Matrix Games Forums

More Games are Coming to Steam! Deal of the Week: Combat Command Return to the Moon on October 31st! Commander: The Great War iPad Wallpapers Generals of the Great WarDeal of the Week Panzer CorpsNew Strategy Titles Join the FamilyTablet Version of Qvadriga gets new patchNew Command Ops: Battles from the Bulge UpdateCommand gets a huge update!
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: AA Reprise

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Scenario Design and Modding >> RE: AA Reprise Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: AA Reprise - 8/4/2011 8:19:08 PM   
Bradley7735


Posts: 2073
Joined: 7/12/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

John,

Do the Japanese 5inchers in the DD's still retain their DP status in Babes?


After reading this thread, I was thinking about the Japanese DD 'quazi' DP guns. You can probably still have them DP, with horrible AA stats (which I think is historical), but still the accurate surface stats. I'm sure John and the Babes team have this thought out much better than I have. I'm looking forward to checking out the details.

_____________________________

The older I get, the better I was.

(in reply to Nikademus)
Post #: 31
RE: AA Reprise - 8/4/2011 8:39:16 PM   
Nikademus


Posts: 25292
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline
In the last version of my mod i opted to change the 5in equipped Japanese DD's to their SP varients as part of a means to reduce the over effective kill results i was seeing from Japanese sea based flak. However i remain concerned over the impact this might have on enemy bomb accuracy. John's test results too have been different from mine so i'm very interested in checking out Babes for the AA variations as well as the logistical improvements. His tweaks may make the changes i made superfluous so am curious on his dark mysterious thought processes from deep within Babes MadLab....home of the deep Dark MATH.

(in reply to Bradley7735)
Post #: 32
RE: AA Reprise - 8/5/2011 12:18:53 AM   
JWE

 

Posts: 6576
Joined: 7/19/2005
Status: offline
The pale, rotting, cankerous denizens of Babes MadLab, who dance their diseased limbs away before the image of dead, dreaming, Cthulhu and his putrescent mate Math, in the vile, slimy, green, nacreous ruins of eons dead R'lyeh, got some ideas in that regard. Pm coming at ya, if you're man enuf and don't live in Arkham.

Oops; better lose your copy of the Necronomincon.

< Message edited by JWE -- 8/5/2011 12:38:26 AM >


_____________________________

Home of DaBabes

(in reply to Nikademus)
Post #: 33
RE: AA Reprise - 8/5/2011 12:38:20 AM   
oldman45


Posts: 2232
Joined: 5/1/2005
From: Jacksonville Fl
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JWE

The pale, rotting, cankerous denizens of Babes MadLab, who dance their diseased limbs away before the image of dead, dreaming, Cthulhu and his putrescent mate Math, in the vile, slimy, green, nacreous ruins of eons dead R'lyeh, got some ideas in that regard. Pm coming at ya, if you're man enuf and don't live in Arkham.

Oops; better lose your copy of the Necronomincon.



You needed to have some kind of alert before posting that. I will be cleaning up around the computer table for a while.


_____________________________


(in reply to JWE)
Post #: 34
RE: AA Reprise - 8/5/2011 3:16:36 AM   
JeffK


Posts: 5111
Joined: 1/26/2005
From: Back in the Office, Can I get my tin hut back!
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JWE

Knew this would happen. Getting pms from folks saying why is this gun’s ceiling xx,xxx. I have a website that says it is yy,yyy.

There’s 5 or 6 different max ceilings in a gun’s specs. Many sites just say max ceiling (altitude), or max effective ceiling. Don’t say squat about which they are talking about. And, of course, all are vastly different.

In Babes, we use “Max Effective Ballistic Vertical Range” as defined by the US Army Coast and Antiaircraft Artillery (Field Manual Series FM-4) as a basis. This is a good basis for two reasons: consistency and how the game code treats high altitudes.

Consistency, because this parameter is readily available for most Allied guns from their official trial statistics. Many Axis weapons were also tested and specified to the same standards. The tube/shell/ballistic parameters of this value are very well established such that any weapon can have this value calculated from first principles from its service specs.

Game effects, because a gun’s effectiveness drops off as a function of altitude. Just because a gun a max ceiling of 41,000 doesn’t mean it can hit anything up that far. Altitude % chance drop off is a quasi inverse square function of max ceiling, and is very severe at the top 20-25%. So the code just happens to convert max vertical effective into honest to gosh max effective (imagine that, maybe GG knew what he was doing?).

This isn’t ultimate max ballistic ceiling. That is even larger, and ya’ll can see where and why we picked the effective max ballistic. And then there were the fuse parameters; fuses were set on time, and muzzle velocity, atmospherics, shell aerodynamics, and slant range were supremely important. Some guns had much better ballistic parameters than their fuse characteristics would seem to suggest. Believe me, as much of that as humanly possible is incorporated into the Ceiling value in Babes.

The Ceiling value is set up to give relative altitude based % hit efficiencies in accord with the Field Manual performance plots, and normalized to Nigel Evans’ ballistics.

Just for grins, your basic 3” M3 AA gun had many different max ranges:
Max Ballistic Altitude Ceiling: 32,200 feet
Max Effective Vertical Range: 30,300 feet
Max Effective Slant Range: 28,500 feet
Max Effective Fire Control Range: 25,000 feet
Max Fuse Time: 15 sec (M2 with M4/M5 Setting Director), at 2,700 f/s FTMV

I think on this particular gun we used max slant, because it was further limited by FC and fuse constraints.

Your basic 90mm M1A1 AA gun had:
Max Ballistic Altitude Ceiling: 36,000 feet
Max Effective Vertical Range: 33,000 feet
Max Effective Slant Range: 34,500 feet
Max Effective Fire Control Range: 30,000 feet
Max Fuse Time: 15 sec (M2 with M4/M5 Setting Director), at 2,700 f/s FTMV

On this one we used MEVR instead of slant, because it was smaller and worked better with the FC and fuse limitations.

I guess this is just a polite way of saying why we are not particularly interested in what some website has to say. Folks find something from Ft Sill, Woolwich, Sydney, etc .. we are all ears. Otherwise ....


Thanks for the explanation, looking for that Sydney data now

_____________________________

Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum

(in reply to JWE)
Post #: 35
RE: AA Reprise - 8/5/2011 2:05:49 PM   
Sardaukar


Posts: 5954
Joined: 11/28/2001
From: Finland/now in Israel
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: JWE


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sardaukar
quote:

ORIGINAL: che200
So John can we just copy the data from the DP guns  from the Babes or do we have to use the new WitpaeLoad ?

I second this question...and to re-phrase:

1. If I just download new DaBabes versions, is there need to use new WitpaeLoad or will new scenarios work without using it?
2. If downloading new DaBabes versions, will the database AA changes update to existing DaBabes save or only when starting a new game?

1. Nope, the Babes scenarios have all the data already in there, good to go. No need to do anything.

2. AA/DP data changes are in the Device file, so should update into existing games with no issues a 'tall, a 'tall. Messed with one particular Brit AA gun that had huge RoF differences between certain mounts and so dinked with Class armament for Battles and Didos, and fixed about 4 others, but these are all late arriving ships, so there should be no vestigal doo doo on existing vessels, like what happened with sub split tubes. Even if your game is already in '44 or '45, it won't hurt much if your ship files don't update. The old guns aren't that much different from what they originally were, so it's a case of - it won't hurt, it just won't help.

Hope this helps. J


Helps a lot!

Thanks for all the hard work!

_____________________________

"To meaningless French Idealism, Liberty, Fraternity and Equality...we answer with German Realism, Infantry, Cavalry and Artillery" -Prince von Bülov, 1870-


(in reply to JWE)
Post #: 36
RE: AA Reprise - 8/7/2011 4:38:41 PM   
JWE

 

Posts: 6576
Joined: 7/19/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bradley7735
quote:

ORIGINAL: Nikademus
John,

Do the Japanese 5inchers in the DD's still retain their DP status in Babes?

After reading this thread, I was thinking about the Japanese DD 'quazi' DP guns. You can probably still have them DP, with horrible AA stats (which I think is historical), but still the accurate surface stats. I'm sure John and the Babes team have this thought out much better than I have. I'm looking forward to checking out the details.

Yes, the ones in B and D turrets are still DPs. They spec out ok. The 10cm/65 specs out better, as do the Allied 4”, 4.5”, 4.7”, and 5”. Some of those spec out a ‘lot’ better. I limited the calculations to simple and basic stuff based on the parameters of the guns themselves. Could have got way more complex, but it really wouldn’t have made much difference. KISS.

Only thing missing from a complete description of AA effectiveness is mount characteristics. There are explicit corrections for director control and director quality, but that’s about it. If one starts looking at train rates vs eff engagement altitude and effective slant range, the trigonometry gets really fun, but the poor Japanese don’t get much AA effectiveness at all. It made more sense to just work with the “year adder” for the Allies and go backwards to 1941/42, using just the gun service specs.

RoF is also quite different given the modes and mount design (and ammo type – bagged or cased). Some guns could do 10 rpm at 10 degrees, but only 2 or 3 at anything greater than 45 degrees. Many Japanese mounts were notably deficient in that respect. They had to drop the barrel after every round; made for pretty poor engagement speed and consistency. But I didn’t get into that, either.

So yeah, many Japanese guns spec out better than perhaps they should (irl), but at least the numerical values are based on something completely consistent across all nations. If ya want to model the real differences in AA performance, here’s some fun things to think about.

Your typical J DD mount had a train rate of about 5 degrees/sec. The loading angle was about 10 degrees, so for AA work, ya had to raise the breech after every round (and hand rammed to boot). But the tube was ok. The 12.7/40 on CVs and BBs had a ‘fair’ tube with a decent RoF, but only a 6 degree train rate. Even though the 10cm/65 was an excellent tube, and could be loaded at any elevation, the mount train rate was about 15 degrees per second. Your typical 5”/38 (OBR, EBR and SP) mount had a train rate of 25 degrees/sec, and loaded at any angle (auto rammed). The Brit 4.5”/45 DD-type mount had a train rate of 20 degrees/sec, and loaded at any angle (also auto rammed).

The point of all this is that your train rate and RoF DEFINE your slant and effective engagement envelope (continuous 20 second target engagement). Do the ballistics trig, and set up the engagement cone, and J guns can only engage (moderately) high altitude and high slant targets effectively. And those are the very ones where gun effect and accuracy are at their worst. Performance “drops” as raid altitude decreases. Allied guns slew so much faster, and their cone is so much wider, that their engagement envelope is 16x (volumetric) that of Japan’s and the effective engagement cone diameter can get down to very low altitudes. And when you factor in range accuracy, it gets to where they are 64x as effective as the J equivalent. Even against the 10cm/65, the 5”/38 had a 10x better envelope, and was 25x more effective. And none of the envelope/effectiveness calculations includes FCS or RPC factors.

I only mention this to show that it was considered. But the results of an accurate model would so absolutely screw Japan, no matter how accurate it may be, that I just didn’t think it would be appropriate in terms of the game. So the decision, in Babes, was to tell the ‘truth’, but not the ‘whole truth’. So, it’s just the tubes.

Hope this helps.

_____________________________

Home of DaBabes

(in reply to Bradley7735)
Post #: 37
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Scenario Design and Modding >> RE: AA Reprise Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.070