detecting sub by peri or mast. On the other hand when I tried to run with slightly exposed sail in MP game, I was sunk at once by P-3. For human players Kilo sail gives return on radar. Don't know for peri or masts, had no occasion to make MP test.
IIRC (but I may be wrong!) the Akula's sail is detected by AI units... so this would be Kilo-only bug. Maybe some value set wrong...
Molon Labe
09-02-05, 08:59 AM
[quote=Dr.Sid]
Second bad thing is what you said - always max volume ping return - even when you don't see enything (but I assure you that it's possible to filter it out) you hear the distance and by bcliking on varius bearings at this range eventually you can mark a contact.... totally unrealistic :down:
Contact should appear every time when you click "mark" button, even if there is nothing in fact. This should be player's problem that if he clicks everywhere he would get contacts everywhere.
Yes! Absofrackinlutely! :rock: :up:
mike_espo
09-02-05, 09:41 AM
Yes Amizaur, I got the exact same result: Although I can't get online......
I switched to the P-3 and had a foxtrot snorkeling.....did detect him with radar. However,AI is blind.....both visual and radar :nope: :down:
LuftWolf
09-02-05, 09:49 AM
Good information.
It's good to know that it isn't a bug with the actual game engine, but rather something that SCS put in for gameplay reasons. I'm pretty sure that's it, because the sensors can detect those objects, meaning that the AI could be made to fire on those detections, it's just that the game is hardcoded not to give a detection for AI platforms. That's my guess anyway.
SCS made some "interesting" gameplay calls with DW, so maybe they put that there so that players could fight ASW aircraft from submarines, the same reason they put in the SAM launcher in the first place, but they figured that in MP, air players wouldn't appreciate that.
My point is that before we get all mad at the game and start using words like "bug", "cheat", etc. it's good to have an understanding of what's entailed in producing the behavior.
Maybe I'm just sensitive to negative emoticons. ;) :-j
Yes Amizaur, I got the exact same result: Although I can't get online......
I switched to the P-3 and had a foxtrot snorkeling.....did detect him with radar. However,AI is blind.....both visual and radar :nope: :down:
I doubt you are right there Mike_espo,
First pic you see a Akula with the sail above surface, next pick you see a orion who linked the Akula to me.
http://home.hccnet.nl/wico.p/Akula%20visible.JPG
http://home.hccnet.nl/wico.p/Akula%20visible%20on%20link.JPG
Amizaur
09-02-05, 03:04 PM
But we don't know how the Akula was detected - by radar, visually or maybe ESM or IR :-).
But we don't know how the Akula was detected - by radar, visually or maybe ESM or IR :-).
I asked but it want not say. :hulk:
Pigfish
09-02-05, 07:30 PM
Hello. In my experience be it an Akula, Kilo, LA or Seawolf I am completly invisable to AI aircraft with only my sail showing and all mast up. Sometimes for fun I will set up a shooting gallery where they just fly above me until I take them out. :roll:
Turn on your radar however-your toast.
Amizaur
09-02-05, 08:10 PM
I asked but it want not say. :hulk:
Try with -debugoutput enabled and DbgView active. I described how to use it somwhere on forums.
mike_espo
09-02-05, 08:35 PM
Hello. In my experience be it an Akula, Kilo, LA or Seawolf I am completly invisable to AI aircraft with only my sail showing and all mast up. Sometimes for fun I will set up a shooting gallery where they just fly above me until I take them out. :roll:
Turn on your radar however-your toast.
Yep! :up: :know: Exactly the same with me. My experience also.. :nope: :nope: :down:
Pigfish
09-02-05, 08:46 PM
Im thinking its only a user sub, in use, that is invisable. An AI Seawolf etc CAN be picked up by other AI units.
Im thinking its only a user sub, in use, that is invisable. An AI Seawolf etc CAN be picked up by other AI units.
The sub om my pics "is" a user sub.
mike_espo
09-03-05, 12:57 PM
I don't know Fish.... :huh: I never had a AI P-3 or any aircraft or helo detect my sail. I tried every playable sub there is...all the same: The aircraft ignores me unless, and only unless, I use radar....I can fire a SAM, use ESM, or snorkel, radio, and no detection...clear day. Aircraft at 300ft within a mile...... :nope: :down: :hmm: :huh: :o
I get around this by programming all aircraft and helos within my scenarios do detect the boat at a set depth..with the awesome mission editior, I can give a set time frame before the aircraft attacks:
My usual settings are detect between 17m and 14m with the Kilo and give them like 2 minutes before they attack: This prohibits me from snorkeling with an aircraft about.....much more realistic...but again, I should not have to do this.... :nope:
Pigfish
09-03-05, 03:28 PM
Ok Fish Im just confused (go figure :roll: ). In the bottom pic you are driving the Akula (RADM Fish 3rd) and a detected Orion (via link) is flying over...itself? :-?
LuftWolf
09-03-05, 04:03 PM
The top picture is showing Fish driving an Akula.
The bottom picture is from a computer linked to the first over a LAN (I'm guessing), of Fish driving SW.
The bottom picture has three icons, two blue subs and a neutral P-3.
The sub on the right is Fish's SW. The sub on the left is the Akula. Overtop of that, is the neutral P-3, which is feeding it's own and the Akula detection positions over the link.
The question with the picture is through what sensor the P-3 detected the Akula.
Bellman
09-03-05, 04:11 PM
Pigfish I think its clear that in dump 1 Ens Osprey dives an Akula-11 and in dump 2 the Aks icon
can be seen beneath the Orions with Fish in his beloved SW standing off.
If 'Truth' and 3D confirmed that the Aks sail was out of the water and Fish reports that the Ak contact was provided
by link info from the P3 .'. QED !
Bellman
09-03-05, 04:13 PM
LW - top picture shows ENS Osprey diving the AK. :stare: :huh: :o ;) :lol:
Bellman
09-03-05, 04:24 PM
:hmm: ENS Osprey does not appear on the Seawolves scoring roster - so Fish was on his Lan.
In that case with an AI P3 we wont know the answer to the question which sensor. Unless the Amizaur suggestied
DbgView procedure is followed. This is going around in circles. :roll:
Amizaur
09-03-05, 04:42 PM
Unfortunately DbgView does not work in MP games, probably to avoid cheating.
Pigfish
09-03-05, 05:21 PM
OK makes sense to me now. The bottom pic has two user subs, a multiplayer pic. :up:
Anyway heres a test pic of myself in a Seawolf with my sail showing and all masts up. I let it go 15 minutes gametime and no attack. Even pinged active for the heck of it. They just fly around waiting to be shot down.
http://prozny.com/_new/AITEST2.JPG
For me playing solo I am definetly invisible from AI with just sail showing.
LuftWolf
09-03-05, 05:24 PM
Based on the fact that human controlled platform sensors can detect sails and masts, I am sticking to the theory that SCS intentionally disabled sail and mast detection for AI platforms to enable players who wanted to shoot down AI aircraft with their SAM launcher to do so. :hmm: :88)
Has anyone tested sails and masts with AI ship radars and lookouts (visual sensor)?
Based on the fact that human controlled platform sensors can detect sails and masts, I am sticking to the theory that SCS intentionally disabled sail and mast detection for AI platforms to enable players who wanted to shoot down AI aircraft with their SAM launcher to do so. :hmm: :88)
Has anyone tested sails and masts with AI ship radars and lookouts (visual sensor)?
I think you are right, LW.
@Pigfish, did you cavitate during your test?
Pigfish
09-03-05, 05:57 PM
Based on the fact that human controlled platform sensors can detect sails and masts, I am sticking to the theory that SCS intentionally disabled sail and mast detection for AI platforms to enable players who wanted to shoot down AI aircraft with their SAM launcher to do so. :hmm: :88)
Has anyone tested sails and masts with AI ship radars and lookouts (visual sensor)?
I hope this is fixed in the patch-not too realistic for solo players.
Anyway did some quick tests using Ludgers editor. I set passive and active SLs to zero, my sub with sail exposed and masts up and a couple of very close Udaloys ignored me. Seems niether AI visual or radar work on a 'sailed' sub, surface or air.
I did get attacked when settings were normal but I think they found me with active in that case.
LuftWolf
09-03-05, 06:04 PM
Thanks for the extra test pigfish. :up:
mike_espo
09-04-05, 10:24 AM
Yep. I did a replenishment scenario a while back.....had a trigger set when I (in my Kilo) was sighted visually, never got the female confirm voice :huh:
Went back to mission editor, and found the problem to be that the AI is blind.
Had to set another trigger when the Kilo got within a certain distance, about 2 nm to set off the visual cue,
I remember sailing rings around the AO...within a few hundred yards and no trigger...... :o
As for some reason, I cannot play online, this feature is kinda important.....
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.