NYGM tonnage calculations

Archive1 · 01-08-07, 05:18 PM

Am using the latest NYGM Tonnage War v 2.2 but the tonnages assigned to me after a patrol are less than 10% of the actual tonnage sunk. For example: have about 28,000 T after 6 patrols in a type II, not super but OK, however NYGM has assigned me only 1,900 T. Am operating at 90% reality - all selected but duds (I know realists will object, but accept it for now) - and all sinkings have been righteous (all identified before sinking as British merchants, tankers, etc. - that is, no neutrals or hospital ships). Where in the code and how does NYGM calculate tonnage for a given Kaleun? I accept that a reduction from 100% would follow from my deselection of duds, but a reduction of 95% seems excessive.

Corsair · 01-08-07, 06:35 PM

Strange never had that ...

Archive1 · 01-08-07, 10:40 PM

Corsair:
Actually it's not the first time I've had this occur. But what I really would like to know is where is the controlling code located? I've done some programming and I'd like to look at the code. Maybe a question for Teddy Baer who has done much of the NYGM v2.2 development.
Maybe should go to the Wolves at War site and submit the question.
Thanks for the response.

Corsair · 01-09-07, 07:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Archive1

Corsair:
Actually it's not the first time I've had this occur. But what I really would like to know is where is the controlling code located? I've done some programming and I'd like to look at the code. Maybe a question for Teddy Baer who has done much of the NYGM v2.2 development.
Maybe should go to the Wolves at War site and submit the question.
Thanks for the response.

In a way it's not so important because as NYGM doesn't use the renown system, this value has no influence on how you can upgrade your canoe. As long as you know you sank them... I personnally keep a manual logbook of all my patrols, and it's my reference for what happened.

codmander · 01-09-07, 08:01 AM

to make sure check your 'K' key for sinking than save the game at that point

Archive1 · 01-10-07, 06:27 PM

Corsair:
Yes I understand the tonnage v renown difference, but it was interesting that when I went to upgrade from a Type IID to a Type VIIB, I got the "Not enough experience message." This after six patrols and about 30,000 tons of shipping sunk. Maybe wrong, but I put it down as a result of only having about 1,900 'official' tons; that would obviously make one "inexperienced". I could be wrong about that but it did seem that NYGM was in fact using the tonnage for at least that decision point. Am going to try a dig further. As I said, maybe Teddy Baer can address the issue if I can find his email address. I try to keep questions like this en clair so everyone can benefit from answers, but maybe a private message to him will work, followed by a repost. Will try and keep you abreast. Thanks for the response.

Codman:
I didn't quite understand your message about the K key and tonnage. It seemed the message may have been truncated, maybe it's only my mind that's truncated. Appreciate the response.

Ducimus · 01-10-07, 06:40 PM

Quote:

m operating at 90% reality

With NYGM you really have to run at 100% realism.

NYGM cleverly uses renown to mirror your tonnage. Your "career tonnage" in reality is your renown under a different name. Basically if a ship is worth say, 2400 tons, then they'll assign the renown reward to be 2400 points, which will then be refeclted in your "career tonnage". However the game awards renown based upon your realism percentage. This is why your missing that 10%.

Archive1 · 01-12-07, 01:15 AM

Ducimus:
I understand the "100%" rule, but for the sake of argument and efficiency (I do have reasons for leaving out dud torpedos, but let's leave that until another discussion) accept a 90% level of play. Review my numbers above and you will see I'm not losing 10% but am losing 95%. I'm credited with about 1,900 official tons for a total of about 30,000 actual tons put down. That's what prompts the question. I'd have no trouble understanding a deduction of even more than 10% ("no dud torpedos" would reduce reality maybe 35% since perhaps 40% of them actually failed), but have trouble understanding a reduction of 95% or so.
Have queried Herr Teddy Bar and he I believe is as curious as am I. Must be some modification I made to the program (there are lots) to screw up some code. But again, I wonder where the line of programming code resides that controls this. Would like to look at it. Anybody know?
Thanks for the reply.

01-08-07, 05:18 PM	#1
Archive1 Captain Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Washington State south of Tacoma Posts: 494 Downloads: 26 Uploads: 0	NYGM tonnage calculations Am using the latest NYGM Tonnage War v 2.2 but the tonnages assigned to me after a patrol are less than 10% of the actual tonnage sunk. For example: have about 28,000 T after 6 patrols in a type II, not super but OK, however NYGM has assigned me only 1,900 T. Am operating at 90% reality - all selected but duds (I know realists will object, but accept it for now) - and all sinkings have been righteous (all identified before sinking as British merchants, tankers, etc. - that is, no neutrals or hospital ships). Where in the code and how does NYGM calculate tonnage for a given Kaleun? I accept that a reduction from 100% would follow from my deselection of duds, but a reduction of 95% seems excessive.

01-08-07, 06:35 PM	#2
Corsair Ace of the Deep Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Toulouse France Posts: 1,140 Downloads: 51 Uploads: 0	Strange never had that ... __________________ NYGM 3.4A / Living SH3 V5.1 + SH3 Commander

01-08-07, 10:40 PM	#3
Archive1 Captain Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Washington State south of Tacoma Posts: 494 Downloads: 26 Uploads: 0	Corsair: Actually it's not the first time I've had this occur. But what I really would like to know is where is the controlling code located? I've done some programming and I'd like to look at the code. Maybe a question for Teddy Baer who has done much of the NYGM v2.2 development. Maybe should go to the Wolves at War site and submit the question. Thanks for the response.

01-09-07, 08:01 AM	#5
codmander Seasoned Skipper Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: cape cod mass. Posts: 678 Downloads: 59 Uploads: 0	to make sure check your 'K' key for sinking than save the game at that point

01-10-07, 06:27 PM	#6
Archive1 Captain Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Washington State south of Tacoma Posts: 494 Downloads: 26 Uploads: 0	Corsair: Yes I understand the tonnage v renown difference, but it was interesting that when I went to upgrade from a Type IID to a Type VIIB, I got the "Not enough experience message." This after six patrols and about 30,000 tons of shipping sunk. Maybe wrong, but I put it down as a result of only having about 1,900 'official' tons; that would obviously make one "inexperienced". I could be wrong about that but it did seem that NYGM was in fact using the tonnage for at least that decision point. Am going to try a dig further. As I said, maybe Teddy Baer can address the issue if I can find his email address. I try to keep questions like this en clair so everyone can benefit from answers, but maybe a private message to him will work, followed by a repost. Will try and keep you abreast. Thanks for the response. Codman: I didn't quite understand your message about the K key and tonnage. It seemed the message may have been truncated, maybe it's only my mind that's truncated. Appreciate the response.

01-12-07, 01:15 AM	#8
Archive1 Captain Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Washington State south of Tacoma Posts: 494 Downloads: 26 Uploads: 0	Ducimus: I understand the "100%" rule, but for the sake of argument and efficiency (I do have reasons for leaving out dud torpedos, but let's leave that until another discussion) accept a 90% level of play. Review my numbers above and you will see I'm not losing 10% but am losing 95%. I'm credited with about 1,900 official tons for a total of about 30,000 actual tons put down. That's what prompts the question. I'd have no trouble understanding a deduction of even more than 10% ("no dud torpedos" would reduce reality maybe 35% since perhaps 40% of them actually failed), but have trouble understanding a reduction of 95% or so. Have queried Herr Teddy Bar and he I believe is as curious as am I. Must be some modification I made to the program (there are lots) to screw up some code. But again, I wonder where the line of programming code resides that controls this. Would like to look at it. Anybody know? Thanks for the reply.