SUBSIM Radio Room Forums - View Single Post - Realism- and gameplay-related hardcode fixes for SH3.EXE

h.sie · 11-25-10, 02:13 PM

Hi Stiebler,

you obviously had a very good learning curve. Thanks.

3. The random generator creates not always a random number between (-1,+1) but much more between the two limits that have been push'ed on the stack in the 2 commands before the random call itself, so I did never plan to change the random routine. One only needs to put the upper and the lower limit on the stack and things go fine.

Syntax: (float)Rnd=Random32(float UPPER_LIMIT, float LOWER_LIMIT)

4. Yes these negative random values are funny and I didn't understand the reason. But I fear to simply build the absolute value. I would't touch that.

6. I could try to divide the windspeed by 2 for a special Stieber's edition, but I don't really like that overall-damping. I personally would prefer your idea of a forced low windspeed on a (randomized) but regulary basis.

Then we can compare these 2 approaches and take the better one.

Greetings,
h.sie

Edit: If I remenber right, there were TWO limiters to [0,4999....15] without exactly knowing the reason for that. So we must be careful by finding the correct exit/entry-point for our patch.

11-25-10, 02:13 PM	#621
h.sie Admiral Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 2,192 Downloads: 131 Uploads: 0	Hi Stiebler, you obviously had a very good learning curve. Thanks. 3. The random generator creates not always a random number between (-1,+1) but much more between the two limits that have been push'ed on the stack in the 2 commands before the random call itself, so I did never plan to change the random routine. One only needs to put the upper and the lower limit on the stack and things go fine. Syntax: (float)Rnd=Random32(float UPPER_LIMIT, float LOWER_LIMIT) 4. Yes these negative random values are funny and I didn't understand the reason. But I fear to simply build the absolute value. I would't touch that. 6. I could try to divide the windspeed by 2 for a special Stieber's edition, but I don't really like that overall-damping. I personally would prefer your idea of a forced low windspeed on a (randomized) but regulary basis. Then we can compare these 2 approaches and take the better one. Greetings, h.sie Edit: If I remenber right, there were TWO limiters to [0,4999....15] without exactly knowing the reason for that. So we must be careful by finding the correct exit/entry-point for our patch. __________________ My Mediafire page: http://www.mediafire.com/hsie