|
neuromancer -> RE: Santa came early ... (4/1/2004 11:52:43 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag
Now you want to add another nesting in the code that keeps track of a state that is currently not tracked ... has a ship already been hit and was the hit a torpedo type of weapon.
Don't forget that this piece of code would also have to be setup so that it only runs at Pearl Harbour and doesn't accidentally come into play at any other time. Oh look, only four battleships can ever be hit by torpedoes during ANY aerial attack.
And the point of the moving ships is still valid. The first four start to move, and thus they no longer screen the others, thus making them valid targets. And saying the game doesn't deal with movement is B.S. There is nothing to say that it isn't already part of the code, and as it seems that in UV damaged ships are easier targets than undamaged ones (as they aren't manuevering as much or as quickly), it would seem that it is part of the code.
ANd what if the planes come in multiple waves (in UV you usually get two a day)? In the first wave West Virginia, Arizona, Maryland, and California get pounded, and the others don't - using the sample code that MDIHL's idea of the screening code. But in the second wave, a completely different set of ships get hit. Because the same code would probably generate four completely different battleships for a different strike.
The point is that the the logic to have the first four battleships screen the others isn't as easy to add as MDIEHL seems to think it is (especially with a program this complex, and this late in the dev process), isn't necessarily historically any more valid than the other way, and generally is a detail that is of so little actual meaning in the game that I cannot believe there is a veritable flame war over it!
- - - - -
quote:
The game does not allow any function for BBs changing from "in port" to underway during the resolution of the attack subroutine.
So not having this function is okay, but not having the first four BBs screen the others from torpedoes is an unacceptable abstraction?
Interesting....
quote:
Look. The strike occurs at a hex number. The attack subroutine directs you to special subroutine for attacking PH. In it the BBs in port are dropped in a 2xn array where n is the number of BBs. One column of the array has the BB name. The other a bit. When a torpedo is launched and hits a BB:
Ah, so any attack at Pearl Harbour will have this happen. Gotcha.
And that is a good thing?
quote:
Since it does not really matter then Matrix is free to conclude that you withdraw any objections to implementing the change that I described above. Thank you for that.
[:D][:D][:D][:D]
You have obviously become confused. No one 'objects' to Matrix doing it. If they really want to, and can do it in some manner that doesn't make things work out in an idiotic manner, then more power to them.
But the simple fact of the matter is, we know they won't. And we can accept this. The only one that seems to have a problem with this, is you.
quote:
Is this or is this not a simulation of 7 Dec. 1941?
No, not that I'm aware of. It is called 'War in the Pacific', not 'Pearl Harbor'. Thus I can assume the game is about the entire war in the Pacific, not just the first day of it, let alone the first few hours.
quote:
Losing 5 BBs or whatever is unrealistic as hell
Actually I've read that it was five BBs sunk. Although I suppose the Nevada may have been counted in that, and she wasn't really sunk.
quote:
the present subroutine assumes that the IJN attack is going to equal or exceed the historical results, and never accomplish less than the historical results.
No.... I think it has been stated several times that the subroutine can result in a very good showing, or a quite pathetic showing on the part of the IJN. I was just reading an AAR that had a very poor result actually.
quote:
It depends on the level of detail you feel must be included in the code.
Again, the detail you want to add is extremely important, and yet other details aren't?
A line has to be drawn somewhere. As stated, the torpedo screen isn't quite as realistic as you seem to think it is in the larger scheme of things, but is more work - and if you think that they can just slap in a tiny piece of code to handle it, let me assure you that you are completely and utterly wrong - for very debatable benefit.
quote:
I'm certain that were I demanding a subroutine that simulates the personal contribution of every punji stake to the repulsion of an American invasion of Honshu you'd be demanding that Matrix include the change.
Interesting assumption. So you seem to believe that only people that want the IJN to win the game are arguing against you.
Funny, I always play the allies in UV.
quote:
I wrote fixed asset depreciation software for three years for an IBM var back in the '80s
And that is relevant to this... how?
Seriously, that is completely irrelevant. As you like to say, a complete non sequitor.
What were you using, an S/390? One of the primitive AIX systems?
The size and complexity of code has increased exponetionally in the past years. I write code in the real world, the modern world, and I can guarentee that your idea is no where near as simple as you think it is.
quote:
I once worked with a team that devised a subroutine that would allow an end user to enter an incorrect, unformatted account code, error check the code and format it properly, even if the account number was padded with blanks or gobbledygook. Now THAT was, admittedly, a somewhat complex bit of logic... at least at the time.
Are we supposed to be impressed?
[>:]
If that is your idea of complex, then you really are not up on modern coding. The basic logic to the routine is actually rather simple. But If I wanted to drop that into the middle of our HIS right now, that wouldn't be quite so simple. I could insert it, but would it be called properly, would it conflict with anything, would anything call it that shouldn't, would it pass on to the rest of the account number routine properly, etc.
It is not a simple case of slap together a little sub routine an dump it in. It sounds simple, but the thing that people cannot seem to grasp is that it isn't.
quote:
In a word. Up yours. You don't know sh1t about me and you apparently are such a slow learner that you haven't yet discovered modular code.
Oh I'd love to actually see you code modern software. It would be such a laugh.
And I've worked on an AS/400 built in 1991, running OS/400 3.1, so I do know what the code in those days looked like then, and I know what it looks like now.
Nice try, but obviously you don't know sh1t about us either.
quote:
Actually, the simpliest "fix" would have been to hardcode this attack which begins
most games as two attacks. One with the Torpedo A/C against those ships on
"Battleship Row" that were vulnerable to their efforts, and one with the rest of
the strike hitting everything. That should be relatively simple and not require
any changes to the basic programming at all.
Yes but people have been less than enthusiastic about the idea of PH always turning out the same way. Some games do assume that PH goes off historically, and then the game starts from there. But WitP seem to desire to make even that more variable, there was certainly many times when it could have gone completely differently.
<<<>>>
And now, the absurd.
quote:
I think the band should be modeled for Dec 7th turns only. If a bomb hits the ship there should be more deaths among the Drum Squads and Tuba Squads. But only if playingcolors is set to Y.
Good idea. Should the "Japanese Clerk is a Poor Typist" variable (which affects whether the Japanese DoW does arrive before the attack) be random, or is it a start up option?
What about the USS Ward sinking a mini-sub? There should be a variable about whether this happens, and whether the report is dismissed by the senior officers.
And the radar crews that pick up the first attack wave. They assumed it was some incoming B17s, turned off the radar, and went for lunch. should be a variable for that too.
Marshall attempted to warn Pearl, but for some reason the message wasn't marked Urgent. Need a variable there that adjusts the readiness rating at Pearl.
There should also be a variable for the Honolulu. It had some big hand crafted thing on it that the crew had to ditch before she could get under way.
In other words, there are a lot of little variables that are abstracted out.
But who cares?
|
|
|
|
