![]() |
SUBSIM: The Web's #1 resource for all submarine & naval simulations since 1997 |
![]() |
#16 |
Neptune's daughter
![]() Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 325
Downloads: 164
Uploads: 0
|
![]()
If you haven't seen it Neal & Dev's I've made a post in the Wolfpack forum that shows the video and two screenshots of the problem.
td;lr The torpedo is hitting about 60m aft of the aiming point, on short targets this means it will pass behind them when you shoot with the periscope at midships on the target. Larger targets it will clip the rudder / stern. This is due to the excessive run before turn that in my example resulted in the torpedo running so far ahead of my ship, that it had to do a 130 degree turn and CHASE the target, despite my firing it when the target ship was at my 060 bearing. I've been led to believe that the historical figure for the run before gyro turn was SIGNIFICANTLY shorter, and even shorter than you had previously coded (a mere 10m or so) although it's turn radius was much larger than the 45m you have right now. Either way, the extreme run before turn has broken several historical shooting methods, and this combined with the fact that: a) The devs didn't put this out on the BETA branch, thus allowing us to 'roll back' to a known better version of 0.17c, and b) The devs being away and probably not able to address this for at least a month, means that unless you're shooting at close to zero gyro angles, then this is unplayable unless you 'guesstimate' how much lead you need to add to the periscope before you fire. I also have a video showing me engaging a target at 2600m and again, firing at midships, and the torpedo JUST clipped the rudder, despite having everything set exactly correct (due to using training solution on to verify). This again proves that even long shots at around 45 gryo angle incur this parallax problem. Hope this info helps and we can get this resolved as quickly as possible when the devs return, whenever that will be. But really, they shouldn't push the update to mainline right away - it should have gone to BETA for a week or two's testing first. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#17 |
Swabbie
![]() Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 7
Downloads: 9
Uploads: 0
|
![]()
How do you revert to 0.17C, or 0.18?
The 0.18A update broken the time system for me, slowing down current time, and timer, when going into the map. It seems though not to slow down the physics, such as speed and travel-distance. Or maybe this is not a bug? A new feature I have not learned? |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#18 |
Neptune's daughter
![]() Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 325
Downloads: 164
Uploads: 0
|
![]()
You don’t. Devs should have using the beta branch for the latest releases but they stopped doing that after the first update.
It has just been patched, despite them being on holiday - so pick up 0.18a on mainline. *thanks devs* ![]() However still weird things visible in the training mission but this has been *mostly* fixed. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#19 | |
Mate
![]() |
![]() Quote:
I'm still researching it but at this time I'm fairly convinced that this negatively affects ship speed calculation because the objects in the game world move in "real time", not in "game timer time". I only get accurate speed readings with a real-life stopwatch, as verified by a non-timer-dependent method (running parallel and matching speed) and through various experimentation. I'm finishing collecting data and will post a formal bug report in the next few days if it's not fixed by then. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#20 |
Gefallen Engel U-666
|
![]()
Vantskruv!
![]()
__________________
"Only two things are infinite; The Universe and human squirrelyness?!! |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#21 |
Swabbie
![]() Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 7
Downloads: 9
Uploads: 0
|
![]()
@gurudennis
Nice I am not the only one. I was quite worried when no one replied here or on discord. ![]() Currently the devs have vacation so I guess a couple of weeks or so for the bugfix. Though I have been, as you, made timing with an external device, but it is hard to make time-plotting, but I have not used that technique as of yet. @Aktungbby Thanks! ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|