Ok, I'm going to do the files for LWAMI 3.08 today... I hope no bugs have been missed because we've spent so much time focused on things like the TLAM. :know:

I've been pretty busy these past few days, so I haven't done much testing myself, my sincere hope is that 3.08 is going to last at least as long as a gallon of milk in an American grocery store.

Cheers,
David

My Kilo in LwAmi at 50m 3 knts Layer 200 m.

The following contacts were marked in NB SA by ctf (No visual indications) :

13.4 nm Trafalgar at 147 m 4 kts.
16.3 nm Type 206A at 46 m 2 kts.
18.7 nm Daphn at 75 m 2 kts.
22 nm Victor 111 at 150 m 5 kts.

I was really just admiring the new models BUT....

Just a quick question, I assume people don't mind if I hold off on the major readme changes and just do 3.08 as I had done before in terms of documentation?

I know there is at least one tournament on hold pending a stable version of LWAMI, so getting that out is my primary concern... then after that, I can release a separate guide and some charts and graphs.

I hope no one minds. :sunny:

Cheers,
David

Sounds like people need to avoid cheating. :yep:

Hasn't this been around in DW since the beginning?

In any case, I can't control things in the engine that are obviously broken.

If I worried about these sorts of things, I wouldn't even play DW let alone spend time modding it. If people want to cheat, they can cheat, this is pretty much the case in any game.

Cheers,
David

True.
I haven't meant to offend or blame anyone on hardcoded user interface bugs. I just had to ask my question, and I like the mod (although I am not experienced enough with (stock) DW to understand the importance of all the fixes that come with the mod :yep:)
So see it like this: you have taken me away from the fate of experiencing all the stock DW issues that are fixed by your mod :ping:

I thought this bug/cheat had been eliminated by SAS and am genuinely surprised to find that its still here. It is well enough documented to ensure that those who can read will I'm afraid use it.

But I am beeing diverted - further tests with a separate installation of stock have confirmed
1. That the bug(etc) is also present in Stock 1.04
2. That it is not TA dependent and
3. That the 'tuning-up' of LwAmi SA sonar sensitivity has increased the bug/fault/cheats impact.

Given the same scenario in stock the Daph was located at 18.7 nm but nothing beyond that range. Whereas LwAmi had the Victor 111 at 22 nm. I will determine the max range.

Thankfully, this falls into the catagory of "things that aren't my problem," since the only solution is to return the Sphere and Hull sonars to the state where they can't even detect civilian shipping at reasonable ranges.

It is unfortunate that SCS can only do threshold fixes for this, rather than a true recoding of the sonar interfaces to actually eliminate this problem at the source.

Fortunately, you can't accidently use this, it's squarely within the realm of "intentional cheats," and it's also fairly obvious when reviewing the replays.

Cheers,
David

Maximum range (to date) Kilo SA NB bug(etc) under LwAmi 44 nm
Maximum range (to date) Kilo SA NB bug(etc) under stock 19 nm.
So a ''modest'' 100% increase in range.

The ability to track neutrals at an increased range comes at a heavy price.

I dont agree that :
1. "things that aren't my problem," You have turned up the sensitivity and therefore the power of the bug/cheat.
2. Its obvious on 'replay' as many 'could' merely use it as a strong 'hint' - not firing down the bearing at an early stage.

But interpretation is not for me - I am just startled at what I've found.

I'll admit, that is pretty extreme. :-?

However, reversing one of the most important changes made in the mod (making 2/3's of the player sonars useful) is not on the table.

The cheat is not created by the mod, nor is the cheat altered in qualitative terms, therefore the increase in range is irrelevant, as far as I am concerned.

My advice regarding this remains what it has always been, only play DW with people you trust, because 2+ hours of your life is worth a lot. :up:

Cheers,
David

Bellman, be aware that the limitation on the stock sensor Click-to-Mark is because of the hardcap on the sonar, which also limits it's detection of exceptionally loud contacts to the same range.

So, what this means is that the stock Kilo sonar will suddenly get a huge spike contact at on it at 19nm for all loud contacts like tankers, etc. In fact, the hardcap on the stock Kilo Sphere array is 36575m, or 19nm.

So, this really all sucks doesn't? Really big range for the cheat, or ridiculous myopia? :-?

But again, the solution is far better than the problem, provided you aren't playing with people inclined to use an obvious exploit.

Cheers,
David

Bellman can I get your map for testing, we tested the Kilo conformal bug in beta and the bug was found and removed.

Fish.

Apparently not. :-?

It is possible using the Kilo Narrowband sonar to mark contacts that cannot be seen, however, it is not possible to assign a tracker to them.

The bug has been fixed for the broadband sonar.

Cheers,
David

Well, **** me in the ass and call me a bitch. :damn::damn:

Fish: On the way.

Test Kilo SA NB 'Mark' Bug in LwAmi 3072 - range maxima 64 - 85 nm.

Test Akula TA NB marking to range 38 nm.(same test location conditions as before.)

Edit: Comparitive tests SW and Ak :
Test SW TA NB Same scenario, same target no discernable NB tonals just an infrequent very missable SNR 1 flicker now and again.

Apparently adjustments to the TA sensitivity have adjusted the odds ?