if you read back a way i allready work on that one :up: --- with stock AI_sensors.dat and the crewrating entirely removed --the DD's are best described by the phrase

moderately effective

with the strange side effect that the DD's stopped using their active sonar--no pinging--they did drop DC's tho (how i've no idea )

once i tried editing the sensor dat again they immediately became useless again even tho i had improved their sensors---what that meant i couldn't tell-

there IS a crewrating of 0 :up:


what's discipline? :huh: i don't do discipline :-j

So CB

I am on track now, :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

Did you delete or use the ;key.

Did you change all crew to Crewrating=0?

I am worried about the non ping you describe so want to make sure I am not going to flog a dead horse here.

What are your thoughts on the Crewrating=0?

I should have looked at what ships and times had this setting before deleting it :damn: :damn: :damn: :damn: :damn: :damn: :damn:

1, 2, 3, 4, seem to represented by what is stated in the multiplayer but no option for a fith setting. I will just boot up a multiplayer game and see how many choices of ai crew we are given to be sure there is not 5.

Are you still leaving all crew ratings out?

By heck man, your British, stiff upper lip and all. I don't do it either but it sounded good :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: .

Bedtime now, will report in tommorow afternoon.

i dunno wether right "track" is the right word but probably yes!!

i used the ; key-- there was a solid difference after this edit so i presumed it was doing what it normally does--

i don't know why the DD's stopped using the active--but it was intrigueing--


i didn't try changing all the crewratings to zero (they were bad enough to start with remember!) i've now restored all the crewratings to test Col's mod

can't say there's much to be said about the crewrating=0 option but never dismiss anything out of hand or assume that you know what's going on with any certainty-iceburgs and most merchants use this rating as stock--which brings me to the discipline thing


what i mean is simply this--the only way to test these results is in open gameplay -- so that in every sort of weather and against every sort of opposition some thing worthy of the title "gameplay" occurs

that's all there is to it-- i can fine tune things in set scenarios for ever and find the whole things useless in full and normal campaign gameplay---it has it's place but only as a very minor part of the testing process

i learn't this lesson the hard way making exactly the same sort of mod we're aiming at here --for SH2 ((DES5 etc was a full sensor unit equipment mod)) and not in any way intended to be realistic-- yet most folks said it was very realistic indeed- because IMO i tested tweaked it and just as importantly played it to check over and over and over again that it was working well in open and fully randomised campaign gameplay--took about a year -- here's discipline for you--for every change i made to it i started and played a full campaign thru to see how it worked---untill i simply ran out of patience -then released it- as a work in progress- a gameplay mod- all realism being implied rather than specific

if the results need to work in the open normal campaign then the only way to effectively test is in open normal campaign gameplay--- it's not overly hard to do either in SH3-- no one listens to poor Zaphros-- no no--

In the ultimate display of my own ignorance, i have a stupid question.

Is it possible that the hydrophone section (not the indivdual numbered passives assigned to escorts) in the ai_sensor.dat has more to do with the hydrophone in your own boat? My logic is, a hydrophone crewman, is infact an AI unto himself, is it not? Or is this KNOWN to be defined elsewhere?
Your hydrophone can listen fairly far away, but your operator only reports things when they're fairly close.

Forgive the ignorance im bored and still muddling thorugh this.

I think that the uboat ai stuff is stored in the sensors.dat - the other AI stuff for the allied vessels etc seems to be the AI_sensors.dat--

but i don't think we've gotten to the bottom of this yet so who knows--
i'm confused by the fact there's an entry for AI_hydrophones AND an entrys for every type of hydrophone etc---

That is what prompted my question. Seems redundant to have both, and from what i gather from this thread, editing the individual entries seem have better results?

i don't know to be honest--for me neither has any profound effect--just facts and figures in a file -- nothing much changes in the game :cry:

BLech, ill change both. If i notice my sonar is has some marked improvment, then ill know :P The key is DD detecting subs and i think, all considered, its close to being cracked.

If i get results, with both edited, ill try reverting the hydrophone settings and see if i get dumb escorts again.


An idea just hit me. Maybe we should all use the same mission file? Standardized testing. Just a approach the convoy scenario? Im no wiz with the editor, otherwise id make one. ( If anyone does make one, post it so we can use it. )

i don't think AI_hydrophones link gets used.

Reasons
1. check the sens file for enemy ships. theres a link to AI_visual for the visual node, but then every other sensor has a link to the named sensor in AI_sensors eg linkname type 144p

2. changing the ai_hydrophones values -- other than noise level and detection time as above -- has no effect at all -- at least, not one that i've detected.

i also feel we're repeating some of the early work done by cb, redwine, and self. not that there's anything wrong w/ it -- the more info we have, the better, and it would be nice to actually confirm things. but i agree w/ gouldj -- we need to all test on a standardized mission (there's links earlier in the thread to mine and someone elses, or we should agree on 1 of the single missions), and tweaking 1 variable at a time. it's no good to change 2 or 3 things, then report that there's changes. we need to figure out which *1* thing, which single variable, does what. once we do that, we can start changing weather conditions etc.

re which mission to use -- i think we should make a mission w/ a single escort, elite crew (or no crew rating), calm weather, set time. that way, there's less confounding variables.

also, when reporting results, we need to give lots of info -- range detected on hydrophones, range pinging started are probably most important.

sorry if it seems that i'm ranting or trying to be bossy -- i just don't want you guys to spend a lot of time and effort doing the same stuff that was done a while ago. forgive me if i've misinterpreted peoples' intentions.

http://rapidshare.de/files/8027236/s...-test.rar.html

standard mission, single escort, calm weather, daylight start, you start on surface. ai_sensors included w/ tweaked sensor ranges and values to be more in tune w/ history (but feel free to not use that bit). sim.cfg has detection times of 0 -- in repeated testing, i've found this greatly reduces the variability in detection ranges. eg try for yourself -- run the test multiple times, and the range you're spotted at changes greatly. detection time 0, and things are a little more consistent.

as my mantra goes -- the less variables, the better.

Ill try testing some of the adjustments ive been making with that mission later tonight hopefully, thanks.

1.) standardized test will hopefully give us a controlled testing enviorment.

2.) speeds up testing. Running a patrol takes time. Sooner this gets hashed out the sooner we can start enjoying the game.


Although if you could come up with a 2nd version that has say, 3 or 4 escorts to go along with the single escort mission, that would help greatly.

Specficially id like to test single DD detection, and then also under a "normal "convoy situation.

EDIT:
BTW whats the crew rating? 3, 4, or is it remarked out? Id like to experiment with that. In specfic, a crew rating of 4 vs a remarked out crew rating.

Thought I might throw in my 2 cents, I generally find that dd's don't detect me unless I surface or something! however once they have detected me they hound me endlessly, dropping dc's with pinpoint accuracy, finally after 30mins or more I give up!! because they sure don't. :-?
This is in a carreer, I don't play the single missions, however I do play LAN coop game and even on the easiest settings (1939) they are the same - uber! if anything 1943 gameplay is much easier & escaping dd's easier :dead:
Keep up the good work modders & don't give in - please! :lol:

Posting this now while its still fresh in my mind:

Using this mission:
http://rapidshare.de/files/8027236/s...-test.rar.html

I edited the starting point back so theres like 11K meters distance between the DD and the player sub to give me time to dive.


Parameters of my testing so far:

Sim.cfg:
Hydrophone]
Detection time=0.0 ;[s]
Sensitivity=0.03 ;(0..1)
Height factor=0 ;[m]
Waves factor=0.0 ;[>=0]
Speed factor=15 ;[kt]
Noise factor=0.0 ;[>=0]


AI_sensors.dat:
I took all default passive sonar values and multiplied it by 3. Ballpark figure, puts most of them in the 20 to 30K range.
AI_Hydrophones set to 30K, later reduced to default value of 6K.


Observations:
Test 1: Escort was at crew rating 4.
Instant i hit 10 meters i was detected at ahead slow, doing about 4 knot.
DD detected me before the sonar operator acknowledged he was there (about 2 seconds later). About 5 seconds later i got him targeted in periscope at about 9800 meters.

THATS FAR.

Test 2: I dumbed down the escort to crew rating 1.
Results were the same as test 1.

After this i re-edited the AI_sensor.dat and changed the AI hydrophone from 30K back to its default value of 6K

Ran test 3: escort of crew rating 1 (unchanged from previous test)
Same results, detected almost immediatly, under same conditions, only difference is the AI_hydrophone was set to 6K while all specific passives were tripled in value.


Next, going to change sim.cfg hydrophones back to default values and run another 2 tests. If results are the same then going to lower hydrophone max range from Default *3, to default *2.

More later.


EDIT:
More testing:
Parameters used:

Sim.cfg:
-vanilla default

AI_sensors.dat
- AI_hydrophones = default of 6K
- All passives = default *3

Test 4: DD crew rating =4
Was not detected on dive, ran at ahead slow at 50 meters. Recieved no detection notice, DD just starting pinging when within active sonar range without any warning.

Test 5: DD crew rating =1
Similar results, not detected on dive, ran ahead at 50 meters at ahead slow. However this time i did recieve a detection notice, im guessing at about 1500-2K meters, Just before he starting pinging.

In neither test did i try silent running, i just ran at ahead slow at 50 meters running head on into the DD to see if/when hed detect me.

Clearly the settings in the sim.cfg play a MAJOR role. My thought now is to tone down the passive sonars to default, or default*2 and fine tune the CFG.

I should also note that all tests were with the above linked mission, calm seas, and clear weather, seems like ideal sonar conditions.

I think ill run another test before chaning anything at ahead 1/3rd and see when im detected.

Hi Ducimus

I am sorry but I have appointment in a bit so cannot do any testing this morning. Therefore my next comments are speculation only.

Lets for 1 second say my Hunch is right and that crew rating does in fact affect sensitivity and sensitivity then goes on to affect the rest i.e. noise, detection time etc etc.

If you leave waves to 0, noise to 0, and detection time to 0 also leave all passives to the same as they was default.

I can imagine you will get similar results with any crew rating.

I can almost imagine that you will start to get passive contact detections closer to what the real levels were set as in the ai_sensors.

This however means that it would be like this no matter what weather etc and in my book, it is just as much a game killer as when we started.

I do think we will end up with one crew setting, and some minor tweaks in the sim.cfg as well as some tweaks at ranges in the ai_sensors to find a common ground.

I personally do not want to remove the noise and wave settings at the moment just because I am getting results. I would rather try to find what ranges and crewratings fit best into the current settings in the sim.cfg

I am after finding what crew rating works the closest to the settings after I nerf them just a tiny bit. It may be that crew ratings will work at 4, 3, 2, 1, or 0. It may be better to remove them all together but CB has already warned of a possible side effect.


When I get back, I am going to set the waves and noise to a much lower level but not completely disapeared i.e. 0.001 or similar.

I am going to leave all crew in the game, and leave the ranges as they are. I bet any money, I start to get similar results to what the rest of you are experiencing.

I do suspect that crew ratings may not only affect sensitivity but they may affect other things and it is these that I want to discover now.


Anyway Good luck guys,

I am off now and will be back around 1pm uk time.

Your hunch is right.

MORE TESTS:


SIM.CFG = default

AI_sensor.dat
-AI_hydrophones = 6k (default)
-All passives = default * 3


Test1: Crew rating = 1
I ran at ahead 1/3rd at 50 meters I was detected im guessing at twice the distance i was before. In this case if it was say.... 1K meters, he picked me up at 2K. Hell he had to step on me to find me.

Test 2: crew rating =4
same parameters, only this time he picked me up at about 4K im guessing.

Im going to run both tests again at periscope depth so i can get a distance to target.

My conclusion as so far :

1.) SIM.CFG settings for lack of a better term seem to dictate "diminishing returns" on the passive sonar. Zero it out, he has no diminishing returns, put it back and he cant hear as far, or how much he hears.

2.) crew rating seems to effect sensitivity as to how soon the escort detects you.

off to test again.

EDIT:
OK More findings:

Test, same files.

Ahead 1/3rd, at periscope depth.

Test 1: Crewrating =1
DD detected me at about 1100-1200 meters.

Test 2: Crewrating =4
2a.) at about 4K meters i noticed he stoped steaming straight, but started zig zagging. Obvsiouly he knows im around, but im guessing hasnt pin pointed my location yet, hence no detection message.. i decided to rerun this test.

2b) DD detects me somewhere in between 3500 and 4000 meters and starts to zig zag.


Im betting by tweaking the CFG files we can increase the distance at which these events occur. Obviously crew rating is a big difference.. im gonna try it one more time with a crew rating of 3 and call it quits for the night.

EDIT:

Damn crew rating 4 makes a BIG difference.

just ran another test with crew rating 3.

Test 1:
at periscope depth at 1/3rd speed he detected me at 1200 meters and started evasive zig zagging. ( I should note that crew rating 1 makes no evasive manuvers where as 3 does)

Test 2:
same thing only at about 1500 meters.



So right now im of two thoughts:

A.) Use crewrating 3, and Tweak the CFG findings so he can hear a bit farther out, Hes obviously not dumb, and not uber, might be worth working with.


or..


b.) use crew rating 4, and impose various limiations to make them escapable and convoys approachable.


Honestly i think B might be easier then A. im not sure. Those CFG settings are very subltle, and make a marked difference. Adjust them properly and we could probably make any DD with a crew rating of 3 find us at some appropriate range.

I think another trick is to make them detect us at "ahead slow" while not in silent running. Personnaly i rarely go above that speed unless im going to miss the firing point. Going 1/3rd is like trying to ring a dinner bell. So a very sublte CFG tweak is probably whats needed.

EDIT: you know, i should rerun the same tests, only instead of 1/3rd, use 2/3rd or standard. Ill bet the detecton ranges will increase, probably in scale to the detection ranges at 1/3rd.