Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: VCDH

Since the AO won't attack a target at that range [like I said above, the AO will use the full speed range which in this case is 54kyds]

Emphasis added by HH

I don't know what test file you were running, but it certainly wasn't the one I posted. I just showed that the AI will attack at that (53nm) range, yet you try to deny it.

I'll remind you that your original contention was:

ORIGINAL: VCDH

the AO will now wait until the target is inside a range that allows the torpedo to travel at attack speed. This allows DBs to move the Rmax setting back to it's original distance.

fb.asp?m=1877844

The AI will not deliberately wait for the target to be within range that allows it to utilize the attack speed (50kts) of the torpedo. The AI will fire at the very first possible opportunity (which is 53nm in this case).

[Deleted by Admins]

ORIGINAL: VCDH

If you'll read my post carefully.

I read your message far more carefully than you read mine. The issue isn't the intercept. That's just a matter of geometry and algebra. The fact remains the torpedo is being fired at a distance in contradiction to your prediction. The sub does NOT close the distance until it can fire the torpedo from a range to utilize the Attack Speed. It will fire at the first possible instance. This behaviour is clearly opposite to your claim that:

ORIGINAL: VCDH

the AO will now wait until the target is inside a range that allows the torpedo to travel at attack speed. This allows DBs to move the Rmax setting back to it's original distance.

fb.asp?m=1877844

ORIGINAL: VCDH

This means that T must either speed up [something the torpedo won't do until it detects a target]

This doesn't happen, either. Under no circumstances that I know of will the torpedo accelerate to Attack speed. [:(]

ORIGINAL: VCDH

I'm not saying that the torpedo didn't fire, it's just that at that range it's mathmatically impossible for the torpedo to make the intercept when S and T are moving in the same direction at the speeds you stipulated.

Herein, you are closing in on the problem. Finally. The sub is firing from a point whereby it is mathematically impossible to catch the target even though the target will exhibit known evasive behaviours.

The premise that the AI unit will actually close to a firing distance that utilizes the torpedo's attack speed is unfounded and false[/b].

Glad to see the two of you turn a budding flame war around into a technical discussion!

For me the underlying problems are:
1. the AI/AO in the past fired torpedos at such long range that a player would almost always avade. Reducing Rmax in the database is a workaround solution. Dale contends that the workaround is no longer needed, Herman says it is. I believe the workaround is adequate though a better logic would be nice to have.

2. Non-wire guided torpedoes fired by the player in BOL mode (the only way to fire at a target further than Rmax) will always run at their lowest speed (generally 24-35 knots) and not automatically go to full speed (Herman contends). This makes even 50nm type 65-76 fired from as close as 8nm not intercept warships racing 30. See AAR of Duel for example. This is new behaviour in ANW (in 3.6 the same torps would speed to 50 knots once the torpedo detects the enemy ship, which is the right behaviour). Seems to me this is a more serious problem than 1.

Can we keep the discussion technical?

Freek

[Deleted by Admins]

Watch the language folks. This tit for tat I'm used to but we have to keep it rated G.

ORIGINAL: VCDH

I don't need to deal with this bull**** and I don't have the time for it. If you're so concerned for the game then fix this problem yourself. You can take your sanctimonious attitude and talk to someone who gives a shit.

I guess this is the "new" New AGSI attitude towards bug-fixing. [8|]

Dale no longer works for AGSI and represents only himself.

Thanks.

ORIGINAL: FreekS

2. Non-wire guided torpedoes fired by the player in BOL mode (the only way to fire at a target further than Rmax) will always run at their lowest speed (generally 24-35 knots) and not automatically go to full speed (Herman contends). This makes even 50nm type 65-76 fired from as close as 8nm not intercept warships racing 30. See AAR of Duel for example. This is new behaviour in ANW (in 3.6 the same torps would speed to 50 knots once the torpedo detects the enemy ship, which is the right behaviour). Seems to me this is a more serious problem than 1.

Emphasis added by HH

I believe that this is inaccurate. I just tested BOL non-wire-guided Type 65-76 in H3 and got the same result as in ANW. The torpedo does not accelerate from a cruise speed of 30kts to an attack speed of 50kts even if it is already in pursuit with a final target.

ORIGINAL: rsharp@advancedgamin

Dale no longer works for AGSI and represents only himself.

Thanks for the clarification.

Does this also mean that the personal ban he issued for the official AGSI chat room will no longer be imposed upon me?

He was working for AGSI at the time so it sticks.

Geez all I asked was I thought an innocent question. I shall add "Start Wars" to my repertoire. [8D]

Harpoon is a great game even with warts, but it will be nice to see in the groove improvements continue.

Game seems more stable now at any rate.

RedMike,

It can be fun as long as you keep a sense of humor about everything and remember it's just the internet.

Glad to have you around. Besides, I'm a firm believer that "Not Starting Wars" is the actual skill.

ORIGINAL: RedMike

Geez all I asked was I thought an innocent question. I shall add "Start Wars" to my repertoire. [8D]

Don't worry. They'll be back soon enough with the next lunar cycle. [:D]

ORIGINAL: rsharp@advancedgamin

He was working for AGSI at the time so it sticks.

There, for the briefest of moments, I did dare to hope that things had changed for the better with Hillier's departure. Unfortunately, my usual skepticism has now returned. The removal of all the "Hilliers" from the Harpoon world will not change anything when the arrogance is institutionalized from the very top with ridiculous beta test NDAs and attempts to ban communications.

AGSI certainly seems to think that it is some kind of 'privilege' for their paying customers to provide free volunteer work testing or to participate on an IRC channel. Nothing could be further from the truth with this warped perspective. Both of these media are simply means to an end; a means to provide AGSI with the information it so desperately needs to fix their game into some basic level of function. Restricting those means of communication is not going to hinder Bug Discussion one iota. It's just going to prevent AGSI from fixing them.

This kind of thinking just re-validates my decision to avoid anything solely controlled by AGSI. Looks like the only changes are those mandated and enforced by Matrix.

ORIGINAL: hermanhum

I feel more comfortable entering data into a system not controlled by AGSI, as I've previously stated to Mr. Gilman. Past experience has shown me that this is the best way to proceed.

fb.asp?m=1802928

It's your tendency to drag on arguments and thinly veil your insults that gets you labeled as divisive Herman. You're certainly not alone in that in this community and so we have to frequently ask everyone to return to their corners. The asking is often enforced by moderation or, in the extreme, banning.

Matrix and AGSI will continue to hear all complaints brought to this forum. Our willingness to engage the customer is not limited by our attitude but our resources. This is mandated by all parties involved or it wouldn't work.

ORIGINAL: rsharp@advancedgamin

This is mandated by all parties involved or it wouldn't work.

And only implemented where Matrix actually has control.

But, hey. AGSI is free to continue shooting itself in the head, foot, or any other region of the body it chooses. It's a free country.

ORIGINAL: hermanhum


There, for the briefest of moments, I did dare to hope that things had changed for the better with Hillier's departure. Unfortunately, my usual skepticism has now returned. The removal of all the "Hilliers" from the Harpoon world will not change anything when the arrogance is institutionalized from the very top with ridiculous beta test NDAs and attempts to ban communications.

Removal of all the Hilliers huh...

Dale did alot for Harpoon and frankly contributed to a great hobby for a lot of years. I don't know why Rusty or Matrix isn't acknowledging that but the hundreds of us that have enjoyed the game over the years certainly know it and thats really what counts. (So you know Dale!)

Dale and our legacy with 3.6.x is great..how's yours with 3.7 and above? Fix your game guys instead of politiking with Herman's botnet at the expense of guys who have helped you, directly or indirectly. You might win a few sales back.

Thanks

ORIGINAL: mikmyk

Removal of all the Hilliers huh...

Dale did alot for Harpoon and frankly contributed to a great hobby for a lot of years. I don't know why Rusty or Matrix isn't acknowledging that

Coming from another "Hillier" who was also removed... [8|]

I'll certainly acknowledge those contributions. [:)]
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys ... 6379fb192c

Herman the guys that count know what I did..so type into this forum all you like[;)]

I take alot of pride these days in not really having to ever engage you anymore[:)]