-ReinForce Alert - worldwide discussion

[sertore]

Hey,

1st off, want to say thanks to Crazy Ivan and RA team for such an incredible mod. I've yet to play it due to a busy schedule, but I trust Crazy Ivan and Team for quality product.

2nd.. regarding detection ranges, your SSP & bottom type affects how well / poor passive and active detection are made. Good chance is what you are seeing is normal, and you are using a bottom limited SSP, where really there isn't anywhere a submarine can hide(no layer); nothing to do with the mod itself.

If you want the affects of a layer, then choose either Convergence zone or surface duct SSP. If not, then use bottom limited.

enjoy

suBB
As you can check by yourself editing the mission attached to my post, SSP SD used with strong layer: but, in our test case, high sonar detection range are related to units in the same side of layer, where its influence is not relevant.

[suBB]

As you can check by yourself editing the mission attached to my post, SSP SD used with strong layer: but, in our test case, high sonar detection range are related to units in the same side of layer, where its influence is not relevant.

will check out your mission shortly.

In fact I need to run some det range tests as preliminary data for scenario design.

Did you install RA 1.1 'clean', as in, completely erase your previous install of DW and brand new folder. If not that could lead to instability issues.(happened to me before trying to install 1.1 over 1.0) guess I could answer my own question; to lazy to read your prior posts :P

In a SD SSP, increased det ranges are expected above the layer(reduced below layer) but to what degree I'm unsure of in RA. Although RA has made a great deal of changes, SSP performance is something that cannot be changed(as I recall from previous inquiry). I wish SSP worked as advertised.

[goldorak]

Hey,
2nd.. regarding detection ranges, your SSP & bottom type affects how well / poor passive and active detection are made. Good chance is what you are seeing is normal, and you are using a bottom limited SSP, where really there isn't anywhere a submarine can hide(no layer); nothing to do with the mod itself.

If you want the affects of a layer, then choose either Convergence zone or surface duct SSP. If not, then use bottom limited.

enjoy

suBB

Hey suBB,

You are 100% wrong on this one. Wether or not there is a layer, a Seawolf cannot detect a Trafalgar going at 5 knots at over 20-25 nm. There was no convergence zone and yet I got the contact. How about the Kilo at 5 knots at over 20 nm ? Is it normal ? C'mon man be serious.
Other players were getting contacts all over the place, and the same exact mission played in single player was correct in the sense that the detection ranges were "normal" all other conditions being identical to the multiplayer match. So yes there is someting wrong with how detection is made in multiplayer. And it has to be fixed.

[sertore]

Let me report two interesting notes by Drakken, a Betasom trainer, about the strange sonar range sensitivity and weapon efficiency:

1) SKK noise
apart for hardcoded changes, on which we have no knowledge, seems that in the DB the value for TRUST is more high for SSK than SSN: for example, the LOS ANGELES class have a TRUST of +16, but the LADA class have +26. Now we experienced the too simple tracking of LADA even if far a lot of nms, meanwhile we LOS ANGELES is really hard to hear even if near to OS.

2) UGST efficiency (vs. MK48)
it seems that the acquisition cone for UGST is just 20°, against the 40° of MK48: the result is that in our multiplayer usually an MK48 shot is letal, and the UGST one is really poor and miss in the major part of the cases the target. Now I know that you surely set the acquisition cone really near to reality, but the playability of the game is suffering a big gap in the US/RU match: any chance to balance the weapons?

Hope this can help to improve the MOD efficiency and playability. Thanks.

[CrazyIvan]

Let me report two interesting notes by Drakken, a Betasom trainer, about the strange sonar range sensitivity and weapon efficiency:

1) SKK noise
apart for hardcoded changes, on which we have no knowledge, seems that in the DB the value for TRUST is more high for SSK than SSN: for example, the LOS ANGELES class have a TRUST of +16, but the LADA class have +26. Now we experienced the too simple tracking of LADA even if far a lot of nms, meanwhile we LOS ANGELES is really hard to hear even if near to OS.

2) UGST efficiency (vs. MK48)
it seems that the acquisition cone for UGST is just 20°, against the 40° of MK48: the result is that in our multiplayer usually an MK48 shot is letal, and the UGST one is really poor and miss in the major part of the cases the target. Now I know that you surely set the acquisition cone really near to reality, but the playability of the game is suffering a big gap in the US/RU match: any chance to balance the weapons?

Hope this can help to improve the MOD efficiency and playability. Thanks.


Noise structures were changed in new a patch. Now ,the modern diesel submarines will be more silent approximately on 30 percents.

40 degrees in ADCAP - this is a vertical cone.

PS: New the patch will arrive approximately in 3-4 days.

[goldorak]

PS: New the patch will arrive approximately in 3-4 days.

Good news. :)

[cayman]

Noise structures were changed in new a patch. Now ,the modern diesel submarines will be more silent approximately on 30 percents.




Yeah, that's a major improvement!
modern diesel sub are very hard to detect by passive sonar, specially the AIP subs, it's almost impossible to detect a low speed modern SSK in shallow water within reasonable range, not even by Virginia class---but that's the major situation the Nuke subs have to face with today----high speed tracing, deep open water, that belongs to cold-war era. the old-school NATO ASW system :SOSUS + P3 +Sub+Surf can't apply to today's world
that's why US navy now turning into research of Low-Frequency Active Sonar and long-range UUV HF searching for their new ASW system code-name "Seaweb"

for the same reason, US's ARLEIGH BURKE class no longer equip SQR-19 Tow Array , the UK's Duke FFG replace 2031 pass sonar array with 2087 LF Active Sonar Array

http://www.fas.org/irp/program/collect/lfa.htm

[suBB]

Hey suBB,

You are 100% wrong on this one. Wether or not there is a layer, a Seawolf cannot detect a Trafalgar going at 5 knots at over 20-25 nm. There was no convergence zone and yet I got the contact. How about the Kilo at 5 knots at over 20 nm ? Is it normal ? C'mon man be serious.
Other players were getting contacts all over the place, and the same exact mission played in single player was correct in the sense that the detection ranges were "normal" all other conditions being identical to the multiplayer match. So yes there is someting wrong with how detection is made in multiplayer. And it has to be fixed.

hang on, am I reading this correctly.... you are saying that REGARDLESS the SSP type, in 1.1 you are getting these detection ranges under these conditions?? If so something is definitely wrong.

back in 1.0, I asked specifically if SSP was affected by RA, the answer was no. I actually created(to better understand changes in RA) a data matrix on 1.0 based on worst case conditions (seawolf detection capability vs noisy alfa), where I did see changes in detection ranges based on SSP type vs speed vs layer vs sonar(towed, hull, sphere) while multiplayer. Results were conclusive in 1.0 in multiplayer; nothing like you are telling me now in 1.1.

when I run out of more important things to do, guess I'll fire up RA and have a look-see :D

[goldorak]

hang on, am I reading this correctly.... you are saying that REGARDLESS the SSP type, in 1.1 you are getting these detection ranges under these conditions?? If so something is definitely wrong.

back in 1.0, I asked specifically if SSP was affected by RA, the answer was no. I actually created(to better understand changes in RA) a data matrix on 1.0 based on worst case conditions (seawolf detection capability vs noisy alfa), where I did see changes in detection ranges based on SSP type vs speed vs layer vs sonar(towed, hull, sphere) while multiplayer. Results were conclusive in 1.0 in multiplayer; nothing like you are telling me now in 1.1.

when I run out of more important things to do, guess I'll fire up RA and have a look-see :D


Hi suBB,

Detection ranges vary with ssp. In single player and multiplayer.
On the ther hand there is something wrong with how sensitive the sonar is in multiplayer. For instance, WITHOUT COVERGENCE ZONES, a seawolf as advanced as it is SHOULDN'T be able to detect a trafalgar or a kilo going at 5 knots for pete's sake at 25-30 nm.
Under any circumstance this should not be possibile, and unfortunately for the moment it is.

Even players on kilo and lada were able to detect contacts that were not cavitating at enormous distances. There is literally something fishy going on.

If you want to test this strange behaviour, you have to do it in multiplayer not in singleplayer were everything works as it should.

[whiskey111]

I want to ask if the message "torpedo in the water" was stricted by range. I'm asking because I still have this message whatever the range is. Is this correct ?

Afterward, something not natural is happening with german type 212 during divers launching. Submarine is going to stall (like an airplane) after divers launch and goes to bottom. But it happens only sometimes. Mostly when I was in move, not 0kts.
There is no any manual for divers operations so maybe I am doing it incorrectly.

[sertore]

Noise structures were changed in new a patch. Now ,the modern diesel submarines will be more silent approximately on 30 percents.

40 degrees in ADCAP - this is a vertical cone.

PS: New the patch will arrive approximately in 3-4 days.
Thanks for good news and support.

[whiskey111]

What is the max range 100 mm/70 (3.9") AK-100 in game ? I was able to destroy OHP from 40 km. And as I know, max range for this gun is about 21km.
http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNRussian_39-70_ak100.htm

But, I'm not an expert so please correct me.

[sertore]

Dear RA team, just finished some tests with MK48, and for another time seems to us that this torpedo is too many powerful than the other ones in the game.

I really do not know if the vertical cone in acquiring range is too high or if there is something else, but the launch of a MK48 means a target hit about 100% of time, without regards on CM and evasion tactics: they are so many good in acquiring the target that there is no way to successfully evade in the major part of the cases.

Other people is complain about that; let me report an interesting analysis found on subsim:

I have been looking at close-in (killing-zone) torpedo performance namely within 1.5nm of target.
Whether or not a mods blurb flags-up changes, often subtle tweaks occur, somewhere on the modding journey.

Under test, a 48 locked on to my sub and bit on my active cm, 300 yds from my sub, as I attempted to slip out of its 'cone.'
Spoofed it climbed to preset depth, levelled then performed a manic vertical rotation to dive verticaly on my sub.
(The cm was released and remained, at subs depth 700 ft, torp preset 100 ft. All action above layer.)

Four issues:-
1. Minimal delay from spoofing to reengagement'
2. Speed of rotation in vertical plane.
3. Exhibits a very large vertical cone.
4. Overall time/distance factor demonstrating 'hyper' sensitivity. (Climb then descend 600ft within 300yds appx.)

On the next Tuesday we will perform a final test in a multiplayer session to give you our last feelings about this issue.

Please consider our concerns for a possible change of MK48 settings, (or improve the settings of the other torpedos, especially the RU ones), to let the game more playable and balanced.

Thanks as usual for your good support.

[goldorak]

@ Sertore : the excerpt you posted was made by Bellman on subsim and he was EXPLICITELY discussing LWAMI 3.10 and not RA.
The only thing he said about RA was this at the end of his post

Just for completeness :


I have been looking at close-in (killing-zone) torpedo performance namely within 1.5nm of target.
Whether or not a mods blurb flags-up changes, often subtle tweaks occur, somewhere on the modding journey.

Under test, a 48 locked on to my sub and bit on my active cm, 300 yds from my sub, as I attempted to slip out of its 'cone.'
Spoofed it climbed to preset depth, levelled then performed a manic vertical rotation to dive verticaly on my sub.
(The cm was released and remained, at subs depth 700 ft, torp preset 100 ft. All action above layer.)

Four issues:-
1. Minimal delay from spoofing to reengagement'
2. Speed of rotation in vertical plane.
3. Exhibits a very large vertical cone.
4. Overall time/distance factor demonstrating 'hyper' sensitivity. (Climb then descend 600ft within 300yds appx.)


This is related to how Mk 48 work is Lwami 3.10


However I have also observed some anomolies in RA torp/cm performance so I need to eliminate the possible effect of game
acceleration and/or Windows 7. I wonder whether anyone else may have had Windows 7 effects ? Hate to criticise
the modders excellent work, if the fault lies elsewhere.
__________________


Here he is discussing RA, but the 2 quotes are not related in any way.
He didn't actually say WHAT anomalies he found, and he thinks these anomalies are maybe linked to game acceleration and windows 7. Further testing is warrented.

:)

[sertore]

I just get the point about subsim post: sorry for mislead information reported.

However I am continuing to think that the MK48 performance are strangely too high, as we are experiencing in Betasom multiplayers: as anticipated, we will play a dedicated test tomorrow evening and we will let you know about the results.

Thanks.

[goldorak]

@ sertore : One last thing about torpedoes :

Unless you are discussing wake homing torpedoes that are basically fire and forget, you only need care to fire them to intercept the wake of your target, there is no way for AI target ships to evade them; all other torpedoes, which means wire guided ones, such as the UGST and mk 48 when launched against human controlled units HAVE to be wireguided to the target.
You cannot expect to fire and forget and have the torpedo figure it all out.

Firing at close range, whether mk 48 or UGST the lethality is more or less the same.
At greater distances you cannot fire only in snapshot and expect to hit the target, moreso if the target is evading.
You need to steer these weapons onto the target.

The last mission Betasom played, had a player steering his mk 48 to hit the target.
The player that was hit was astounded to see the torped backtrace and hit him.
And he shouldn't be surprised.
The lethality of the UGST and Mk 48 rests entirely on the ability of the operator to bring the weapon on the target.
If you don't then even the mk 48 can miss.

Players need to learn to account for this new tactic. In other mods torpedoes had a larger acquisition cone, so you could fire in snapshot and be more or less sure of acquiring your prey.
Now its not so easy.
You need to take into account search depth, you need to take into account countermesures which have a real effect, you have to take into account maximum speed and turning radius etc...
And you have to STEER the weapon on the target.

If you don't steer the weapon on your prey the mod isn't really at fault is it ? :rolleyes

[sertore]

@ sertore : One last thing about torpedoes :

Unless you are discussing wake homing torpedoes that are basically fire and forget, you only need care to fire them to intercept the wake of your target, there is no way for AI target ships to evade them; all other torpedoes, which means wire guided ones, such as the UGST and mk 48 when launched against human controlled units HAVE to be wireguided to the target.
You cannot expect to fire and forget and have the torpedo figure it all out.

Firing at close range, whether mk 48 or UGST the lethality is more or less the same.
At greater distances you cannot fire only in snapshot and expect to hit the target, moreso if the target is evading.
You need to steer these weapons onto the target.

The last mission Betasom played, had a player steering his mk 48 to hit the target.
The player that was hit was astounded to see the torped backtrace and hit him.
And he shouldn't be surprised.
The lethality of the UGST and Mk 48 rests entirely on the ability of the operator to bring the weapon on the target.
If you don't then even the mk 48 can miss.

Players need to learn to account for this new tactic. In other mods torpedoes had a larger acquisition cone, so you could fire in snapshot and be more or less sure of acquiring your prey.
Now its not so easy.
You need to take into account search depth, you need to take into account countermesures which have a real effect, you have to take into account maximum speed and turning radius etc...
And you have to STEER the weapon on the target.

If you don't steer the weapon on your prey the mod isn't really at fault is it ? :rolleyes
Dear Goldorak, I understand your comments, do not agree but I will go along with them. :)

About last Betasom mission, to which I personally attended, we had a great player piloting a Los Angeles FLT III sinking three trainers (with trainers I mean people that is teaching at Betasom Accademy how to play the game to the DW addicted , with really deep knowing of submarine warfare) on Akula II and Lada: never happened, especially at really close distance (< 5nm)!
The Los Angeles was able to simply evade lot of RU unit's torpedos, instead the RU units were catch by MK48 even with tidy use of CMs and evasion tactics: my feeling is that the RU players have to stay to steer continuously their weapons while the US ones can dedicate their attention to sonars research while their torpedo are working for them... the game is not balanced at all.

In any case, if you are thinking that everything is perfect and the MOD is complete as is, please discard my comments and fix just the sound issues of SSK.

I do not want to continue to annoying you, RA people and other visitors with an not useful discussion: I will not post any other comment about the matter if not requested.

Thanks again for support.

[whiskey111]

All Akulas have no option "promoted to link"

And something wrong is with AI surface: I turned on radar and found some ships from surface group. There were ships such as; Spruance, Ticonderoga, OHP. None of them attacked me.

[Castout]

I don't know if this has been brought up but I think I may have found a glitch on Akula II improved narrow band sonar station


If the player scan the cursor long enough left and right and keep doing that WHEN the center display is set to point South then the cursor would get stuck at some degrees. This is reproducable especially when selecting the hull and towed array.

[sertore]

All Akulas have no option "promoted to link"

And something wrong is with AI surface: I turned on radar and found some ships from surface group. There were ships such as; Spruance, Ticonderoga, OHP. None of them attacked me.
In our test no problem with promotion to link, and AI units are really fast to attack: can you please post a mission to test?

[sertore]

I don't know if this has been brought up but I think I may have found a glitch on Akula II improved narrow band sonar station


If the player scan the cursor long enough left and right and keep doing that WHEN the center display is set to point South then the cursor would get stuck at some degrees. This is reproducable especially when selecting the hull and towed array.
I confirm we experienced the same issue, present just on Akula II Improved.

[whiskey111]

This is link to my mission
http://www.mediafire.com/?gwfwyo3q2zk


And what about my two previous questions ? Any chances to be answered ? :D

[Jaf]

I want to ask if the message "torpedo in the water" was stricted by range. I'm asking because I still have this message whatever the range is. Is this correct?

This is abnormally.
Whether the mod was installed correctly according with installation recomendations?
Have you installed other mods?
What operating system do you use?

Submarine is going to stall (like an airplane) after divers launch and goes to bottom.

Your boat must be stopped before the launch of divers, otherwise the divers will collide with you boat and as a result of known error in the game engine you boat will crash at the bottom.

What is the max range 100 mm/70 (3.9") AK-100 in game? I was able to destroy OHP from 40 km. And as I know, max range for this gun is about 21km.

You're right. This will be fixed.

[sertore]

This is link to my mission
http://www.mediafire.com/?gwfwyo3q2zk


And what about my two previous questions ? Any chances to be answered ? :D
Dear whiskey, the promotion to link and AI attack works fine for me both: the problem is the bad weather that degrade the acoustic condition and reduce the detecting range.

About promote to link you have to surface and raise the radio antenna: surfacing is necessary because the high waves continuosly blind your radio if not surfaced; as soon as you are surfaced and you are able to receive the links of your ally the promote to link option appears on unit menù on NavMap.

The same for AI attacking: try to cavitate, and the AI units at about 10nm will detect and attack you in less than 30 secs:

http://i47.tinypic.com/2lk5p48.jpg

If you not cavitate the AI units could not detect and engage you, even with visual due to the really bad sea condition.

As final test, try to set environmetal conditions to sea state 1 and weather clear, and you will be attacked in less than 30 secs from the start of the mission due to increased range detection of AI units.

About other question I leave the points to RA people...

[CrazyIvan]

In mission with SSP such as Convergence ZONE - layer is located between 300 and 500 ft
In mission with SSP such as Surface DUCT - Layer is located between 400 and 1200 ft.

The mission demonstrates, as the transition UNDER a LAYER weakens a passive signal only partially, a signal from the display - Completely does not delete though even the player has left on 1000 or 1400 ft (MUCH BELOW than LAYER) - signal, all the same is present on the display.

Minesweeper, which is located in 8.5 miles more to the right side Sub of the player - signal vanishes at a leaving under a layer. His also vanishes active ping.

And that minesweeper which at the left side in 5 miles from the player - he remains on sonar - both in a passive and in active scan mode.
( Pay attention - speed at the ships identical, that is production of noise identical.But 8.5 miles of a distance - considerably are weakened by noise level which your sensor control [BB Sonar] reaches.)
At the moment of transition through a layer, easing a signal on BB Sonar will be visible. Also it is visible on a DEMON - as the strips of edges - will be little bit more thin there is some easing of a signal.

In general, it is possible to speak - that Layer it not a "steel board". Especially for short distances and loud Targets.

[whiskey111]

-Jaf-
1. I installed RA as it described in readme. Only RA, no any mods installed.
2. My os; win7 64
3. Nice to hear that range of this gun will be fixed.
4. One more thing: will be cool if AI units use their heavy guns too. Now I have impression that onlu human controlled units are using heavy guns.
5. Any chance that RA team will do some manuals for divers, sirena etc... ?

-sertore-
1. This is trange because Akula II or Victor is able to sent links.
2. I was talking about radar detection, not cavitating. I turned on it, discovered some surface targets and none of DD or OHP attacked me.

[Jaf]

I installed RA as it described in readme. Only RA, no any mods installed. My os; win7 64

RA has not been tested in win7.
Some people reported same bug in win7.

will be cool if AI units use their heavy guns too. Now I have impression that onlu human controlled units are using heavy guns.

AI units use their heavy guns too if the distance is allowed.

Any chance that RA team will do some manuals for divers, sirena etc... ?

As to sirena (and divers too) - see ..\Dangerous waters\Manual\RA_Weapon_Info_rev2.pdf page21
(you sub must be stoped before launch)

This is trange because Akula II or Victor is able to sent links.

Promotion to link work normally on all Akulas.
You must be on PD with extended radio mast.

I was talking about radar detection, not cavitating. I turned on it, discovered some surface targets and none of DD or OHP attacked me.

Surface units detect you radar emission, but they do not attack you because:
1) distance is too big for weapon use
2) due to bug in game engine new track do not transmitted to doctrine sometimes - try to reload mission
3) wait ~5min and you recieve birds :)

[whiskey111]

Promotion to link work normally on all Akulas.
You must be on PD with extended radio mast.
I am on PD and radio mast is esxtended. But I can't promote any targets. I have noticed that only when Akula I is surfaced then I can do this. Other subs work correctly.
Sertore wrote that it is necessary to be surface to promoting any targets by data link. So something is not as has to be.

Surface units detect you radar emission, but they do not attack you because:
1) distance is too big for weapon use
2) due to bug in game engine new track do not transmitted to doctrine sometimes - try to reload mission
3) wait ~5min and you recieve birds :)

Hmmm... No, it doesn't. It happened in mission http://www.mediafire.com/?gwfwyo3q2zk for Akula I. Maybe it is Win7 bug, maybe not.
Please check it and give me an answer.

[Jaf]

I am on PD and radio mast is esxtended. But I can't promote any targets.

I Confirm an incorrect value for the height of radio masts on Akula-I & Akula-I Imp.
PromoteToLink option appears only above 17m
Will be corrected.

[whiskey111]

I wanted to download Ra mod and install it again. Unfortunatelly I can't do this because download process doesn't want to start at all. Any chance to upload it on mediafire or rapidshare ?

[sertore]

I wanted to download Ra mod and install it again. Unfortunatelly I can't do this because download process doesn't want to start at all. Any chance to upload it on mediafire or rapidshare ?
Download works fine for me: maybe you have to check your browser settings or internet connection options.

[Jaf]

Hmmm... No, it doesn't. It happened in mission http://www.mediafire.com/?gwfwyo3q2zk for Akula I. Maybe it is Win7 bug, maybe not. Please check it and give me an answer.

The enemies at once detect the radar emission and after a while Kitty Hawk launches two Vikings, who are attacking me.

Important note: When creating a mission You MUST insert O.H.Perry*AI* (with MH-60R AI Helo) instead of O.H.Perry*User* (with MH-60R -PlayerCtrl-) if you do not use it as manned, otherwise disrupted helicopters work.
You must insert O.H.Perry*User* in mission ONLY if you will manage it.
All this concerned Udaloy*User* & Udaloy*AI* too.

I wanted to download Ra mod and install it again. Unfortunatelly I can't do this because download process doesn't want to start at all.

Try another browser (Opera etc.)
Or try this link:
http://dangerouswaters.pl/download/RaDWX_v1.1_new.rar

[whiskey111]

Thank you for alternative link. Unfortunately resinstalling Ra mod didn't help.

AI surface doesn't react of my sub radar.
Additionaly I found something new: this happened only for US subs. Radar antenna was broken in every attempt to extract it. I hope this is only Win7 bug.

What is the chance to make RA mod playable on Win7 ?

[Jaf]

Additionaly I found something new: this happened only for US subs. Radar antenna was broken in every attempt to extract it. I hope this is only Win7 bug. What is the chance to make RA mod playable on Win7 ?

This is not Win7 bug - this is inability to use the materiel :)
For successfull radar use you must go to radar depth (not to PD).
See "USNI Referense > Ownship Information" section for appropriate depth&speed for radar operation.

[goldorak]

This is not Win7 bug - this is inability to use the materiel :)
For successfull radar use you must go to radar depth (not to PD).
See "USNI Referense > Ownship Information" section for appropriate depth&speed for radar operation.

http://www.hwupgrade.it/forum/images_hwu/smilies/14.gif

Whiskey111, READ THE FREAKING MANUAL. :)

[whiskey111]

My mistake my Master. I was looking at radio depth not radar.
:D

[whiskey111]

1. I did a lot of tests about this radar issue. And it isn't win7 bug, it's RA bug.

Akula vs Spruance
When Akula was about 20nm to Spruance I could lock on it by radar. Spruance didn't see me. No any reaction of Spruance was noticed.

Spruance was able to detect my radar when I was about 5nm to it. Then attacked me by torpedos and subrocks.

The same conclusion had my friend. He uses winXP.


2. What is the maximum range of launching torpedo to receive the message "torpedo in the water" ?

[Jaf]

I did a lot of tests about this radar issue. And it isn't win7 bug, it's RA bug.

A brilliant conclusion :)
Before drawing such conclusions you must at least checked how it works in a clean version of DW or in other mods. Do not you?

Akula vs Spruance
When Akula was about 20nm to Spruance I could lock on it by radar. Spruance didn't see me. No any reaction of Spruance was noticed.

The Spruance saw you, but you were out of its torpedoes and he began to prepare the helicopter for the launch. And since you have most likely disabled QuickAircraftLaunch option, then Spruance launch helicopter to you only after an hour - that's you were not see for his reaction.
Enable QuickAircraftLaunch and see the result.

Spruance was able to detect my radar when I was about 5nm to it. Then attacked me by torpedos and subrocks.

Now you're in range of weapons.

What is the maximum range of launching torpedo to receive the message "torpedo in the water" ?

The maximum range at which you can see the message "torpedo in the water" is 3nm

[goldorak]

The Spruance saw you, but you were out of its torpedoes and he began to prepare the helicopter for the launch. And since you have most likely disabled QuickAircraftLaunch option, then Spruance launch helicopter to you only after an hour - that's you were not see for his reaction.
Enable QuickAircraftLaunch and see the result.


@ Jaf : is it possibile that you modify the alert status of the ASW helicopters from 60 minutes to 15 minutes ? Or is this value somehow hardcoded in the navalsimengine ?

[dd149]

@ Jaf : is it possibile that you modify the alert status of the ASW helicopters from 60 minutes to 15 minutes ? Or is this value somehow hardcoded in the navalsimengine ?
Agreed, 15 to 30 min seem more realistic, how could an alert crew in real life do nothing for more than 45min after detection of unknown/assume hostile sub? Hopefully it is not hard coded as many other bugs by Sonalysts :84:

[dd149]

Hello Jaf And CrazyIvan, in the bug report of your site, several bugs are shown fixed, does it mean that the files have already been updated, or is a patch coming? I understand that regarding sound behavior (detection ranges / layers etc.) you have only decided to modify diesel subs for the time being. Do you consider that some other sound mod will be needed in addition to that one? Thanks again for your superb development work. Best regards

[Jaf]

is it possibile that you modify the alert status of the ASW helicopters from 60 minutes to 15 minutes ? Or is this value somehow hardcoded in the navalsimengine?

Yes, it is hardcoded, but maybe it is possible to change - must look.
What is the real time for this operation?

in the bug report of your site, several bugs are shown fixed, does it mean that the files have already been updated, or is a patch coming?

This means that we fix them and in the next version they will not appear, I hope :)

[dd149]

Thanks Jaf!

[goldorak]

Yes, it is hardcoded, but maybe it is possible to change - must look.
What is the real time for this operation?




You mean in real life ? I have no idea, but it seems reasonable that if an asw warship goes into an operation zone where there are presumably hostile submarine contacts, its helicopters are put in standby.
Surely not one hour to launch and prosecute the contact. I think something around 15 to 20 minutes should be acceptable. The helicopter is on the deck (not in the hangar), the weapons are already loaded, and the engine is not running. Check up procedures etc... shouldn't take very long.

[CrazyIvan]

You mean in real life ? I have no idea, but it seems reasonable that if an asw warship goes into an operation zone where there are presumably hostile submarine contacts, its helicopters are put in standby.
Surely not one hour to launch and prosecute the contact. I think something around 15 to 20 minutes should be acceptable. The helicopter is on the deck (not in the hangar), the weapons are already loaded, and the engine is not running. Check up procedures etc... shouldn't take very long.

It is possible and now to set readiness of the helicopter in the editor.

Click the right button of the mouse by the ship in the mission editor.

Also enter - Flight Shedule.

5 minutes readiness - helicopter on a deck.
15 and 30 minutes - helicopter in a hangar.

[goldorak]

@ CrazyIvan : I think the original question whiskey111 asked was related to quick missions. So right now when you play a quick mission, the asw warships put automatically the helicopters on alert 30, which means 60 minutes to launch.
Can you mod this value so that the warships would have the helicopters 15-20 minutes from launch and not 1 hour ? For the quick missions of course.

[CrazyIvan]

@ CrazyIvan : I think the original question whiskey111 asked was related to quick missions. So right now when you play a quick mission, the asw warships put automatically the helicopters on alert 30, which means 60 minutes to launch.
Can you mod this value so that the warships would have the helicopters 15-20 minutes from launch and not 1 hour ? For the quick missions of course.


In quick missions, the aircraft is under duress blocked.

At any conditions, air unit will not be created.

[whiskey111]

@ CrazyIvan : I think the original question whiskey111 asked was related to quick missions. So right now when you play a quick mission, the asw warships put automatically the helicopters on alert 30, which means 60 minutes to launch.
Can you mod this value so that the warships would have the helicopters 15-20 minutes from launch and not 1 hour ? For the quick missions of course.
Now, I made a single player mission. Flight schedule was set up on 15min.

==========================================
-Jaf-
You were right about radar issue. I haven't play non-moded version that I completely forgot how it was.

By the way, I did several tests on win7 and winXP IN SINGLE PLAYER.

There is very interesting issue of "torpedo in the water' message.

For win7: I got this message in range of (about) 25nm
For winXP: as it was developed, in range of 3nm.

As long as I have tested this version of RA I have noticed only this difference between winXP and win7. AI behaviour is the same. Everything else work correctly on win7.

Additionaly one more question: I have an impression that all warships have the same range of radar. Any chance to fix it ?

I have no idea what is causing the difference of message range on win7. I hope it is fixable.
I would like to do for you any test you wish to make this mod fully compatible with win7.
I hope There is a chance to help you all who create this mod.

[CrazyIvan]

Now, I made a single player mission. Flight schedule was set up on 15min.

==========================================
-Jaf-
You were right about radar issue. I haven't play non-moded version that I completely forgot how it was.

By the way, I did several tests on win7 and winXP IN SINGLE PLAYER.

There is very interesting issue of "torpedo in the water' message.

For win7: I got this message in range of (about) 25nm
For winXP: as it was developed, in range of 3nm.

As long as I have tested this version of RA I have noticed only this difference between winXP and win7. AI behaviour is the same. Everything else work correctly on win7.

Additionaly one more question: I have an impression that all warships have the same range of radar. Any chance to fix it ?

I have no idea what is causing the difference of message range on win7. I hope it is fixable.
I would like to do for you any test you wish to make this mod fully compatible with win7.
I hope There is a chance to help you all who create this mod.


Probably that there is a problem in due course of readiness 15 minutes.

I think that time 15 minutes - bugget. I do not receive rise of the helicopter in this time.
However readiness 30 minutes - works fine.

Concerning radars (surface search radars) - the distance is limited to horizon.

Height of masts - is not considered. Only value of the size of the radar signature.

[Jaf]

Good news guys:
I hope that a bug in the game engine associated with drowning of unit with 0% damage was defeated.
It is only necessary to conduct more tests to confirm the stability of the result.
If the result is confirmed, it will be possible to make the sunk ships lying at the bottom, as requested by mr. goldorak

[CrazyIvan]

Good news guys:
I hope that a bug in the game engine associated with drowning of unit with 0% damage was defeated.
It is only necessary to conduct more tests to confirm the stability of the result.
If the result is confirmed, it will be possible to make the sunk ships lying at the bottom, as requested by mr. goldorak


Is checked up. Works absolutely correctly.


The description of the bug (Tested mission - attached):

On start of mission - you receive 28 % of damages from the mine.


Further - expect the second explosion (between 12:03 and 12:05).


After the second explosion - pay attention, that your submarine also has 28 % of damages - and thus she fatally begins to be crushed on depth.

This bug henceforth - was removed. The coming patch - will remove it.

Personal tnx for Jaf and Krabb! :bud:

[whiskey111]

I thought that every sunk ship was lying on the bottom.
What kind of fix is it ?

[goldorak]

I thought that every sunk ship was lying on the bottom.
What kind of fix is it ?

No, up to now every sunk ship stays x minutes at the botton and it is taken out of the game by the navalsimengine.
With the fix Jaf and CrazyIvan have devised once a ship is sunk, it stays at the bottom for the rest of the game.
From a gameplay perspective it means that if you fire a torpedo that goes very very near the sunken ship it can hit it again instead of the real target. So now you need to have a general idea of where you sink your targets.

[Jaf]

I thought that every sunk ship was lying on the bottom. What kind of fix is it ?

Of course, each sunk unit lies on the bottom, but after a while it is removed from the game.
We can make so that the wrecks were lying on the bottom - this will make the game in the shallow water more difficult and interesting.

[cayman]

Of course, each sunk unit lies on the bottom, but after a while it is removed from the game.
We can make so that the wrecks were lying on the bottom - this will make the game in the shallow water more difficult and interesting.

that's great improvement for realism!

[dd149]

Good news:bud:

[CrazyIvan]

Of course, each sunk unit lies on the bottom, but after a while it is removed from the game.
We can make so that the wrecks were lying on the bottom - this will make the game in the shallow water more difficult and interesting.


Probably we shall refrain from it...

[whiskey111]

(...) this will make the game in the shallow water more difficult and interesting.
What you mean by it ? Sunk ships will be detectable by active sonar, for example ?

[suBB]

Of course, each sunk unit lies on the bottom, but after a while it is removed from the game.
We can make so that the wrecks were lying on the bottom - this will make the game in the shallow water more difficult and interesting.

nice touch!!!

that will also make for one helluvah active countermeasure when the oppty presents itself, pulled this off a few times in my MP days of ole.

Keep up the great work guys!!!!

RA just keeps getting better and better, and I haven't even played 1.1 yet :P

EDIT:

also wanted to say that the energy, creativity and level of detail that you guys are putting into RA is deeply appreciated; Thank you very much for quality product!!!

[Castout]

Of course, each sunk unit lies on the bottom, but after a while it is removed from the game.
We can make so that the wrecks were lying on the bottom - this will make the game in the shallow water more difficult and interesting.



Yes please do do it!

Or even with some improvement that wrecks present slightly lowered detectability or make the wreck disappear or suffer from lowered detectability when it is hit with more than enough torpedoes the point of which is up to the modders, say 200% damage?

Anyway when can the patch be expected?

[cayman]

Probably we shall refrain from it...

why is that? it can only effect active sonar which is true, no harm to realism and more fun

[Jaf]

What you mean by it ? Sunk ships will be detectable by active sonar, for example ?

I mean, that sunk units are visible on the HF and active sonars and affect the behavior of the torpedoes.

why is that? it can only effect active sonar which is true, no harm to realism and more fun

I think that all the same we shall add it :)

[CrazyIvan]

Цитата:
Сообщение от CrazyIvan http://www.redrodgers.com/forums/styles/1/buttons/ru/viewpost.gif (http://www.redrodgers.com/forums/showthread.php?p=112686#post112686)
Probably we shall refrain from it...

why is that? it can only effect active sonar which is true, no harm to realism and more fun


The damaged platform does not remain in a point where she has reached bottom (seabed).

There is a constant displacement of a dead platform.

In 20 minutes - the platform can be displaced on 1 mile (or even more).

As though her carries away by underwater stream.


Any ideas?

[goldorak]

The damaged platform does not remain in a point where she has reached bottom (seabed).

There is a constant displacement of a dead platform.

In 20 minutes - the platform can be displaced on 1 mile (or even more).

As though her carries away by underwater stream.


Any ideas?

Why is the sunken unit displaced by the navalsimengine ? Does the engine assign a non zero speed where instead it should be 0 (not something approximately zero) ?

The mod already has s sunken sub (i think its a sunken xia) object in the database that can be placed in missions. I don't remember this object moving all over the seabed during the 2 or 3 hours of the game.

Why does it work for one kind of object but not the other ? :52:

[CrazyIvan]

why is that? it can only effect active sonar which is true, no harm to realism and more fun

Why is the sunken unit displaced by the navalsimengine ? Does the engine assign a non zero speed where instead it should be 0 (not something approximately zero) ?

The mod already has s sunken sub (i think its a sunken xia) object in the database that can be placed in missions. I don't remember this object moving all over the seabed during the 2 or 3 hours of the game.

Why does it work for one kind of object but not the other ? :52:

XIA SSBN Sunk: Separate object in DataBase - and it in mission real ALIVE object.

Damage SHIP (or SUB) - real DEAD object. (grey mark on Nav. map)

Besides, XIA SSBN Sunk - in a database WITHOUT THRUST and with max spd = ZERO.

Therefore also is not displaced...

[cayman]

Цитата:
Сообщение от CrazyIvan http://www.redrodgers.com/forums/styles/1/buttons/ru/viewpost.gif (http://www.redrodgers.com/forums/showthread.php?p=112686#post112686)
Probably we shall refrain from it...




The damaged platform does not remain in a point where she has reached bottom (seabed).

There is a constant displacement of a dead platform.

In 20 minutes - the platform can be displaced on 1 mile (or even more).

As though her carries away by underwater stream.


Any ideas?

ocean currents effect. you might uncheck the "enable currents" in game options, and give it another try , see how that works

[CrazyIvan]

ocean currents effect. you might uncheck the "enable currents" in game options, and give it another try , see how that works

Water region - is absent by default in the scenario.

[goldorak]

XIA SSBN Sunk: Separate object in DataBase - and it in mission real ALIVE object.

Damage SHIP (or SUB) - real DEAD object. (grey mark on Nav. map)

Besides, XIA SSBN Sunk - in a database WITHOUT THRUST and with max spd = ZERO.

Therefore also is not displaced...


So the navalsimengine does not set THRUST and max speed to ZERO to sunked units. Is this the problem ?
Even if it were somehow impossibile to set these values to zero, how about a very small value so even if the units move, they move what several hundred feet during a typical multiplayer mission (that almost never goes beyond 4 hours) .
Would this be an acceptable compromise ?

[CrazyIvan]

So the navalsimengine does not set THRUST and max speed to ZERO to sunked units. Is this the problem ?
Even if it were somehow impossibile to set these values to zero, how about a very small value so even if the units move, they move what several hundred feet during a typical multiplayer mission (that almost never goes beyond 4 hours) .
Would this be an acceptable compromise ?

>> So the navalsimengine does not set THRUST and max speed to ZERO to sunked units. Is this the problem ?

Yes.

I shall measure moving - for one hour.

Then the displacement of a platform will be precisely known (in kts).

[Drakken]

Hi all,
Hi, CrazyIvan
I'm a player of BETASOM Groups, in the last game we have noticed some
problem of acquisition about Russian Torpedo (UGST, TEST71, and SET series) respect the MK48s .

This is the report of last our game:

ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS:
Sea State: 2 - Bottom type: Mud - Weather: Overcast - SSP Type: Bottom Limited - Ice Coverage: 92%


TABLE N.1 HRS 13.00.08 zulu (show TRUTH)

http://img688.imageshack.us/img688/9185/nuovaimmagineb.png


TABLE N.2 HRS 13.00.10 zulu (without show TRUTH)

http://img708.imageshack.us/img708/2606/nuovaimmagine1t.png

As the TMA can be seen it was very precise, rather it set us the nearest sub... therefore my torpedos are activated well before..


TAVOLA N.3 HRS 13.00.33 zulu (show TRUTH)

http://img266.imageshack.us/img266/3245/nuovaimmagine2.png

Test of the happened activation is the progress to zig-zag of the torpedos... (series TEST-71)


TABLE N.4 ORE 13.00.51 zulu (show TRUTH)

http://img295.imageshack.us/img295/7797/nuovaimmagine3.png

Attention, the two torpedos (here in evidence the first one to the left) they find under the 200 yards of distance...) the first one doesn't hook a Long target more than 100 meters..


TABLE N.5 ORE 13.00.51 zulu (show TRUTH)

http://img708.imageshack.us/img708/9718/nuovaimmagine4o.png

the second draws near to almost 100 yards but also this doesn't see the target...

it seems that the cone of more acquisition draws near to the more target is inefficient...
in fact to the maximum distance of acquisition, the torpedo hooks the target, (you see table n° 1) but reached few yards, the torpedo (cause the values of angles reduced of acquisition, and also doctrines) loses the contact... (you see table n° 3)

I ask you to check it. Thank you.

[CrazyIvan]

To: Drakken.

I shall check it.

But I need in original mission - can put it here?.

You have specified SSP Type: Bottom Limited and Bottom type: Mud are most bad acoustic conditions.

The distances of detecting decrease critically. As for sensor controls on controlled platforms, as well for sensor controls of torpedos.

[Drakken]

To: Drakken.

I shall check it.

But I need in original mission - can put it here?.

You have specified SSP Type: Bottom Limited and Bottom type: Mud are most bad acoustic conditions.

The distances of detecting decrease critically. As for sensor controls on controlled platforms, as well for sensor controls of torpedos.

Thanks for your support !!! :)

In attachments the multyplayer mission... :pilot

[CrazyIvan]

I think game has problems with the network protocol.

Test mission in a single mode.

Test-71M Well enough works.

From 15 test checks, I never have seen the bug at which torpedo no sees target.

Method of shooting - Snapshot 133 degrees. Active Mode, PreEnableSpeed 38 kts. RunTo Enable from 400 to 800 m. Others presets - default.

[goldorak]

I think game has problems with the network protocol.


It is possibile, the betasom community is finding many "strange behaviours" that are simply absent in single player.
I don't know, maybe testing should be done on a lan to see if lag really is creating havoc with the navalsimengine. :152:

[PJB]

We at Seawolves Virtual navy are finding the same problems. Seems mostly to be russian torpedoes, and only in multiplayer, dropped 4 stallions all within 1 nm of target and not 1 aquired target, same mission in single and 2 of torps aquire and make kill. Have tried same mission on a LAN and works fine was only when playing over IPs, we even use hamachi and tunngle and same results in multiplayer.

[CrazyIvan]

Somebody tried service OpenVPN?

http://www.redrodgers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5728


For a long time, KPV74 me informed, that Hamachi can give similar bugs.

[goldorak]

Somebody tried service OpenVPN?

http://www.redrodgers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5728


For a long time, KPV74 me informed, that Hamachi can give similar bugs.


Betasom doesn't play with hamachi.
All our matches are through direct public ip.
No virtual networks whatsoever.

[CrazyIvan]

Betasom doesn't play with hamachi.
All our matches are through direct public ip.
No virtual networks whatsoever.


PJB wrote: "Have tried same mission on a LAN and works fine was only when playing over IPs"

One people use IPS and receive good job.
Others at use IPS - receive opposite result.

Where logic?

Or nevertheless - connection problem?

I assume - LAN it within the limits of one houses?

[goldorak]

@ CrazyIvan :

What I meant was that for testing in multiplayer people should do it on a lan.
A real lan, where latency is not a problem. The moment you start playing over the internet, wether through public ip, or recreating a virtual lan as with hamachi you are still subject to lag. Thats the nature of the internet.
Testing on a physical lan is the only way to be sure that latency can influence negatively the new version of the navalsimengine.

The old versions of DW, didn't exhibit such drastic differences between local play and playing over the internet. RA 1.1 seems to suffer badly when there is lag. So much so that "bugs" appear whereas in the local play no such strange behaviour is observed. Maybe some things were tuned in such a way as to assume that no lag would be present. And when there is lag all hell breaks loose.

[CrazyIvan]

Mission "ICE-WRECKS_SINGLE2.mu" - was checked up in service OpenVPN.

Any deviations it was revealed not.

LOG of record of session is applied.

On page 8 (LOG file doc.) - can see distance on which TEST-71M has found out the target.

FROM LOG:
[3488] NSE: Improved LA SSN detected by TEST-71M Torpedo with Active Sonar at rng 1489
[3488] NSE: Improved LA SSN ID'd Hostile by TEST-71M Torpedo.

Goldorak - I want to invite you in test mission on service OpenVPN. (In some next days) :-)

Or try OpenVPN in your community. On this service we do not see while any problem.

Torpedo Check for mission ICE-WRECKS_SINGLE2.mu :
Method of shooting - Snapshot 133 degrees
Active Search Mode.
RunToEnable: 2200 m.
Speed - 38 kts.
Other Presets - Default.

[Акустик]

CrazyIvan, а Вы не думали про добавление так называемых неакустических средств обнаружения на наши лодки? Возможно ли вообще это осуществить как-нибудь?

[CrazyIvan]

CrazyIvan, а Вы не думали про добавление так называемых неакустических средств обнаружения на наши лодки? Возможно ли вообще это осуществить как-нибудь?

Here communicate in English. Do not break rules.

[Акустик]

What do you think about whithoutacustics (so funny, but i havent any dictionaries) tools of finding submarines on russian Acula? Its posible or not?

[cayman]

What do you think about whithoutacustics (so funny, but i havent any dictionaries) tools of finding submarines on russian Acula? Its posible or not?

Do you mean the "wake flow sensors" on Akula? that's unique tech of Russian. but how to make it work in Gameplay, that's a wonder

[goldorak]

Do you mean the "wake flow sensors" on Akula? that's unique tech of Russian. but how to make it work in Gameplay, that's a wonder


Yeah, Norman Polmar in Cold War Submarines says something (not a lot really) about how the soviets developed non acustic sensors contrary to the americans that were always focusing on sonar detection.
I have to wonder it if is even remotely possibile possibile to simulate such a sensor in DW.

[Акустик]

yes, Im about "wake flow sensors".

[PJB]

Crazy Ivan yes my LAN is in house. I test the TEST 71 and it works fine, but for some reason the stallion doesnt aquire can you check and see if you get different reslut maybe is me, although a few different seawolves have tested in single player and also say stallion torps will not aquire target, one player says he see torp in 3d and it just circles around sub.

[Акустик]

this one is posible to add to DW or not? if its possible, ill ready to help !!! For example: wake flow life very long time-maybe 1 week.... In DW its life-1 hour... 3 general functions-radiation, temperature and hurlyburly water (Im sorry , my english is awful, I know)))...). Rad-50 min, T-30 min, and HBW-10 min. Dancing from this...
That do you think about?

[Jaf]

this one is posible to add to DW or not?That do you think about?

We think that this everything is wonderful and drop dead!!!!!!!! :)
Wake flow sensors, controlled carriers, race cars, space shuttles, etc. etc.
Ask the source codes from S.C.S. and we add all of this.

[Акустик]

Thats drop dead? That does it mean?
Shkval VS Ford Mustang...Whos faster? Cool idea, Jaf.

[CrazyIvan]

Somebody wants to check up game in multipay on inet?

On OpenVPN service?

I can guarantee, stable job.

Any doubting. Inform me.



To Drakken: Try use OpenVPN in your community.

It can encourage behavior DW in multiplay...



I can take part in check of session and on hamchi service also.

I do not see any problems. If you have them - show me them in multiplayer, even under your ANY inet gameserver service.

[PJB]

Have found a bug with the Red October. It is possible to go in reverse 150+kts sustained speed. Here is the procedure how to do it. Makes sure you are below 15om depth, go emergency reverse and raise the snorkel mast, start the hydrodynamic engines, you will start to go reverse very fast but the snorkel mast will break, then using the pull down menus open the engine hatches and restart the hydrodynamic engines and you will go 150+ kts in reverse and maintain this speed until you turn off engines. A seawolves member found this bug dont ask me how all i know is this is how he did it, i tested myself and it works

[CrazyIvan]

Have found a bug with the Red October. It is possible to go in reverse 150+kts sustained speed. Here is the procedure how to do it. Makes sure you are below 15om depth, go emergency reverse and raise the snorkel mast, start the hydrodynamic engines, you will start to go reverse very fast but the snorkel mast will break, then using the pull down menus open the engine hatches and restart the hydrodynamic engines and you will go 150+ kts in reverse and maintain this speed until you turn off engines. A seawolves member found this bug dont ask me how all i know is this is how he did it, i tested myself and it works


I see what is it standard mistake from SCS.

Kilo - shows the same result.

When - on reversal speed is damaged Snorkel (there is a message on damage - in a window of damages and about inability of repair Snorkel).

However - from down the menu, is allowed to lift and to lower a mast. At the same time, with the help of the mouse - the management of a mast is inaccessible. The nut key - instead of a hand occurs.

[PJB]

I see what is it standard mistake from SCS.

Kilo - shows the same result.

When - on reversal speed is damaged Snorkel (there is a message on damage - in a window of damages and about inability of repair Snorkel).

However - from down the menu, is allowed to lift and to lower a mast. At the same time, with the help of the mouse - the management of a mast is inaccessible. The nut key - instead of a hand occurs.

I see what you mean with the kilo, but what i mean as a bug is the red october going 150kts in reverse

[Drakken]

To Drakken: Try use OpenVPN in your community.

It can encourage behavior DW in multiplay...



I can take part in check of session and on hamchi service also.

I do not see any problems. If you have them - show me them in multiplayer, even under your ANY inet gameserver service.

Thanks CrazyIvan, for your suggestions, but we have played another game in multy.
We have noticed other bug, :192:

1) TIW from a distance of 100 MN
2) torpedos AIR-DROPPED DON'T WORK FINE

Besides this, I have seen that the torpedos in DB and in the doctrines have almost all been notably reduced the cones of acquisition, (except the MK48s and the SPEARFISHs) this unfortunately is a problem for the playability of the games, I ask, if you can in the next patch, to give a best ability to all the torpedos in acquisition. (AIR-DROPPED NATO & RUSSIANS) RUSSIANS TORPEDOS - SUBROCS e ASROCS (SILEX).

In many international comunity and in the SUBSIMs forum many players find the same problems

Thanks. :)

If you want we can do a test session in multyplayer with our type connection. :D

In attchments the last game...

[CrazyIvan]

Thanks CrazyIvan, for your suggestions, but we have played another game in multy.
We have noticed other bug, :192:

1) TIW from a distance of 100 MN
2) torpedos AIR-DROPPED DON'T WORK FINE

Besides this, I have seen that the torpedos in DB and in the doctrines have almost all been notably reduced the cones of acquisition, (except the MK48s and the SPEARFISHs) this unfortunately is a problem for the playability of the games, I ask, if you can in the next patch, to give a best ability to all the torpedos in acquisition. (AIR-DROPPED NATO & RUSSIANS) RUSSIANS TORPEDOS - SUBROCS e ASROCS (SILEX).

In many international comunity and in the SUBSIMs forum many players find the same problems

Thanks. :)

If you want we can do a test session in multyplayer with our type connection. :D

In attchments the last game...

Even if I shall try your service - and I shall see 100 Nmi TIW - what is it will change?

We can not alter game under your resource.

We tried OpenVPN - and have not found any bug.

You try also.

Probably it will remove all your problems.

[sertore]

Even if I shall try your service - and I shall see 100 Nmi TIW - what is it will change?

We can not alter game under your resource.

We tried OpenVPN - and have not found any bug.

You try also.

Probably it will remove all your problems.
Hello CrazyIvan,
we will surely try OpenVPN: as we are a quite new to this tunneling software, can you please state exactly which is the configuration that we have to setup?

Maybe are you running an OpenVPN client in service mode on the DW HOST and the other participants are connection to this pseudo-server?

Or have we to use another configuration?

Thanks in advance for your kind help.

PS: BTW, we are using the direct connection of participants to an HOST with the DW session running through a reacheable IP, without any tunneling or VPN software... no service or particular client used at the moment, just the native connectivity provided directly by the game.

[CrazyIvan]

Hello CrazyIvan,
we will surely try OpenVPN: as we are a quite new to this tunneling software, can you please state exactly which is the configuration that we have to setup?

Maybe are you running an OpenVPN client in service mode on the DW HOST and the other participants are connection to this pseudo-server?

Or have we to use another configuration?

Thanks in advance for your kind help.

PS: BTW, we are using the direct connection of participants to an HOST with the DW session running through a reacheable IP, without any tunneling or VPN software... no service or particular client used at the moment, just the native connectivity provided directly by the game.


1. To receive the program http://openvpn.se/download.html (Installation Package (Both 32-bit and 64-bit TAP driver included)
2. Install (nothing changing in options of installation)
3. To place the unpacked archive dw-common.rar in C:\Program Files\OpenVPN\config
http://www.redrodgers.com/forums/showpost.php?p=107285&postcount=1 - dw-common.rar

4. We press by the right button an icon OpenVPN in task bar (on the right from below - where hours) and the first item of the menu "Connect" is chosen.

5. The window with a heap of the letters will appear which disappears in some seconds, on the right help from below emerges that the connection is successfully established, and the icon OpenVPN changes colour with red on green.

6. Your address in the turned out virtual local network looks like 192.168.151.xxx, it(he) can be learned(found out), having guided the mouse on an icon OpenVPN in task bar (on the right below), and having read the information in the emerged help (last string in a window).

7. We start dangerous waters in a mode host multiply and we look, what adapter and the address was chosen by game as working. The address should be ours, such, what was determined in the paragraph 6 by.

7.1. If is chosen wrong (that happens in 90 % of cases), then we leave game, we go in the catalogue, where the game is established, and we look a file adapters.txt. He contains the information on all network adapters (real and virtual) and their addresses. The file looks approximately so:

This file contains all adapters found on this system:
Local Area Connection 2 - IPv4 - 192.168.151.10
Local Area Connection - IPv4 - 192.168.2.1
Stream - IPv4 - 91.76.142.169

Us that adapter interests, at which the address from our virtual local network (192.168.151.xxx), in this case is very first.

We open a file dangerouswaters.ini in the catalogue with game, and in a line .AdapterName in section [Multiplayer] we enter a name of our adapter (everything, that up to first hyphen in the necessary line). In the given example should be:

.AdapterName "IPv4 - 192.168.151.10"

8. We solve, who should be host, host creates at itself a room and informs all ip-address from a virtual local network. Others enter it(him) and enter in game room.

9. For discussion and preparation of battles it is meaningful to use TeamSpeak. I have one empty - yo.jabber.ru:8769 (pay attention, that port non-standard), password - "akula" (without inverted commas, certainly).

[sertore]

1. To receive the program http://openvpn.se/download.html (Installation Package (Both 32-bit and 64-bit TAP driver included)
2. Install (nothing changing in options of installation)
3. To place the unpacked archive dw-common.rar in C:\Program Files\OpenVPN\config
http://www.redrodgers.com/forums/showpost.php?p=107285&postcount=1 - dw-common.rar

4. We press by the right button an icon OpenVPN in task bar (on the right from below - where hours) and the first item of the menu "Connect" is chosen.

5. The window with a heap of the letters will appear which disappears in some seconds, on the right help from below emerges that the connection is successfully established, and the icon OpenVPN changes colour with red on green.

6. Your address in the turned out virtual local network looks like 192.168.151.xxx, it(he) can be learned(found out), having guided the mouse on an icon OpenVPN in task bar (on the right below), and having read the information in the emerged help (last string in a window).

7. We start dangerous waters in a mode host multiply and we look, what adapter and the address was chosen by game as working. The address should be ours, such, what was determined in the paragraph 6 by.

7.1. If is chosen wrong (that happens in 90 % of cases), then we leave game, we go in the catalogue, where the game is established, and we look a file adapters.txt. He contains the information on all network adapters (real and virtual) and their addresses. The file looks approximately so:

This file contains all adapters found on this system:
Local Area Connection 2 - IPv4 - 192.168.151.10
Local Area Connection - IPv4 - 192.168.2.1
Stream - IPv4 - 91.76.142.169

Us that adapter interests, at which the address from our virtual local network (192.168.151.xxx), in this case is very first.

We open a file dangerouswaters.ini in the catalogue with game, and in a line .AdapterName in section [Multiplayer] we enter a name of our adapter (everything, that up to first hyphen in the necessary line). In the given example should be:

.AdapterName "IPv4 - 192.168.151.10"

8. We solve, who should be host, host creates at itself a room and informs all ip-address from a virtual local network. Others enter it(him) and enter in game room.

9. For discussion and preparation of battles it is meaningful to use TeamSpeak. I have one empty - yo.jabber.ru:8769 (pay attention, that port non-standard), password - "akula" (without inverted commas, certainly).
Dear CrazyIvan,
first of all I would like to thank you for extensive and complete guide to OpenVPN: we will organise a test in the next days and we will let you know the results.

Thanks also for the availability of TeamSpeak server: we already have an our own server for Betasom community and you offer is really appreciate, even if we will use our service.

Hope to get good results using OpenVPN to full enjoy your superb MOD. :D

[FERdeBOER]

Hi to you all!
Finally I registered in the forum, it wasn't so hard as I expected it to :)

First of all, thank you very much for your great job. You guys really brought life again to the game and put it to where it should have be since the beginning.

I can tell you I'm playing it on Windows7 32bit, always in single player, without problems. Maybe sometimes I got detected too far away, but other times I've managed to pass undetected at very close ranges, so I suppose is sound conditions, no problem at all.

How is the update progress?

May I ask for something? Is it possible to bring back the "user action" doctrine to the mission editor? It was in Sub Command and no in DW. Maybe SCS only unquoted it and is easy to bring it back. It would be very useful.

Also, can you create some cities? Maybe 3 kind of them: small town, medium and large city. Not need to be an accurate model, just to create a "skyline" to add realism. I suppose is no difficult to create.
Simulate this by putting many buildings slows down game performance a lot (and creates A LOT of visual contacts reports on air/surface units), but creating a single block would be great.

Thank you very much and thanks again.

Edit:
Maybe you can use some of the free models that are in internet, like the ones in google sketchup...
http://sketchup.google.com/3dwarehouse/search?q=city&styp=m&btnG=Buscar&start=0

[CrazyIvan]

User Action was applied in SubCommand for creation of the description Training Mission.

For DW the videoclips were used. Therefore necessity in UserAction has disappeared also they were completely removed from a code in DW.

[FERdeBOER]

User Action was applied in SubCommand for creation of the description Training Mission.

For DW the videoclips were used. Therefore necessity in UserAction has disappeared also they were completely removed from a code in DW.

Oh, ok. It's a pitty. I found it useful in SC to create missions, I used specially the raising antenna as a trigger to send/receive messages.

[Rocky]

Dear CrazvyIvan,

I would like to bring these issues to your attention:

1. SS-N-27 ASW in RTE [0]05 is passive, in [1]05 is active, [2]05 above layer etc. but it's modes are not documented in the RA weapons manual v2. The modes are different from the UUM-125b sealance, even though in the sealance section of the manual it says all of Sealance's modes apply for all Subrocs, however SS-N-27 ASW's modes are different.

2. Active sonar can be exploited specifically. It is my understanding that active sonar visual ping-returns have been reduced in visibility in Ra Mod for more realism, however speeding up the sub and then slowing down, pressing the TRANSMIT (single) button while at 16-18 knots (while still slowing down, otherwise it won't work) makes all visual ping-returns from that single ping, light up very brightly on the display, like in stock 104. Using that exploit, even subs as far as 15 miles away are lit up very bright on the display. I have this confirmed by another person.
Is this really a hidden feature or simply a bug?



Thank you very much for your time and for creating this fantastic mod.


A question on the side:

Why doesn't the Spearfish torpedo do 80 knots in the game but only 70? Many sources including wikipedia say it can do 80 knots maximum, not just 70.



kind regards,

Paul

[goldorak]

A question on the side:

Why doesn't the Spearfish torpedo do 80 knots in the game but only 70? Many sources including wikipedia say it can do 80 knots maximum, not just 70.

kind regards,

Paul

The wikipedia article is very lacking.
Most important it doesn't say whats the range of the torpedo at 80 knots. They say short range, but without qualifying further what do you propose, the modders pick an arbitrary value out of the sky ? No. 70 knots is a very very good compromise.

Here is another source : http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WTBR_PostWWII.htm

read about the spearfish, in the range/speed box this is what it says :

1981 version: About 23,000 yards (21,000 m) / 60+ knots
1994 version: Range unknown / 80+ knots

[CrazyIvan]

To: Rocky

Tnx!

Really, some problem was.

It was eliminated. Now presets in subrocs missile, absolutely identical.

[CrazyIvan]

Boys, we are going to strengthen influence of a layer on detectability of torpedo sensor controls.

Now - the layer actually does not render any influence on sensor controls of a torpedo.

The influence of a layer, is increased with a distance up to target.
However, closer than 5 miles the influence of a layer will be absent.

We shall eliminate this defect. But it will do hunting by even more difficult.
As - the torpedo should be on the same party of a layer where and target.
However on short distances (within the limits of 200-300 meters) we the layer for protection against a torpedo will not block.

Any ideas?

[goldorak]

Boys, we are going to strengthen influence of a layer on detectability of torpedo sensor controls.

Now - the layer actually does not render any influence on sensor controls of a torpedo.

The influence of a layer, is increased with a distance up to target.
However, closer than 5 miles the influence of a layer will be absent.

We shall eliminate this defect. But it will do hunting by even more difficult.
As - the torpedo should be on the same party of a layer where and target.
However on short distances (within the limits of 200-300 meters) we the layer for protection against a torpedo will not block.

Any ideas?

Yes it is a good idea.
Players should always launch 2 torpedoes when a layer is present, one over and one under the layer for maximum detectability and kill. And even if you launch only one torpedo, most of them have the ability at the request of the user to change search depth, over and under the layer. So making the layer have an influence on the detection range of a torpedo is a good thing.
:D

[CrazyIvan]

Yes it is a good idea.
Players should always launch 2 torpedoes when a layer is present, one over and one under the layer for maximum detectability and kill. And even if you launch only one torpedo, most of them have the ability at the request of the user to change search depth, over and under the layer. So making the layer have an influence on the detection range of a torpedo is a good thing.
:D


There can be many questions - " why the torpedo can not get in the target, if the target is visible on 3D the screen? ".

By the way - we have an opportunity to reduce under water visibility on 3D the screen. :D

[goldorak]

There can be many questions - " why the torpedo can not get in the target, if the target is visible on 3D the screen? ".


Put a notice in size 40 :80: in the readme stating that effectiveness of a torpedo is NOT reflected directly on the 3d screen because other factors influence the behaviour of the torpedo sensor. Specifically the presence of a layer.


By the way - we have an opportunity to reduce under water visibility on 3D the screen. :D

Go for it CrazyIvan. :D

[dd149]

Good news, go for it:bud:
The layer effect is there in real life, so why not in the game if you can make it. Will it be more or less a "can/cannot detect" mod or do you have a way to fine tune the loss of sensibility on the other side of layer?

Do you plan to release some intermediate version, as many bugs have already been fixed since last big release.

[cayman]

By the way - we have an opportunity to reduce under water visibility on 3D the screen. :D

that's not good. afterall, on screen view just for players eyecandy only, doesn't effect the real performance of the game, so, reduce visibility means harder for my eyes, actually, could you increase the visibility? that could let us play the game longer

further more, we all know that the graphic of DW is 16 bit color, I've been done some experiments for 32 bit and widescreen, no luck, did DWX team do any test on that? any proposal?

[Rocky]

that's not good. afterall, on screen view just for players eyecandy only


That's not exactly true but i like the idea of reducing visibility underwater.

In Ra mod you can have a full 360° underwater view up to a couple hundred feet depth with the new observation periscope that was added in Ra mod - it's like an underwater board camera. When using the observation periscope to view underwater, underwater sound is also enabled so one can hear torpedos aswell. I can locate a really closeby torpedo with my 5.1 surround headset and the observation periscope for some reason i can't see it tho. If Crazyivan could make it so that torpedos are visible with the observation periscope underwater - that would be awesome!
For some reason dived objects are not visible through the periscope (when periscope is underwater) until they are very close up to the surface including the own submarine hull!


But my personal wish is that when reducing underwater visibility the water color should be darkened aswell, it would make everything look more believable in my opinion.



kind regards,

Paul

[CrazyIvan]

that's not good. afterall, on screen view just for players eyecandy only, doesn't effect the real performance of the game, so, reduce visibility means harder for my eyes, actually, could you increase the visibility? that could let us play the game longer

further more, we all know that the graphic of DW is 16 bit color, I've been done some experiments for 32 bit and widescreen, no luck, did DWX team do any test on that? any proposal?

It only is fair for the truth on 3D the screen.

You always play only with the truth of display?

For me it is pleasant as was in 688H/K - there is no truth of display.

Only received data from sensor controls.:D

Or - they a kind of model - but do not have its exact coordinates. It is necessary to find her it!

[FERdeBOER]

Hi Crazy Ivan.

I've just uploaded here (http://www.commanders-academy.com/forum/showthread.php?p=44054#post44054)

A little program I've made to create random generated missions. As I made it Using your mod as base, I though I should mention it here.

Another question: why did you change the name of the whale in the game for "Grey whale"?
The model is a Sperm Whale (despite is not a whale, but is a technical question) and the song is from a "real" whale, not an Sperm Whale;if you change the name, can you put the right one? I know is silly :152:

[Rocky]

Is it just me or do passive countermeasures not work with passive torps?

I threw them out of my inventory for i found them useless. Passive torps never seem to lock on to passive CMs, it's as if they weren't there.

[CrazyIvan]

The bug of spontaneous inclusion of active sensor controls was removed.:pop:

( The description of this bug, write in the document RA_Weapon_Info_rev2.pdf on page 48 - " About Active Sensor Enabled Bug ")

[About Active Sensor Enabled Bug:

In the engine of game there is an essential bug - if your distant controlled helicopter will be
counterdetected by enemy unit, and the is classified as -HOSTILE -, then by the helicopter the
NavalSimEngine will under duress switch ON a Your Helo radar.
If hostile sub which has counterdetected your helicopter there is at periscope depth - a radar the
helicopter will be SWITCHED ON. If the Sub not at periscope depth, radar is NOT SWITCHED
ON. [Damn It Evil …]
It is fair as well for the surface ships - while they were NOT found out by an enemy, the radars
at them will be switched off ( If EMCON Option Enabled In Mission Editor). But if there will be
an counter detection (for example: AI SUB will find out this ship even at 20 miles far, but sub
stays at PD), the NavalSimEngine also will switch ON radars by the ship. It is simply incredible
- how the submarine can, SWITCH ON radars an the Enemy ship?
Why by the ship (or by helicopters) the active sensors, are enabled - me it is not known.]


The special gratitude for -Krabb-, without which it would be impossible! :190:

[goldorak]

Amazing, one important bug after the other is being crushed. :D

What about the famous bug relating to wakehoming torpedoes that can't sink player controlled surface units ? Do you guys (CrazyIvan, -Krabb-, Jaf, etc...) think its possibile to correct it ? http://www.redrodgers.com/forums/images/smiles2/pop.gif

CrazyIvan, why don't you guys release a more complete patch (that contains also the fixes for the SSKs, lowering their sound level and other improvements you have already done ) ?

[CrazyIvan]

Amazing, one important bug after the other is being crushed. :D

What about the famous bug relating to wakehoming torpedoes that can't sink player controlled surface units ? Do you guys (CrazyIvan, -Krabb-, Jaf, etc...) think its possibile to correct it ? :pop:

CrazyIvan, why don't you guys release a more complete patch (that contains also the fixes for the SSKs, lowering their sound level and other improvements you have already done ) ?


When the global and serious bugs will be eliminated.

And when gameplay- will exchange cardinally.

We to burn oil in night, for acceleration it :)

[Castout]

When the global and serious bugs will be eliminated.

And when gameplay- will exchange cardinally.

We to burn oil in night, for acceleration it :)

Burning oil lamp all through the night.

YOU MUST STAND by your words :rolleyes

I've uninstalled RA and awaiting new patch

[whiskey111]

When can we expect new version ?

[CrazyIvan]

I see what you mean with the kilo, but what i mean as a bug is the red october going 150kts in reverse

The bug was removed.

Now, broken snorkel mast (based on Kilo ShipContrlol Station) it is impossible to lift from drop the menu.

[CrazyIvan]

Bug Description:
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=1448234&postcount=1

The reasons causing this bug - were found.

:pop: The bug was removed from the engine of game.

[FERdeBOER]

You guys are doing an amazing job :)

I have some questions:
1- Is it possible to solve the bug that makes crash a mission if it has a dynamic group inside dynamic locations?

2- I detected contacts first with the conformal array and later (much later) with the sphere. Is it normal? I attach one test mission on which I detect a Sierra at 10 miles with conformal (is an example I tested it in other environmental conditions).

3- Changing depth at speeds lower than 5 knots is a bit tricky with Victor classes, going to periscope depth at low speed makes you breach surface if you don't stop first at, lets say, 30 meters. I've tested it going from 100 meters at 3 knots with all 3 Victors and is more pronounced with Victor2. Then I tested it with other subs (Akula, Oscar and Sturgeon) and are much more stable. Is this intentional?

4- I see that Akula I subs have external tubes, but I thought they had "only" 8 internal ones and were the Akula I improved and IIs the ones with the 6 external addition.

Thank you and continue with your great job :)

[CrazyIvan]

You guys are doing an amazing job :)

I have some questions:
1- Is it possible to solve the bug that makes crash a mission if it has a dynamic group inside dynamic locations?

2- I detected contacts first with the conformal array and later (much later) with the sphere. Is it normal? I attach one test mission on which I detect a Sierra at 10 miles with conformal (is an example I tested it in other environmental conditions).

3- Changing depth at speeds lower than 5 knots is a bit tricky with Victor classes, going to periscope depth at low speed makes you breach surface if you don't stop first at, lets say, 30 meters. I've tested it going from 100 meters at 3 knots with all 3 Victors and is more pronounced with Victor2. Then I tested it with other subs (Akula, Oscar and Sturgeon) and are much more stable. Is this intentional?

4- I see that Akula I subs have external tubes, but I thought they had "only" 8 internal ones and were the Akula I improved and IIs the ones with the 6 external addition.

Thank you and continue with your great job :)

1 - I do not see this bug. The scenario is applied. Generation from 1 up to 2 ships, in 4 different points dynamic location. (After 1 minute on start mission)

2. Conformal Sonar has a bandwith 100-600 Hz, Sphere 800-2000. Lower frequency - is found out earlier.

3. It is the broken physics of game, when actually displacement spoils realistic behaviour.

4. The Akula uses the same folder of the interface, as Akula-1 Imp and Akula - II.
Specially, we no made the separate interface (we NOT want to increase the size of archive).

[FERdeBOER]

1 - I do not see this bug. The scenario is applied. Generation from 1 up to 2 ships, in 4 different points dynamic location. (After 1 minute on start mission)
Didn't know the 1 minute trick, thank you!

2. Conformal Sonar has a bandwith 100-600 Hz, Sphere 800-2000. Lower frequency - is found out earlier.
Thank you, I thought it should be something like that.

4. The Akula uses the same folder of the interface, as Akula-1 Imp and Akula - II.
Specially, we no made the separate interface (we want to increase the size of archive).
OK.

Thank you for your answers!

[CrazyIvan]

Hello CrazyIvan,
we will surely try OpenVPN: as we are a quite new to this tunneling software, can you please state exactly which is the configuration that we have to setup?

Maybe are you running an OpenVPN client in service mode on the DW HOST and the other participants are connection to this pseudo-server?

Or have we to use another configuration?

Thanks in advance for your kind help.

PS: BTW, we are using the direct connection of participants to an HOST with the DW session running through a reacheable IP, without any tunneling or VPN software... no service or particular client used at the moment, just the native connectivity provided directly by the game.

Any News ?

[sertore]

Sorry CrazyIvan,
not yet: I was in holiday out from home with the notebook and I did not installed the OpenVPN client because I was not able to recover any system corruption in case of problem (like the last time I installed Tunngle... after I had to reactivate the XP installation due to too many hardware changes!).

I returned just few days ago and the other Betasom guys are now in holiday: I can understand your request of news... I will try to setup a test for the next week-end with some friends of mine.

Apologise again for delay in our checks.

EDIT: good news: test session planned in the middle of the next week!

[CrazyIvan]

Sorry CrazyIvan,
not yet: I was in holiday out from home with the notebook and I did not installed the OpenVPN client because I was not able to recover any system corruption in case of problem (like the last time I installed Tunngle... after I had to reactivate the XP installation due to too many hardware changes!).

I returned just few days ago and the other Betasom guys are now in holiday: I can understand your request of news... I will try to setup a test for the next week-end with some friends of mine.

Apologise again for delay in our checks.

EDIT: good news: test session planned in the middle of the next week!

It is desirable to receive the confirm bug report about this problem.

[sertore]

OpenVPN update: no way to use the russian OpenVPN server... network latency too high. We are setting up a local server in Italy to try to use it for our test: news as soon as possible.

UPDATE: OpenVPN server seems to be not stable and reliable: no way to test the MOD. We will try another session using Hamachi. :84:

UPDATE 25/8/2010: Hamachi test revealed same problems as direct native connection: usual problems on torpedo acquisition, apart for MK48, and rare CTD due to unknown problems, and strange sonars behaviour. Our feeling is that time conditions in doctrine files are affected by lags on network during multiplayer sessions, and the result is a mess in doctrine execution: this could be the reason for unexpected CTD due too too many time difference between client and server.

[CrazyIvan]

DWX v1.2 has been released.

Links - at first post this theme.

[goldorak]

Congratulations for the new release guys. :D
Now I have to download RA 1.2, and reinstall DW. :132:

[FERdeBOER]

Downloading!!

Thanks!

[sertore]

Thanks!

EDIT: just a little cosmetic note: using the mission editor Ocean Fauna appears even in surface countries drop list, without any possible class and unit to select obviously.

[Гена]

Thank you very much RA Team!

[CrazyIvan]

The sensor controls of torpedos, are sensitive to target angle.

The distance of detection will vary here is how, depending on that under what angle are a Torpedo and Target.

Screen in Archive.

[dyshman]

hi, crazyivan, can you introduce changelog of new version?

[kyte]

What about F17 mod.2 turn radius? Circle has about 1 nmi diameter... I think it's too much. Torpedo has no chance to re-attack target.

Торпеда F 17 имеет огромный радиус поворота при режиме поиска "круг". Цель уходит. Так задумано? Раньше (до RA v.1.2) так не было.
Мануал читал, у этой торпеды нет возможности изменения режима поиска (широкая/узкая-змейка/круг)

[CrazyIvan]

hi, crazyivan, can you introduce changelog of new version?


Some of change for version 1.2 (Another - I do not remember).

Bug with SSP by station Rubis-Amethyste - depth of a layer - now in meters.
Corrected new Kilo Imp periscope with night TV - factor of magnification is added.
The doctrines SUBROCs - removal of the not worked rocket and parachute are corrected.
The doctrine of the helicopter, is corrected at transit tactic, radar now works.
The doctrine SS-N-27 is corrected: the bug with logic of recognition of a countermeasure.
The mission # 3 companies Red Storm Rising is corrected. Also some other mission - corrected.
Model Trafalgar replaced - now bow planes work correctly .
the models of transmitter radioaerials are added. Model The transmitter centre added.
the information on the underwater divers in USNI is added.
the bug with Iranian Kilo LoadOut CTD - corrected.
is corrected noise diesel SUB in small speeds .Corrected noise some SSN.
the distances for 76 and 100 mm of shells on O.H.Perry and Udaloy are corrected.
the bug with CTD ESM by station on Kilo, ALFA, Victors-1 and Victor-II, is corrected.
the sensor control on a missile SS-N-27 ASM - is fixed, the correct work is restored.
Strange Behavior Subs with close range at started mission fixed.
the vertical cone of an active sensor control on direct run torpedos is reduced.
the mistake of depth Promote Link on a Akula - I and Akula -I Imp is corrected.
Periscope height (LaserFinger) on a Akula-II is corrected
the bug with sunk of platforms with percent of damage less than 100 - is corrected.
is corrected noise level at torpedos of a series APR.
is corrected bug EMCON function, with switch on of a Radar, by counterdetect enemy.
Fixed User Subroc bug, when the incorrect mode was established.
the influence of a layer is amplified in the torpedo doctrines.
Snorhel bug Kilo was removed - now broken snorkel not available from drop menu.
RBU - the new principle of work of this weapon (based on artillery) is established.
The bug is removed, when at ending mission has not written in the report the killed or damaged platforms with Subrocs.
Added some Chinese platforms.
Added Dong Feng-21 and SS-21 Scarab tactical anti-ship ballistic missile.
Fixed CTD events in NavalSimEngine, when torpedo has been launched (Only in some Users this bug has been occured).
For Udaloy and O.H.Perry the option in drop menu is added - to find out Sub on Periscope Depth (Within the limits of 3-3.5 miles.)

[cayman]

:80::80::80:
It's my lucky day~! everytime! thank you for all of your hard work, RA team

[CrazyIvan]

:80::80::80:
It's my lucky day~! everytime! thank you for all of your hard work, RA team

We have tried normally to systematize Chinese Destroyers and Frigates.

Specially for you Cayman! :)

[goldorak]

The use of the new font is a good improvement over the default fischer-price one. It really lends a professional military view on the interface.
Is it possibile to use the same font to replace all the other labels in the various 2d screen interfaces ? Maybe by using a bold variant of the new font ?

[cayman]

We have tried normally to systematize Chinese Destroyers and Frigates.

Specially for you Cayman! :)

what can I say? you guy Rock! that's my best birthday gift, ever!:80::80::80:

this day, I enjoy a new way of playing DWX: using 4 computer to control 4 different platform in Multi-LAN at a time, myself act as a fleet commander, that's a lot more fun
3-D hunting sub is more interesting and more modernize, of course, more effective. then, I realized how important it is if the Sub can share the data link network by automaticaly upload its intellegent to other playable platform , the AI sub can behave so in the AI data link, so , I figure with some code change, the controlable Sub can upload its tatical information by raising its floatwire, then, we should have a new kind of tatic in multi-play. Will RA team consider this kind of development in DWX?

BTW: since I build several computers to play multi-DW, found out that the best Video card for DW are those belong to DirectX9.0b era, especially the old ATI videocard(like X600 X800), or Intel intergrated graphic card(X4500, intergrated in Intel G41/45 motherboard is the best choice,). those latest videocard like Nvidia GTX 460, ATI 5870, 5450, none of them are good for DW, just so you know

[CrazyIvan]

what can I say? you guy Rock! that's my best birthday gift, ever!:80::80::80:

this day, I enjoy a new way of playing DWX: using 4 computer to control 4 different platform in Multi-LAN at a time, myself act as a fleet commander, that's a lot more fun
3-D hunting sub is more interesting and more modernize, of course, more effective. then, I realized how important it is if the Sub can share the data link network by automaticaly upload its intellegent to other playable platform , the AI sub can behave so in the AI data link, so , I figure with some code change, the controlable Sub can upload its tatical information by raising its floatwire, then, we should have a new kind of tatic in multi-play. Will RA team consider this kind of development in DWX?

BTW: since I build several computers to play multi-DW, found out that the best Video card for DW are those belong to DirectX9.0b era, especially the old ATI videocard(like X600 X800), or Intel intergrated graphic card(X4500, intergrated in Intel G41/45 motherboard is the best choice,). those latest videocard like Nvidia GTX 460, ATI 5870, 5450, none of them are good for DW, just so you know

Probably you well will check up multigame.

Some players complain on CTD with multigame.

I would like to check it.

The coming days, I would like to invite some players for network game, on mine host

PS: In mu machine NV 6600 video put, I do not receive any problems with this hardware.

[goldorak]

BTW: since I build several computers to play multi-DW, found out that the best Video card for DW are those belong to DirectX9.0b era, especially the old ATI videocard(like X600 X800), or Intel intergrated graphic card(X4500, intergrated in Intel G41/45 motherboard is the best choice,). those latest videocard like Nvidia GTX 460, ATI 5870, 5450, none of them are good for DW, just so you know

DX10+ cards work fine with DW.
The only difference is that the new cards don't have the hardware for dithering 16 bit graphics (which is what DW uses !!!!).
So with these new cards you tend to get piss poor graphics during night missions, or underwater.

You want someone to blame ? Blame SCS for using a 16 bit graphics engine in 2005. :132::132:

[goldorak]

Hi Guys,

The towed array is non working in the perry and udaloy.
Either in quick missions or designing a mission with the mission editor.
You can click on the "stream towed array" button, the game voice will say "towed array deployed" but if you go into the towed array station all screens are dead, they don't show anything.
Same thing if you design a mission with the towed array already deployed. You will see nothing at the sonar screens.

[CrazyIvan]

Hi Guys,

The towed array is non working in the perry and udaloy.
Either in quick missions or designing a mission with the mission editor.
You can click on the "stream towed array" button, the game voice will say "towed array deployed" but if you go into the towed array station all screens are dead, they don't show anything.
Same thing if you design a mission with the towed array already deployed. You will see nothing at the sonar screens.

Switch on from drop menu an option Sensors ---- > PD Mast Search - ON

I should designate it option in drop menu as " Towed Array / PD Mast Search" :( :52:

[goldorak]

Switch on from drop menu an option Sensors ---- > PD Mast Search - ON

I should designate it option in drop menu as " Towed Array / PD Mast Search" :( :52:


Yep its clearer this way.
Although the best way would be to have 2 different entries in the drop menu, one for "deploy towed array" and another for "PD mast search" since these 2 things are conceptually very different and have nothing to do with one another.

[goldorak]

Hey Guys,

I want to ask a question about sonar performance. I was playing a mission on a Lada, and managed to detect a Han at 12.2 nm going at 4 knots. It was not cavitating, and both him and I were on the same side of the layer. I got him on broadband on the conformal sonar. Not even on the towed array.
Is this realistic ?

I have uploaded a save of the mission, so you can see how easily the Lada detected the Han.

[cayman]

DX10+ cards work fine with DW.
The only difference is that the new cards don't have the hardware for dithering 16 bit graphics (which is what DW uses !!!!).
So with these new cards you tend to get piss poor graphics during night missions, or underwater.

You want someone to blame ? Blame SCS for using a 16 bit graphics engine in 2005. :132::132:

Yep, that is what I meant, bad color performance in Dx10 Dx11 videocard, although the FPS is much better. After all, It's an old game.

[cayman]

Probably you well will check up multigame.

Some players complain on CTD with multigame.

I would like to check it.

The coming days, I would like to invite some players for network game, on mine host

PS: In mu machine NV 6600 video put, I do not receive any problems with this hardware.

International multiple-play? Count me in

[dasOoops]

The sensor controls of torpedos, are sensitive to target angle.

The distance of detection will vary here is how, depending on that under what angle are a Torpedo and Target.

Screen in Archive.

Good time of day!
Is this debug info made by internal debug system of DW or by external debugger?
Thanks.

[CrazyIvan]

International multiple-play? Count me in

Ok! :)

[CrazyIvan]

Good time of day!
Is this debug info made by internal debug system of DW or by external debugger?
Thanks.

External.

[CrazyIvan]

Hey Guys,

I want to ask a question about sonar performance. I was playing a mission on a Lada, and managed to detect a Han at 12.2 nm going at 4 knots. It was not cavitating, and both him and I were on the same side of the layer. I got him on broadband on the conformal sonar. Not even on the towed array.
Is this realistic ?

I have uploaded a save of the mission, so you can see how easily the Lada detected the Han.

ALFA vs HAN.

Some Subs - loud.

However HAN - Not the loudest Sub.

At 4 kts, HAN have noise level 74 points.
Hotel-II - 75 points.
ALFA - 69 points.
688 Imr - 65 points.
Seawolf - 62 points.
Kilo - 65 points.
Kilo Impr - 61 points... etc,etc

It is necessary to say, that for diesel submarines, the significant noise increase occurs on speed 3-4 kts.

On 2 kts - you practically can not find out a diesel submarine.

[goldorak]

It is necessary to say, that for diesel submarines, the significant noise increase occurs on speed 3-4 kts.

On 2 kts - you practically can not find out a diesel submarine.


Hmm so 2 knots is maximum speed to be silent.
Does this apply also to diesel submarines that use the "nuclear sub interface" ? Harushio, Type 212, Collins and Lada ?

[CrazyIvan]

Hmm so 2 knots is maximum speed to be silent.
Does this apply also to diesel submarines that use the "nuclear sub interface" ? Harushio, Type 212, Collins and Lada ?

Yes.

[goldorak]

Hi Guys,

I have a bug report :


Faulting application dangerouswaters.exe,
version 0.1.0.4,
faulting module dangerouswaters.exe, version 0.1.0.4,
fault address 0x002f3976.


0000: 41 70 70 6c 69 63 61 74 Applicat
0008: 69 6f 6e 20 46 61 69 6c ion Fail
0010: 75 72 65 20 20 64 61 6e ure dan
0018: 67 65 72 6f 75 73 77 61 gerouswa
0020: 74 65 72 73 2e 65 78 65 ters.exe
0028: 20 30 2e 31 2e 30 2e 34 0.1.0.4
0030: 20 69 6e 20 64 61 6e 67 in dang
0038: 65 72 6f 75 73 77 61 74 erouswat
0040: 65 72 73 2e 65 78 65 20 ers.exe
0048: 30 2e 31 2e 30 2e 34 20 0.1.0.4
0050: 61 74 20 6f 66 66 73 65 at offse
0058: 74 20 30 30 32 66 33 39 t 002f39
0060: 37 36 0d 0a 76..


I was playing on a seawolf against an Akula 2.
I fired 2 mk 48, one over and one under the layer. The Akula 2 went under the layer so the first torpedo missed.
The second one after a 10 minute course hit the Akula from broadside.
2 minutes later the game crashed. No other units were present on the map, only seawolf and akula 2.

[dasOoops]

Hi Guys,

I have a bug report :


Faulting application dangerouswaters.exe,
version 0.1.0.4,
faulting module dangerouswaters.exe, version 0.1.0.4,
fault address 0x002f3976.


Is first torpedo miss on target and go away or do circle and detect target in second time?

[goldorak]

Is first torpedo miss on target and go away or do circle and detect target in second time?

No the first torpedo was set to a depth higher than the layer.
Since the enemy sub was under the layer the torpedo just went over him and continued on its route. I didn't make him go around since I already had a second torpedo going under the layer.

[CrazyIvan]

No the first torpedo was set to a depth higher than the layer.
Since the enemy sub was under the layer the torpedo just went over him and continued on its route. I didn't make him go around since I already had a second torpedo going under the layer.

It happens constantly?
Step by step?

[dd149]

In France, we are planning some testing soon, we will inform you about results and eventual problems. Thanks a lot for this additional development, great job and great additions. One question from the French forum, do you think that it would be possible, for wire guided torpedoes, to have some sort of feedback in the sub of the detection status of the torpedo auto director, i.e. some detection, locked on target, lock lost and reacquiring status information, you see what I mean. We understand that it is probable difficult as it implies some sort of interface between torpedo doctrines and sub display management, but depending on program structure, it might be possible. What is your opinion, we can guess that some provision has been implemented by Sonalysts as they use other versions of same software for professional simulators, which obviously have to include that kind of function in order to be fully realistic.

[CrazyIvan]

In France, we are planning some testing soon, we will inform you about results and eventual problems. Thanks a lot for this additional development, great job and great additions. One question from the French forum, do you think that it would be possible, for wire guided torpedoes, to have some sort of feedback in the sub of the detection status of the torpedo auto director, i.e. some detection, locked on target, lock lost and reacquiring status information, you see what I mean. We understand that it is probable difficult as it implies some sort of interface between torpedo doctrines and sub display management, but depending on program structure, it might be possible. What is your opinion, we can guess that some provision has been implemented by Sonalysts as they use other versions of same software for professional simulators, which obviously have to include that kind of function in order to be fully realistic.

No is not probably.
~~~~~~~~~~~

I doubt that Sonalysts has made something serious in the field of real sim for the militarian. It is a bluff. :D

http://www.sonalystsmedia.com/gallery/Sonalysts-3D-Product-Animation/spf.html

[dd149]

It is a pity that they chose not to release the source, it would have made it much easier to improve the code. Anyway, you have already done a lot, some ideas about what are the coming developments for RA team?

[goldorak]

It happens constantly?
Step by step?

I'll replay the mission to see if the crash happens again in the same circumstance.

Edit : False Alarm, the CTD must have been caused by a faulty driver.

[dd149]

No is not probably.
~~~~~~~~~~~

I doubt that Sonalysts has made something serious in the field of real sim for the militarian. It is a bluff. :D

http://www.sonalystsmedia.com/gallery/Sonalysts-3D-Product-Animation/spf.html

With DWEDIT, it is possible to activate "feedback" flag for the wire guided torpedoes, wouldn't it give the desired function and behave a little bit like an UUV.

[CrazyIvan]

With DWEDIT, it is possible to activate "feedback" flag for the wire guided torpedoes, wouldn't it give the desired function and behave a little bit like an UUV.

It will be given the bug on passive sensor of torpedo.

The passive sensor control all time will be switched on, and will not be capable to ENABLE - PREENABLE option, even on a wire control.

[dd149]

It will be given the bug on passive sensor of torpedo.

The passive sensor control all time will be switched on, and will not be capable to ENABLE - PREENABLE option, even on a wire control.

Ok, not so gogd idean then, thanks for your answer, we tested it on the Millsab French mod (which does not have your revised torpedo control) but it is also biasing the gmae to much in favour opf the platforms with wire guided torpedoes.
Waht are your next ideas to improve RA 1.3?

[FERdeBOER]

Hi.
Congratulations for the 1.2 release. Amazing job, as usual :)

I'm creating a mission and, when testing it, I found that the sub AI engaging is not very good.
Of course is far better than stock one but, in this case, one AkulaI and a SierraI against a three ship formation, the Russian subs attack too early and too far. Several times I tested it and always same behaviour: first a couple of antiship missiles (not enough to pass the AA screen. Then another two again shot-down by AA.
Then 65-76 launched too far away that use to end fuel before arriving the ships or miss.
Then they attack with the rest and so on... always too far and when not, missing the target.

I attached the mission. Is a small version of the original, which is bigger and takes a lot of time to engage.
Select the Kilo as your platform and look the Akula and Sierra attacking.

Thank you for your time and your job.

[goldorak]

Hi Guys,

I have a bug report :


Faulting application dangerouswaters.exe,
version 0.1.0.4,
faulting module dangerouswaters.exe, version 0.1.0.4,
fault address 0x002f3976.


0000: 41 70 70 6c 69 63 61 74 Applicat
0008: 69 6f 6e 20 46 61 69 6c ion Fail
0010: 75 72 65 20 20 64 61 6e ure dan
0018: 67 65 72 6f 75 73 77 61 gerouswa
0020: 74 65 72 73 2e 65 78 65 ters.exe
0028: 20 30 2e 31 2e 30 2e 34 0.1.0.4
0030: 20 69 6e 20 64 61 6e 67 in dang
0038: 65 72 6f 75 73 77 61 74 erouswat
0040: 65 72 73 2e 65 78 65 20 ers.exe
0048: 30 2e 31 2e 30 2e 34 20 0.1.0.4
0050: 61 74 20 6f 66 66 73 65 at offse
0058: 74 20 30 30 32 66 33 39 t 002f39
0060: 37 36 0d 0a 76..


I was playing on a seawolf against an Akula 2.
I fired 2 mk 48, one over and one under the layer. The Akula 2 went under the layer so the first torpedo missed.
The second one after a 10 minute course hit the Akula from broadside.
2 minutes later the game crashed. No other units were present on the map, only seawolf and akula 2.

It happens constantly?
Step by step?

I played a new mission today. A Seawolf against the Colussus and a hydrofoil attack ship. In total I launched 5 torpedos, 3 against the aircraft carrier, and 2 against the hydrofoil. The 2 against the hydrofoil missed, the target being very fast and manouvrable. The aircarft carrier was sunk. At that moment I was at 500 feet. I decided to attack the hydrofoil with 1-2 harpoons so I changed depth to 110 feet. Right after setting the missile, I opened the tubes and launched one harpoon. 1 second later CTD. The error is the same as the one I quoted above last week. The address is the same 0x002f3976.
It was a quick mission.

The hardware and drivers on my pc haven't changed for at least a year.
I never had these crashes on RA 1, 1.1. So I'm astounded with RA 1.2. :132: :132:

[cayman]

Yu-4 torpedo seems have an unlimited weapon range , to RA team

[Von Faust]

Hi Guys,
I receive a TIW in this condition (from 15 nm whith island in the middle, my Udaloy at 30 kts):

http://img697.imageshack.us/img697/641/tiw.png

PS: the helicopter was not in the search phase

I have Win7
Thanks !!!

[whiskey111]

Von Faust: this is win7 problem. RA team has not fixed this problem yet. You will have TIW in range of 50nm.

Question to RA team:
What has happened with ice ? Whatever the ice coverage is I can surface without any demages. It wasn't like that as I remember :)

[CrazyIvan]

To: Goldorak

>The 2 against the hydrofoil missed, the target being very fast and manouvrable.

missed torpedoes still were in water?

[CrazyIvan]

Question to RA team:
What has happened with ice ? Whatever the ice coverage is I can surface without any demages. It wasn't like that as I remember :)

Compare to the original of the version 1.04.

[CrazyIvan]

I played a new mission today. A Seawolf against the Colussus and a hydrofoil attack ship. In total I launched 5 torpedos, 3 against the aircraft carrier, and 2 against the hydrofoil. The 2 against the hydrofoil missed, the target being very fast and manouvrable. The aircarft carrier was sunk. At that moment I was at 500 feet. I decided to attack the hydrofoil with 1-2 harpoons so I changed depth to 110 feet. Right after setting the missile, I opened the tubes and launched one harpoon. 1 second later CTD. The error is the same as the one I quoted above last week. The address is the same 0x002f3976.
It was a quick mission.

The hardware and drivers on my pc haven't changed for at least a year.
I never had these crashes on RA 1, 1.1. So I'm astounded with RA 1.2. :132: :132:


You can check it as follows - replace with time of test, DangerousWaters. EXE and NavalSimEngine. DLL

Establish in a folder with game, these files from the original 1.04 versions.

Check up some times test mission.

I think - you will receive the same mistake (CTD).

I am very difficult to understand a nature of this bug - never I receive CTD to this address.

[whiskey111]

Compare to the original of the version 1.04.
Frankly speaking I can't exactly remember how it was in 1.04. I know that in some version of the game it was impossible to surface through ice coveraged water (above 80%).
But you propably know better :)

Maybe it could be a cool fix for the game ?

[goldorak]

To: Goldorak

>The 2 against the hydrofoil missed, the target being very fast and manouvrable.

missed torpedoes still were in water?

Yes, the 2 mk48 missed but I still made them follow their target until the fuel ran out.


You can check it as follows - replace with time of test, DangerousWaters. EXE and NavalSimEngine. DLL

Establish in a folder with game, these files from the original 1.04 versions.

Check up some times test mission.

I think - you will receive the same mistake (CTD).

I am very difficult to understand a nature of this bug - never I receive CTD to this address.

I don't understand either. Nothing hardware/software changed on my pc between RA 1.1 and 1.2. And I don't remember having those crashes with 1.1, so I'm really at loss as to why its crashing now. :52:

[CrazyIvan]

Yes, the 2 mk48 missed but I still made them follow their target until the fuel ran out.




I don't understand either. Nothing hardware/software changed on my pc between RA 1.1 and 1.2. And I don't remember having those crashes with 1.1, so I'm really at loss as to why its crashing now. :52:


Ок.

Try then the doctrines from the version 1.1

Torp_Adcap.txt
TorpHom.txt
TorpHomCMN.txt

The old doctrines - will give you this CTD in your test mission?

[Von Faust]

Hi Guys,
I receive a TIW in this condition (from 15 nm whith island in the middle, my Udaloy at 30 kts):

http://img697.imageshack.us/img697/641/tiw.png

PS: the helicopter was not in the search phase

I have Win7
Thanks !!!

I have changed the dangerouswaters.exe compatibility mode from "Windows XP (Service Pack 2)" to ""Windows XP (Service Pack 3)" and I don't receive "strange" TIW (whis the same mission condition).

Then I returned to "Windows XP (Service Pack 2)" compatibility mode but I have not the problem of TIW..........strange, very strange :52:

[goldorak]

Ок.

Try then the doctrines from the version 1.1

Torp_Adcap.txt
TorpHom.txt
TorpHomCMN.txt

The old doctrines - will give you this CTD in your test mission?


Hi CrazyIvan,

The moment I downloaded RA 1.2 I cancelled the old 1.1 version. :132:
Since you have my email address, can you send me the old doctrines please ?

[Jaf]

send me the old doctrines please

Hi, goldorak & Von Faust
We have made some fixes in exe&dll concerning TIW and CTDs
PM me your E-mail and I'll send them to you for tests.

[CrazyIvan]

Hi CrazyIvan,

The moment I downloaded RA 1.2 I cancelled the old 1.1 version. :132:
Since you have my email address, can you send me the old doctrines please ?

I have sent to you on Gmail fixed EXE and NSE files.

It eliminates bugs under Windows 7, but it also will and work with XP OS.

[dd149]

I have sent to you on Gmail fixed EXE and NSE files.

It eliminates bugs under Windows 7, but it also will and work with XP OS.

I f you want, we can also test it in France, our first multiplay went well but ended also in CTD. Check pm for mail info

[sertore]

I have sent to you on Gmail fixed EXE and NSE files.

It eliminates bugs under Windows 7, but it also will and work with XP OS.
We are planning to play some multiplayer games within the next weeks: do you agree on use of the new version of EXE files or do you prefer to have the feedback from selected tester?

If you agree on use of the new files, can you please post an official version of them to avoid wrong file selection by interest users?

Thanks in advance for help.

[CrazyIvan]

We are planning to play some multiplayer games within the next weeks: do you agree on use of the new version of EXE files or do you prefer to have the feedback from selected tester?

If you agree on use of the new files, can you please post an official version of them to avoid wrong file selection by interest users?

Thanks in advance for help.


Archive Password: ReinforceAlert

PS: DangerousWaters.EXE and NavalSimEngine.DLL files - also are compatible to the early versions Windows (XP, Vista).

[sertore]

Archive Password: ReinforceAlert

PS: DangerousWaters.EXE and NavalSimEngine.DLL files - also are compatible to the early versions Windows (XP, Vista).
Thanks: I will inform the international DW communities (french and polish) to update all the RA 1.2 MOD installations around the world to the new one.

Any possible feedback will be posted here.

[dd149]

Thanks: I will inform the international DW communities (french and polish) to update all the RA 1.2 MOD installations around the world to the new one.

Any possible feedback will be posted here.

French teeam already informed, under update. For the big mult player game hopefully it will work:)

[dasOoops]

Archive Password: ReinforceAlert

PS: DangerousWaters.EXE and NavalSimEngine.DLL files - also are compatible to the early versions Windows (XP, Vista).
Quick testing on WinXP SP2: previous founded crash of DangerousWaters 104 + RA12 (and RA11) is absent. :bud:

[goldorak]

Quick testing on WinXP SP2: previous founded crash of DangerousWaters 104 + RA12 (and RA11) is absent. :bud:


Is there a reason you haven't installed SP 3 ?
Windows XP SP2 is not even supported by Microsoft anymore.

[dd149]

On XP pro SP3 no specific crash, but did not try multiplayer yet

[dasOoops]

Is there a reason you haven't installed SP 3 ?
Windows XP SP2 is not even supported by Microsoft anymore.

Primary OS: Linux, Secondary: other :) So, no SP3

[whiskey111]

There is a huge bug in game. AI's anti ship missles can't lock on other ships and destroy it.
Was this issue described here ?

[Jaf]

There is a huge bug in game. AI's anti ship missles can't lock on other ships and destroy it.
Was this issue described here ?

You must install "Doctrines Fix #1"

[whiskey111]

Thank you :)

[CrazyIvan]

I played a new mission today. A Seawolf against the Colussus and a hydrofoil attack ship. In total I launched 5 torpedos, 3 against the aircraft carrier, and 2 against the hydrofoil. The 2 against the hydrofoil missed, the target being very fast and manouvrable. The aircarft carrier was sunk. At that moment I was at 500 feet. I decided to attack the hydrofoil with 1-2 harpoons so I changed depth to 110 feet. Right after setting the missile, I opened the tubes and launched one harpoon. 1 second later CTD. The error is the same as the one I quoted above last week. The address is the same 0x002f3976.
It was a quick mission.

The hardware and drivers on my pc haven't changed for at least a year.
I never had these crashes on RA 1, 1.1. So I'm astounded with RA 1.2. :132: :132:

Any changes have affected is in the best party - with updated a EXE file and NavalSimEngine Fix?

[whiskey111]

Is it possible to add new ships as a controlable ? It could be cool to control Sovremeny or Arleigh Burke.

[Von Faust]

The Towed Array of my Udaloy and OH Perry doesn't work.
It's only my problem ?

Thanks

[dd149]

Is it possible to add new ships as a controlable ? It could be cool to control Sovremeny or Arleigh Burke.
Both are mostly AA ships, so the playability might become quite boring after a while. The AA missiles being very basic in their controls.

[Jaf]

The Towed Array of my Udaloy and OH Perry doesn't work.

See:
http://www.redrodgers.com/forums/showpost.php?p=113604&postcount=1146

[CrazyIvan]

The Towed Array of my Udaloy and OH Perry doesn't work.
It's only my problem ?

Thanks

It is a problem was eliminated.

In the next a patch, it will work correctly.

[Von Faust]

It is a problem was eliminated.

In the next a patch, it will work correctly.

Very good, thanks !!! :D

I have finished the test on Udaloy.
It seems all ok (all elo mode included).

continue whith other platform......:bud:

[CrazyIvan]

Very good, thanks !!! :D

I have finished the test on Udaloy.
It seems all ok (all elo mode included).

continue whith other platform......:bud:
Probably that for Udaloy DDG we shall add station active Intercept and TMA made as digital technology of development of the decision instead of paper as on O.H.Perry.

[goldorak]

Probably that for Udaloy DDG we shall add station active Intercept and TMA made as digital technology of development of the decision instead of paper as on O.H.Perry.


http://www.hwupgrade.it/forum/images_hwu/smilies/12.gif http://www.hwupgrade.it/forum/images_hwu/smilies/12.gif http://www.hwupgrade.it/forum/images_hwu/smilies/12.gif

I want that upgrade also on the perry !!!! :D

[goldorak]

Any changes have affected is in the best party - with updated a EXE file and NavalSimEngine Fix?

I'm still testing although it seems that the game CTD when I fire a lot of weapons, like 6 to 8 torpedoes. Or a mix of torpedoes and missiles.
If I eliminate a hardware problem, then perhaps its a software incompatibility of some kind. The 2 programs I have continously active are Avira Antivirus and a torrent client. I'll see later what happens when pausing the torrent client.

[dd149]

No major CTD on XP but testing still in progress. Antivirus Symantec active, but does not seem to interfere
New improvments for Udaloy make our mouth watering.:)

[dd149]

CTD experienced on the mission "keep the petrol flowing" after killing the 2 kilos
still 2Mk48 and 4 kilo fired torpedoes chasing me plus two fired against the tanker at least 5 decoys (two AI three by me)in the water, so it seems that the CTD happens with a lot of objects (associated with sophisticated doctrines maybe?) in the water.
CTD occurred after 1st ASUW torpedo hit the tanker and just at the moment the 2nd one was hitting.

[CrazyIvan]

CTD experienced on the mission "keep the petrol flowing" after killing the 2 kilos
still 2Mk48 and 4 kilo fired torpedoes chasing me plus two fired against the tanker at least 5 decoys (two AI three by me)in the water, so it seems that the CTD happens with a lot of objects (associated with sophisticated doctrines maybe?) in the water.
CTD occurred after 1st ASUW torpedo hit the tanker and just at the moment the 2nd one was hitting.

The exact information is necessary - where CTD? EXE or NSE files, offset adress.

[dd149]

The exact information is necessary - where CTD? EXE or NSE files, offset adress.

It showed a error window, but with no information inside and the main window became smaller and empty.How to get the debug info? I will try to reproduce the same situation.

[goldorak]

It showed a error window, but with no information inside and the main window became smaller and empty.How to get the debug info? I will try to reproduce the same situation.


On windows xp :


go into control panel
click on administrative tools
click on event viewer
go into the application entry

you'll find a list of all the applications that have CTD, hanged or exited abnormally. Find the one relating to DW, and it will have all the information CrazyIvan requested.

[dd149]

On windows xp :


go into control panel
click on administrative tools
click on event viewer
go into the application entry

you'll find a list of all the applications that have CTD, hanged or exited abnormally. Find the one relating to DW, and it will have all the information CrazyIvan requested.

Thanks, I have not found any DW exe or navsimengine dll related entry but will try to reproduce the CTD tonight.

[sertore]

Can I ask if you plan the adding of IDAS missiles for U212 or other similar weapons for the next version of RA MOD, if technically possible (multiple target capabilities, AAW included, with submarine launch)?

Just for reference http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IDAS_(missile)

Thanks.

[dyshman]

there are some pics of new-modelled USN cruisers CG26 Belknap and CGN38 Virginia
1. cg26 http://s49.radikal.ru/i125/1009/bf/19c9a5748488.jpg
2.http://s54.radikal.ru/i145/1009/d2/96da31b02e08.jpg
3. http://s003.radikal.ru/i202/1009/72/d2ca134813d4.jpg

[Sag75]

RA Team, all my compliments for your amazing job!

I've just a question, is it possible implement russian accent speaking on Udaloy? Thanks!

[CrazyIvan]

RA Team, all my compliments for your amazing job!

I've just a question, is it possible implement russian accent speaking on Udaloy? Thanks!

Most likely - no

[dd149]

Thanks, I have not found any DW exe or navsimengine dll related entry but will try to reproduce the CTD tonight.
I did not get CTD on two tests, but due there were less torpedoes in the water compared to the test where the game crashed. (lest shots from the AI kilos).

[cayman]

I'd run many MULTI-stations Lan party in the last few weeks, some mission runs even for days, never encounter a CTD so far, the new version DWX is the best stable version ever, beautiful work! keep rocking! DWX Team, I salute you!

[CrazyIvan]

I did not get CTD on two tests, but due there were less torpedoes in the water compared to the test where the game crashed. (lest shots from the AI kilos).


AI Kilos were not on periscope depth or above - after they have shot.

Whether there were friendly platforms for Kilo in mission?

[dd149]

AI Kilos were not on periscope depth or above - after they have shot.

Whether there were friendly platforms for Kilo in mission?
Kilo shallow depth but not sure if masts extended or not.
No friendly for kilos only cargo ship and neutral fishing boats.

[Гена]

Great mod. There is no issues with unstable work till now as it was with 1.1 version at list in single mode. Gameplay is more harder and realistic then it was in original DW, hordes of bugs were dismissed, tons of information were corrected and added. Thanks again RA HQ.

[Rocky]

Just tested Ra 1.2 in singleplayer.

This time, passive countermeasures seem to work great, they can deflect torpedoes even when aquired to my sub while diving, turning and only 1000 yards away, so evading got a bit easy here.

[CrazyIvan]

Just tested Ra 1.2 in singleplayer.

This time, passive countermeasures seem to work great, they can deflect torpedoes even when aquired to my sub while diving, turning and only 1000 yards away, so evading got a bit easy here.


Not absolutely easy.

It depends on a torpedo.

If the torpedo has an option " to distinguish the signature a CM " - she will not deviate.

If distance up to CM too large - torpedo can not distinguish her and it is possible first time - will attack it. However as approaching to CM, the signal strength of a CM will increase, and the torpedo distinguishes her.
The phase of attack will be completed, and the torpedo again will take preenable course.

[Panzermensch]

First, привет, hello and greetings to the whole RedRogers Crew and all its fellows. =D
Second, I'd like to thank you all for keepin this great (!) Mod up! As we all know DW isnt that well programmed, so we need a active community like this one!

I hope my english is to understand, because I'm from Germania and so I'm not a native speaker. =(

Well, I'm not sure wether its allready been mentioned, but I found a Bug in DW (tested in SSN21- Multiplayer):

When you do Multi-Station-Game and the Sonaroperator does not have control over Steering-Room. he cant listen to towed array audio.

I have a LAN-Crew and we play with multi-station the most time up to 6 persons per platform. (Yes, I know, insane...but with good roleplay alot of fun ;D) So my Helmsman takes TA-Audio away from my Sonarman! =/
Hope there could be any solution! Does anyone have a clue?

thanks and greetz
Paddy =)

[CrazyIvan]

First, привет, hello and greetings to the whole RedRogers Crew and all its fellows. =D
Second, I'd like to thank you all for keepin this great (!) Mod up! As we all know DW isnt that well programmed, so we need a active community like this one!

I hope my english is to understand, because I'm from Germania and so I'm not a native speaker. =(

Well, I'm not sure wether its allready been mentioned, but I found a Bug in DW (tested in SSN21- Multiplayer):

When you do Multi-Station-Game and the Sonaroperator does not have control over Steering-Room. he cant listen to towed array audio.

I have a LAN-Crew and we play with multi-station the most time up to 6 persons per platform. (Yes, I know, insane...but with good roleplay alot of fun ;D) So my Helmsman takes TA-Audio away from my Sonarman! =/
Hope there could be any solution! Does anyone have a clue?

thanks and greetz
Paddy =)

Welcome To Aboard!

Concerning the Ships - Read the message 1145-1146 about Towed Array problem.

In the following patch it was eliminated.

But with SSN21 TA problem - unknown.

We shall check it.

[Panzermensch]

But with SSN21 TA problem - unknown.

We shall check it.


Yeah, we should! =) I'm very excited about what we could find out.

[Invicible]

Regards to all, start by thanking for the wonderful work done with RA 1.2 ;). I am writing to ask you some questions about the strange behavior of the Mod.

During a test with the following mission http://www.filefront.com/17458854/TEST.mu I found this:
http://img229.imageshack.us/img229/3729/trafalgarbbdifferent.jpg
you see in the image, the trace in the two sonar screens BB is different. Why? The Target has a speed of 29 kn, is very close to my unit(Trafalgar), it is not working the WAA and the Demon. Why?

I repeated the same mission with the Seawolf.
http://img820.imageshack.us/img820/4710/seawolfbbsimilar.jpg
The two tracks in this case are the same, just as it is. In addition, the WAA and the Demon are functioning.

With both units, I see in the NB, the same number of frequencies and intensities.See pictures below:
http://img831.imageshack.us/img831/2584/immagineoiq.jpg

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

The operation of the WAA in RA 1.2 is influenced by what? The operating range of the WAA and Demon was reduced in RA 1.2?
I am very interested in the WAA and Demon, because I play with TMA manually, and without a functioning Demon and WAA, the speed of analysis will always be reduced. It 's very important for a player of TMA manual.

Thanks for your answers.

Greetings
Invincible

[CrazyIvan]

I do not see any problem with displacement of a mark of a signal on BB Sonar.
The line very thin, therefore displacement not so is appreciable as on a thick line at SSN21.

You look time - give a picture at Trafalgar - 4 minutes after of a beginning of mission, and SSN21 - 2 minutes.

If you will look SSN21 also at 4 minutes - displacement of contact on BB sonars it will not be visible any more.



Trafalgar - has no WAA. Only modernized Trenchant carries WAA of the side antennas.

[Invicible]

Understood, Trafalgar does not have the WAA system.:42:

In RA 1.2, which is the distance of maximum work of WAA & Demon?
Thanks

[CrazyIvan]

Understood, Trafalgar does not have the WAA system.:42:

In RA 1.2, which is the distance of maximum work of WAA & Demon?
Thanks


The distance will depend on environmental conditions and target noise.

For "Trenchant", maximal distance of WAA: 22224 m. (24304 yards)

[Invicible]

The distance will depend on environmental conditions and target noise.

For "Trenchant", maximal distance of WAA: 22224 m. (24304 yards)

Thanks CrazyIvan.

Question:
In DW, the Bearing Rate is calculated in relation to the solution we obtained with the TMA. You can change this through the Mod? making the calculation of Bearing rate than the real solution and not the estimated solution?

[Invicible]

The distance will depend on environmental conditions and target noise.

For "Trenchant", maximal distance of WAA: 22224 m. (24304 yards)

Thanks CrazyIvan.

Question:
In DW, the Bearing Rate is calculated in relation to the solution we obtained with the TMA. You can change this through the Mod? making the calculation of Bearing rate than the real solution and not the estimated solution?

http://img819.imageshack.us/img819/346/immaginesv.jpg

[CrazyIvan]

These data are on the screen DDI. (Transparent window an Nav.Map)

Besides - what valuable information contains in Bearing Rate???

[Invicible]

These data are on the screen DDI. (Transparent window an Nav.Map)

Besides - what valuable information contains in Bearing Rate???

Bearing Rate is essential to know which way to turn a Target. Without the Bearing Rate, may be right or left at 50%. Guessing and luck. For this is essentially the Bearing Rate for playing with TMA manual. Also can be used to apply different theories. For example, the Ekelund range. Bearing Rate to a hundredth of a degree would be ideal.:rolleyes
The TMA stations in real submarine calculating the Bearing Rate to the hundredth of a degree , perhaps beyond.

[CrazyIvan]

These data are on the screen DDI. (Transparent window an Nav.Map) :)


It data is accessible on nav.map to any player, even in multistation a mode

[Invicible]

These data are on the screen DDI. (Transparent window an Nav.Map) :)


It data is accessible on nav.map to any player, even in multistation a mode

Ok! But , the Bearing Rate in DW, Which are computed with respect to our estimated solution, and not with the real target.
For this reason it is useless.

[goldorak]

These data are on the screen DDI. (Transparent window an Nav.Map) :)


It data is accessible on nav.map to any player, even in multistation a mode

Hi CrazyIvan,

In real life the bearing rate is independant from the tma solution.
Bearing rate depends on how the bearing to the contact changes with time (thats all it is, and the game should in principle have no problem showing this value). And this information can tell you (together with tma) how the target is moving with respect to you.
Now in DW, bearing rate is determined by the tma solution. That is to say that the value you see in the DDI (the litte screen in the navmap) and in the tma station is generated once you set a target solution. And this is conceptually wrong because bearing rate doesn't depend on the tma solution.
For instance if you are tracking a target (you have assigned a tracker), you won't get a bearing rate until you generate a tma solution. If the solution is correct the bearing rate will be correct, if your solution is wrong the bearing rate will also be wrong. In real life it doesn't work this way, bearing rate is independant from tma information. So you can have a correct bearing rate value even if you don't generate a tma solution.
This is another of those brain deaded implementation issues that Sonalysts just didn't care to think out straight. :132:

[dd149]

Hi CrazyIvan,

In real life the bearing rate is independant from the tma solution.
Bearing rate depends on how the bearing to the contact changes with time (thats all it is, and the game should in principle have no problem showing this value). And this information can tell you (together with tma) how the target is moving with respect to you.
Now in DW, bearing rate is determined by the tma solution. That is to say that the value you see in the DDI (the litte screen in the navmap) and in the tma station is generated once you set a target solution. And this is conceptually wrong because bearing rate doesn't depend on the tma solution.
For instance if you are tracking a target (you have assigned a tracker), you won't get a bearing rate until you generate a tma solution. If the solution is correct the bearing rate will be correct, if your solution is wrong the bearing rate will also be wrong. In real life it doesn't work this way, bearing rate is independant from tma information. So you can have a correct bearing rate value even if you don't generate a tma solution.
This is another of those brain deaded implementation issues that Sonalysts just didn't care to think out straight. :132:

Thank you Goldorak for this clarification on this somehow hazy and complicated subject :D

[Panzermensch]

Well, I'm not sure wether its allready been mentioned, but I found a Bug in DW (tested in SSN21- Multiplayer):

When you do Multi-Station-Game and the Sonaroperator does not have control over Steering-Room. he cant listen to towed array audio. PS: You can see the waterfalls, but even when Audio Toggle is ON, you can't hear anything.

Paddy =)

CrazyIvan, any suggest about trying out this situation?

[Invicible]

If the calculation of the Bearing Rate will be fixed in DW, the mortgage will become even more realistic, you can use in the TMA as a real submarine.
:rolleyes

[Гена]

Hm, i didn't know about this shit with bearing rate. I thought it was calulated with respect for real contact. Maybe it is because i didn't use tma manually.

[Lau]

Hello to everyone !

It is a pleasure to have the time again to post in this forum and of curse to be able to use RA 1.2! Thanks:)

Red October : what is the intention with regards to hydrodynamic system, at the moment it says in USNI operate below 150m depth. But when trying it is the opposite set to work above 150m? If there is a choice to make and for stealth reasons it should only work below 150m It will be nice also to have a greater penalty on speed. Now it is 26 to 25, my syggestion is 26 to 18.

Is there an alteration of signature once hydrodynamic system is on?

Thanks in advance for your kind reply,

Lau

PS: I know and once more my request are of small importance compared to top priorities in RA dev, but thought it would be nice to give you easier issues to solve :D

[dd149]

One of our members in France has the feeling that there is trouble with spearfish fired from Trenchant sub. While still under wire guidance to redirect, it passed several time very close to target without being able to acquire it. See attached pic for situation.
Do you think this doctrine is faulty, is it the same as used by other torpedoes?
Thanks again for your work.
French team is still discovering the new features.

[dd149]

Another strange thing
RA 1.2 patched on 1.04
MH 60 user Vs Typhoon Red October user
Visual contact on the conning tower from the MH 60 pilot station, but nothing appears on FLIR???

[kyte]

What about towed arrays on controllable surface ships? They doesn't work (both PERRY and UDALOY)

May be this is only my problem???:(

RA 1.2

[goldorak]

What about towed arrays on controllable surface ships? They doesn't work (both PERRY and UDALOY)

May be this is only my problem???:(

RA 1.2

In the Navmap,
Switch on from drop menu an option Sensors ---- > PD Mast Search - ON.
That will get the Towed Array working.

[goldorak]

One of our members in France has the feeling that there is trouble with spearfish fired from Trenchant sub. While still under wire guidance to redirect, it passed several time very close to target without being able to acquire it. See attached pic for situation.
Do you think this doctrine is faulty, is it the same as used by other torpedoes?
Thanks again for your work.
French team is still discovering the new features.


The spearfish works perfectly.
You must understand how to take advantage of it. First of all the AI is a big step up from other mods, it knows how to evade well, and not just by dumping countermeasures. This means you cannot launch the torpedo in a fire and forget style, most of the time it will not work even with mk48 adcaps.
The torpedo will not acquire the target. Second point, the probability of acquisition depends on the angle between target and torpedo (also distance, depth, and layer), it is maximised at 90 degrees and then decreases. So to get a good kill probability you must resteer the torpedo to hit the target broadside.
And this requires having a very good tma solution (and have it updated continuosly).
Third, the higher the launch speed, the more difficult time you'll have in restreeing it on a new course. 70 knots is all good and well, but only in the final attack phase. 45-50 knots is what you want during search.

Finally don't use Lwami or At3 or mille-sabords mod as a comparison, they are much simpler mods in the sense that you can score much more easily, and the AI is not as challenging.

[Sag75]

Hi all RA Team, I'd like know if this is a DW bug on Perry. When I watch at single beam in FFG's towed array station I can see the contact frequences. That's fine. But when I switch back to LOFAR panel and I go in an other single beam panel (to see an other contact) I still see the old frequences lanes of the previous sinlge beam display going away, and the new ones of the new contact appearing in the bottom in the waterfall. So at the begining it was confusing me! Now I understood. There is a way to refresh the single beam when I switch it in order to have clean single beams without the remaining frequences of the previous ones? Thanks for attention! RA rocks!!

[goldorak]

Hi all RA Team, I'd like know if this is a DW bug on Perry. When I watch at single beam in FFG's towed array station I can see the contact frequences. That's fine. But when I switch back to LOFAR panel and I go in an other single beam panel (to see an other contact) I still see the old frequences lanes of the previous sinlge beam display going away, and the new ones of the new contact appearing in the bottom in the waterfall. So at the begining it was confusing me! Now I understood. There is a way to refresh the single beam when I switch it in order to have clean single beams without the remaining frequences of the previous ones? Thanks for attention! RA rocks!!


The lofar beams will show in real time the frequencies of the different contacts. As the contacts move the corresponding frequencies will shift from beam to beam.
There is no automatic refresh, but if you tag a contact and then select slave to tag, the frequecies of the selected contact will not jump from beam to beam. Instead the lofar will show you exactly which beam is hearing the frequency of the contact (even if the beam changes) so you don't have to chase the frequencies in the different beams.

[CrazyIvan]

Hello to everyone !

It is a pleasure to have the time again to post in this forum and of curse to be able to use RA 1.2! Thanks:)

Red October : what is the intention with regards to hydrodynamic system, at the moment it says in USNI operate below 150m depth. But when trying it is the opposite set to work above 150m? If there is a choice to make and for stealth reasons it should only work below 150m It will be nice also to have a greater penalty on speed. Now it is 26 to 25, my syggestion is 26 to 18.

Is there an alteration of signature once hydrodynamic system is on?

Thanks in advance for your kind reply,

Lau

PS: I know and once more my request are of small importance compared to top priorities in RA dev, but thought it would be nice to give you easier issues to solve :D

It was corrected for v. 1.3 - 150 meters and BELOW now work hydrodynamic system on Red October.

The separate signature no. As well as however and for diesel engines KILO.

The signature is attached not to the separate engine (on thrust dialogue in Database), and to the object.
Therefore - signature always same for the electrical and diesel engines.

[CrazyIvan]

In the Navmap,
Switch on from drop menu an option Sensors ---- > PD Mast Search - ON.
That will get the Towed Array working.

For ver. 1.3, this has been fixed.

The dependence Towed Array is separated from the switch of search of masts.

Towed Array will work - when the player will deploy it from station ShipControl.

[Sag75]

The lofar beams will show in real time the frequencies of the different contacts. As the contacts move the corresponding frequencies will shift from beam to beam.
There is no automatic refresh, but if you tag a contact and then select slave to tag, the frequecies of the selected contact will not jump from beam to beam. Instead the lofar will show you exactly which beam is hearing the frequency of the contact (even if the beam changes) so you don't have to chase the frequencies in the different beams.


Goldorak, you haven't understood my point. Let's have two stable contacts in two different LOFAR panels. One is my own ship and it's on beam #1 of course. The second contact -let's say- it's a ship on beam #5 and it's stable there. That's it. I jump now on the single beam #1 and I see my own ship frequences as very strong. That's fine. Now, if I come back to LOFAR station and I select the single beam #5 I still can see my ship's frequences that come away upwards on the display and the new ship's frequences coming up from below. Try it. So why this happens?

In other words, it seems when I click on a single beam in LOFAR stations I don't get a sudden simple zoom of that beam! It still displays for a while the previous frequences of the previous single beam visualization.