View Full Version : Waepon Arcs in ANW
Is it true that weapons ignore the weapon arc info in the database and fire regardless of bearing of the target. I saw that AGSI is not going to fix it. I would consider this a pretty big bug, regardless of maneuver capabilities.
Herman Hum
19 Jun 06, 14:55
Yes. What you have read is from open sources. Darrel Dearing, H3 Programmer, made those comments on the Mantis Bug tracking system. I have quoted him to save you the effort of looking.
A pair of test files have been attached in case you would like to see for yourself. They are made with the Official Database supplied by AGSI.
Therefore, when you approach another vessel to exchange salvos, both ships are able to fire EVERY SINGLE gun on each ship. So, there is no possiblilty for manoeuvres like 'Crossing-The-T' because every gun fires in every direction.
Of course, this causes heaps of problems for any scenario relying upon surface gunnery (i.e. WW2 DB) because the surface gunnery model of ANW is crippled.
I can't beleive they don't consider this a major bug. I assume missle mounts don't have this problem.
Herman Hum
19 Jun 06, 23:00
No idea if it is construed as either Major or Minor. However, AGSI has made their decision on it.
Unfortunately, Missile Mounts also suffer from this deficiency. This makes all missile mounts aboard ships de facto VLS systems. :cry:
Now, there might be a way to modify the Database to get around it, but many users would likely construe it as too cumbersome and unrealistic. I am not optimistic that the situation can be rectified with the current tools.
A saving grace is that Sensors are not victims of this problem and appear to work according to the arcs set for them.
I can speak on this topic from experience monkeying with the Harpoon Classic code where we've had much less rigid time constraints and much less forced guidance from on-high as to what features to implement and which bugs to fix. The H3 programmers haven't had most of those luxuries and have to make harder choices about allocation of resources.
Many seemingly basic features and fixes in Harpoon seem like minor things. Hmm, my weapon arc data from the DB should be followed. Sure, doing that is quite easy. The herculean task is teaching the AI how to maneuver in a way that the weapons can be brought to bear. Herein lies the non-trivial task. Now the obvious thing would be to have certain features flagged as enabled for games where all sides have a human player but that just isn't something that resources allowed for 3.7.0.
In some cases the team can say that adding a feature without fully equipping the AI is okay. Other times a simple feature will not be added because the AI changes are too drastic for the current or forecast coding and testing cycles. And every now and then a feature disabled is the best way to bring the game forward on the whole and stand a chance of getting it in the hands of players.
Now in the case of H3 we as players stand a good chance of gaining a whole new side of AI, the so called 'maneuver' model. It will if given the time and talent to mature take care of weapon arcs and host of other items as well.
In the end H3 is the living game with a huge milestone ahead in version 3.8, and another huge leap to become TNH (The Next Harpoon). As a benefit we get lots of betas and features to try, but with that comes the realization and hopefully acceptance that the 3.7.x releases are on the whole improvements over 3.6.x and yet just a stepping stone on the way to 3.8 and beyond.
I understand the implications of fixing bugs and equipping the AI, but I would have thought this a much higher priority than MP. It is just my opinion.
Us Harpooners have stood around and looked upon other naval simulations/games as overly simplified. Now something as basic as weapon arcs is found to not work. I'm sorry, for the all the detailed work that goes into some of the arcane aspects of the game, I can't believe you can call a game like this realistic.
Once again, I will say that for my $50, something as basic to realistic naval warfare would have a better plan than just, "its a feature".
Herman Hum
20 Jun 06, 15:46
I understand the implications of fixing bugs and equipping the AI, but I would have thought this a much higher priority than MP. It is just my opinion.
Us Harpooners have stood around and looked upon other naval simulations/games as overly simplified. Now something as basic as weapon arcs is found to not work. I'm sorry, for the all the detailed work that goes into some of the arcane aspects of the game, I can't believe you can call a game like this realistic.
Once again, I will say that for my $50, something as basic to realistic naval warfare would have a better plan than just, "its a feature".
To be fair, this Firing Arc behaviour has been around from the very beginnning. Harpoon Classic has it as does all the Harpoon II and III versions. Evidently, either no one notice or no one cared. Everyone has tried at least one version of the game and had fun at it, right? So, is it going to spoil your fun, now? Are you going to boycott your existing Harpoon because of this newly found knowledge? Probably not. :D
Players would just as likely continue on with playing what they enjoy. So, you know a little bit more of the system and how it operates. Just make up a plausible explanation.
For example, if I try to approach a cruiser from the rear to avoid his forward SAM batteries and he fires one at me, am I going to say, "That's Unrealistic!" and throw a tantrum? No, I could just as easily explain that behaviour to the AI Captain giving his phantom crew the order, "Manoeuvre as necessary to unmask batteries."
The reason why the Firing Arc behaviour was mentioned was due to the discussion for using Harpoon ANW as a simulator for WWII warfare. It doesn't mean that it cannot be done, but it does mean that if you approach HMS Rodney from the rear, you can still expect to be blasted by all of its main guns. (In real life, all her main guns fire to the forward aspect).
Herman, you motor up behind a Tico or Burke from behind in your basic Warsaw Pact flying iron, you're going to get an SM-2 fired "over the shoulder" in the old snot locker. Piece of cake. Not withstanding, these ships have VLS fore and aft, so what difference does it make? If you're talking about a gun engagement, yeah, you have a point. But Harpoon is doing what Harpoon has always done with nitpicking stuff like this: It abstracts the actual move to unmask batteries. The most the game could be made to do, is do a die roll to reduce the chance of hit if the target is masked, to simulate the time the ship would have to take to turn. And FWIW, it doesn't take nearly as long as you seem to think to throw the wheel over hard and get that battery unmasked.
Boats
To be fair, this Firing Arc behaviour has been around from the very beginnning. Harpoon Classic has it as does all the Harpoon II and III versions. Evidently, either no one notice or no one cared. Everyone has tried at least one version of the game and had fun at it, right? So, is it going to spoil your fun, now? Are you going to boycott your existing Harpoon because of this newly found knowledge? Probably not. :D
Players would just as likely continue on with playing what they enjoy. So, you know a little bit more of the system and how it operates. Just make up a plausible explanation.
For example, if I try to approach a cruiser from the rear to avoid his forward SAM batteries and he fires one at me, am I going to say, "That's Unrealistic!" and throw a tantrum? No, I could just as easily explain that behaviour to the AI Captain giving his phantom crew the order, "Manoeuvre as necessary to unmask batteries."
The reason why the Firing Arc behaviour was mentioned was due to the discussion for using Harpoon ANW as a simulator for WWII warfare. It doesn't mean that it cannot be done, but it does mean that if you approach HMS Rodney from the rear, you can still expect to be blasted by all of its main guns. (In real life, all her main guns fire to the forward aspect).
The reason why the Firing Arc behaviour was mentioned was due to the discussion for using Harpoon ANW as a simulator for WWII warfare. It doesn't mean that it cannot be done, but it does mean that if you approach HMS Rodney from the rear, you can still expect to be blasted by all of its main guns. (In real life, all her main guns fire to the forward aspect).
Ah, one of the many reasons I still dig out Great Naval Battles of the North Atlantic (GNBNA to those in the know) every now and then. Driving the Rodney is a hoot as is being a German and using a Prinz Eugen to pick away at the behemoth by trying to stay out of the gunnary arcs.
Ah, one of the many reasons I still dig out Great Naval Battles of the North Atlantic (GNBNA to those in the know) every now and then. Driving the Rodney is a hoot as is being a German and using a Prinz Eugen to pick away at the behemoth by trying to stay out of the gunnary arcs.
Hehe, and as Tony well knows from SH3, its a real PITA trying to get that stern torp to turn fast enough to smack that tin can charging in on your rear flank. Its real nice when the weapon arcs really do work. :)
Hehe, and as Tony well knows from SH3, its a real PITA trying to get that stern torp to turn fast enough to smack that tin can charging in on your rear flank. Its real nice when the weapon arcs really do work. :)
Yes, once again this evening Tony got chased down and rammed/DCed by a DD just after taking a beauty of a shot at a C2 Cargo ship (which missed...). I'm learning though, evade first, come back for a shot later and I already learned not to cut the evasive maneuver short...
vBulletin® v3.7.0, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.