[REL] patSH3r - Reborn

[Fader_Berg]

Originally Posted by Tycho

About "Repair time factor", if I understood correctly. Why not to make it to work when V16B1 is used but its "Realistic Repair Times" is not active? I use V16B1, but "Realistic Repair Times" is unchecked because of NYGM.

That's a good point. I'll change the behavior to the next revision, so that you may enable the repair time factor if it's turned off in V16B1.
I don't know why V16B1s repair time is incompatible with NYGM. But I guess there is a slight risk that it will be incompatible with patSH3rs repair time factor too.

[Fader_Berg]

Originally Posted by Fader_Berg

That's a good point. I'll change the behavior to the next revision, so that you may enable the repair time factor if it's turned off in V16B1.

Or not... Now I remember why I didn't do it.

H.sie has integrated his own - some sort of - game mechanics that has something to do with repairs (and other h.sie related stuff). These mechanics are in use regardless of whether the repair time fix is enabled or not.
So if we bypass them, some other h.sie thing will probably not work as expected.

[h.sie]

Did I? I don't remember. How auch ever , if you are interested in the assembler sources (which are full of interesting pointers), let me know. There is also the code for a new version V16D which I never released. You can use it all - proper credits provided, but I am too busy ATM to give any support. Comments are rare and in german. To be honest, I forgot most things in the meantime.

Good work, by the way. Could bring old SH3 to new dimensions...

[Fader_Berg]

Originally Posted by h.sie

Did I? I don't remember. How auch ever , if you are interested in the assembler sources (which are full of interesting pointers), let me know. There is also the code for a new version V16D which I never released. You can use it all - proper credits provided, but I am too busy ATM to give any support. Comments are rare and in german. To be honest, I forgot most things in the meantime.

Good work, by the way. Could bring old SH3 to new dimensions...

I would very much like to see that code of yours, and of course you'll be credited.

[sublynx]

yay ! This kind of work might give SH3 another 10 years of developing gameplay!

[keysersoze]

Excellent work Fader_Berg!

I'm following this thread closely.

[Fader_Berg]

r28:

• Increased the random spread in WO range estimation error (from 1-3 to 1-5). It was a bit too chunky.

[areo16]

Originally Posted by Fader_Berg

I would very much like to see that code of yours, and of course you'll be credited.

Yep, he should told me about it too.

Here's a link to the source:

http://www.mediafire.com/download/47...ler+sources.7z

Have fun!!!

[LGN1]

Originally Posted by Fader_Berg

r26:

• Added hy_targeting
• Added hy_targeting_msg

Hydrophone targeting

Hydro-guy will report on hydrophone targeted contact. Yes... though the periscope is up.

Hi Fader_Berg,

could you please provide some more information on this part?

I guess if I lock a target with the periscope and ask the hydrophone guy, he will report the rough distance to the locked target. But what does 'hydrophone targeted contact' mean?

Regards, LGN1

PS: Some further improvements which would be great are:

• No 'We have been detected' and 'The enemy is pinging us' messages
• Radar warnings without a direction line on the map. I don't think that, e.g., Metox could provide a bearing

[Fader_Berg]

Originally Posted by LGN1

Hi Fader_Berg,

could you please provide some more information on this part?

I guess if I lock a target with the periscope and ask the hydrophone guy, he will report the rough distance to the locked target. But what does 'hydrophone targeted contact' mean?

If you point the hydrophone to a ship and ask for a report. He will report about that particular ship. Not the closest one.

Originally Posted by LGN1

PS: Some further improvements which would be great are:

• No 'We have been detected' and 'The enemy is pinging us' messages
• Radar warnings without a direction line on the map. I don't think that, e.g., Metox could provide a bearing

I agree regarding the messages. I'll take a look on it later.
It looks like (according to wikipedia) that it could give some sence of bearing. Maybe make it less accurate?

[sublynx]

My guess is that the radar warnings did not give a direction as in U-boat KTBs they always give the bearing where the threat was if they knew it. Radar warning texts in the KTBs only mention the duration and the wavelength of the signal, visual sightings mention the bearing, height and speed.

Thanks for the ability to separate between different hydrophone signals! This will make underwater attack planning so easy that I might have to restrict myself from using certain procedures that are too gamey!

[Fader_Berg]

Originally Posted by sublynx

Thanks for the ability to separate between different hydrophone signals! This will make underwater attack planning so easy that I might have to restrict myself from using certain procedures that are too gamey!

He, he... I can't count the times I've spent a long time doing hydroplotting and suddenly a trawler shows up and f**ks it all up.
But you're right. It probably gets too easy sometimes. Haven't tried it out yet. Maybe I'll have to counter-patch it somehow.

[LGN1]

Thanks for the replies!

Concerning the bearing information:

I have tried very hard to obtain reliable information about that. However, this is quite difficult. If you look at the Biskaya Cross it's clear that you should be able to get a direction-dependent signal. However, was it ever used that way? I doubt it because it would be quite cumbersome with someone rotating the Biskaya Cross by hand and the operator down in the boat. In addition, I have never found any evidence of such procedures in any documents (like sublynx also points out).

Anyway, the current situation in SH3 is very unrealistic. You can use the RWR perfectly to shadow convoys, ships,... It's much better than the hydrophone!

I think the main problem is that SH3 does not model the different radar wave-lengths and which RWR could detect which wave-lengths. Even Metox in SH3 can detect 3cm radar Thus, you can easily shadow all ships with Metox even if they have 10cm or 3cm radars.

To circumvent the problem I have changed my RWR to detect only signals from sources 50m above sea level --> no ship contacts. And for plane contacts the bearing information is not very useful.

But I would love to see any clear evidence that u-boats used (or did not use) RWR to detect/find/shadow ships. And information about which antenna provided bearing information and which didn't.

Regards, LGN1

[Fader_Berg]

Originally Posted by LGN1

But I would love to see any clear evidence that u-boats used (or did not use) RWR to detect/find/shadow ships. And information about which antenna provided bearing information and which didn't.

Regards, LGN1

I know very little about these things and I'll trust you as an enthusiast. If you haven't found anything so far, then maybe its because they never used it that way.
I haven't played much with radar either, so I don't really know how it affects the game play.
I'll put it on the wishlist, and we'll see if I manage to find anything while examining the code.

[sublynx]

Here's a line from the KTB of U-466 from June-August 1943:

Dived for detection on 134 cm wave, 2 second impulses, recurring. Skilled operator. [Used radar] sparingly.

http://www.uboatarchive.net/KTB466-3.htm

The allied started switching their radars off now and then while approaching the U-boat to lessen the possibility of getting detected by RWR. Maybe this could be randomized somehow in order to have the crewmen sometimes miss the approaching airplane/destroyer altogether?