LuftWolf and Amizaur's Weapons and Sensors Realism Mod - Page 34

Deathblow · 10-30-05, 02:03 PM

Ran more testing with a default depth shallower. Sub still bottomed out. I agree, it just might be that that subs can't make the turn without loosing that much depth.... :hmm:

Maybe the solution is to change the mass the AI subs, so that they won't dip when turning...

Makes it hard to simulate a littoral combat environment when the AI captains don't even know how to drive their boats.

LuftWolf · 10-30-05, 02:11 PM

Or the mission designers could set the depth of their AI subs shallower... perhaps no less than 30-40ft off of the bottom, except when absolutely necessary.

LuftWolf · 10-30-05, 02:52 PM

Hey guys, we can change the acceleration of the subs and FFG by altering the drag value for each platform.

What do you guys think?

Deathblow · 10-30-05, 03:02 PM

I always thought that the acceleration/deceleration curves in the game were a bit too steep. Sounds like a good idea to me.

Only thing to worry is if the drag increase will make the ships stop even quicker than they do now. It would be asymetrical if the ships took 2minutes to reach speed, but only 20seconds to go from top speed to standstill.

What about prop efficiency in the thrust dialog menu... does that influence acceleration?

LuftWolf · 10-30-05, 03:28 PM

None of the thrust values seem to effect acceleration and deceleration... but we can do it with the object masses, I believe.

:|\

Deathblow · 10-30-05, 03:34 PM

Interesting... :hmm:

as a simple test perhaps increasing the mass of the ships by a factor of 10 to see how they respond. Would also make the math easier because I think that massess the game uses now are derived from RL stats.

EDIT: but then again 10x might be overkill.... :hmm:

Mau · 10-30-05, 03:37 PM

Well again an OHP should no loose than 6-7 knots on a hard turn at 30 knots. So we have to change it for the best not for the worst. If we add drag.....
Propeller yes should be a better avenue, but you guys are the expert in changing things...

LuftWolf · 10-30-05, 03:38 PM

We have to do it with mass, it looks like. About 3x appears to be sufficient, but we'll have to be very very careful with this and do a lot of testing for each individual platform, AI and playable.

Quote:

Well again an OHP should no loose than 6-7 knots on a hard turn at 30 knots.

I don't understand, I'm sorry. Can you clarify that?

Mau · 10-30-05, 03:48 PM

I put a post a bit earlier this week in that regards.

When you have the OHP making a hard turn at 30 knots now, the ship is slowing down up to 9 knots. This is unrealistic.
In a modern frigate when we are conducting a hard turn (30 degrees rudder) and we do a complete donut, (circle) the max we will loose will be 5 knots (so 30 knots to 25 knots)
With a single shaft OHP, we should not loose more than 6-7 kts (so passing from 30 kts to no less than 23 kts.
By this than a Torpedo Counter Measure manoeuvre wold than be more possible.

LuftWolf · 10-30-05, 03:54 PM

3kts...

I have to be honest, that doesn't sound like a big deal.... but then again, I'm not a FFG driver usually, so I have to take what you say seriously.

We'll definately look at it as part of the fix to the submarine acceleration/mass.

Thanks for bringing it up for us!

LuftWolf · 10-30-05, 04:27 PM

Ok, I think I have to call off the mass-acceleration fix, unless you want flying SW's followed by minutes worth of occilation.

Sorry... I (and many others) tried and failed. SCS, you're our only hope.

LuftWolf · 10-31-05, 09:39 PM

Molon,

I owe you an appology. Apparently, there is a randomized factor in the anti-missile behavior of the AEGIS ships. In testing the new CIWSAttack doctrine with the comments in a neater order, I noticed that sometimes the aegis ships do wait until they get posID before firing. This occurs in all missions run until I exit the game to desktop and reload it. And then, when I get a load where the ships engage at range, they do this for every mission I load until I exit the game again. This is most likely due to a the random seed generator used in the engine.

I can't believe I never saw this before, as I tested the doctrine many many times. So, the answer to our dilemna is that we were both right, and sometimes the ships wait and sometimes they don't.

I'm not entirely sure how I feel about this, but a little bit of randomness is ok I suppose, but it would be nice to have some control over it.

In any case, I'm sorry that I thought it had something to do with a difference in our testing procedures, I really should have seen this before, I can't believe I didn't.

Cheers,
David

LuftWolf · 10-31-05, 10:05 PM

On second thought, it may have something to do with a random error in reading the CIWSAttack doctrine... I had a comment in a bad location and it may cause the error sometimes, but then I moved the comment to an even worse place and it caused the posID very very often, much more than with the other doctrine. I think once I lock down the right place to put it (it's only because I'm an idiot) it should work the way it was designed all the time.

However, my apology still applies... it's probably my fault.

Amizaur · 10-31-05, 10:23 PM

Just add debugout comments everywhere in important places of doctrine and then with DbgView you would know EXACTLY what happens in doctrine, what is stateof all variables ect. The ship is NOT doing anythng "on it's own", if there is an order to fire it comes from the doctrine, if there is order to wait for ID it have to come from doctrine too. Analyze the doctrine and you'll know if there is ID needed or not. I don't know at the moment, haven't analyzed it about ID.

LuftWolf · 10-31-05, 10:25 PM

Amizaur, exact same doctrine and exact same test scenarios, sometimes the ship wait and sometimes they don't.

I really don't know what's going on... even with the best version I could come up with for the doctrine, it's still happening sometime and not others.

There must be some random factor in the ship engagement routines based on the seed number.

10-30-05, 02:11 PM	#497
LuftWolf Ocean Warrior Join Date: May 2005 Location: Free New York Posts: 3,167 Downloads: 2 Uploads: 0	Or the mission designers could set the depth of their AI subs shallower... perhaps no less than 30-40ft off of the bottom, except when absolutely necessary. __________________ LW

10-30-05, 02:52 PM	#498
LuftWolf Ocean Warrior Join Date: May 2005 Location: Free New York Posts: 3,167 Downloads: 2 Uploads: 0	Hey guys, we can change the acceleration of the subs and FFG by altering the drag value for each platform. What do you guys think? __________________ LW

10-30-05, 03:28 PM	#500
LuftWolf Ocean Warrior Join Date: May 2005 Location: Free New York Posts: 3,167 Downloads: 2 Uploads: 0	None of the thrust values seem to effect acceleration and deceleration... but we can do it with the object masses, I believe. :\|\ __________________ LW

10-30-05, 03:54 PM	#505
LuftWolf Ocean Warrior Join Date: May 2005 Location: Free New York Posts: 3,167 Downloads: 2 Uploads: 0	3kts... I have to be honest, that doesn't sound like a big deal.... but then again, I'm not a FFG driver usually, so I have to take what you say seriously. We'll definately look at it as part of the fix to the submarine acceleration/mass. Thanks for bringing it up for us! __________________ LW

10-30-05, 04:27 PM	#506
LuftWolf Ocean Warrior Join Date: May 2005 Location: Free New York Posts: 3,167 Downloads: 2 Uploads: 0	Ok, I think I have to call off the mass-acceleration fix, unless you want flying SW's followed by minutes worth of occilation. Sorry... I (and many others) tried and failed. SCS, you're our only hope. __________________ LW

10-30-05, 02:03 PM	#496
Deathblow Captain Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 518 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	Ran more testing with a default depth shallower. Sub still bottomed out. I agree, it just might be that that subs can't make the turn without loosing that much depth.... :hmm: Maybe the solution is to change the mass the AI subs, so that they won't dip when turning... Makes it hard to simulate a littoral combat environment when the AI captains don't even know how to drive their boats.

10-30-05, 03:02 PM	#499
Deathblow Captain Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 518 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	I always thought that the acceleration/deceleration curves in the game were a bit too steep. Sounds like a good idea to me. Only thing to worry is if the drag increase will make the ships stop even quicker than they do now. It would be asymetrical if the ships took 2minutes to reach speed, but only 20seconds to go from top speed to standstill. What about prop efficiency in the thrust dialog menu... does that influence acceleration?

10-30-05, 03:34 PM	#501
Deathblow Captain Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 518 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	Interesting... :hmm: as a simple test perhaps increasing the mass of the ships by a factor of 10 to see how they respond. Would also make the math easier because I think that massess the game uses now are derived from RL stats. EDIT: but then again 10x might be overkill.... :hmm:

10-30-05, 03:37 PM	#502
Mau Sonar Guy Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 382 Downloads: 3 Uploads: 0	Well again an OHP should no loose than 6-7 knots on a hard turn at 30 knots. So we have to change it for the best not for the worst. If we add drag..... Propeller yes should be a better avenue, but you guys are the expert in changing things...

10-30-05, 03:48 PM	#504
Mau Sonar Guy Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 382 Downloads: 3 Uploads: 0	I put a post a bit earlier this week in that regards. When you have the OHP making a hard turn at 30 knots now, the ship is slowing down up to 9 knots. This is unrealistic. In a modern frigate when we are conducting a hard turn (30 degrees rudder) and we do a complete donut, (circle) the max we will loose will be 5 knots (so 30 knots to 25 knots) With a single shaft OHP, we should not loose more than 6-7 kts (so passing from 30 kts to no less than 23 kts. By this than a Torpedo Counter Measure manoeuvre wold than be more possible.

10-31-05, 09:39 PM	#507
LuftWolf Ocean Warrior Join Date: May 2005 Location: Free New York Posts: 3,167 Downloads: 2 Uploads: 0	Molon, I owe you an appology. Apparently, there is a randomized factor in the anti-missile behavior of the AEGIS ships. In testing the new CIWSAttack doctrine with the comments in a neater order, I noticed that sometimes the aegis ships do wait until they get posID before firing. This occurs in all missions run until I exit the game to desktop and reload it. And then, when I get a load where the ships engage at range, they do this for every mission I load until I exit the game again. This is most likely due to a the random seed generator used in the engine. I can't believe I never saw this before, as I tested the doctrine many many times. So, the answer to our dilemna is that we were both right, and sometimes the ships wait and sometimes they don't. I'm not entirely sure how I feel about this, but a little bit of randomness is ok I suppose, but it would be nice to have some control over it. In any case, I'm sorry that I thought it had something to do with a difference in our testing procedures, I really should have seen this before, I can't believe I didn't. Cheers, David __________________ LW

10-31-05, 10:05 PM	#508
LuftWolf Ocean Warrior Join Date: May 2005 Location: Free New York Posts: 3,167 Downloads: 2 Uploads: 0	On second thought, it may have something to do with a random error in reading the CIWSAttack doctrine... I had a comment in a bad location and it may cause the error sometimes, but then I moved the comment to an even worse place and it caused the posID very very often, much more than with the other doctrine. I think once I lock down the right place to put it (it's only because I'm an idiot) it should work the way it was designed all the time. However, my apology still applies... it's probably my fault. __________________ LW

10-31-05, 10:23 PM	#509
Amizaur Sonar Guy Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Poland Posts: 398 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	Just add debugout comments everywhere in important places of doctrine and then with DbgView you would know EXACTLY what happens in doctrine, what is stateof all variables ect. The ship is NOT doing anythng "on it's own", if there is an order to fire it comes from the doctrine, if there is order to wait for ID it have to come from doctrine too. Analyze the doctrine and you'll know if there is ID needed or not. I don't know at the moment, haven't analyzed it about ID.

10-31-05, 10:25 PM	#510
LuftWolf Ocean Warrior Join Date: May 2005 Location: Free New York Posts: 3,167 Downloads: 2 Uploads: 0	Amizaur, exact same doctrine and exact same test scenarios, sometimes the ship wait and sometimes they don't. I really don't know what's going on... even with the best version I could come up with for the doctrine, it's still happening sometime and not others. There must be some random factor in the ship engagement routines based on the seed number. __________________ LW