Hard Light Productions Forums
Modding, Mission Design, and Coding => FS2 Open Coding - The Source Code Project (SCP) => Nightly Builds => Topic started by: SirKnightly on May 19, 2014, 04:13:03 am
-
Here is the nightly for FreeBSD on 19 May 2014 - Revision 10705
Group: Standard
fso_Standard_20140519_r10705.tar.bz2 (http://swc.fs2downloads.com/builds/FREEBSD/fso_Standard_20140519_r10705.tar.bz2)
MD5Sum (http://swc.fs2downloads.com/builds/FREEBSD/fso_Standard_20140519_r10705.md5)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
r10689 | niffiwan | 2014-05-13 05:41:23 -0500 (Tue, 13 May 2014) | 3 lines
Changed paths:
M /trunk/fs2_open/code/menuui/barracks.cpp
Fix assertion when entering barracks in debug
Assert that there's one more line free, not number-of-ships lines
------------------------------------------------------------------------
r10695 | chief1983 | 2014-05-15 12:26:07 -0500 (Thu, 15 May 2014) | 1 line
Changed paths:
M /trunk/fs2_open/configure.ac
Add some lib locations for Solaris for software installed from OpenCSW.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
r10701 | The_E | 2014-05-17 09:48:04 -0500 (Sat, 17 May 2014) | 2 lines
Changed paths:
M /trunk/fs2_open/code/ship/ship.cpp
Checking a ship_info flag against a ship flag isn't going to work
------------------------------------------------------------------------
r10702 | The_E | 2014-05-17 11:24:23 -0500 (Sat, 17 May 2014) | 2 lines
Changed paths:
M /trunk/fs2_open/code/ship/ship.cpp
See 10701, same issue here
------------------------------------------------------------------------
r10704 | The_E | 2014-05-17 16:15:50 -0500 (Sat, 17 May 2014) | 2 lines
Changed paths:
M /trunk/fs2_open/code/parse/sexp.cpp
More ship flag/ship info flag confusion cleared up
------------------------------------------------------------------------
r10705 | m_m | 2014-05-18 02:03:14 -0500 (Sun, 18 May 2014) | 1 line
Changed paths:
M /trunk/fs2_open/code/weapon/weapon.h
M /trunk/fs2_open/code/weapon/weapons.cpp
Add support for countermeasures that will pull aspect seekers away from their previous targets.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
Add support for countermeasures that will pull aspect seekers away from their previous targets.
More info please!
-
It was a feature request to make capship-launched countermeasures more effective for BP.
According to Rian's analysis, countermeasures have the following effect in retail:
The countermeasure attempts to decoy the incoming munition. If the decoy attempt succeeds:
Heatseekers alter course to chase the countermeasure.
Aspect seekers go dumbfire, and proceed along their last course at full speed.
The latter behavior is problematic for capship-launched CMs because most bombs are aspect seekers. This means that a warship can successfully CM an incoming bomb, but it will proceed along its last course and still strike the warship.
The flag should cause aspect seekers to chase flagged CMs, just as heatseekers do.
You can see the desired behavior by opening the BP2 mission 'One Future', approaching the Morena MacDuff, waiting for it to launch a volley of missiles, and firing your countermeasures in response. Because the Morena's Ouster missiles use a heat seeker, they will chase the countermeasures instead of going dumbfire.
-
I also added documentation to the wiki: http://www.hard-light.net/wiki/index.php/Weapons.tbl#.22pulls_aspect_seekers.22
-
Now we just need to figure out how the seeker strength value interacts with countermeasures to determine the chance of being pulled off target...
-
I think I've found the relevant code (see below), which means that the chance of a homing missile chasing a countermeasure is:
+Heat Effectiveness: (default 1.0) / +Seeker Strength: (default 3.0)
or
+Aspect Effectiveness: (default 1.0) / +Seeker Strength: (default 2.0)
(The homer has to be inside the CM +Effective Radius: (default 300.0), and each CM has one chance to decoy any given missile)
...
if (dist < cm_wip->cm_effective_rad)
{
float chance;
if (wip->wi_flags & WIF_HOMING_ASPECT) {
// aspect seeker this likely to chase a countermeasure
chance = cm_wip->cm_aspect_effectiveness/wip->seeker_strength;
} else {
// heat seeker and javelin HS this likely to chase a countermeasure
chance = cm_wip->cm_heat_effectiveness/wip->seeker_strength;
}
if ((objp->signature != wp->cmeasure_ignore_objnum) && (objp->signature != wp->cmeasure_chase_objnum))
{
if (frand() >= chance) {
wp->cmeasure_ignore_objnum = objp->signature; // Don't process this countermeasure again.
} else {
wp->cmeasure_chase_objnum = objp->signature; // Don't process this countermeasure again.
}
}
...
-
HAIL SATAN
-
I think I've found the relevant code (see below), which means that the chance of a homing missile chasing a countermeasure is:
+Heat Effectiveness: (default 1.0) / +Seeker Strength: (default 3.0)
or
+Aspect Effectiveness: (default 1.0) / +Seeker Strength: (default 2.0)
So by default, heat seekers are less likely to be decoyed than aspect seekers?
-
Yeah, that seems to be the case.