Improved and user-friendly naval fire control system and HUD

[kkang2828 1,446]

Any chance this could be passed for consideration for this month?

[kkang2828 1,446]

Any chance this could be passed for consideration for this month?

[kkang2828 1,446]

Still not passed for consideration? Come on.

[jandaro 42]

i like your suggestion, but should we combine ours, i think that would be a double win

 

https://forum.warthunder.com/index.php?/topic/567252-fire-distance-estimation/&tab=comments#comment-9478211

 

tell me your toughts

[TrotylYu 116]

1 hour ago, jandaro said:

i like your suggestion, but should we combine ours, i think that would be a double win

 

https://forum.warthunder.com/index.php?/topic/567252-fire-distance-estimation/&tab=comments#comment-9478211

 

tell me your toughts

 

A kind reminder, WWII age FCS cannot provide accurate vertical leading, that's why there're ranging shoots.

The logical/technical calculation mechanism makes it much less possible/realiable than horizontal leading.

 

So even if there going to be vertical leading indicator simulated, directly using it should result in all shell misses.

[jandaro 42]

1 hour ago, TrotylYu said:

A kind reminder, WWII age FCS cannot provide accurate vertical leading, that's why there're ranging shoots.

wait, if we measure distance to the enemy ship, and then do it again, we get how much distance changed per given time

 

along with information of how long would it take for shells to reach their target we could estimate required lead, this would work, right?

 

this, however, will be very hard to do manually during game, so i'd prefer having fire control doing it for me.

[TrotylYu 116]

Just now, jandaro said:

wait, if we measure distance to the enemy ship, and then do it again, we get how much distance changed per given time

 

along with information of how long would it take for shells to reach their target we could estimate required lead, this would work, right?

 

this, however, will be very hard to do manually during game, so i'd prefer having fire control doing it for me.

 

Calculating horizontal leading requires accurate angle change rate (with only rough distance info), which is feasible at that time.

Calculating vertical leading requires accurate distance change rate, which is not feasible at that time.

 

The fixed range finding window/timespan is only a game feature, not realistic at all.

[jandaro 42]

1 minute ago, TrotylYu said:

The fixed range finding window/timespan is only a game feature, not realistic at all.

rangefinders were a thing in ww2, sure, they were not as accurate as modern day rangefinders, but the range lead, as well as horizontal lead, are still just an estimation...

[TrotylYu 116]

Just now, jandaro said:

rangefinders were a thing in ww2, sure, they were not as accurate as modern day rangefinders, but the range lead, as well as horizontal lead, are still just an estimation...

 

As mentioned above, you may have the vertical estimation, but which still can't help you make direct hits, you need several ranging shots based on it, and keep apply correction to the estimation.

So there could be two more distance parameters displayed, estimation shoting distance and estimation shoting distance correction. Making no good to the game.

 

However, horizontal estimation are accurate enough, so they can be directly used.

[jandaro 42]

16 minutes ago, TrotylYu said:

 

As mentioned above, you may have the vertical estimation, but which still can't help you make direct hits, you need several ranging shots based on it, and keep apply correction to the estimation.

So there could be two more distance parameters displayed, estimation shoting distance and estimation shoting distance correction. Making no good to the game.

 

However, horizontal estimation are accurate enough, so they can be directly used.

i get what you are saying, but still, its better than being send into battle with not a slightest clue on where to shoot, and that is purpose of my suggestion, its not end all, be all, but a hint, i've found horizontal suggestion to be wrong at times as well, so im taking it as a suggestion on where to shoot, not an order.

[TrotylYu 116]

25 minutes ago, jandaro said:

i've found horizontal suggestion to be wrong at times as well

 

The in-game horizontal leading is accurate enough (unless you're expericing BUG which always show it in center of boat), given that no state change for either ship.

In real battles of cource both ships are continuously changing state, so you need to apply the state change to the ideal leading value.

 

Vertical aiming is just a hard skill IRL, not really caused by game issue. (Generally the bullet following camera based correction should always provide much more accurate suggestion than a range finder based estimation. Otherwise it become an aimbot)

Edited November 6, 2022 by TrotylYu

[jandaro 42]

17 minutes ago, TrotylYu said:

 

The in-game horizontal leading is accurate enough (unless you're expericing BUG which always show it in center of boat), given that no state change for either ship.

In real battles of cource both ships are continuously changing state, so you need to apply the state change to the ideal leading value.

 

Vertical aiming is just a hard skill IRL, not really caused by game issue. (Generally the bullet following camera based correction should always provide much more accurate suggestion than a range finder based estimation. Otherwise it become an aimbot)

it doesnt need to be an aimbot, they can make range distance estimations capped on certain values (like tank rangefinders), if you are afraid of them so much...

[TrotylYu 116]

40 minutes ago, jandaro said:

it doesnt need to be an aimbot, they can make range distance estimations capped on certain values (like tank rangefinders), if you are afraid of them so much...

 

So besides the concern about unrealistic game features.

 

Just had a search on your service record, and found out you have never played any cruisers or battleships, but only destroyers.

I think it might be important to let you know, aiming skill is currently the only real factor determines long-range open-area duel result (except ship different).

Once aiming skill levels get eliminated, the naval battle are almost total skill-less OP ship farming mode.

[BagelIsMyWaifu 838]

Another thing I hate about the current system is how inconsistent rangefinders are modelled. Currently, there are four variants:

"Rangefinder"  24 sec calculation, 14 sec update and 85% accuracy

(1) "Fire Director"  18 sec calculation, 10 sec update and 100% accuracy

(2) "FIre Director"  13 sec calculation, 10 sec update and 85% accuracy

(3) "Fire Director"   6 sec calculation, 3 sec update and 100% accuracy

 

The rangefinder and first fire director are usually used on WW2 and earlier ships, third fire director on radar frigates that dont have a specific fire director module (e.g. F120 Köln) as well as some cold war ships (e.g. USS Mitcher) while the 2nd gets used some other cold war ships (e.g USS Asheville or JDS Ayanami). And this is where the issues start, both Asheville and Ayanami have radar, so why do they not get the radar assisted fire direction but this special type. Additionally some cold war frigates, despite using radar, use the first fire director type, for example HMS Leopard or Blackpool.  So which ship gets what fire director appears completely arbitrary.

And then there are the range finders and type 1 fire directors on ww2 and earlier ships. There is no division between the base width, stereoscopic vs coincidence nor age of the system. A great example of this is Nürnberg, launched in 1934 with her 6m main rangefinder, compared to IJN Settsu, launched in 1911 with her ~1m "fire director". Ingame, Settsu's rangefinder is both faster and more accurate than Nürnberg's. From how it looks to me, everything that is enclosed and rotating with the rangefinder is considered a fire director, while open systems are all rangefinders.

 

So in my opinion, rangefinding equipment should be unified to pre cold war and cold war with radar assistance, atleast until a more sensible model can be introduced. Since the 3D models already exist, maybe using the base range of the equipment. Maybe coincidence could be faster in update speed while stereoscopic faster in initial rangefinding. Just something that isnt the current mess.

[jandaro 42]

10 hours ago, TrotylYu said:

Once aiming skill levels get eliminated, the naval battle are almost total skill-less OP ship farming mode.

so you are telling me that whole game mode is about hitting enemy ships? no maneuering? no teamplay? no positioning? just shooting at other ships until you die?

 

 

(btw, i was never a fan of "skill" based gameplay, because it rewards people who dont take showers... unless its something that has to deal with large scale gameplay, and doesnt require much of wasting life "practice")

Edited November 7, 2022 by jandaro
P.S.

[TrotylYu 116]

1 hour ago, jandaro said:

so you are telling me that whole game mode is about hitting enemy ships? no maneuering? no teamplay? no positioning? just shooting at other ships until you die?

 

 

(btw, i was never a fan of "skill" based gameplay, because it rewards people who dont take showers... unless its something that has to deal with large scale gameplay, and doesnt require much of wasting life "practice")

 

First of all, I have got around 100 KDR for the Kutuzov (68A) introduced last major, you really think I don't familiar with those trivials?

 

The so-called positioning is mostly about camping, and I'm good at it.

 

Maneuering skill is just about aiming skill, for the other ship. (Unless you mean seek and hide)

 

Keep shooting until you die is the best thing to do for large ship battles. (You may change position for switching targets, but maintaining DPS is important)

 

From what you said I can fully understand you're a boat player, not a real ship player.

Edited November 7, 2022 by TrotylYu

[kkang2828 1,446]

18 hours ago, jandaro said:

wait, if we measure distance to the enemy ship, and then do it again, we get how much distance changed per given time

 

along with information of how long would it take for shells to reach their target we could estimate required lead, this would work, right?

 

this, however, will be very hard to do manually during game, so i'd prefer having fire control doing it for me.

 

It is not hard to do it manually. Experienced players do it all the time. You're just too inexperienced. If you want the game to calculate vertical lead for you, try naval AB where that is actually a thing. 

 

17 hours ago, jandaro said:

i get what you are saying, but still, its better than being send into battle with not a slightest clue on where to shoot, and that is purpose of my suggestion, its not end all, be all, but a hint, i've found horizontal suggestion to be wrong at times as well, so im taking it as a suggestion on where to shoot, not an order.

 

The lack of a detailed aiming tutorial within the game is a huge issue, as I pointed out in my suggestion. But as I said, go try arcade if you want vertical lead estimation.

 

17 hours ago, TrotylYu said:

(Generally the bullet following camera based correction should always provide much more accurate suggestion than a range finder based estimation. Otherwise it become an aimbot)

 

If you're saying what I think you're trying to say, I cannot agree. Shell following camera is just a cheesy feature that is copied off of WoWs, and completely arcade-y. IMHO it should be disabled from RB entirely, but that is another topic. 

 

5 hours ago, jandaro said:

so you are telling me that whole game mode is about hitting enemy ships? no maneuering? no teamplay? no positioning? just shooting at other ships until you die?

 

 

(btw, i was never a fan of "skill" based gameplay, because it rewards people who dont take showers... unless its something that has to deal with large scale gameplay, and doesnt require much of wasting life "practice")

 

The small size of the current normal battle maps precludes most of the things you've mentioned, and the matches do tend to be about who can sink the enemy faster. It is certainly not a good thing, but GJ is extremely stubborn about their game modes and maps being "good enough". If you don't like that, I suggest trying naval EC once you've got some more experience and good cruisers, or playing another game such as the ones I mentioned on the other post.

 

And, yes, DPS was the most important thing in IRL naval warfare as well, whether through RoF or accuracy, at least once the shooting started. Pretty much all the important maneuvering and positioning decisions had to be made long before opening fire. After that, they're all just a means to support DPS.

Edited November 7, 2022 by kkang2828

[kkang2828 1,446]

13 hours ago, BagelIsMyWaifu said:

Another thing I hate about the current system is how inconsistent rangefinders are modelled. Currently, there are four variants:

"Rangefinder"  24 sec calculation, 14 sec update and 85% accuracy

(1) "Fire Director"  18 sec calculation, 10 sec update and 100% accuracy

(2) "FIre Director"  13 sec calculation, 10 sec update and 85% accuracy

(3) "Fire Director"   6 sec calculation, 3 sec update and 100% accuracy

 

The rangefinder and first fire director are usually used on WW2 and earlier ships, third fire director on radar frigates that dont have a specific fire director module (e.g. F120 Köln) as well as some cold war ships (e.g. USS Mitcher) while the 2nd gets used some other cold war ships (e.g USS Asheville or JDS Ayanami). And this is where the issues start, both Asheville and Ayanami have radar, so why do they not get the radar assisted fire direction but this special type. Additionally some cold war frigates, despite using radar, use the first fire director type, for example HMS Leopard or Blackpool.  So which ship gets what fire director appears completely arbitrary.

And then there are the range finders and type 1 fire directors on ww2 and earlier ships. There is no division between the base width, stereoscopic vs coincidence nor age of the system. A great example of this is Nürnberg, launched in 1934 with her 6m main rangefinder, compared to IJN Settsu, launched in 1911 with her ~1m "fire director". Ingame, Settsu's rangefinder is both faster and more accurate than Nürnberg's. From how it looks to me, everything that is enclosed and rotating with the rangefinder is considered a fire director, while open systems are all rangefinders.

 

So in my opinion, rangefinding equipment should be unified to pre cold war and cold war with radar assistance, atleast until a more sensible model can be introduced. Since the 3D models already exist, maybe using the base range of the equipment. Maybe coincidence could be faster in update speed while stereoscopic faster in initial rangefinding. Just something that isnt the current mess.

 

Whilst this is an issue, this suggestion is mainly about making the whole system less frustrating and more user friendly, which is the biggest issue rn. If you want, you can create a separate suggestion about this. I will gladly support it. Though you might need to do some serious historical research on whether what is a "rangefinder" and a "fire director" on each ship, something that probably won't be as crystal clear as you want.

[jandaro 42]

7 hours ago, kkang2828 said:

try naval AB where that is actually a thing. 

i would, but airplanes in AB suck

 

7 hours ago, kkang2828 said:

I suggest trying naval EC once you've got some more experience and good cruisers,

actually i played EC with my destroyers and scored some good kills, i understand how game mode works and what you got in your mind, but i will not step away from my suggestion just because i got good, i think fire distance estimation in rb should be a thing.

[kkang2828 1,446]

6 hours ago, jandaro said:

i would, but airplanes in AB suck

 

actually i played EC with my destroyers and scored some good kills, i understand how game mode works and what you got in your mind, but i will not step away from my suggestion just because i got good, i think fire distance estimation in rb should be a thing.

Well we’ll see what you think after you’ve actually gotten good. Feel free to make your own separate suggestion on this if you want.

[jandaro 42]

10 hours ago, kkang2828 said:

Well we’ll see what you think after you’ve actually gotten good

peharps, but i always seek to make life more pleasant for the weakest, while at the same time not breaking it for the strongest...

[kkang2828 1,446]

15 hours ago, jandaro said:

peharps, but i always seek to make life more pleasant for the weakest, while at the same time not breaking it for the strongest...

Well handholding the “weakest” isn’t exactly what I’d call “large scale strategic gameplay”. People who want more helpers can play arcade any time they want.

 

Making aiming easier requires an actually decent in-game tutorial, not more helpers. It’s not that hard to aim in naval. People just need to be taught properly.

 

And you don’t even know if it will break it for the strongest or not, due to your lack of experience.

 

At least, that’s my opinion. But I’m pretty sure most naval players would agree.

Edited November 9, 2022 by kkang2828

[kkang2828 1,446]

On 23/09/2021 at 04:19, ItssLuBu said:

Approved and open for discussion. 

 

Any chance this could be passed for consideration for this month? Please...

Edited November 12, 2022 by kkang2828

[Hand_0f_G0D 26]

my main issue with RB fire control is that due to me being color blind its almost impossible for me to pick out which shells are mine when i am shooting at a target others are shooting at.   In arcade battles this isnt as big of a deal since i can see the lines.  A secondary irritation is that i cannot aim at a smoke cloud and say add 100m so that i can shoot into said cloud even with a loss of accuracy or whatever penalty OR say i am trying to shoot at something 5km away i cant just set my guns for 5km and blast away at say a capture point in hopes of hitting someone capping or flying a plane in etc. 

[kkang2828 1,446]

8 hours ago, Hand_0f_G0D said:

my main issue with RB fire control is that due to me being color blind its almost impossible for me to pick out which shells are mine when i am shooting at a target others are shooting at. 

 

IIRC the other warship game had some post FX modes just for color blind people, so maybe the same thing could be introduced to WT.