A problem with the omnimeter

[in_vino_vomitus]

So. I recently enabled map contacts, which makes determining course and speed ridiculously easy. I'd like to turn them off again. Especially since I've been itching to use the omnimeter that's part of the OTC mod. However, for some reason, the sliding scales seem to be cut in half. I thought this might be an issue with screen resolution, but everything I've tried so far yields the same result. Can anyone help?

I wasn't sure if this would be a better query for a PM, but on balance I thought if someone else has the same problem then an answer here would be useful to them also - and if anyone else has had this problem and fixed it, I don't mind where the solution comes from

finally a word of thanks to Cap'n Scurvy for the work he's put into this mod. If I could buy you a beer for it, I would do....

[merc4ulfate]

What exactly is the sliding scale you are referring too? You can disable the contact with a check box in game play options.

[in_vino_vomitus]

There are two sliding scales on the OTC in-game Omnimeter - I attached a pic, but it's not great - anyway, for whatever reason, the two sliders only have half of their scales showing, and the index marks are hidden, which pretty much makes it useless.

One thing I really like about the pre-radar game is the way you have to gradually build up a solution from purely visual and sonar cues. Map contacts on is a good way of simulating range estimates by an experienced crew, but the trouble is, you know that they're exact. I'd rather make my own estimates, plot them myself and firm them up on the go. I do own a slide rule, but to be honest my maths isn't good enough to convert telemeter info to range and AoB. also it irks me that there's a gadget in the game that I can't play with.

[CapnScurvy]

I'm suspecting your running a mod conflict. What specific mods are you running? I'm going out on a limb looking at your signature and seeing:

TMO 2.5
1.5 Optical Targeting Correction 031312 for TMO 2.5
1.5 OTC Realistic Scopes for TMO

Is the version of TMO 2.5 actually named (found in JSGME's MODS folder)....."1_TriggerMaru_Overhaul_2-5" ? It should be.

The only way the Omnimeter could have the sliding scales out of sync with the meters base is by the menu_1024_768.ini file having been corrupted. I would first remove all mods from "Activation", then have JSGME's menu "Tasks.../Compare Snapshot" run to check your stock game files. I'm assuming you took a clean install "Snapshot" of your stock game files just after adding JSGME to your game (no mods added yet). If not, I would reinstall the game (follow the instructions found HERE). Then install JSGME and take the "Snapshot". Re download the mods again, then put them into JSGME.

Moving mods in and out of the game with JSGME is the safest way......BUT, its not fool proof. There are plenty of ways of screwing up your stock game files with mods (that's why JSGME has the Snapshot feature.......To check if there are any screw ups). Mod files themselves can get corrupted if pulled out of "order of activation" so always remember to follow the rule....."First one in, last one out".

[in_vino_vomitus]

Thanks!! - I'm right on it

[in_vino_vomitus]

I didn't re-download the mods again, but the snapshot comparison didn't show any problems after I de-installed them - when I reinstalled them the omnimeter was as before - Is there any way this could be because I'm running this on a laptop?

[CapnScurvy]

I've not run the game on a laptop, so I really wouldn't know. I've always thought of a desktop machine to be the computer of choice for games. I wonder what your Windows screen size is on the laptop? What's the resolution/aspect ratio you're using for the game? If they're different from each other, I wonder if you're experiencing some sort of screen resizing issue?

Are you running the game in a window? I've heard this can cause screen resizing problems.

[in_vino_vomitus]

Yeah - I agree about the desktop being the machine of choice, but this is all I've got to it's credit it runs the game pretty well. This is the first real issue I've had with it. - anyway, it's a minor annoyance. I'm pretty sure I can make one if I can't get the in-game version working. Thanks for taking a look

[in_vino_vomitus]

I had to have it - So far it seems to work pretty well........

[TorpX]

Not bad. What do you have it mounted on?

[in_vino_vomitus]

I had a sheet of black plastic lying around. What it's called I don't know, but it's about 1/8" thick, rigid, like perspex, but it's opaque, so I cut and glued it to make a baseplate and sliders then enlarged and printed the omnimeter graphic from the OTC docs, drew the face on graph paper, using the printout to measure the scale increments and then stuck that to a sheet of stiff card, cut it into the appropriate strips and stuck those to the plastic. I used a plastic document pocket as a clear cover to keep my grubby handprints off the scale.

What was instantly apparent was that once you have a target ship id'd and the Telemeter scale set, range estimates are pretty much instant, unlike the stadimeter, and you can get workable ones at some pretty huge ranges. I didn't intend to use it when I did, I was going to do a training mission with map contacts on to check it for accuracy, but when I found myself in the strange situation of having visual contact but no radar return, it seemed a perfect opportunity to try it out. I have no idea how accurate it actually is yet, but the estimates I got from it, fit very neatly into the plots I'd made using radar over the previous couple of hours.

[CapnScurvy]

"Necessity is the Mother of invention"!!


Like the authentic Omnimeter, it was hand made by the machinist on-board, with the tool used by one of the "Firing Party" of the boat. This original Omnimeter from the USS Cod Museum (in Cleveland, OH) was hand made out of aluminum.







The original post from a friend named Gino was started some years ago (found HERE).


One thing I found interesting about the original Cod Omnimeter was it had a correction to the original design. After I corrected the games optical view to mirror real life dimensions, I found the original sliders position for marking the targets height dimension was off by a fraction of an inch. As the below image close-up shows, there's the original mark with the "triangle", and a smaller "notch" made just a fraction of an inch away for setting the slider to the estimated height figure.







That "notch", just to the right of the triangle, is much more accurate than using the original "triangle" spot. The crew obviously found this to be so (as I did using the tool in-game); they simply corrected their calculator with a new "notch" on the original.


I'm suspecting the tool was hung near the periscope (maybe even on it) by the round loop hole at the one end.

[in_vino_vomitus]

Interesting thread - I had another chance to check out the tool when I re-did the attack I messed up so stupidly yesterday. So far it seems to be way preferable to the stadimeter, just because it's easier to use. Probably takes much less than 5 secs of periscope exposure, and having compared the readout from the stadimeter with the omnimeter - there seems to be a discrepancy, but it's not big enough to matter, and I've no reason to think the stadimeter range is the correct one anyway. So, again, thanks for an excellent piece of work

[CapnScurvy]

Since there's no way of me checking this with a real life periscope (I have looked through the display periscopes at the Nautilus Museum in New London, Conn. however, the stadimeter function is removed on these display models), I believe the game's stadimeter is much less accurate than the authentic one. The game adds an "error" to the view which I believe to be excessive to the real thing.

In-game, the stadimeter will produce an error in range finding if you're just one pixel width off the exact height point of measurement. This error is only a half dozen yards off if the reading is made towards the top of the periscope view. Towards the water line, the error can be hundreds of yards off with just one pixel width of inaccuracy.

The error was probably put in-game to simulate the idea that a range measurement at longer distances (towards the waterline) can be less accurate than one made at close range (the measurement height spot is higher in the view). More pixel widths away from the "sweet spot", the error get's multiplied. The fact that the Telemeter hash marks on the scope lens are two pixel widths in size, tells you just how easy it is to get an inaccurate range reading when using the stadimeter. A small twitch with the mouse; the sub or target ship moving to the wave action; the fact that the mast top can "flicker" with the poor rendering by the video card; all produce poor results with the stadimeter.

There's nothing we can do about the error in pixel width, its hard coded in game, along with the math formula that makes the range finding.

[in_vino_vomitus]

I have no problem with the error factor - to be honest I'd find it more frustrating if measurements were spot on. One thing I noticed comparing Stadimeter and Omnimeter estimates was that, so far there seems to be less error with the latter, but you need to be good at judging fractions - also in low light, you have to be aware that the top of the mast might not be visible. Thing is, Stadimeter error is automatically included in solution, whereas the Omnimeter gives me more control. Since I've barely used the thing so far, I doubt I'm getting the best performance out of it, but I have to say it's becoming the tool of choice. I fired ten torpedoes at a convoy last night, using only info gained from the Omnimeter - well - I worked out the speed during the approach, but they changed course just prior to firing, so the rest had to be worked out from scratch. I was firing at four targets, the convoy was about 3500 yards off my beam, I got two impacts, at least two duds and at least three prematures - I guess I'll need to turn duds off in order to properly evaluate it, but given my prior success rate using the PK and curved fire, I can tell you it's an improvement. I'm actually a pretty good shot, but the trouble is I've thought that means I ought to be able to shoot torpedoes too. Letting go of that misapprehension was painful, but productive

Anyway - thanks for a great tool