Back to searchlights

[NachtPiloten]

I have an XP install and the win10 with Ankor's shaders. I develop in XP and test in win10. This is what I have found, in XP the lights track about the same if not exactly the same as they do in the win10 w/ the new shaders. So as far as I can tell there is no accuracy difference, appearance yes, but how they track not really. Without the older versions of the lights, the planes that I used to test the lights (all in the win10 with the new shaders) were only silhouetted by the light beams and never "light up", that is until I installed the older effects code the planes were just dark images in the light beams. Once I installed the GC code the planes were then in light and reflected the bursts.

The beams themselves have taken on a different look with the new shaders and some work (In my opinion) is needed to make them appear more realistic if that is even possible.

I have a set of lights that we worked on last summer or so but as with all the versions of the lights they do not track.

Want you to think about something for minute - the guns we have on planes even if the rate is high still have limited accuracy and tracking ability - I believe that is a coding scheme by MS to represent the difficulty in aerial combat. I offer that unless there is new code developed for a gun that addresses this or a work around, I doubt any improvements will be possible in how these lights track - limitations of the sim. Of course I just push polys around and coding is not my skill so I am most certainly handicapped by my limited knowledge.

So for me, I like the older version since in my install (most likely I have done something wrong) the reflected light although random at times is far superior to the silhouetted appearance without these light bursts.

[AnKor]

Andy, I agree, somehow the shaders have to be changed to put the beam along the (positive?) Y axis rather than the negative X axis. Hopefully it's as you suggest with a simple edit of the .fx file.

Unfortunately it is impossible, there's a bit of code inside the dll which specifically gets light direction from the X axis.

I don't know how they implemented tracking in WOFF, but it is quite bad at times. I recall being very annoyed when I tested those lights that sometimes they couldn't even track a Zeppelin at 1000m.

[NachtPiloten]

Given what Ankor just added to the conversation, tracking seems random at best and once in a while even a blind squirrel finds a nut. For me, illumination of the plane is far more important and if that happens sporadically and only briefly then it is the best we can do, unless someone else can develop a work around. I will tighten up the models we worked on last year to get the beam height correct and the textures working as best as I can. I would be happy to work with anyone on this.

Ted

[gecko]

The tracking on the WOFF searchlights is poor because the beam was modeled along the wrong axis for what CFS3 needs.

The GC ones tracked targets pretty well because their beams were modeled along the Y axis.

Unfortunately without an update to the dll we have to choose between correct tracking and Ankor's improved visual effects. I'll review this over the weekend when I have time to look again at the different models we have.

[mongoose]

Just worth considering.
The accuracy of ( I assume radar controlled) searchlights was never very high in WWII; I am assuming less than 50% chance of one particular aircraft being lit up. I'll try and did into that.
As I mentioned in the posts above, the lighting up of the aircraft is often on the top side which is inaccurate and must also be resolved.

Ted what was meant to be in that zip file or is it irrelevant now?

EDIT: QUOTE

A recent analysis of searchlight operations led to the following conclusions: German antiaircraft defenses rely mainly on unseen methods of control but augment their fire by visually controlled guns, using searchlights only when there is little or no cloud. Among aircraft coned by lights for more than 20 seconds (and therefore probably engaged visually), the percentage damaged has been about twice as high as among planes illuminated for a shorter period. There was no evidence that those coned for more than 20 seconds were subjected to more intense antiaircraft fire than others. The risk of being illuminated by searchlights seemed to be about the same at all bombing altitudes (6,000 to 20,000 feet). On one occasion when conditions were favorable for searchlights, there were 70 to 80 bombers over a target at one time and they were effectively coned (i.e., for more than 20 seconds) at the rate of about one per minute. Heavy antiaircraft fire in coordination with searchlight cones is extremely accurate and destructive. Once a cone centers on a plane, it ignores all other aircraft and proceeds methodically to direct the destruction of the one it has caught.

ALSO

On clear nights, when in belts to aid fighter interception, the usual tactic was to illuminate the target by directing beams vertically too produce a wall of light against which enemy bombers would be visible to fighters attacking from the rear, or to compel the bombers, as they ran the gauntlet of lights, to fly so close that they became visible from the ground, thus enabling other lights to engage them.

[NachtPiloten]

James - I prefer the older searchlights and the illumination they provide albeit seemly om all surfaces at times. Unless the revised lights actually illuminate the planes then the older models are superior in my mind. Tracking will never be precise or reflect actual operations. I have the lights we made last year and never tested them since I did not have the new shaders working. Dan will look at these and see what else needs to be done as he said the textures were fine, so I believe that we could combine the two types if you want, personal preferences.

Need to stop fooling around with this stuff and finish the planes I have...really distracting this other stuff is....LOL

[gecko]

Hold the phone folks, I got something to work!

Ted, I was using one of the models you made a few months back that was fully compatible with Ankor's shaders and got it to accurately track targets and hold them in the beam, with skill level determining how fast they could acquire a target and how long they could hold it, but it worked on all skill levels. I set up the searchlight gun as a regular cannon instead of a flak gun firing a bursting shell and set up the searchlight vehicle picktype as "support_truck". This kept the AI from trying to create a field of flak bursts around its target and instead focused on it directly. Targets were nicely illuminated from below when within the beam, and searchlights within the same facility worked together to successfully "cone" targets consistently. On ace setting it seems like they matched James' description of the radar guided lights fairly well. Searchlights in separate facilities operated independently. I suspect that if I added flak guns to the searchlight facility that they would concentrate their fire on whatever target the searchlights had coned since the facility seems to pick the target for all the lights.

So it looks like we should be able to have our cake and eat it too after all. It also seems like we can have it track with a variety of degrees of accuracy ranging from a semi-random search patterns of individual searchlights to radar-guided cooperation of multiple searchlights and flak. I only had time for a few short tests this evening, but I'll flesh it out more over the weekend.

[mongoose]

That looks fantastic!. Now I have talked to Theo Boiten on 12 o'clock high forum and another guy. He has and is releasing stuff on searchlight assisted results (expensive to buy but I might). The point being that. if possible, we need 2 sets date related. 1. Prior radar controlled (tracking by sound) and 2., radar controlled as the flak. I am assuming, from what you said, that is possible. The picture looks really great!

[NachtPiloten]

Nice - better and better!

[Led Zeppelin]

That's a real improvement, great work!