Not a Known ANW Issue #01 or How to build AIP Submarines

[FransKoenz]

Just 2 little children who are fighting for a ...........
PDB
 
HUD
 
Does anyone understand this whole discussion? It is not about the game, it is about persons.
 
The PDB contains all the units I like to put in my scenarios, but I'm not sure about the integrity of this DB
I'm sure that Darren's DB is well build up with decent calculations, but imho I can't design scenarios with the units available in the HUD.
 
I suggest that AGSI [finally] shows up with a DB that satisfies everyone, after all it's their product.
 
Now it is a yes-no battle between two grown up persons who fight like little children for a lolly [:(]
 
Ciao,
Frans [aka Taitennek].
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

[Bucks]

ORIGINAL: hermanhum

Rubbish.

You the ECM value should have absolutely no effect on any visual sensor. The Visual Light bandwidth isn't even selected for any of the ECM systems. If they are somehow exerting an effect on the Visual sensors, you've got some majorly bad things going on. It would be like saying Radar has some effect on Sonar.

Utter rubbish.

No Herman it's not rubbish.

You have an issue listed that reports a visual sensor being jammed by ECM, I looked at the issue and the DB and I saw the negative values. I immediately had to ask myself exactly what effect a negative output value might have on any sensor, not just visual. The figure in question (search output) is representing transmitted power, and you are representing that negatively.

I've not tested your issue in depth, time limitations. I'm simply raising a point based on the same questions I apply to all of these problems and my testing. If there are unusual values, we need to establish their effects. This may be important for current development of FCR (Fire Control Radar) handling and yeah you'll moan about yet another change and yes there's work involved, but it makes the simulation even closer to reality. Not only that, if you want to use these values, and they do cause issues if they are able to be worked into the code in the hope of reducing the issues list I'm sure Russell will attempt to achieve that if possible.

Cheers

Darren Buckley

[hermanhum]

ORIGINAL: Bucks

HERE IT IS AGAIN - NOTE VISUAL SENSORS ARE NOT MENTIONED IN MY PREVIOUS POST

Uh, sure they are. It's hard to hide from your own words. Right here:

ORIGINAL: Bucks

A perfect example are numerous ECM systems in the PDB that have negative values for their Search Output data and the only interaction this value has in game terms is for ECM detection, i.e. the range at which the ECM system will be counter detected by ESM systems. A negative value in this case has to my knowledge UNKNOWN effects on the GE's resolution and interpretation of this situation. The value should always be positive and is translated to detection range in the same way emitting radar systems are

ORIGINAL: Bucks

I'm trying to explain how it works, it's not a popularity contest and there is a lot of "under the hood" stuff here. I wanted to ask how you arrived at your values and if they do work, exactly how they are being interpreted by the Game Engine. Ok it's outside my model and the expected values for use by the GE. If they do work fine but how do these negatives interact with your ESM systems? Don't they have issues detecting a negative output in the case of your ECM as compared to your positive radar output values?

See previous reply from Herman

Herman if your values don't fit the guidelines of the values the coding handles, pull your list down and go away, thanks for the admission you have no idea what your doing.

Better still, thanks for showing everyone that you have no idea what works and what doesn't.

I've even made up a little test file with the vaunted HUD3.
tm.asp?m=1904270&mpage=1&key=&#

As you can see, even with positive ECM values, the Visual Sensors are able to detect ECM. Now, the only question remaining is whether you are man enough to admit that you have no idea what is going on.

ORIGINAL: Bucks

Anyway back to work...

And thanks for clarifying exactly who is responsible for the current horrendous behaviour in ANW.

[Bucks]

ORIGINAL: Taitennek

Just 2 little children who are fighting for a ...........
PDB

HUD

Does anyone understand this whole discussion? It is not about the game, it is about persons.

The PDB contains all the units I like to put in my scenarios, but I'm not sure about the integrity of this DB
I'm sure that Darren's DB is well build up with decent calculations, but imho I can't design scenarios with the units available in the HUD.

I suggest that AGSI [finally] shows up with a DB that satisfies everyone, after all it's their product.

Now it is a yes-no battle between two grown up persons who fight like little children for a lolly [:(]

Ciao,
Frans [aka Taitennek].

Frans you're wrong.

It's not about Herman or me or the DBs, it's about the game and making sure we minimise the possibility of issues being reported that may easily be rectified by sticking to some common rules for DB Editors. If we all do that we can have 50 DBs and minimise the reports of bugs DB Editors should be responible for having ensured aren't a result of their actions.

I have to laugh about your comment about not being able to build scens with the HUD3, no I don't have Wonder Woman's famous invisible plane, yet... Freek is on my case to add it, the Golden Lasso weapon's going to be harder to model tho' [;)]

I'm not sure Freek understood the joke, but I'm sure the US based members of the audience will.

Take it easy

Darren

[Bucks]

Congrats Herman, you're learning how to really look for explanations.

You get how we look at everything now?. You're playing by the rules now, we've established there's an issue independent of search output value. Must be something with the GUI and the ECM active notations being activated regardless of Output and Sensor type.

Your report was so limited and showed half the issue, you see something pass it on and expect me and Russell to dig for answers, thanks for the help we're getting now. It's starting to work... [8D]

Cheers

Darren

[hermanhum]

If you want help or clarification, ask for it.  Arriving with pre-determined conclusions is not productive.  [8D]

[th3flyboy]

meanwhile that song from that video i had to watch in 7th grade comes to mind the one where they sing about the scientific method...

Anyway, I suggest experimenting with the PDB a little rather than just saying it can't be the db... It's obvious that your overcome with feelings right now, and anyone who has coded C++ or any major programming language can tell you, if you ignore the syntax, bad things happen... It might be a good idea just to test the theories by complying with the actual DB syntax rather than just saying "I'm right you're wrong..."

[hermanhum]

ORIGINAL: th3flyboy

It might be a good idea just to test the theories by complying with the actual DB syntax rather than just saying "I'm right you're wrong..."

That's exactly what happened... [:D]

[Ron Belcher]

Interesting... [;)]