I'm sure that fixing the sim files will not be difficult, they are not very big, only a handful of values IIRC. Maybe start by opening them in S3D and doing a visual comparison of GWX vs STz vs B&D? The solution might be as simple as merging the differences. (Edit: mind you, we don't want them unsinkable! ;))

Ah! A perfectionist I see! :ping:

Done, thanks! :up:

I think (well, for me at least) it's more a matter of immersion than lost tonnage. Sure, maybe one or two ships did sink in bad weather IRL, but not whole convoys (as sometimes happens in GWX, if the assortment of ships is right... or "wrong" perhaps is a better word). In any case I agree I would rather have makman's mod given the choice.

BTW, makman, one ship that STz didn't fix is the Tramp Steamer. They sink all the bloody time. I was just thinking, maybe while you're at it... ;)

I just did it for NKSQ_ in the post above yours :up:

thing that should also be corrected as I stated earlier is draft in .cfg files

Rubini put ships deeper by increasing draught in .sim files, so now .cfg and .log files are little wrong in this matter, which can cause problems when using magnetic torps supposed to go under the keel :salute:

what's on my mind lately is to merge TMT with Thomsen's ships :D, but not original Thomsen's ships only the new version which doesn't include messing around with gc_height (well it doesn't exist yet) :cool: only acceleration and turning abilities + enhanced funnel smoke :up: now that would be brand new ships behavior ha :D

Right you are! I guess we cross-posted. :oops:

that's no problem OLC :up:

in fact I expected some discussion on my post because I'm not sure if my statements about buoyancy are right :hmmm:

many thanks Graf Paper ! :up:

sure it helped!

as i have no idea about all these ( positive buoyancy....:hmmm: ....etc) and how to be altered, i am afraid that i have no opinion at all.
are you saying here that if we put the StzSinkingFix's mass and displacement values to b+d mod and leave all the others values untouched will do the trick? and the height will be unchanged ???

about the draft values ,i have already told you that the problem is that we don't know for sure if the original values are acurate (and i can't think a better way to check this exept of starting firing infinite torpedoes ....which is a little bit .... let's say...impossible).
BUT do this if you have the time and the will to do it.open the original .sims (not b+d's .sims) FOR EACH SHIP and check if the draft value is the same with the value at original .cfgs. do this for each ship and report back.if so ,then we will write on TMT's cfg the b+d's draft values.of course ,that means that if the original values are not accurate ...the same will go to the new draft values but for sure it will be better than nothing

bye

when i told you that, if anything is done right ,you will see an accuracy of +-1 degree at AOB.....i wasn't joking! (thats why i like this 'game' so much) :up:

Not any more OLC ! Tramp Steamer is going just fine with b+d mod.

saw the post #27# ??

i checked them all and only the NLPL (ocean liner) and the NLST (landing ship tank ) have problem.just these two ships.

now i tested the .sims for these ships from StzSinkingFix and they didn't sink (although especially the landing ship tank is very...funny at 15 m/sec).so,if at last don't find a way to merge the .sims then i will use StzSinkingFix's sims for these two ships and readjust them
bye

Rubini's called his mod 'neutral buoyance and draught', I can see (comparing B&D and original .sim files) that he achieved this 'neutral' buoyancy by removing mass values in .sim for each ship, well in fact sometimes displacement is removed, but according to S3D the result is the same, game uses mass == displacement.

Stz wanted some of the ships not to sink, and his mod introduces mass < displacement. And it actually works ;)

The question is how it is modeled by the game :hmmm: mass + displacement + draught :hmmm:

It looks like mass and displacement don't have the influence on draught, well it's just a game, not a real physics. So I believe that if we set draught to x meters in .sim file, than the ship will be put exactly x meters deep into the water. The difference is how it behaves on the waves I suppose, don't forget that Rubini was trying to minimize 'rubber duck in bathtub' effect.

Correct me if I'm wrong - the .cfg files are used only for recog manual right ?

I'll do this :up: expect the results by the end of this week, maybe I'll be even able to prepare corrected .cfg files by then.

above with green

(like the 'bad' girl...nobody wants it as girlfriend BUT everybody wants it to....)

:haha: :har: :rotfl: that was completely unexpected!

P.S.
That's great news regarding the tramp steamer :up:

hi,

makman please take a look at this:
http://www.mediafire.com/file/tmjm42cnzfl/GWX.xls

this file contains comparison of drafts and displacements in .cfg, .sim for stock GWX3.0

generally speaking the answer is yes, before B&D mod draughts in .sim and .cfg where the same, although there are exceptions ;)

1. some .sim files have draught = 0 , after S3D: 'The object's draught[m]. If 0, then it is taken from the object's global position.', as I can see Rubini left those as is, and we can't really do much about them unless we figure out their global position from 3D models ;)

2. if both draught values (.sim and .cfg) are present then the are 17 differences, which I think are just bugs

the real fun starts when you look at displacements :up:

1. generally both values are given in .sim file, mass and displacement, and generally mass < displacement and difference is 1,5T

2. some .sim have displacement = 0

3. there are a LOT which just look messed up :-?

good job Rs77 ! :up:


edit: just looking your .xls file(<----very nice) and i think that we can start copying the b+d draft values to TMT's .cfgs.we will see what will be done with those that have draft=0

I won't continue further, in fact I have set of unified .sim, .cfg files for all ships based on TMT mod but I'm afraid I created more mess doing this ;)

I'd like to point out a few more things:
- cumberland, devonshire, norfolk - looks like they have wrong mass/displacements in .sim, I checked wiki on this and 13300 for their displacement in .cfg looks much more real

- one of the fishing boats - boat_4 - has displacement of 885 tons in .cfg, it doesn't look right, fishing boat of destroyer size ?

- pbtrawler, again .cfg says 480 tons compared to 110 in .sim, a little to big

we need complete clean solution for all ships, that would be great :rock: