RAOBF

[toniloCoyote]

Does Paint.net features Vectors or is it only for bitmaps?

(I'll send you the final list in a few minutes).

[Trevally.]

Paint.net is bitmap.

[toniloCoyote]

But, doing it with a bitmap editor can be a nightmare, and it's too difficult to achieve accuracy, isn't?

[toniloCoyote]

@ Trevally:

I have already finished the dimensions list and you can download it from here:

http://www.FileFront.com/17763032/To...om_3D_v1-0.zip


Inside the zip there are the listing in Excel (.xls) format and in RTF format (open with Wordpad).

There are 11 ships which have a value of 0 in field "draught" (in their .sim files), so their calculated Draft values (and therefore the Mast Height values) may not be correct.
The procedure I followed is the one I have explained before:


For each boat:

1 - Open its 3D model file (.GR2) in "Granny Viewer" program.
2 - Enable Measurement Axis and note the length and height of the model.
3 - Open its .SIM file in Goblin Editor.
4 - Note the value "Draught" in Hydro-Surfaced category.
5 - For those boats which have this value to 0, open the model in Granny Viewer, enable Origin Grids and count the meters (grid lines) ranging from the bottom of the model to the Origin point.
6 - Calculated "Mast Height" value is obtained from the formula (MastHeight = HeightOf3DModel - ValueOfDraughtField).


Point 5 could be done otherwise, that is, by using the "draft" value from the .CFG file of these vessels.
The reasons to do it as I am doing are:

1- The help for "draught" field states:
"The object's Draught [m]. If 0, Then it is taken from the object's global position."
With 3D models, the Origin Point is like the handle of the model. Whenever you give the position of a 3D model what sits there is the Origin Point. Also, when you open the ship's model in Goblin Editor, you can see that the origin point (where the red and green lines intersect) is always located at the height of what appears to be the ship's waterline. When building a mission, you write 0 for ship's altitude, which is the altitude of water level. Thus, it is not unreasonable to think that SH5 places the origin point of the boat at the water level altitude.

2 - The "draft" values in .CFG files seem to be very wrong, according to tests I've done. (Inside the Excel file there is a sheet called "Estimated Drafts" where I recorded these values and the differences with the origin point.)


The fact is that I am not happy with the results for these vessels which have 0 in their "Draught" fields. For many tests I've done, launching torpedoes, I could not check their level of accuracy.

I have to come up with some better method to check it. Launching torpedoes give changing and inaccurate results.

(I hope don't goof too much due to my bad English, sorry).

[Trevally.]

You have done a fantastic job ToniloCoyote

I am having some problems with the 5.71 marker to 10.
In this pic I am 1 pixel short of the 5.71



I had to move the 20 marker to thr right by 6 pixels.
The aob does not now look correct.

I thought that my last set were closer. Perhaps I should move the 20 marker back. the finder shows it should be 24 clicks at this range. That is 6 pixels short.

[toniloCoyote]

I would like to help you, Trevally, but I don't know how.

I've been so embedded in my own task that I'm feeling now lost in yours.
I hope you're not doing the work by stretching and narrowing bitmaps, right?

Can I help in any way?

[makman94]

@ ToniloCoyote : yes, for the ships that have 0 at their .sims the

"The object's Draught [m]. If 0, Then it is taken from the object's global position."

is the answer to what must be done. with some method must count the distance between the origin node of ship's hull ( coordinates for this node are always 0,0,0) and its keel . i can tell you how i did it for sh3 but the programm i used is not working with sh5 .the programm is called misfit (thanks to Privateer ). with misfit it is a piece of cake to take these measurments ...i know that this is not so helpful for sh5 but what i am saying is that this distance must be measured.

@ Trevally :

you are going just fine ! just make your '10' at vertical scale to match EXACTLY with 5,71 (not close to it...make it to match exactly) and then MAKE THE HORIZONTAL TO BE EXACTLY THE SAME WITH THE VERTICAL SCALE.

about your last pic: i see that the tool is now working great ! why i am saying this? becuase ,i hope that you understand that if your true range to target was 1030m (and not 1000) the tool will show the correct aob ...right ?

have in mind this: at aob(s) close to 90....the degrees are very close each other (damn...english are not helping me here) so just a slight 'wrong' more or less at inner ring's rotation will be some(or many) degrees off ....and ,also ,add to this some light inaccuracies for the tool itself and you will understand that your tool is going now...just fine !
the aob rings are more usefull for angles not close to 90 degrees (see the space between 25 to 30 degrees and compare it with the space between 80 to 85 degrees).
but ,most of all ,i believe that at your example (last pic you showed) it was your true range to target that causes this,i am saying it again, light 'mistake' on aob rings.

i run the test mission and here is what i got (i have given the correct value to mast at ship's cfg e.g 47,92 and i used the stadimeter to get the range .note: i used the higher zoom when i used the stadimeter in order to get the more precise ,as possible, range reading.then i switched to minimum zoom and the rest is at the following pic) :

[Trevally.]

about your last pic: i see that the tool is now working great ! why i am saying this? becuase ,i hope that you understand that if your true range to target was 1030m (and not 1000) the tool will show the correct aob ...right ?

no I had not thought of that. Of course it now makes sense
And this is the very reason to set the scales to the 5.71

Thanks again Makman for your continuing help.

I hope you're not doing the work by stretching and narrowing bitmaps, right?

No ToniloCoyote I am drawing a new one each tiime or inserting extra pixels All the lines drawn are 1 pixel size.

I am going to push on today and draw all the scales for emtguf scopes at the different ratios

[Gauthier]

Hello,

is it possible, as mentioned elsewhere, to use the UI change color function to change the crosshair color?

Keep up the good work!

[TheDarkWraith]

Originally Posted by Gauthier

Hello,

is it possible, as mentioned elsewhere, to use the UI change color function to change the crosshair color?

Keep up the good work!

If you're talking about the crosshairs of the RAOBF I added that starting in v6.3.0 patch 1 of the UIs mod IF you're not talking about that but rather talking about the scope crosshairs themselves then no, they can't be changed because the game hard code controls them.

[Gauthier]

Originally Posted by TheDarkWraith

If you're talking about the crosshairs of the RAOBF I added that starting in v6.3.0 patch 1 of the UIs mod IF you're not talking about that but rather talking about the scope crosshairs themselves then no, they can't be changed because the game hard code controls them.

I was talking about aob crosshair. Tks

[Trevally.]

Screen size 8:5 is finished.

Here is pic 16:9

http://img10.imageshack.us/img10/918...0108152139.png

[TheDarkWraith]

Originally Posted by Trevally.

Screen size 8:5 is finished.

Here is pic 16:9

http://img10.imageshack.us/img10/918...0108152139.png

Threre's only one problem I see. According to makman once you have the vertical scale set to 5.71 you just copy the vertical scale to the horizontal scale....or am I reading what he wrote as wrong

[toniloCoyote]

@ Trevally:

OK. I just wanted to understand what you were doing. I imagine the task you have in hand must be daunting and, at this point, you must have already filled with grids your head.
What I pointed out is that these tweaks are much easier to do (up to 20:1) with vector programs than with bitmap editors and, as I do not know exactly how you're doing it, I do not know either how I could help you. If I can do, let me know it.

(Congratulation, I just read your last post).

@ Makman:

Thanks for the confirmation. That's how I've done (for boats with Draught = 0) in the list I posted in the thread, but I'm not happy because of 2 reasons:

1- The measurement from the point of origin to the bottom of the keel have been obtained by counting the lines of a grid, but I would like that these measures should be as accurate as with the other boats.

2- Although the inaccuracy of these measures (always for vessels with draught = 0 only) are, possibly, only of decimals, and even though you've confirmed that my assumption about the origin point is correct, I should like to confirm this irrefutably.


The impediments to clear those doubts are:

1 - Ubisoft has adopted the Granny format (.GR2) for SH5 3D Engine. The creators of this format (RAD Game Tools, Inc.) boast of the closed and unwavering that this format is (and they dumped that on its price). Despite this, there are some guys (gr2decode.altervista.org) that have managed to make an importer / exporter, but it is for 3DS max v.8 only, and I work with 3DS max v.2010.
Even so, I have all the libraries needed to develop an importer for 3DS max 2010, but I don't know if I'll embark myself on this task. This would solve many things, including the reason #1 above.

2 - I've been trying to verify the accuracy of these draft measurements by launching torpedoes at different depths, but the results are intermittent, so you can not trust them.
I think the best way would be to build a floating rule (with measures above and below water level), as if it were a boat for SH5 or as part of a scenario.
Thus, you could put a ship next to the floating rule, and measure its actual (as in SH5's world) draft, mast height, etc... Imagine it, you look through the periscope and see a boat and, next to it, floating, a rule. But to do this it firstly would require to develop the importer / exporter for 3ds max.


For all above, I would like that if anyone knows a faster way to assess the validity of these measures (at least for vessels with Draught = 0), they let me know.

(Note: The link to the final list of measures is in post # 124)

[toniloCoyote]

@ TheDarkWraith:

Although for me it's more comfortable that the two scales are equal, I think that, while one is exactly twice the other, is only a matter of adding versus calculating the average.

Am I wrong?