Sensors

[makman94]

Originally Posted by h.sie

@makman: I'll give you the fix as soon as it is done, maybe 1-7 days.

The randomization works as follows (with some simplifications to make my description easier):

On a regulary basis, let's say every second, the detection probability p for a (currently undetected) object (in sensor range) is calcutated, based on the distance and environment parameters. Lets assume, it's dark and the distance is 15km and thus we get something like p = 0.000005.

Now, every second, a random number r between 0.0 and 1.0 is created. If r is smaller than p = 0.000005, then the ship is detected (and p is automatically set to a very high value, because detection probability for an already detected object is very high, of course).

According to the randomness, the moment when r < p occurs (detection), can happen at a distance of 15km, but it can also happen at 3km. But it is very unlikely at 15km and becomes more likely, the smaller the distance is.

I agree with you that the influence of the random numbers on detection is unrealistically strong. I would expect a smaller distribution of detection ranges than the game simulates.

I offer to work on an hardcode fix that does the following:

1) reduce influence of randomness on detection

2) make crew visual sensors (also periscops?) more blind at night

just make something 'clear' for me H.Sie,
is the tool we are talking about(for the tests) TOTALLY ELIMINATE the propability ?
if not....can you make one that TOTALLY eliminate the propability ? this is the best (outopic) for checking adjusting values . we need a tool that our crew will spot ALWAYS at SAME distance the target if we change nothing at parameters.

[reaper7]

Originally Posted by h.sie

@makman: I'll give you the fix as soon as it is done, maybe 1-7 days.

The randomization works as follows (with some simplifications to make my description easier):

On a regulary basis, let's say every second, the detection probability p for a (currently undetected) object (in sensor range) is calcutated, based on the distance and environment parameters. Lets assume, it's dark and the distance is 15km and thus we get something like p = 0.000005.

Now, every second, a random number r between 0.0 and 1.0 is created. If r is smaller than p = 0.000005, then the ship is detected (and p is automatically set to a very high value, because detection probability for an already detected object is very high, of course).

According to the randomness, the moment when r < p occurs (detection), can happen at a distance of 15km, but it can also happen at 3km. But it is very unlikely at 15km and becomes more likely, the smaller the distance and the higher p is.

I agree with you that the influence of the random numbers on detection is unrealistically strong. I would expect a smaller distribution of detection ranges than the game gives us.

I offer to work on an hardcode fix that does the following:

1) reduce influence of randomness on detection range

2) make crew visual sensors (question: also periscopes?) more blind at night

Well worked out h.sie, that explains the changes in memory variable I was seeing.

Originally Posted by makman94

just make something 'clear' for me H.Sie,
is the tool we are talking about(for the tests) TOTALLY ELIMINATE the propability ?
if not....can you make one that TOTALLY eliminate the propability ? this is the best (outopic) for checking adjusting values . we need a tool that our crew will spot ALWAYS at SAME distance the target if we change nothing at parameters.

I think what H.sie is suggesting would be better than totally eliminating randomness, to reduce it to very small amount. (currently to large a random variance)

So during a dark night your crew in stock (Made up figures) could detect a contact anywhere between 1000M and 5000M.
With a reduced randomness that could be changed from 1000M to 1500M.
Whereas if eliminated altogether they would always detect at 1000M.

That small random figure would make for more realistic human observation and not be to robotic in nature.

[makman94]

Originally Posted by reaper7

....
That small random figure would make for more realistic human observation and not be to robotic in nature.

i am talking for the tool that we will use at developing the mod John !
of course the randomness will be getted back AFTER the completion of mod !
i agree with you that we need some little randomness for realistic purposes BUT we don't need it for testing purposes.

[reaper7]

Originally Posted by makman94

i am talking for the tool that we will use at developing the mod John !
of course the randomness will be getted back AFTER the completion of mod !
i agree with you that we need some little randomness for realistic purposes BUT we don't need it for testing purposes.

Got ya, yes for a test tool it should be set for 0 to help with the environmental setup.

@h.sie In your testing have you seen a way to set the Initial detection range or can you set a certain range to yield a very high probability factor.
Eg to set anything from 1000M to 0M to very high and any thing from 1001M up to low probability.
In order to get past the stock detection range.

[h.sie]

@makman:

- yes, totally elimination of randomness for testing purposes).
- and reduction of randomness for final mod.

@reaper:

- Currently I can only use the detection probability p as a trigger for detection. Say, if p > 0.01, a ship is detectd. This always happens at the same distance, when I eliminate randomness.

[makman94]

Originally Posted by h.sie

@makman: yes, totally emimination of randomness (for testing purposes).

...PERFECT !!!
whenever you are ready !!

[Rubini]

Bump!

Any news at night visual sensors issue hard fix?
I will reinstall my tools and modded Sh3 on my new PC this weekend (after some months away from sh3) and this is the most important issue that is not yet fixed, IMHO.
I will have some free time and will be happy to test/help on this fix.

Salute mates!