Fatigue factors : Technical question, please

[lumat83]

Hi all :)

I don't understand one thing with all fatigue models, in two rooms.

The crews in the radio room (in surface), and the crews in the engine room (in immersion), always lost more fatigue than the others crews. Even all the values in all rooms are the sames in the basic.cfg file. :o

Why this ? Anybody know ?
It's a bug ? or There are others parameters somewhere in the same file or in an other file ?

Thank for your help :D

[CB..]

it maybe the

SpecificFactor30=0.004
SpecificFactor31=0.001

entrys for those rooms - but if you have them all equal across the board it might be down to actual choice of crewman for those compartments other wise your right it's stored some where else--- :hmm:

[lumat83]

But as I said it, with the same values for these two factors, the lost of fatigue is different. The crew has the same experience

Radio always lost more fatigue in surface, and it's the engine in immersion.

Strange, no ?

[lumat83]

Nobody know ?

It's strange this problem appear for me only :cry:

[CB..]

no no i get the same thing---but it kinda makes sense--guys in the engine room breathing fairly dank air and all the noise--guys in the radio room with their headphones on all the time lots of stress

maybe it's meant to be that way--i reduced the rate that the whole crew take fatigue and yup-- the sonar guys allways tire first

[lumat83]

Yes, it's right, There are the rooms with a maximum of stress.

But in what file can I find this parameters. Because in my crew fatigue model all the values are equals for a result variable.

For exemple, I've just finished a mission and I've encountered an another result. After 5 days (2 with a bad weather) and no immersion, I've :
- Cental compartment 12% :roll: :roll: :doh:
- Radio 10%
- Engine about 6%
- Bridge a little more, about 7-8%

It seems to me that the result of the fatigue coef in a mission are a little variables and I don't understand why

[CB..]

it may be influenced by the crewconfig cfgs in the cfg folder---

i haven't experimented with them i must admit so can't say--

personally i've been trying to track down exactly which features of the damage model crew hitponts etc etc control how likely it is that a crew member will recieve "damage" during an attack and be registered as wounded--(as this has never happenned to me so far without actually losing the boat and game over as it were--i would like to hugely increase the likelyhood of a crew member being wounded or die-ing during a heavy attack (other than the AA crews that is -ie: whilst submerged during a dc attack) as this to my mind would bring the crew selection and roleplaying side of the game alive--losing crew thru injury and or death and having to replace them from the barracks would keep things turning around AND give me another way to guage how well i'm doing---if i'm losing a lot of crew as this is registered on the end patrol screen does it alter the amount of renown recieved for that patrol etc etc--

no luck so far by altering the entrys in the basic cfg

i edited all the crews HP etc to this

Hp=0.05
wounded=-0.01
Dead=-0.05

which you would imagine would make them far more vunerable -but not in gameplay terms--as they stubbornly refuse to get wounded even under heavy DC bombardment--
so as with the fatigue it must be some where else--

in the crew config cfg it list hitpoints for the crew so perhaps i need to alter those as well--

or some setting in the damage zones cfg may be influencing this

but im loath to touch that as i have it about as i like it--

lots and lots of sytem damage can be incurred and the boat can and frequently IS comp-letely disabled even tho the hull integrity remains at 100%

ie

all desiel and electric engines/batterys destroyed
both periscopes destroyed
bridge and uzo destroyed
deck gun and flak guns destroyed

game over

even tho the hull integrity is at 100% i AINT going no where and i CAN'T attack even if i could--LOL
add some crew deaths and wounds to this set up and it becomes very realistic indeed


this might have some effect on crew survivability and health- in the basic cfg

[DAMAGE]
OpenComp=1
PartiallyOpenComp=0.5
EnclosedComp=0.1

i'm assuming that its 100% for the bridge deck gun etc (open compartment)
50% for the same whilst surbmerging (partially open compartment)
and 10% for every-where whilst fully submerged (enclosed compartment)

so i'll give that a try as it is likely having thought about it that this must refer specifically to the crew to actually make any sense :hmm:
so i may have actually solved my problem whilst looking for the soloutin to yours -which is allways a boon!!
if i find anything related to fatigue i'll let you know

[Der Teddy Bar]

i would like to hugely increase the likelyhood of a crew member being wounded or die-ing during a heavy attack (other than the AA crews that is -ie: whilst submerged during a dc attack)
No offence, you know its going to be bad when we start a sentence that way :rotfl: Deaths during depth charge attacks were rare as were substantial injuries. I challenge anyone to show me a dozen recorded deaths as a result of a depth charge attack where the u-boat survived.

From my reading, I would argue that the injury rate during a depth charge attack is currently way too high.

even tho the hull integrity is at 100% i AINT going no where and i CAN'T attack even if i could--LOL
add some crew deaths and wounds to this set up and it becomes very realistic indeed
No its not. With all due respect, again, show me the evidence. I can respect that it is your right if you want your crew to die easily and unhistorically. But if you want it on the false assumption that thats the way it should be then I would say to you that the injury rate during a depth charge attack is currently way too high.

Humans have a lot more elasticity than a bolted to the floor or wall device. So the depth gauge on the wall or the electric engine bolted to the floor cannot bend with the shock wave as a human could/does, and thus all the shockwave force is transferred to these items.

Hp=0.05 <== the available resilience i.e. health
wounded=-0.01 <== how much morale is lost when another crew member is wounded
Dead=-0.05 <== how much morale is lost when another crew member is killed

The available damage points that would be used against the crew, I do not know if it is a % of the total, a left over figure or what, however, the available points are distributed amongst all the crew in that compartment.

So, if a compartment receives enough HP's to kill one member when there was 3 crewmembers, should the same thing occur again but now there is 8 crew members, no crew member will be killed as there is now 2.6 times more crewmen to distribute the HP's too.

[CB..]

trust you to drag out the old "realism" debate :arrgh!:
as i say one man's realism is another man's arcade--and vice versa we all prefer certain aspects of the game over other aspects so it is easy to assume that this is in fact realism when it is in fact tunnel vision
it is precisely because so many people can find so many different aspects of the game to enjoy (and enjoy really does have to be the operative word) that gives the game it's longevity and fascination--
none of this detracts from any one else enjoyment of the same game-
and as a modder you mod it to suit your own pleasure-personally i would like to have the extra "worry" of having decide wether to spend renown points on new crew or fat torps because it would add an extra dimension to the game that i would enjoy--having spent many patrols building up the stats of the crew promoting them awarding them medals and qualifications etc - to lose an important member would be quite an immersive event gameplay wise --making the role played heroism (and it IS roleplayed) ever so slightly more meaningful
Hp=0.05 <== the available resilience i.e. health
wounded=-0.01 <== how much morale is lost when another crew member is wounded
Dead=-0.05 <== how much morale is lost when another crew member is killed

The available damage points that would be used against the crew, I do not know if it is a % of the total, a left over figure or what, however, the available points are distributed amongst all the crew in that compartment.

So, if a compartment receives enough HP's to kill one member when there was 3 crewmembers, should the same thing occur again but now there is 8 crew members, no crew member will be killed as there is now 2.6 times more crewmen to distribute the HP's too.

that was highly usefull tho many thanks ;) :up:

[Der Teddy Bar]

CB..
one man's realism is another man's arcade Not so when backed up by veraviable data. The difference is that you 'feel' that this is realistic, with no foundation in fact and a lot to suggest strongly otherwise. That is not to say that I am against you playing this way, I just dislike seeing 'this is real cause I assume so'. Anyway, that is my growly rebutal :D No hard feelings? :up:

I am very much in agreement with you about wanting, enjoying the 'this is my crew' part of the simulation. This is why in the Tonnage War mod we now have it so that deck gun and AA crew are easily wounded and killed by 20mm gunfire and that the crew in the conning tower will get wounded and killed by 3" gunfire.

Making attacking a merchant ship equiped with a gun or going toe to toe with a Elco a risky venture. Attacking an escort, well........

We have tied the wounding/death of your crew into the morale. Have a crew member wounded and the entire crew's morale gets a big hit, get one killed and it plummets.

Morale is part of the compartment effeciency formula, so low morale will have an adverse effect. Coupled with the fact that we will only have the base level crew available making your loss even greater should you have nutured him through the ranks and skills.

[CB..]

shucks i don't mind particulaly as long as it doesn't detract from the threads creative flow- you did after all provide some usefull info :up:
but the old realism donkey gets dragged out of the stall far too often,
as we cannot recreate the emotional realism required to back up the historical and technical realism so valued by hard-core players- i personally find the arguments some what lacking in credibility --
as long as the game is enjoyable and flexible enough to take these modifications and as - if the game actually was real- we would not have the benifit of hindsight nor years of historical records to study- very little of the information we use to guage wether the game is real of not would actually be available--because we would be in 1942 (et al bear with me on this lol) and little of this purely hisotrical research would actually have taken place--so if you follow any of this at all and especailly within the context of a game -- realism is limited to the purely personal experience of playing-- and in the end that is about enjoyment---and it is a difficult subject-- or should be even if it is not--to gain enjoyment from the simulated reconstruction of events that were very rarely - in terms we could apply to a game perhaps--enjoyable--

i prefer to view realism within the context of a game with the suspicion one might normally reserve for a double glazing salesman!

realism is allways -and allways should be- a difficult and far from straight forward subject when applied to computer gaming : the feelings and contradictions it arouses are often the non scripted- purely personal- elements of the game that help to fuel the gameplay

AFAIK!!!

:up: :arrgh!: