|
Alfred -> RE: Depth Charge Damage Question (12/23/2014 2:53:51 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58
quote:
ORIGINAL: crsutton
Yes, that is a measure of the damage done and is usually system damage but not always. That type of hit is rarely serious and reflects a near miss but the stars indicate how much damage it did-within a range though so you never really know. You probably will never sink a sub unless you get an actual "hit" message. My rule of thumb has been that a solid "hit" on a small RO type Japanese sub will sink it 50% of the time and two hits on a larger I boat will sink them 50% of the time. Allies subs almost always will never sink with two hits but three will generally do them in. But when you get the *** message you have not sunk anything.
I agree that I have never sunk an enemy sub without a "hit" message or three, and a "penetrating" hit at that.
However, on the issue of the number of asterisks being meaningful, I don't think so. There was a post by JWE/Symon that discussed this, but damned if I can find it. I found a reference to it in a 2011 post, and I searched by every key word and combo I can think of, but can't find it. I think there might have been a partial purging of JWE's old posts during the "unpleasantness" during which he became Symon.
But from memory he said those text messages are thrown from a random pool with a random number of asterisks inserted, the main purpose being to make sure there was visual separation between the text messages. I also believe, with no rigorous correlation, that non-penetrating DCs--IOW, the DC explosions that throw off the other text messages--do some random amount of System damage. Small amounts. I just don't think the amount of random System damage is related to the number of asterisks.
If any Search mavens can find the post I'm referring to I would appreciate it. I looked for over thirty minutes.
You rrrrrrrranggggggggg.
The Symon quote is from mid 2014. It doesn't quite say that but does make it very clear that people are reading far too much into the messages. I'll add the thread in an edit as I only know how to hyperlink one thread at a time.
The direct on point game coder provided info on asterisks comes from 2006, in classical WITP from Mike Wood, in this thread:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1244496
Mike Wood's comments on classical WITP are to be preferred to those of Terminus because Mike Wood was the actual game coder involved in patching and debugging. I am quite certain that AE did not revise the role of the asterisk in depth charging.
There are many AE threads which discuss this subject. Unfortunately they are particularly notable for the absence of AE dev participation. Consequently one finds many conflicting statements in those threads. As AE dev participation is lacking in those threads, they are not really definitive.\
Alfred
Edit:
As promised, this is the thread containing Symon's commentary. It is post #57
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3603329&mpage=2&key=messages�
Note how cleverly hidden it is in a fortification building thread.
|
|
|
|
