Quote:
Originally Posted by timmyg00
Will SCAF fix that? I'm running RSRDC for stock 1.5 (no mega-mods), 3000yd bearing Tool, 3D Radar/TDC, and Show Air Contacts. Is there a SCAF version for me?
|
No, SCAF will not fix this problem.
As a matter of fact I would not use SCAF since it's "height" correction was based on the premise that the subs center point of calculating range was equal and consistent in whatever direction you took a reading. As I point out, this is not the case.
The truth is, some of the ship "heights" in SCAF
are accurate because they were based on using the targets position either directly perpendicular to the test sub (usually a Porpoise class). As the two illustrations of the Hiryu or Northampton show, the positions of the targets either at the 90 degree or 270 degree relative bearing are consistent with each other. Basing a corrected height from those positions will give a correct mast height. However, basing a height of a target in the frontal bow position (which I did) will create an error close to a half a meter off. A half a meter height difference at only 1000 yards will create about a 20 yard error in found range with manual targeting. The error increases by several fold as the true target distance increases.
My plan is to correct the Optical Targeting Correction mod (which I consider the replacement for SCAF) and continue to make specific versions for other mods.
==========================
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Daniel Prates
We're dealing with cargo ships, are we not? How do we know if the target is loaded or unloaded? Because the distance of the top of the mast (or any other part of the ship for that matter) will be closer to the waterline when loaded, and farther when unloaded.
|
Good consideration, but the game does not take into account this fact. The game makes no distinction between a loaded ship or not. The ships are constantly positioned at the same height.
You mention the stadimeter is not perfect, and I do not disagree. The game sets several factors into play regardless of whether the "height" measurements are correct or not. One of these is the fact that each separate pixel line will give a different stadimeter found range when compared to its "adjacent" pixel line. This difference between adjacent pixel lines will be less toward the upper sections of the scope, and greater toward the waterline. This factor is based on the idea that a target at a greater distance (closer to the horizon) will give a greater amount of inaccuracy when compared to a closer target (which fills the scope view, having its mast top toward the top of the view). The point is, each pixel line between the scope's horizon (waterline) and top of view, will give a different found range when compared to its adjacent pixel line. For a typical target at a 1200 yard distance the difference between pixel lines are about 8 yards each. Throw in lighting conditions, rough seas, an unsteady hand clicking the mouse, and you aren't going to get an accurate range to target even with a correct mast height.
I just don't think the mast heights should be off as they are. Any real Captain who missed a target due to an incorrect mast height would have "red penciled" his Recognition Manual with what he thought was the more accurate measurement in the event of running into the same target again. I'm simply giving a player the accuracy he "should" have when dealing with manual targeting.
By the way, for you TMO 2.0 players. The mod has the Hiryu mast height at 20 meters. Any guesses as to what that figure will give you at the same 1000 yard true distance as in the above illustration? Ever hear of not being able to hit a bull in the ass with a bass fiddle?