[FIXED B529] Mirracle on carrier deck?

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

[FIXED B529] Mirracle on carrier deck?

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] >> Command: Modern Operations series >> [FIXED B529] Mirracle on carrier deck?

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

[FIXED B529] Mirracle on carrier deck? - 5/17/2014 4:27:43 PM

hb921

Posts: 136
Joined: 5/13/2014
Status: offline

Possibly I am misreading something. Or there is assumption I am not aware off.
But otherwise there is mirracle on carrier deck - all 4 catapult (including waist ones) are in use when plane is completing landing. It should not be possible.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by emsoy -- 5/22/2014 9:43:46 PM >

Post #: 1

RE: Mirracle on carrier deck? - 5/17/2014 4:41:30 PM

dmagnusson

Posts: 85
Joined: 8/1/2006
Status: offline

multikill

(in reply to hb921)

Post #: 2

RE: Mirracle on carrier deck? - 5/17/2014 7:10:24 PM

ComDev

Posts: 5735
Joined: 5/12/2006
Status: offline

No miracle, the last plane in the landing queue caught the wire 28 seconds ago and is being moved to an elevator while aircraft are simultaneously being moved to catapults.

Thanks!

_____________________________

Developer "Command: Modern Air/Naval Operations" project!

(in reply to dmagnusson)

Post #: 3

RE: Mirracle on carrier deck? - 5/17/2014 8:56:25 PM

hb921

Posts: 136
Joined: 5/13/2014
Status: offline

Well, not exactly. Number given is time to finish operation. So it cauth wire 2 seconds ago, while aircrafts started to be moved to catapults 3 seconds ago. If you claim such perfect coordination is possible, I have even beter below - all 4 catapults are nearly exactly half way in launch sequence (it takes 80 seconds to launch, 39 of them have passed), and plane just catched arresting wire... (competing landing takes 30 seconds - it just started with other aircraft siting on waist catapult).

It look like there is no logic preventing simultaneous use of this two facilities.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to ComDev)

Post #: 4

RE: Mirracle on carrier deck? - 5/17/2014 9:28:35 PM

ComDev

Posts: 5735
Joined: 5/12/2006
Status: offline

Hmmm weird, I clearly remember programming this back in january/february. Will take another look when time permitts

Thanks!

_____________________________

Developer "Command: Modern Air/Naval Operations" project!

(in reply to hb921)

Post #: 5

RE: Mirracle on carrier deck? - 5/17/2014 11:47:20 PM

Agiel

Posts: 39
Joined: 7/22/2013
Status: offline

Just wanted to say: "A fellow Opera user? Right on duder!"

(in reply to ComDev)

Post #: 6

RE: Mirracle on carrier deck? - 5/18/2014 8:10:41 AM

Tomcat84

Posts: 1952
Joined: 7/10/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: emsoy

Hmmm weird, I clearly remember programming this back in january/february. Will take another look when time permitts

Thanks!

I thought you knew by now that the code has a life of its own...

_____________________________

My Scenarios and Tutorials for Command

(Scenarios focus on air-warfare :) )

(in reply to ComDev)

Post #: 7

RE: Mirracle on carrier deck? - 5/18/2014 9:35:41 AM

hb921

Posts: 136
Joined: 5/13/2014
Status: offline

Yes, code has life of his own

If you have some time to check it, you can have a look on this one - as long as plane that just landed is using one elevator planes in hangar are not using any of three other available elevators. They are "frozen" in this state as long as there is plane on landing aproach. Clearly, it isn't real world limitation, just "air boss" logic isn't up to the task.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Tomcat84)

Post #: 8

RE: Mirracle on carrier deck? - 5/18/2014 9:39:45 AM

hb921

Posts: 136
Joined: 5/13/2014
Status: offline

And here is a scen from which screenshot was taken. I am using buid 521.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to hb921)

Post #: 9

RE: Mirracle on carrier deck? - 5/18/2014 9:55:06 AM

hb921

Posts: 136
Joined: 5/13/2014
Status: offline

And now I am really risking looking nitpicking... - but there are two aircrafts using the same elevator. It is two plane elevator, so it has enough capacity - but planes don't started elevator cycle at the same moment - one was close to end of its cycle, then next one entered elevator - clearly impossible in RW. Just suspect that code is handling elevator the same way as access point - that is quite possible for access point is no no for elevator.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to hb921)

Post #: 10

RE: Mirracle on carrier deck? - 5/18/2014 3:40:22 PM

mikmykWS

Posts: 11524
Joined: 3/22/2005
Status: offline

Logged but need to check to see if this was fixed in a subsequent release. Reporter is using 519.

Thanks!

Mike

_____________________________

(in reply to hb921)

Post #: 11

RE: Mirracle on carrier deck? - 5/18/2014 7:13:19 PM

hb921

Posts: 136
Joined: 5/13/2014
Status: offline

Here is rerun of simultaneous landing and launch in Build 521.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to mikmykWS)

Post #: 12

RE: Mirracle on carrier deck? - 5/18/2014 7:35:18 PM

mikmykWS

Posts: 11524
Joined: 3/22/2005
Status: offline

Thanks we're up to 528 in our internal beta so may have already nailed it.

Thanks!

Mike

_____________________________

(in reply to hb921)

Post #: 13

RE: Mirracle on carrier deck? - 5/19/2014 7:45:25 AM

ComDev

Posts: 5735
Joined: 5/12/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: hb921

Yes, code has life of his own
If you have some time to check it, you can have a look on this one - as long as plane that just landed is using one elevator planes in hangar are not using any of three other available elevators. They are "frozen" in this state as long as there is plane on landing aproach. Clearly, it isn't real world limitation, just "air boss" logic isn't up to the task.

This is by design. During landing cycles, recovering and stowing landing planes takes priority. The air boss is more concerned with getting all planes down safely and avoid deck and elevator congestions than launching.

_____________________________

Developer "Command: Modern Air/Naval Operations" project!

(in reply to hb921)

Post #: 14

RE: Mirracle on carrier deck? - 5/19/2014 7:51:57 AM

ComDev

Posts: 5735
Joined: 5/12/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: hb921

And now I am really risking looking nitpicking... - but there are two aircrafts using the same elevator. It is two plane elevator, so it has enough capacity - but planes don't started elevator cycle at the same moment - one was close to end of its cycle, then next one entered elevator - clearly impossible in RW. Just suspect that code is handling elevator the same way as access point - that is quite possible for access point is .......

Yes we know. The code is different but as you say elevators do not have 'up' or 'down' states etc, so its a shortcoming in the model. Might be looked into at some point after we've cleared 1000 other, more pressining items on our list

_____________________________

Developer "Command: Modern Air/Naval Operations" project!

(in reply to hb921)

Post #: 15

RE: Mirracle on carrier deck? - 5/19/2014 1:23:48 PM

hb921

Posts: 136
Joined: 5/13/2014
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: emsoy
This is by design. During landing cycles, recovering and stowing landing planes takes priority. The air boss is more concerned with getting all planes down safely and avoid deck and elevator congestions than launching.

Don't you think air boss is overdoing it a bit? Aircrafts land at near two minutes intervals, keeping 4 elevators for them look like ill use of resourcess - those 4 elevators can move 8 aircrafts in 2 minutes.

I mean - it look like sound practice to have overcapacity for landing planes, but 8:1?

< Message edited by hb921 -- 5/19/2014 2:26:02 PM >

(in reply to ComDev)

Post #: 16

RE: Mirracle on carrier deck? - 5/20/2014 11:01:15 AM

ComDev

Posts: 5735
Joined: 5/12/2006
Status: offline

Yes you're right. Logged the pesimistic use of the elevators, hopefully someone will look at it soon. Thanks!

_____________________________

Developer "Command: Modern Air/Naval Operations" project!

(in reply to hb921)

Post #: 17