Makes sense. :hmmm:
I didn't notice any of the differences between "sea" and "land" coastal defenses that you are pointing to, because during my tests the radio patch was disabled.

In my opinion the radio patch is too cool for simply giving it up. Until (hopefully) TDW is back to fix it, a possible workaround is placing more blockships, more sub nets, more mines, more reworked coastal defenses and more airbases near major ports.

On a side note: one of TDW's patches (the one making sunk ships not to disappear under the sea bottom), might interfere with the reworked coastal defenses; more exactly with the "equipment" platforms. :yep:

EDIT: IF NOT, we have found a way to fix the problem of sub nets sticking out of the water surface when they hit the sea bottom and the said patch is enabled...

Will do :up:

I think you should be able to test it, even without TDW patcher. The radio is built in feature, I think...The patch is only for "destructible" radio ? No?

No observed problems there...:up:

EDIT
...Because they are not "collidable" yet...

...aaaand more CTDs...:haha: Heh , airbases... You wont find any help there...:)

Yes and no. Besides mimicing destructible radio equipment aboard ships, TDW's radio patch heavily reworks stock radio routines :yep:

Well, in that case my edit below applies :yeah:

Have you tried colliding them? I didn't but I can't move the camera through them, which tells me that they are physical objects now...

Why?

[QUOTE]Well, apparently not enough, the bug can be observed without radio patches enabled, I've just checked that...

You can sail right trough it...The bunker is collidable though...


Why?!:) Ask Ubi... :D
Seriously, more units/objects in small area, more CTD possibility...Simple as that... :yep: Add few airplanes there and ctd is almost guarantied...

:hmmm:

Yep, I can confirm, just tested that, and it seems I had been too optimist. Tomorrow I will try making the new platforms collisionable, though it might be impossibe while keeping gun functionality unaltered :-?

Once air raids on ports were a serious problem, but as you probably remember the problem was coming from FX Updates debris, not from stock game, as Rongel demonstreted with his fix. Similarly, most of the units/objects we are placing around ports are imported straight away from SHIII-IV. You can't imagine how much redundant/obsolete data I see every time I open one of the imported dat files, including your recently imported ships :yep:

I am optimist that converting them to granny objects/optimizing them for use in SHV (with dds compressed texture, LOD models, subdued effects, more recent controller versions, etc.) will obviate problems, at least in part. :)

Okay, putting back a StaticObject controller on platform's collision mesh was the solution. Now the V-platform that our bunker is currently equipped with, is fully collisionable. :yeah:

While the platforms were terrain objects, the said controller prevented adjoining coastal defenses from using their guns, but now that the platforms are an equipment of the bunker unit, no adverse effects can be noticed. Had I used the usual collision spheres instead, I am almost sure bunker's gun would have stopped working, as those spheres tell unit's AI that an obstacle is close, and stop regular routines in favour of collision avoidance routines.

Tomorrow I will update all the platforms available so far with sim file and StaticObject controller, and I will improve their collision mesh so that it will match better visible meshe's shape. Your task will be testing my changes with TDW's seabottom patch, and making the usual ballistic tests against the bunker, for excluding any possible adverse side effects :)

gap off :salute:

Air raids are problematic even today, but not because of FXU debris but because of some different "reasons".

I dont know WHY SSC will occur in SH5 but I know very well how to reproduce it, even with lightly modded game.
There's no specific cause for this issue, the only possible cause is lack of official patches...

I'm afraid I am not...Sometimes even the simplest object , like sub flags, will prove to be too much for the game...Why, I really dont know.

Check my tips for stable gameplay when you have time. They apply to SH5 with any modlist. You may get a picture what actually SH5 engine doesn't like.

:salute:

Dock?
 

Gutte morgen kaleunen. Can i ask what am i supposed to do when i arrive into dock? I am in Kiel where i was rebased to while i was on my first mission to attack polish task force, driven into pen, but i dont know how to end a mission..

Thank you very much for any advice..

Hi palmic

You must not end your game before September 4th.
Look for the flashing yellow anchor and you can then end your patrol knowing you can continue again ok.

The Wolves Of Steel Frequently Asked Questions + Campaign Fix In >FAQ’s & Game Tips (Please Look Here First Before Posting A Question)

- I've arrived in Kiel but I cant select Eastern British Coastal Waters objective, only Danzing objective is available?
Campaign objectives are date controlled and EBCW objective will not be available until 4th September 1939.

Peter

oh
 

I didnt expected its in the FAQ, thank you! :salute:

Sub flags are not a simple object.

If you open SubFlags' and stock Conning_7*.FX files in hex editor (if you do it in Goblin you wont notice any difference among the two sets of files), you will see that TDW added three new dummy equipment bones -one for the flagstaff and one for each flag- to U-boat conning towers, and he did it using a file type which is rather supposed to link effects to unit models (hats off to him)! Obviously this is not the most orthodox way to go, today we would simply create the needed bones through GR2 Editor (though I am not sure that GR2 Editor is able to process conning tower granny objects yet), but at the time he worked on the flag mod, this option was surely not available.

Add to that, that each flag is actually composed of 25 dat objects, each composed in turn of 98 polygons, 164 edges and 70 vertices, which are loop-animated at an average rate of ca. 12 frames per second.

Add to that, that sub flags are always in rendering range.

Add to that that sub flags and ship flags use two different sets of animated meshes, so when at least one ship is in rendering range, memory/GPU are burdened twice.

Tell me anything you want, but sub flags are not a "simple object". :know: :D

Hi Guys:salute:

I have been following your progress with the CDs - looking very good:D

I thought I would upload a few pics for you from my home town that overlooks the Hoy Sound entrance to Scapa Flow

View from inside CDs
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/pict...pictureid=8476

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/pict...pictureid=8479

Spotting tower
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/pict...pictureid=8477

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/pict...pictureid=8478

Thank you Trev, do you happen to have a picture showing the outside of the main gun emplacement? Is the inside of a bunker-like structure the one shown in the top picture? :)

OK OK, they are not simple, of course:):)...But they are not hardware intense too. What are 92 poligons, vertices or whatever for today standards? Nothing...
Even with my old computer I can add sub flags without noticing any FPS impact or anything. Yet, the game will become largely "destabilized" and CTD chances will be significantly increased, especially in some "intense areas" like Kiel...

And it is always the same CTD, with same fault module name...MSVCR90.dll

And this what bothers me... Why? It is not simmple mods incompatibility, that's for sure...

I can tell how can you reproduce this "illusive" MSVCR90.dll CTD even without sub flags on board with just "must have" mods on board (OHII, NewUIs, FXU ect) and if you tell me something more about it I will kiss your Italian buttocks...:D

Problem with docking?
 

Hi Kaleunen, i am really sorry to bothering you with it, but my problem with docking still exists and i really dont know what i am supposed to do.
- It was not relevant to choosing mission before 4.9. as intended before.

Right now i am in dock in Kiel at 5. september and i have no docking button in my UI. I simply cannot go out of my boat and end the patrol.. :hmmm:

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-L...1_18.55.36.jpg https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-F...1_18.55.41.jpg https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-a...1_18.55.47.jpg https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-e...1_18.55.52.jpg

Thank you very much for any advice!

Sail closer to the blue anchor mark (nav map) and yellow anchor icon will pop-up in your upper right corner. If it doesn't pop-up when you get closer, then save and reload the game. Then it will for sure...

http://www.rankopedia.com/CandidatePix/54200.gif

Gap , how about this texture for crates in British bunkers? You know from which cartoon it is?:D

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/pict...pictureid=8482

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/pict...pictureid=8480

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/pict...pictureid=8483

searchlight emplacement
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/pict...pictureid=8481

Check these vids
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2B0jgbupsk8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6WCnKH4OLP8

If you want specific pics Gap - I can easily take them as this is a 5 min walk from my house:yep:

thank you
 

Thank you kind sir, it did it :up:

I think this should be in FAQ too near of the 4.9. answer, because its quite unintuitive if you expect to really dock das boot which is likely with so immersive mod.
I'll try to HINT here any other "user test" question which ill have because i think it could be valuable for you to have notes from newbies about "strange things" :salute:

Unless you want to incomodate black magic :O:, it is obvious that there is a rational explaination for SubFlags destabilizing the game. I provided some clues on what could be causing that, though I am aware that the problem could come from another direction. My first suspect is the way TDW dealt with FX files for linking his flags to the connning tower, but don't ask me why and how this might CTD the game under some circumstances and not in others. I can just tell you that what I see is not usual :03:

That dll is related to Microsoft Visual Studio. :hmmm:

Indeed it is not. At least not in the usual acceptation of the therm "mod incompatibility"

:rotfl2:

Wile the Coyote and the Road Runner :03: