Profile of MMX

Ignoring the question whether it is appropriate to ban someone for using someone else's IGN for a bit, the fact that it is clearly stated in the Code of Conduct as a bannable offense shouldn't leave anyone baffled as to why they get banned if they do it. I mean, this is kind of like driving w/o a license for ages and having the audacity to complain about getting caught one day - sure, a lot of other people are doing it, but the fact that it is poorly enforced doesn't mean it's not punishable. Not to mention calling those who enforce it assholes for doing so.

Took me quite a few reads to actually get what you're doing to test the length of the vehicle. I had to laugh a bit to be honest, it looks like the poor man's equivalent to analyse the velocity by analyzing frames in a video. At the same time it is super creative.

Anyway, the way I thought about this initially was closer to your second suggestion. Basically count how many shots have missed and how many hit with a modified unit (0 accuracy, 0 horizontal scatter, no impact etc). Based on the scatter angle and the ratio of hit shots, you should be able to estimate the length. Are you really sure you need so many repetitions? By gut feeling I would have assumed that probably 100 would already be at least okay, although I have not tried to estimate this with a calculation.

However, I had a second idea:
We could take a bunch of standardized vehicles (0 accuracy etc as above...) that just differ in their scatter angle. Each will then shoot at a target at fixed distance. If the scatter angle is too small, all shots will hit. If it is too large, there will be misses. At range 40, each 1° increment in the scatter stat would correspond to 0,35m in vehicle width. So depending on how the angle increments are set up, it would probably be possible to nail the width down by 0,2-0,3 meters.

On the other hand, I think your second method is probably more straight forward. I'd just take less shots, should be good enough. Especially if you can cross check with similarly sized units. If the test gives you similar results for the P4 and T34, I wouldn't worry too much about it.

Yeah, now that you say it the length measurement method surely is kind of the poor man's solution to frame-counting... albeit it did at least prove that the size of the in-game model seems to be roughly equivalent to that of the hitbox.

I've been thinking about your suggestion to reduce the number of rounds used for probing the dimensions of the hitbox, and you're definitely right that 5000 is way over the top. In theory, 100 sampling shots should give a standard deviation of +/- 5% in the worst case (50/50 chance of hitting) - not too bad for a rough estimate for sure. Upping the number to 500 would cut the standard deviation about in half and shouldn't be too taxing time-wise either, so maybe that's a good compromise between accuracy and effort. I'll try to set up some measurements later today and see how reproducible the results are and how well they line up with the visual estimates.

However, if Vipper is right and the hitboxes can be measured via the map editor, this would of course be even better!

Yes, I was mostly asking about the head-to-head tab. If you'd have taken the average reload time, it could make the difference between consistently shooting 0,1 seconds earlier than the opponent which would lead to a clear victory. The randomization doesn't solve this, but at least will give some more realistic picture of the real variance.

Fair point. Will definitely have a look into that one.

Oh a micro intensive ability that gives almost zero resualts for its role hahahaha [...]

it's a simple ability toggle... how much less micro-intensive do you want it to be?

IIRC only the E8 lost access to radio net and got compensated elsewhere for it? So I'm not sure how this affects the other Sherman variants, which still benefit from Radio net as usual?

This is very cool stuff! Will be more helpful since people will rather user a table calculation program rather than Python where I cobble my stuff together. I'll have to have a look soon when I find the time!


Since I assume you referred to this calculator in the "Ostheer accuracy" thread, I have a question:
How did you get the 24% scatter hit chance in the PaK vs T70 match up? Don't you need some value for the vehicle size in that one, or at least the width of the T70? Since we don't have that, what did you take as a substitute for estimation?


EDIT:
The only thing I noticed at the moment is that some ROF times are a bit off? Units like the Panther for example fire a bit faster than they are in game.

Thanks a lot!

You're right about the vehicle size being a bit of a" guesstimate" atm, since there's no way to extract these from the game files (at least that I'm aware of). Most of the values are therefore just rough measurements of the size of the model obtained using the grid in cheatmod. I did some validation for a couple of tanks which seem to coincide quite nicely with the visual dimensions of the respective units, but that of course isn't guaranteed to be the case for all tanks.

I'd probably try to 'measure' some more in the future, but my current approach is rather time-consuming. For those interested, this is what I used for calibration:

Show Spoiler

As to the ROF being a bit off for some units, I used an old formula to calculate the average time between shots that might be somewhat inaccurate, especially in light of what you dug up recently in your ROF thread. I don't think the deviation is too great (maybe a frame more or less here and there), but I'll probably try to update this in a future release...

Or are you specifically talking about the delays in the 'Head-to-head' tab? These are randomized between the theoretical min and max values on purpose to give the sim a more realistic 'feel'.