Jump to content
Welcome to the virtual battlefield, Guest!

World War II Online is a Massively Multiplayer Online First Person Shooter based in Western Europe between 1939 and 1943. Through land, sea, and air combat using a ultra-realistic game engine, combined with a strategic layer, in the largest game world ever created - We offer the best WWII simulation experience around.

Recommended Posts

trevor8
4 hours ago, GrAnit said:

Rats, do you have a set of standard test cases for weapon performance that you can test between patches?  That would allow you to test for unintended consequences that may happen when you mod the spaghettis code you inherited.

This. If nothing has been changed physically? How do we know the other changes are not affecting it? Is this regularly tested? Some aircraft do have armored spots like the cockpit glass and seats correct? 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 79
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Mosizlak

    13

  • undercova

    5

  • bogol

    4

  • KEMPI

    4

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Well its kinda like a certain Tanker on the Allied side that doesn't seem to die where all the other tanks die , and before one hits the despawn button cause exactly that Tanker just killed you with o

then again, let me tell you what the perception of the PB is. no, I am not speaking for myself, any pilot I spoke with has the same perception. Back when the @KardehK"He Fix" was implemented, it

The damage model was great for a week or so after they did their thing then something happened and everything went to crap

Mosizlak
Posted (edited)

Well, they better check something, cause I just hit a hurricane 3x with 40mm , another bofors reported a hit, and watched him do a complete loop then suicide a bofors. 

 

1 minute ago hit a different hurri 3x on the nose with 40mm and it strafed me and flew away like nothing happened. 

Dunno why this isnt checked every single patch. We get the same old "we didnt touch that unit" line, but stuff always breaks anyway. 

I had to video the matty bug for anyone to believe me, "we checked it out you are wrong"...then I show them the vid and "oh, we didnt check that". 

 

Cmon. 

Edited by Mosizlak
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
bmw
2 hours ago, Mosizlak said:

Well, they better check something, cause I just hit a hurricane 3x with 40mm , another bofors reported a hit, and watched him do a complete loop then suicide a bofors. 

 

1 minute ago hit a different hurri 3x on the nose with 40mm and it strafed me and flew away like nothing happened. 

Dunno why this isnt checked every single patch. We get the same old "we didnt touch that unit" line, but stuff always breaks anyway. 

I had to video the matty bug for anyone to believe me, "we checked it out you are wrong"...then I show them the vid and "oh, we didnt check that". 

 

Cmon. 

Maybe thats whats needed............video evidence like you had submitted before.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Mosizlak
34 minutes ago, bmw said:

Maybe thats whats needed............video evidence like you had submitted before.

Shouldnt need it. 

I cant get Bandicam to record sounds on my new rig, but I'll start recording anyway. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • CORNERED RAT
KEMPI
On 7/7/2021 at 8:44 PM, GrAnit said:

Rats, do you have a set of standard test cases for weapon performance that you can test between patches?  That would allow you to test for unintended consequences that may happen when you mod the spaghettis code you inherited.

Any HE changes happen then everything to do with HE are tested, even if this is HE on something completely unrelated for obvious reasons.

 

We can test this however, AAA guns are not server tracked sometimes if you see a hit when several are shooting at the plane, other shots can look like yours are hitting causing that black puff of smoke. In reality to the person firing the shot, it is missing on their screen and hitting on others. Although the predictions are better for 3rd person than they used to be, it is not perfect especially with fast moving targets.

I do know the other night a 190 was hit 9 times in total before anything happened, mainly due to other AAA hitting from a 3rd party view.

I will look at the damage models and test this also we have to remember a hit does not always mean you will have a kill on your AAR screen. Sometimes the kill will not show in AAR until 10 minutes later, but it will eventually show up on your stats.

Link to post
Share on other sites
bogol
On 7/7/2021 at 12:52 PM, HATCH said:

There have been no changes to the HE ordnance data since the May 2018 HE Audit. (See bofors_he history.jpg, hispano_he history.jpg, mg151_he history.jpg, and mgff_he history.jpg for reference)

 

I am going to stop reading right there. So, the @KardehKHE fix is just a dream? It was part of the patch that broke the servers, that you guys rolled back, and then started to implement back sequentially. It was sold as an "HE Fix". It was this year, 2021. So, what is this 2018 you talk of????? Now I am confused @HATCH

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • CORNERED RAT
KEMPI
5 hours ago, Mosizlak said:

Dunno why this isnt checked every single patch. We get the same old "we didnt touch that unit" line, but stuff always breaks anyway. 

When it comes to patches everything possible is checked, but you can not check everything, to push patches out you have to focus on areas that are more likely to cause issues.

There are standard tests in place when it comes to release clients, anything that has been problematic does get added to these standard tests list, which is now quite a large list, and grows every patch.

 

A single patch can have around 50 tickets, if any one of them tickets has an issue, then you have to release another client. And start the testing from the beginning. Not to mention once a release client is issued everything has to be tested and signed off by multiple volunteer testers. 

I know some single items have taken over 12 hours to test for 1 tester only which requires multiple testers to sign off.

 

And all this is before it goes to RC testing, which means the massive growing list has to be tested by multiple people. And every ticket again has to be tested all over again too.

 

In an ideal world everything would be tested, but this game has a hell of a lot of moving parts, more than some people actually realise. 

 Something can be broken but then requires specific conditions to take place before it becomes an issue. So you are multiplying each scenario on top of another condition that is required and then on top of another condition that is also required for it to break.  Before you know it, that one item that can simply be tested can take up to 20 hours to actually be tested fully.

 

Again I can not stress enough, reporting issues is important it gives us the ability to look at problem areas and actually test it fully. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • CORNERED RAT
HATCH
3 hours ago, bogol said:

I am going to stop reading right there. So, the @KardehKHE fix is just a dream? It was part of the patch that broke the servers, that you guys rolled back, and then started to implement back sequentially. It was sold as an "HE Fix". It was this year, 2021. So, what is this 2018 you talk of????? Now I am confused @HATCH

Perhaps you shouldn't have stopped "reading right there"? :oThe HE "fix" of which you refer, that facilitated turning the non-penetrating ordnance shrapnel back on for ground unit interactions, was part "b)" of the following paragraph...

Link to post
Share on other sites
bogol
9 hours ago, HATCH said:

Perhaps you shouldn't have stopped "reading right there"? :oThe HE "fix" of which you refer, that facilitated turning the non-penetrating ordnance shrapnel back on for ground unit interactions, was part "b)" of the following paragraph...

then again, let me tell you what the perception of the PB is. no, I am not speaking for myself, any pilot I spoke with has the same perception.

Back when the @KardehK"He Fix" was implemented, it was immediatelly apparent that our HE rounds would actually do real damage real quick to enemy airplanes. As in all you needed was a good 1s burst at convergence and things happened. As in parts were flying off, fire was ignited, i.e. that plane on the receiving end was really feeling it. 

Then, there was the rollback, and the subsequent re-introduction of the "HE fix." After the reintroduction, the "fix" felt neutered. We were back to the good ole' days where it took a lot more rounds to see the same catastrophic effects described above. So, I ask again, what gives? Are we all (the pb) just in a mass hysteria, mass delusion? 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
vanapo
On 7/7/2021 at 6:52 PM, HATCH said:

We'll continue to look for anything out of the ordinary, but with nothing more than anecdotal evidence and no specific and 100% repeatable examples to look at, there isn't a lot more for me or Scotsman to specifically address at this time.

I encourage everybody to record their gameplay, probably via your nvidia driver, to get some according footage. NVIDIA f.e. allows you to just spit out the last 5 or 10 minutes of gameplay by pushing a button. There you go. Give those guys something to look at, as we all know there are a lot of cases where planes absorb multiple 30-40mm hits, laughing all the way to the airfield about it.

https://www.howtogeek.com/259573/how-to-record-your-pc-gameplay-with-nvidia-shadowplay/

Quote

With Instant Replay mode enabled, you can press Alt+F10 to save the last five minutes of gameplay to a file. If you don’t manually save, NVIDIA Share will automatically discard the recorded gameplay.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Scotsman
On 6/27/2021 at 5:57 PM, blggles said:

Think it was a Scotsman audit, and yeah the planes are tougher, though none ought probably take 4 x 40mm. 

This - there is nothing in the data to suggest anything can take that sort of damage so not sure what to say unless some other change has inadvertently affected things. I have no idea if the HE mechanics fix that was introduced screwed up something but the data is good and has remained static since the aircraft damage audit. It’s not data - has to be something else.

Edited by Scotsman
Link to post
Share on other sites
Mosizlak

My first two hits against a Boston this new map. No effect. The 110 chasing it, I assume, was hitting it as well, since it started to smoke a bit before I hit it.  The Boston just ignores my hits, evades the 110 like nothing happened, rolls and dives like a brand new aircraft. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • CORNERED RAT
OLDZEKE

That's odd. Both of my boston deaths this new map are from 109s. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Mosizlak
1 hour ago, OLDZEKE said:

That's odd. Both of my boston deaths this new map are from 109s. 

No one is saying they don't die...What most people say is that they absorb WAY too much damage before they die. 

I think you know this. 

Edited by Mosizlak
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • CORNERED RAT
OLDZEKE

Moz, all I can give you is what I got.

I just compared the bofors ammo data from dec 2019 against the current bofors ammo data.

I compared the Component Data files on the Boston1 from january this year to current.

I checked the armor values/skin thickness/component "toughness"  on the boston1 january to current.

The files are indentical right down to Hatch's and Scotsman's signoffs.

I just went through and compared the numbers and they match, no changes. 

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Mosizlak
3 minutes ago, OLDZEKE said:

Moz, all I can give you is what I got.

I just compared the bofors ammo data from dec 2019 against the current bofors ammo data.

I compared the Component Data files on the Boston1 from january this year to current.

I checked the armor values/skin thickness/component "toughness"  on the boston1 january to current.

The files are indentical right down to Hatch's and Scotsman's signoffs.

I just went through and compared the numbers and they match, no changes. 

 

I've been saying it for years. 

Literally years, and most other people as well.  I get sick of trying, so I quit posting mostly, because all I get is "nothing changed". Yeah, nothing changed is the problem, it's been a disaster for a decade. 

I've posted videos like what I just posted. Can anyone say stuff like that is OK?   

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
fidd
18 minutes ago, OLDZEKE said:

Moz, all I can give you is what I got.

I just compared the bofors ammo data from dec 2019 against the current bofors ammo data.

I compared the Component Data files on the Boston1 from january this year to current.

I checked the armor values/skin thickness/component "toughness"  on the boston1 january to current.

The files are indentical right down to Hatch's and Scotsman's signoffs.

I just went through and compared the numbers and they match, no changes. 

 

Is there anywhere in the code a routine that causes hits to be disregarded due to lag spikes or delay or similar?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • CORNERED RAT
OLDZEKE

Not that I'm aware of. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
jwilly

Seems like someone needs to do a test with an A20 flyby and a skilled Bofors gunner getting multiple hits, on a test server using event-capture clients with time stamping.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Scotsman

Hatch is looking at it - as there has been no data change - all I can think of is that something is wonky in the code rollback or the last HE fix. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
GrAnit

So  the the physical configuration data is all the same.

What about how the HE round disperses it's energy upon exploding?  Is that the same each time or is there a random element to it?  If it is the same then it should be consistently testable.  For example you could park a boston on the runway and shoot a bofors at it the same way after each patch and the results should be the same.  If random, then you could set up a controlled test to look at how the energy dispersion varies from shot to shot to see if there is something wonky in the randomization code.

Edited by GrAnit
Link to post
Share on other sites
jester

IIRC there was no data change when the Church 7 magically developed its track armor leak and had that sit around for a while. Or when the Hawks' props 3rd person stopped moving (been years for that one). Stuff tends to break very randomly and without explanation.

I understand it's kind of a Catch-22 when on the QA side you see nothing changed, but players with 1000's of hours on equipment say otherwise, I tend to lean towards the latter being the case. Remember tom77?

 

  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Mosizlak
5 hours ago, jester said:

IIRC there was no data change when the Church 7 magically developed its track armor leak and had that sit around for a while. Or when the Hawks' props 3rd person stopped moving (been years for that one). Stuff tends to break very randomly and without explanation.

I understand it's kind of a Catch-22 when on the QA side you see nothing changed, but players with 1000's of hours on equipment say otherwise, I tend to lean towards the latter being the case. Remember tom77?

 

Tom77, the guy with a bajillion 88 sorties.  Said something changed, got laughed at til he unsubbed. 

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
undercova
1 hour ago, Mosizlak said:

Tom77, the guy with a bajillion 88 sorties.  Said something changed, got laughed at til he unsubbed. 

 

 

you must know ... the guys/devs who never play axis or 88 ... know exactly when the 88 changes or not eh ? ;)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • CORNERED RAT
TR6AL

We fix things when we can reproduce the issue consistently  .. as we have done for many Axis problems.. as you well know. We are NOT side biased, unlike some players. We can't be . 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...