VampireNightVision Bugfix

[Rubini]

In my sig i have some words from an old (no offense Steve!) Kaleun here from subsim that resumes this discussion.

The vampire night fix just works flawless, it just moves the fog wall accordingly sun position. Seems that in the final mod h.sie will include a customisation for the mod (amount of fog wall movemment). Someone can think in something better?

The reallity is that we have so much mods on sh3 that changes the environment and sensors, also we have different monitors, is virtually impossible to have a best solution for all just out the box. So, the customisation is the best way to go and it´s done!

Also i can say that h.sie tested a lot others approachs to fix the problem, for example, messing with the visual sensors directly but neither works so well and mainly - no side effects - than the fog wall fix.

Hopes that a lot of ppl can use the fix and feel that his Sh3 have done one more step ahead!

Good hunting for all!

[Jimbuna]

Originally Posted by h.sie

This mod was created based on an assumption - not based on knowledge - by Makman94, Rubini and me.

We started this thread in order to discuss about the extent of reduction of visibility at night, exactly because we don't have facts so far.

Thus, constuctive comments are welcome and I don't have any problem with funded arguments - I have often considered them in my fixes. Many of the hardcode fixes I programmed result from discussions here.

But I have a problem with your behaviour. In your 1st post ever in this forum you say that the fix is "very bad". Only because your personal opinion does not agree with the personal opinions of others. That is not sufficient to be taken seriously and it's not the Fix that is disqualified.

Carry on with your good work...PM inbound

[Kaleun Cook]

Originally Posted by Rubini

The reallity is that we have so much mods on sh3 that changes the environment and sensors, also we have different monitors, is virtually impossible to have a best solution for all just out the box. So, the customisation is the best way to go and it´s done!

Maybe you guys should have made that a bit more clear in the first post. I remember it said something like: If it doesn't work correctly then adjust your values in the cfg - I had no clue what the incorrect behaviour would be nor how to adjust which values. It only became clear to me after an explanation of Makman via PM.

I don't intend any offense - I just think that a small explanation might have avoided some trouble with people like me who aren't used to edit around with the games files like you experts are.

Thanks again for all the efforts! The fix is working great on my installation.

[Rubini]

Originally Posted by Kaleun Cook

Maybe you guys should have made that a bit more clear in the first post. I remember it said something like: If it doesn't work correctly then adjust your values in the cfg - I had no clue what the incorrect behaviour would be nor how to adjust which values. It only became clear to me after an explanation of Makman via PM.

I don't intend any offense - I just think that a small explanation might have avoided some trouble with people like me who aren't used to edit around with the games files like you experts are.

Thanks again for all the efforts! The fix is working great on my installation.

This is just an alpha and our intention is to get feedbacks on how the fix behaviour on more sh3 installations - as it happens with any mod that have an open alpha/beta. It´s to we know if it have some hidden problem/bug that needs fix or not.

The main intention was not to we discuss the best night detection distance (but no problem in do that if we all want), as this will be totally customizable and also because this is a bit to the "each one taste" side.

The final mod will have then a player´s adjustable fog wall barrier from nothing (as it is now on unfixed sh3) to 100%, to be adjustable to any player´s taste. Obviously with the offcial release we will add also a readme with more info/advices on the matter.

Anyway, with the directions on the first post it already works very well, enough to anyone play a complete career from beggining to the end without problems.

[Capt. Morgan]

Originally Posted by Noisy_Buoy

Thanks for the link Morgan, will check it out tomorrow

Yer welcome, and that's Capt. Morgan to you, buoy.

[Graf Paper]

Again, we're back to the old debate of realism versus playability.

Some players will prefer an absolutely pitch-black night, where you can barely see your own hand in front of your face on a moonless night. They'll be happy as a clam, knowing the crew will have to practically run over a convoy to see them.

Others will prefer less dark nights, where targets can still be spotted and stalked. After all, what fun is it to waste your free time staring at blackness when what you want is to see burning ships slipping beneath the cold Atlantic?

In truth, even stars offer enough light to see, if they're the only light source around. A sailor whose vision is well adapted to his environment can distinguish objects by starlight alone. It is also historical fact that u-boat crews could even spot ships simply by the glow of a lit cigarette being smoked by a sailor on that ship... from a distance of several miles.

At higher latitudes, where the sun never sets as completely as it does near the equator, there is enough ambient light from atmospheric diffraction to allow distinction of the horizon, except during the middle hours. During this time, the diffraction is also reflected by the ocean surface, blending with the horizon so completely that sky and sea become one to the human eye. However, stars are a steady light source that can be used for silhouetting a target, with a very practiced eye.

Since SH3's engine does not take latitude into account, this fix is as good as it gets and I'm amazed it could be done at all.

Very well done, h.sie, Rubini, and Makman!

Weather, and its affect of vision is another question entirely. Something I do not believe this mod is meant to address, if I've read correctly. As such, citing cloudy conditions, or other weather phenomena, has no bearing on the mechanics involved with this mod.

[Rubini]

Originally Posted by Graf Paper

At higher latitudes, where the sun never sets as completely as it does near the equator, there is enough ambient light from atmospheric diffraction to allow distinction of the horizon, except during the middle hours. During this time, the diffraction is also reflected by the ocean surface, blending with the horizon so completely that sky and sea become one to the human eye. However, stars are a steady light source that can be used for silhouetting a target, with a very practiced eye.

Hi mate,

During the test phase of this fix I runned a mission on very high latitude (even above grids) and i noticed that Sh3 make this effect very well: the sun never completely set on summer and the night is toooo long in the winter. As this fix uses the sun position (not the hour of the day) to changes the fog wall it then works very well also on this extrem environment, much better than stock.

[Kafka BC]

Because people are making assumptions and declaring their certain perceived truths as facts in this thread, I thought I would jump in with some facts of my own for people to ponder, and as a way to defend Noisy_Buoy in his contentions about seeing ships at night.

Regarding the pitch black of clear moonless nights and night vision, here is a quote from an article on using Diffused Lighting as Camouflage on ships during WWII:

In the fall of 1940 Burr had to evaluate military optical instruments designed for night observation for the National Research Council. While observing aircraft flying at night without navigation lights, he noted that their shapes were easily visible using special binoculars. He attributed this visibility to the contrast that exists between a completely blacked-out plane and the slight luminosity of the sky, which is never completely black even when the darkness appears total.

Having, in my youth, been out many times on clear moonless nights with plenty of stars (something no one seems to have considered as a light source) in the country away from lights and the glow from a city, I can attest to the fact that you can see the contrast difference between the sky and land. After about forty to fifty minutes a person's night vision becomes fully acclimatized and the shapes of large objects can be discerned. Night vision is one of the reasons why red light is used at night on warships because it has the least effect on it.

Another quote from the same article:

Being smaller than the ships of a convoy, with a compact superstructure and a low profile, U-boats sailing on the surface at night could, in effect, see their targets from further away than the escort ships protecting convoys could see the U-boats. Equipped with excellent night vision binoculars, German seamen could clearly make out against the horizon the shape of ships sailing at night.

Regarding those night vision binoculars, here is the section on Night Glasses from Wikipedia's article on Night Vision:

Night glasses are telescopes or binoculars with a large diameter objective. Large lenses can gather and concentrate light, thus intensifying light with purely optical means and enabling the user to see better in the dark than with the naked eye alone. Often night glasses also have a fairly large exit pupil of 7 mm or more to let all gathered light into the user's eye. However, many people can't take advantage of this because of the limited dilation of the human pupil. To overcome this, soldiers were sometimes issued atropine eye drops to dilate pupils. Before the introduction of image intensifiers, night glasses were the only method of night vision, and thus were widely utilized, especially at sea. Second World War era night glasses usually had a lens diameter of 56 mm or more with magnification of seven or eight. Major drawbacks of night glasses are their large size and weight.

And here is a thread from PanzerGrenadier.net where you can see some Kriegsmarine binoculars from WWII. Scroll down to see the color photographs of the various Night Vision ones. The first thing you should notice is the size if the main objective lens (the ones at the front), they are pretty big in comparison to your normal "daytime" binoculars. Now every knowledgeable photographer or astronomer will tell you that the light-gathering power of a camera or an optical telescope is directly related to the square of the diameter of the objective lens or mirror, thus a telescope with a lens which has a diameter three times that of another will have nine times the light-gathering power...in layman's terms, and to reiterate Wikipedia, larger lenses gather more light.

Someone here mentioned about the difficulties in using a sextant on the horizon at night, and by his "bare facts" reasoning you cannot see anything on the horizon at night at all. Using a sextant as an example is the same as comparing opera glasses to these powerful babies...pointless.


Now, to discuss ship and convoy spotting distances since I have seen some astronomical claims in these forums on how far a ship can be spotted visually from a U-Boat.

One of the great shortcomings of the U-boats, which sat very low in the water, was their limited visual range, with the visible horizon for the bridge lookouts being only 8km (5 miles) away. I have seen this figure a number of times in things that I have read, but if you care to check it use this simple Distance to the Horizon Calculator and enter 5 meters (16 feet) as the observers height above sea level. The average range that the bridge lookouts could spot a SINGLE ship was not much more than that.

Somewhere in this thread I read a statement that you can see a 35 meter high mast at 31 kilometers. I wrote that down just so I can check it, so lets do that using the previously mentioned Distance to the Horizon Calculator. A 35 meter height gives a figure of 21.1 kilometers for the over the horizon distance, add that to the 8 kilometers from the bridge lookouts yields 29.1 kilometers.

Even if the mast was higher, without taking into account atmospheric haze caused by distance, and having personally used both hand-held and tripod mounted cameras equipped with telephoto lenses, I can state with confidence that it is impossible to see the barest tip of a mast on the horizon at that distance. A ship would have to be an awful lot closer before the image seen in binoculars on a rocking and vibrating U-Boat can resolve itself enough to be discernible as the mast of a ship. If they are painted white, you probably can't see them until you start to see funnels or superstructure, but I won't declare that as a "fact".

It is true that a battleship or a heavy cruiser can clearly see and fire on a ship at 30+ kilometers, but they have spotting tops and large stabilized range finders of great optical efficiency that are located considerably higher than the bridge of a U-Boat.

Although highly technical this article on Antisubmarine Warfare in World War II gives the following average spotting distances based on a number of factors (including smoke):

- Single ship 6 miles (9.6 kilometers)
- 8-ship convoy 11 miles (17.6 kilometers)
- 64-ship convoy 23 miles (36,8 kilometers)


The previous chapter to the above article is interesting in that it shows that the sweep width (which is double the the effective range of contact) around a submarine at night is 9.4 miles (15 kilometers). Halving that gives 7.5 kilometers which is close to the visual distance to the horizon from a U-Boat's bridge.

And this article on U-Boat Strategy and Tactics states:

The average range at which a convoy is sighted is 10 to 15 miles.

To conclude, without trying to sound "bitchy", I think people should do a little homework before stating things as "fact".

I personally have no problem with the so called VampireNightVision Bug because I don't think it is that much of a bug and the visual spotting distances can be adjusted in the config files. If you read a lot on convoy battles you will find that the big bugaboo for U-Boats was not the night. The scary creature for them was fog, which drastically reduced visibility and allowed escorts to get close enough to spot them on radar.

Now, if someone could fix the problem of the visual sensors spotting smaller ships at greater distances before spotting larger ships which are closer, that would make me happy.

Your neighborhood Grouch

[Graf Paper]

That's the truly astounding part of your mod, linking the fog wall to the sun's position. You have effectively caused latitude to become a factor in the game mechanics.

Following that same logic, could it also be possible to somehow link the weather controllers to the sun, making it more likely to have stormy weather in temperate and polar latitudes at times of the year when the sun's position relative to the horizon indicates the seasonal changes when such foul weather was common?

Once more, you have demonstrated the mastery you have developed and the exceptional craftsmanship that has brought new dimensions to SH3 that none thought were ever possible. Please keep up the good work!

I most certainly hope you have documented everything you've learned, in the hope there may come a day when it can be released for the benefit of future modders.

[h.sie]

@Kafka: Thanks for your post. You don't sound bitchy and your post and research work is very much appreciated and helpful for further discussions.

Only 2 comments:

1) It was not my/our intention to present anything as a fact. Exactly because of this, this thread was opened in order to discuss what we don't know so far: visible ranges at night. We don't say: This fix is realistic - anyone has to use it - all others are wrong. The fix is an offer for those who are not satisfied with the current situation regarding night-visibility. Those who are satisfied should not use it. It will be customizeable via .ini file so that it can satisfy different opinions of "reality".

But I must admit that I should have not called the mod VampireVisionBugFix, which implied that a bug is present. I should rename it! Good point. I apologize.

2) The sh3 environment cannot represent real environment, because of restricted visible range of 16-20km in-game even at clear day (compared to > 30km(?) in reality). Thus, the real environment IMHO has to be scaled down to sh3 game dimensions. Ranges between reality and game cannot be compared directly. If in reality visible ranges at night are smaller than at day, this must also be modelled in the game.

The balance / relations are more important than absolute values.

As I already wrote: The mod was created out of the assumption that at night one cannot see as far as at daylight.

So the main question is: Are visible ranges / detection ranges smaller at night or not?


By the way: I added the following note to the 1st post of the hardcode fixes sticky thread:

Personal Note
The term "realistic" in this thread is not meant as "absolute realistic". Instead, it has to be understood as "what h.sie assumes to be realistic".

[Graf Paper]

Kafka BC, I believe you'll notice many statements regarding visual detection ranges, some being allegorical. Your assertions regarding spotting ranges are well thought and backed by historical and technical sources.

However, you must consider that your own direct observations regarding low-light visual acuity in distinguishing a horizon were done on dry land. Light behaves differently on water, which is both a highly reflective and refractive surface that redirects and absorbs light in some interesting ways that is not at all similar to how trees, grass, and terrain interact with light. Most ambient and direct light is absorbed by foliage and earth, making dimmer lights like stars stand out more brightly, thus emphasizing the horizon. Couple water's behavior with the atmospheric effects on light, and the greater haze in the air over large bodies of water, and you will find the horizon on the open ocean can be very indistinct at night, especially without landmarks to use as a referent. I have seen this in action with my own eyes on open ocean.

My statements regarding visual acuity are taken directly from testimony made by both u-boat crewmen and merchantmen. Since they were actually there and we were not, I'll have to take their word as the final authority. I don't recall any of them saying they could spot mastheads at 35 kilometers with the naked eye. Although one thing is interesting to note: The u-boat lookouts primarily spotted ships by the smoke exhausting from a ship's funnel, not mast tops or superstructures. Coal-fired vessels could be easily spotted from very great distances, some estimates around 50 miles, by the dense black smoke belching from their stacks.

Also, this mod primarily deals with night vision using the unaided eye, a fact I think some have missed while attempting to prove some points. This is why you must tweak the sensors configuration to properly account for special optics, be they ordinary binoculars or low-light lenses. You must also bear in mind that SH3's engine is rather incomplete and limited in the data and factors that allow for a more realistic simulation, as h.sie has said. This mod is a compromise that attempts to ameliorate one particular shortcoming (if not a bug).

I wholeheartedly agree with you that surface ships seem to visually spot my u-boat far too easily. I must endure enough abuse later in the war, thanks to radar and ASDIC, but the visual powers of the enemy serve only in adding insult to injury. It's bad enough that the enemy radar, ASDIC/sonar, and hydrophones are not the least bit impaired by land masses, ships, or other solid bodies while I'm forced to sail in an ocean that has no thermoclines, currents, or inversion layers.

[h.sie]

I fear we'll never get a final truth about what is realistic and what not. I remember discussions regarding my first ever hardcode fix "realistic repair times" with two serious guys:

1) One of them (who served on a surface ship) believes that the stock repair times (1-8 minutes) are realistic, since the crew is trained to repair the essential machinery and equipment as soon as possible.

2) The other (commander of a surface warship and, before that, crew member of a modern submarine) said that repairs normally take time in hours and days dimensions.

But since all the fixes are ON/OFF-switchable and will also be customizeable - there is no problem at all.

[makman94]

Originally Posted by Graf Paper

.....

Since SH3's engine does not take latitude into account, this fix is as good as it gets and I'm amazed it could be done at all.

Very well done, h.sie, Rubini, and Makman!

......

ahoy there Graf Paper ! nice to see you around again after so long time ! how are you mate ?

yes , Graf Paper ,given the limitations of sh3's engine what you see here is way much more than the one we were looking for during the development of this mod . H.Sie found the best solution we can ever hope and as for the detection ranges during night...etc this is something that now can be easily adjusted ! But before it was just impossible and without doupt this mod is a huge step forward !

in fact , you have in front of you the best (and i mean it 100%) mod ever made for sh3 and most of people are failing to 'see' it !
anyway ...it will take time but sooner or later you will see it to be at the no1 of 'must have' mods

Originally Posted by Kafka BC

....


Somewhere in this thread I read a statement that you can see a 35 meter high mast at 31 kilometers. I wrote that down just so I can check it, so lets do that using the previously mentioned Distance to the Horizon Calculator. A 35 meter height gives a figure of 21.1 kilometers for the over the horizon distance, add that to the 8 kilometers from the bridge lookouts yields 29.1 kilometers.....

hi Kafka ,
yes it was me who wrote it and i will tell you the why . the 'calculator' at your link is a simple one and is not giving you very accurate results becuase it uses the geometrical formulas for calculating the distances.

go to this link here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horizon
read carefully the article there and then scroll down a bit where it says ''Effect of atmospheric refraction'' were it gives some simplified formulas that are taking in account the atmospheric refraction
there i used the simple formulas d=3.86*sqrt(h)
so
d1=3.86*sqrt(5)= 8,63 km
d2=3.86*sqrt(35)= 22,836 km

d1+d2= more than 31 km
and that is a more valid distance than the geometrical one thats why i said more than 31 km
(of course the theme is much more complicated but i think that the above formulas are the best for using and giving fast-good accurate reality results)

Originally Posted by Kafka BC

.....

- Single ship 6 miles (9.6 kilometers)
- 8-ship convoy 11 miles (17.6 kilometers)
- 64-ship convoy 23 miles (36,8 kilometers)

that is very interesting finding and sure will help us but i want to ask: i assume that these ranges are for day, and i don't understand why a 8-ship convoy is spotted from 20.4 km (11miles=20,4 km) and why a 64-ship convoy is spotted from 42.6 km (23miles=42,6 km).
what makes the difference ? the tallest ship will be spotted first no matter if convoy has 8 or 64 ships , ....no ?

Originally Posted by Kafka BC

The previous chapter to the above article is interesting in that it shows that the sweep width (which is double the the effective range of contact) around a submarine at night is 9.4 miles (15 kilometers). Halving that gives 7.5 kilometers which is close to the visual distance to the horizon from a U-Boat's bridge.

thats also an interesting finding Kafka !
so according to this article we have vissuality at night at about 9,4/2=4.7miles= 8,7 km ( 9,4miles = 17.4km)


so , by using your data Kafka i would say that if the max range that we can see at day is 42,6km and this is reducing to 8,7 km at night then ,accordinally, a 16km environment (vissuality at day = 16km max) must be reduced to 3,27 km at night (if we want to have 'balanced' day-night).
don't you agree with this or i missed something ? please explain

[Rubini]

Randomization is obviously a very desired and important part of any game to try to simulate our real environment. And it isn´t easy to implement correctly as we can see in various games overthere.

Sh3 already have some degree of randomization in various aspects of the game (the visual detection is one of them), but seems that they don´t work very well.
This fix, for example, already have (or preserve) a randomness on it, and it can be raised or lowered by sensors.cfg settings.

All mods on Sh3 (probably the same for any game) is a compromisse between what the game engine allows and realism (without speak also on what the modder desire with the mod). This fix is the unique opportunity (and a very good one!) until now to bypass another odd stock sh3 behaviour - at least for the guys that are annoyed with this crew vampire night vision issue.

Also i should like to say that even with all our community cummullative experience/knowlegde on sh3 files that using only the sh3 files settings isn´t possible to have a good behaviour on visual detection issue (well, perhaps for some it is...personal preferences again). This is were this fix shines.

[Graf Paper]

Hello, makman! I'm doing well and glad to see many of the Subsim crew still around. I hope you're well and most happy to see you, Rubini, h.sie, and many others still giving so much to the community.

I had to take a forced vacation away from SH3, due to real life obligations, plus the necessity of a complete system rebuild. I am glad my favorite Silent Hunter is still thriving, more than ever thanks to the ongoing efforts in this thread and others.

With SH5 being such a washout, I wish the Grey Wolves would come out of retirement to resume GWX4. I'll keep that hope alive.

As for this Vampire Nightvision Fix, I just don't understand all the fuss.

We can sit here and debate the minutiae of real versus perceived horizon, earth's curvature, the properties of light, water, and atmosphere... ad nauseum... but, it's all a moot point, aside from the fun of the debate itself.

Any measure of "realism" is entirely subjective when considering that SH3 is first and foremost a game. I hesitate to call it an actual simulator because it is only an approximation of a real world experience built upon the inevitably faulty assumptions and technical limits of the game programmers.

We have many people here that have never served aboard WWII vessels, let alone been at sea, making all kinds of assertions with whatever logic can be mustered, regardless of any fallacies in the basic reasoning. I dare say that, for most of us, our only reference for how "real" this game is would be "Das Boot".

Too often, I have seen mods and their creators criticized for not meeting some imposed criteria for what is deemed "real", despite the fact that not one of us actually knows what that is from firsthand knowledge.

God save us from all these armchair admirals!

IF you like the mod, use it. If you hate it, leave it alone. I plan to enjoy every minute of it, happily tweaking away until I achieve results that suit my desires.

Regardless of any modifications that you use, the important thing is that you walk away with the experience you were anticipating after the mission is complete. If you feel like you just spent several tense hours in a rusty, stinking tin can under the crushing weight of the ocean while being rewarded with the thrill of engaging a convoy, suffering the blind terror of enemy depth charges, and the dread creeping up your bones as you hear the ping of ASDIC with the surging motors of a destroyer... that is all that matters.

I say go ahead and make this mod compatible with the other fixes and release it immediately. It's just perfect as it is now. Leave it up to the individual to use the settings they feel work best and quit worrying about pleasing the nitpickers.

Time to leave this in your hands. I have to go look up Niels to see if he wants to get a multi-player game going. Wolfpacks are always better than being a lone wolf. Then again, I've always been biased toward SH3 multi-player.