It apparently occurs if you save within rendering range of any scripted harbor or coastal traffic. I do not know how it may affect other scripted elements such as convoys or surface engagements... though it does stand to reason that they are affected in the same way.

I don't know if it affects elements scripted into the random campaign layer. (The majority of GWX campaign elements, such as Hunter-Killer groups and convoys reside in the random layer.)

I have saved too close to convoys in the past, and it does affect them. It is funny to watch the ships going every which way when you reload a save. The last time this happened, a escort was just turning left when I saved. When I restarted the game, the escort took off in a straight line in the direction it was turning and left the convoy behind.

Just a heads-up for everyone. The 2.1 update may be delayed by a week or two.

Right now we've got three crew down sick/ill, and two with PC issues relating to weather problems local to those members. (heavy snowfall/flooding)

We'll get there. Gotta get through the rough patch though first.

Best wishes
 

Best wishes for the quick recovery of all those in the sickbay!
I hope the harbor nurses can do a little bit more than just throw flowers at our uboote :yep:

Vunderbar
 

Mmm... this is not a new prob...
 

re: Graf paper post:


I have also had a similar problem but I know this has exsisted before GWX 2.0. Ive seen it in previous versions of GWX and it would not surprise me if it is in other mods that model harbour trafic.

In this example on pulling into Wilhelmshaven all the ships were out of place in the outer harbour including Turpitz. It seemed to me they were all about 150 meters SW of their correct position. Here are a couple of screen grabs:

http://img443.imageshack.us/img443/1...2056ty2.th.jpg

http://img443.imageshack.us/img443/5...2055vg7.th.jpg


Its strange because the destroyer within the inner harbour dock did not seem to be affected and this may have been due to the current flow and the fact they had no where to go?

In the picture it shows one ship planted on dry land. This may be because when the game loads the objects in the harbour as you close the coast it factors in current flow (drift) and then sticks them where its calculated them to be rather than where they should be if they had not drifted? If this was so then the destroyer should have also been planted on the dock aswell?

I had also saved my games well over 150km away NW of Heligoland. I think due to all these ships moving in almost the same direction its shows that this is the drift bug and it it inherant in SH3. Exactly how the game calculates and handles drift I do not know but I believe what Kpt Lehmann has said is the root of the problem.




One of the things that surprised me when I first got SH3 was that there was no harbour traffic and I think that may have been because the Ubisoft team had problems with it and didnt get to finish it. :hmm:

When I left Wilhelmshaven after refueling and rearming all the ships were in their correct positions and so again another pointer to the drift bug. At the beginning of the game they havent drifted as yet. It might be a good experiment to after you save the game come out of it completely than load up the game again to see if the problem occurs....:hmm: in theory the save would not have recorded their positions and then when you load the game the positions when they spawn perhaps might be where they should be rather than in their drift positions? cos perhaps this only happens when you have had a long session with the game? ...just a thought. But the save must be be before the harbour traffic spawns, so well out to sea.


Just my tuppence worth!!

Lehmann you have a PM! :up:

Also, I dont know if you are aware of my "whispeRING RING" mod. People are asking me if will it work with 2.1, and by now you can tell me if the speed orders are going to change. I guess probably not... Anyway, if you guys think thats a good idea to reduce the loud RING RING in your gwx 2.1, as there are many people complaining, feel free to import my mod as a optional! :up:

Thanks in advance!

Wilhelmshaven
 

I am not sure if it will be of use in the update, but I am part way through a simple plan drawing (labelled), of the layout of the Naval Base at Wilhelmshaven during WW II.

Because my SH III boat is based in Wilhelshaven, I noted that in the KTB's of boats based there they refer to certain locations when entering of leaving. As I do very detailed KTB's from my patrols, it caused me to chase up what turned out to be a very bad photocopy of the base. To make a decent copy I have been redrawing it.

So, if you would like a copy, I am more than happy to expedite the task and send it to you.

I know that multiplayer SH3 is probably not a large segment of the community, but can anything be done to enhance GWX 2.1 over GWX 1.03? My buddy and I have conducted many hours of MP with both versions and the consistent result is that 1.03 performs heads and shoulders above 2.0. Using the same router settings (him hosting, me client), we experience significant problems regarding ship hits/kills in 2.0 whereas the same mission in 1.03 performs as expected. Namely, what he sees as host in 2.0 often miscompares with what I see as client. I put torpedoes into ships and see them burning, decks nearly awash and bobbing up and down in the water while he sees the same ships as not burning, possibly low in the water and bobbing up and down. He has gone to external camera and watched me pump torpedo after torpedo into a ship with no significant damage indicated even though I see fires and smoke albeit without the resultant sinking. The end result is that I have attacked as many ships as he and cannot sink a single ship running 2.0 while he wipes the map clean. One might be tempted to chalk it up as "just one of those SH3 problems", but running the same scenario under 1.03 results in far more uniform results with both of us sinking the ships we've targeted and both observing the same effects of the engagement. I don't know if it's related to the amount of information that must be transmitted between host and server is greater in 2.0 than in 1.03, but the tests we've run always produce the same results. It's not the end of the world if there is no solution in 2.1, we can always revert to 1.03, but it would be nice if we didn't have to.

@ i_b_spectre

How many Ram do you have on your PC and how many Ram got your mate ?

GWX 2.0 got 200 Ships and you need 2GB for playing 2.0 Online.
If you got only 1 GB, Windows put many things from the game to the virtual Ram on the HD and this is the reason for the problems cause the virtual ram from HD is to slow.

We from AOTD got the same problem.
Ouer next Onlinecampaign we will play with GWX 2.0.
In first tests with GWX 2.0 we had the same problems with people who got only 1 GB Ram but i have small down the GWX Sea-folder down to 130 ships and reduced the number of ship-tga´s to maximum of 4 different designs and all problems are gone.
The next part that has to be overworked for better onlineplaying is that you have to delete all entrys in the campaign_rnd.mis and campaign_scr.mis. .

I got the permission from Kpt. Lehmann to release a small mod with overworked campaign-files for better Onlinegaming.
This small Mod i wanne release today !


Greets

Maddy

Kpt. Otto, the timing of your post is perfect regarding "drift" in the harbors.

Kpt. Lehmann, this does indeed appear to be the infamous "drift" bug as Kpt. Otto's post has done much to clarify my situation at Scapa Flow. I kept thinking "drift" as in the ships drifting out of position in real time, not having their positions displaced by some goofy algorithm that's misplacing a decimal (or whatever) while rendering the scene. My apologies to you.

I witnessed this behavior in reverse because I decided to dig around in Campaign_SCR.mis to see if I could spot the trouble. 'BR T2 Tanker 53' is the ship that has been under discussion. I changed her heading from 270 to 180 and then loaded the game. I made a beeline straight for Scapa Flow, sailed in through Kirk Sound and right up to the sub net. I then went to F12 and flew across to the harbor to see how the tanker was behaving.

Much to my surprise, every single ship at anchor nearby or moored to the docks had shifted positions to the left by several degrees, occupying berths one space over from previously. This placed the tanker in a spot where being parked at a heading of 270 was no problem. She would have been alongside the dock front proper instead of double parked across the berths. However, due to my edit, she was in the right place but sitting with her stern pointing to the dock instead of parked alongside.

I exited the game, restored the original Campaign_SCR.mis file, restarted, ran to Scapa, and there she was parked nice and neat alongside the dock!

Thank you both, Lehmann and Otto, for helping me with this and getting it through my head. :)

Kpt. Lehmann, I appreciate your patience in this while I was busy being lost in bugville. Sometimes it takes me a little while to grasp these things as I have yet to possess the experience and know-how of the more esoteric aspects of SH3's technical intricacies.

I did not take your remarks as being rude concerning replacing the tanker. For me, harbor raiding is not generally a task I engage in but I had completed my required patrol and had not found a single contact in 6 days, so I decided to re-enact the Scapa raid just as the real U-47 did and see if it could still be done even in mid-1940. If it hadn't been for the tanker issue, a few ships would indeed be resting at the bottom of the harbor. My successful withdrawal is another matter that remains pure speculation.

Again, thank you very much and I'm looking forward to GWX 2.1!

I pray all the Wolves will be well and safe despite the troubles besetting your team.

Maddy, I have 1.5GB of RAM and I think my buddy may be running a full 2GB. Recalling one of your earlier posts on the MP issue as experienced by AOTD, I feel you are onto really something. It seems logical that the differences between 1.03 and 2.0 noticed during online play are a result of synchronization as you have hypothesized. Further, the increase in the number of objects, the fact that there may be more of them to track in 2.0 (IIRC, ships now sail from origin to destination rather than spawning/despawing), all contribute to a considerable increase in data over 1.03. This would also explain why the problem is unique to playing online with 2.0, which works so well offline. I have seen the same thing happen with online air combat sims wherein the developer provides an offline map and an online version of the same area to reduce the object count for more efficient data flow.

I'm pleased to know you have been given the go-ahead by the GWX team for your mod. While I've played more offline since getting SH3, I still enjoy playing online with friends. I appreciate your work and their's in making this game even more pleasurable than it already is. Looking forward to trying your MP mod :up:.

Spectre

UPDATE
 

Would like to see US downgraded off East Coast in 12/41-6/42 period. It's supposed to be the 2nd Happy Time. US actions well described in Hardegen's bio DRUMBEAT centering on his 2 US visits. No sonar, short attention span of escorts, no convoys, lot's on unescorted single ships with no guns.

Since original SH3 I find nothing but escorts on E C. Usually in the dark, stormy seas at 300m too. Last vist 2/42 got attacked by Tug, shot up, escaped, he refound me so I blew him up. Then a DD got me same close range a day or so later.

Hardegen was attacked by one plane, depth charged by bored ,sonarless DD that wandered off after 1 pass and he made heavy use of deck gun. I find weather always so bad off US no DG available. Majority of US escorts were sent where U-boats weren't and not where they were thanks to muddled USN command that lasted for months.

Sounds more like the stock game your describing to me :hmm:

WOW
 

I have been out of it building my first HTPC and when I come back the world has changed...Great job GWX team! :up: