Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: witpqs
If the original manual is correct, it might have been included in the code that derives a ships detectability level (I might have misremembered the exact terminology the manual used). Supposedly, detection level is used by the code to modify how successful attacks will be (in addition to how hard/easy it is to detect a ship at all).

Howdy witpqs,
Game has evolved over the years and what with this patch & that patch, it's not surprising that the manual isn't exactly in tune with what's up today. I've seen lots of commented out sections, even whole blocks. It's still evolving. There's a pretty chunky section that's being adapted even as we speak.

John

I still remember the first time I mistakenly volunteered to read the thing; I almost wanted to "comment out" myself...[X(]We have a much better manual lined up for AE.

I would be so happy if they would make it editable - maybe a MS Word document - so I could make notes, adjustments, corrections, etc>

That's not something Matrix will want to do, I shouldn't think.

ORIGINAL: Terminus

I still remember the first time I mistakenly volunteered to read the thing; I almost wanted to "comment out" myself...[X(]

Don't do it! You're much too young to be commented out! [&:]

ORIGINAL: witpqs

ORIGINAL: Terminus
I still remember the first time I mistakenly volunteered to read the thing; I almost wanted to "comment out" myself...[X(]

Don't do it! You're much too young to be commented out! [&:]

Yeah, and don’t you believe it either. Brother Terminus has been instrumental in defining many aspects of AE; he’s a smart, knowledgeable man and one worth listening to. Despite his ‘reputation’, he commands a width and depth of knowledge that certainly has my attention.

John

ORIGINAL: witpqs

ORIGINAL: JWE

ORIGINAL: herwin
So it comes in ahistorically.

I would assume damage would express itself in increased noise and detectability...

Well of course it does. But, this is, after all, a computer game.

Since there is no such thing in the game as a 'noise' parameter, it makes the analysis pretty futile doesn't it?

If the original manual is correct, it might have been included in the code that derives a ships detectability level (I might have misremembered the exact terminology the manual used). Supposedly, detection level is used by the code to modify how successful attacks will be (in addition to how hard/easy it is to detect a ship at all).

What is a detection level?

ORIGINAL: el cid again

What is a detection level?

The original manual notes that the game assigns a 'detection level' to each unit. It is based upon things intrinsic to the unit, and (for ships) such things as current damage level. Combine with search, etc. to see if a unit is detected, and how well it is detected (you know something is there, you know a capital ship is there, you know a BB is there, you know which BB is there, etc.) including localization - the better the detection level the better able to deliver an attack.

That sounds like a single field - typical of WITP - with multiple functions. Radar, visual, maybe sound - how can a naval unit have just one value for detection? But it also seems this field is not one we can influence direcly - it is calculated and hidden from editors.

Another question: can a submarine attack a submarine? What if the submarine has an ASW device?

I don't know.

ORIGINAL: witpqs

I don't know.

I don't either. What was the question?

ORIGINAL: JWE

ORIGINAL: witpqs

I don't know.

I don't either. What was the question?

From El Cid:

Another question: can a submarine attack a submarine? What if the submarine has an ASW device?

I am going to find out - when I finish data changes I will test some options using new devices.\\

Looks like Squid works.

ORIGINAL: witpqs

ORIGINAL: JWE

ORIGINAL: witpqs
I don't know.

I don't either. What was the question?

From El Cid:

Another question: can a submarine attack a submarine? What if the submarine has an ASW device?

Sorry pal, have the sewage treatment button turned on, didn’t see the question.

In standard WiTP there is no provision for sub v sub combat. Can’t be made to happen, and can’t even be finessed, because the TF validity matrix is hard coded. Thus, putting ASW weapons on a sub is a non sequitor.

(slightly OT) many things are possible in AE; think sub v sub was fairly well discussed in one of the Nav thread lines. If you can’t find it, send me a pm and I’ll try to give you a good preview datadump.

One wonders at that decision? By 1945 the gravest threat to a USN submarine was a Japanese one. Overall - subs of both sides were about equally effective - on the order of 13 were lost by both in PTO (13 IJN - 12 USN and 1 Russian all to submarines of the other side). Sounds like Herwin's lament may be somewhat justified: they really didn't understand ASW. Making it impossible was not necessary - so it is very difficult to understand.

The question remains about aircraft: do aircraft actually use ASW weapons - or is something hard coded and automatic in ASW routines?
Looks like UNARMED planes with NO loadout "hit" subs if assigned ASW Patrol. Hit with what?