[TEC] SH5.exe patches to fix bugs and add functionality

[TheDarkWraith]

Originally Posted by gap

Since we are at it, have you checked the relation between engine RPMs and their maximum theoretical speed in game?

The knots / RPM gradient calculated by me should be about 0.0357-0.0375 for surface propulsion (both diesel and electric) and 0.0262-0.0280 for submerged propulsion. Most silent propulsion @ ca. 90 RPM.

See the following posts by me for further detail and info sources:

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/show...postcount=1672
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/show...postcount=1677
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/show...postcount=1683





Do you need airbases to have sensors attached? Did I get you correctly? If so, can't you simply assign the needed sensors to them?

v1.0.124.0 released. See post #1

Starting with v1.0.124.0 Added a new patch to the SH5.exe, SHSim.exe, and SimData.dll: Electric engine properties. This patch will add a new section to the sub's .cfg files named [ElectricEngineProperties]. It allows you to define the engine ratios for the electric engines. See the Notes= of the patch for more info and an example.


@gap - this will allow you to test your graphs and/or develop the correct electric engine ratios now

For the airbases I will be looking into them in depth tomorrow to see what their capabilities are and whether they can use sensors or not.

[Sartoris]

Great to see another update!

@TDW:

As always, apologies if this has been discussed before.

Is there any chance that the randomized distance reported in the message box could be replaced with the words "long", "medium distance", "short distance" (or whatever the proper terminology might be)? The randomized number is a great idea, but is there perhaps a chance you might be able to make the sighting report more similar to the one from SH3/4?

[THE_MASK]

At least now , some aircraft carriers placed strategically in some enemy ports will give better defence .

[gap]

Originally Posted by TheDarkWraith

@gap - this will allow you to test your graphs and/or develop the correct electric engine ratios now

There is not much space for conjecturing over engine ratios. They can be desumed directly from the sources that my graphs were based on (i.e. Admiralty measures carried on captured VIIC U-boat, and Kriegsmarine VIIC's manual). As it is natural, they report slightly different figures, but what matters is that if not identical, their numbers are fairly compatible with each other:

DIESEL PROPULSION	       RPM RATIO
________________________________________________________
		German		British		Average
SPEED ORDER	source		source
________________________________________________________
AheadSlow	 0.37		 0.33		 0.35
AheadOneThird	 0.57		 0.54		 0.56
AheadStandard	 0.71		 0.64		 0.68
AheadFull	 0.91		 0.97		 0.94
AheadFlank	 0.98		 1.00		 0.99
BackSlow	-0.37		  -		-0.37
BackStandard	-0.43		  -		-0.43
BackFull	-0.52		  -		-0.52
BackEmergency	-0.82		  -		-0.82


ELECTRIC PROPULSION	       RPM RATIO
________________________________________________________
		German		British		Average
SPEED ORDER	source		source
________________________________________________________
AheadSlow	 0.18		 0.20		 0.19
AheadOneThird	 0.37		 0.37		 0.37
AheadStandard	 0.53		 0.53		 0.53
AheadFull	 0.83		 0.78		 0.81
AheadFlank	 0.95		 0.93		 0.94
BackSlow	-0.18		  -		-0.18
BackStandard	-0.37		  -		-0.37
BackFull	-0.53		  -		-0.53
BackEmergency	-0.83		  -		-0.83

The above ratios were calculated over the RPMs reported for each speed order by the said sources, considering the maximum theoretical load for diesel and the electric propulsion equal to 485 and 300 RPM respectively. Indeed, we can discuss on which source must be considered more reliable, and on the correctness of the maximum loads I have used as reference. On this subject, the german document states 470, 480 and 490 RPMs respectively as "full load", "overload" and "maximum load", whereas no explicit mention is made about maximum electric load.

Knots / RPM gradients interpolated over data reported by each source are summarized below:

DIESEL
PROPULSION	    KNOTS/RPM RATIO
________________________________________
		German		British	
Condition	source		source
________________________________________
Condition "A"	0.0374
Condition "B"	0.0366			
Calm weather			0.0357


ELECTRIC
PROPULSION	    KNOTS/RPM RATIO
________________________________________
		German		British	
Condition	source		source
________________________________________
surfaced	0.0375
submerged	0.0280		0.0262

As you can see, in general performances desumed from the German manual tend to be slightly better than the ones stated in the British report, so it is probable that they refer to new hulls / engines, while it is sure that British data are based on "old" boats.

[volodya61]

Originally Posted by gap

DIESEL PROPULSION RPM RATIO
.....
ELECTRIC PROPULSION RPM RATIO
.....

Thanks for this Gabriele

Can I use this data to modified my edited u-boats .cfg files? is it true?

(honestly, I'm already doing it right now , just wanted to say thanks )

[gap]

Originally Posted by volodya61

Can I use this data to modified my edited u-boats .cfg files? is it true?

Of course it is. Have I ever given you wrong information?

[volodya61]

Originally Posted by gap

Of course it is. Have I ever given you wrong information?

Let me think a little
No, so far.. but everything someday happens for the first time

[SU-33UB]

hoi do i need all previous TDW patchers ??

[volodya61]

Originally Posted by SU-33UB

hoi do i need all previous TDW patchers ??

No.. just download last version and enable patches you want.. all the patches are there, within the last version

[volodya61]

Hi TDW

Thanks for the new version..
And there is RUS manual for the next version - http://www.4sync.com/archive/FAuQqCH...l_RUS__10.html

[TheDarkWraith]

Originally Posted by gap

Since we are at it, have you checked the relation between engine RPMs and their maximum theoretical speed in game?

Do you need airbases to have sensors attached? Did I get you correctly? If so, can't you simply assign the needed sensors to them?

I located the function that takes ordered speed and calculates the sub's speed. It's some kind of formula that doesn't look familiar to me at all. The numbers being used look very strange

Yes it's a very simple measure to add sensors to them via their .sns file. The question is will the game recognize them? There are many strange things coded in SH5, this could be one of them. I tracked down why the type 500 units (subnets and minefields) aren't recognized by the game and it's because the game doesn't store a list of them (the devs coded it so the game reads the files in but does nothing with them). That is why the mission editor says platform x not found in platforms library

[gap]

Originally Posted by TheDarkWraith

I located the function that takes ordered speed and calculates the sub's speed. It's some kind of formula that doesn't look familiar to me at all. The numbers being used look very strange

can you report it here?

Originally Posted by TheDarkWraith

Yes it's a very simple measure to add sensors to them via their .sns file. The question is will the game recognize them? There are many strange things coded in SH5, this could be one of them.

Let's hope not

[TheDarkWraith]

I setup a single mission with an airbase, one victory cargo, and one VIIC sub (me). Hit a bookmark in the code where it iterates over all the units in the game. I was thrilled to see that the there were 3 units in the list (all 3 I had defined in the single mission) and upon investigating the second one (the airbase) I saw it was missing a pointer in one of it's memory addresses (it's a pointer to a type of Commanders controller). Without this pointer it will never use any sensors it has (any of them defined in the .sns file) and it will probably never fire any weapons given to it in it's .eqp file because this controller is missing (this controller is responsible for detecting contacts). I opened up it's .dat file and sure enough there is no commander controller specified in the .dat file. That explains why this pointer is missing

I let the game continue running till it hit the bookmark for checking for airstrikes. This is where I'm at currently and seeing if I can make the airbase spawn aircraft based on units in the area within a certain radius of the airbase having a contact. If the unit within the radius of the airbase has a contact then I'm going to try and make the airbase spawn a unit to investigate the contact.

[gap]

Originally Posted by TheDarkWraith

...I opened up it's .dat file and sure enough there is no commander controller specified in the .dat file. That explains why this pointer is missing

Have you tried giving the airbase an unit_CostalDefense controller in its sim file?

[TheDarkWraith]

Originally Posted by gap

Have you tried giving the airbase an unit_CostalDefense controller in its sim file?

No need to. That would just eat up memory (think how many airbases are defined in the game ) and there is a LOT of memory eaten up by each commanders controller (over 200 bytes each + bytes for the support stuff it creates)

I've come up with a clever solution! When the game checks for airstrikes it iterates over all the units and finds those units with airgroups defined. Every unit it finds that has an airgroup is added to a list. Then that list is iterated over and each item of that list is checked to every unit in the game:
- comparing sides
- comparing distances between them
If they meet the parameters then the game unit is added to the unit with airgroup's defined list of units to do airstrike against.

Then the unit with airgroup list of unit's to do airstrikes against is iterated over and airstrikes commence.

I'm inserting some code in here that will check to see if unit with airgroup is an airbase. If so then each game unit to commence airstrike on will be checked against all units in game to see if any of them have this unit as a contact. If so then each one will be checked to see if it radioed about it's contact (random number). If the game finds it did radio about it's contact then an airstrike will commence on the unit (plane(s) will be spawned from the airbase and given the waypoint of the unit). If not then the normal airstrike will be done (which spawns a unit in a random location around the contact and gives it random waypoints). Elegant, simple, and brilliant if I do say so myself