Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Electronic Hardening - Effect is not simulated in Pyfa #2602

Open
TheTheladio opened this issue Apr 8, 2024 · 3 comments
Open

Electronic Hardening - Effect is not simulated in Pyfa #2602

TheTheladio opened this issue Apr 8, 2024 · 3 comments

Comments

@TheTheladio
Copy link

Dear Ladies and Gentlemen,

with the search for 'Electronic Hardening' here on the page, I have found 3 issues (all fixed) from 2019 and 2017.

Today I found a bug regarding that charge again.
When simulating the effect of that charge on my current ship, or via projection onto another ship, it only simulates the bonus for Sensor Strength (18%), but not the 'Remote Sensor Dampener / Remote Weapon Disruption Resistance bonus' (-9%), when said ship is effected with a TD or a RSD in the 'Projected' tab below.

I've used the following Abos fitting to test it:
++++
[Absolution, Absolution EH Test]

[Empty Low slot]
[Empty Low slot]
[Empty Low slot]
[Empty Low slot]
[Empty Low slot]
[Empty Low slot]
[Empty Low slot]

[Empty Med slot]
[Empty Med slot]
[Empty Med slot]

Heavy Beam Laser II
Information Command Burst II, Electronic Hardening Charge
[Empty High slot]
[Empty High slot]
[Empty High slot]
[Empty High slot]
[Empty High slot]

[Empty Rig slot]
[Empty Rig slot]

Information Command Mindlink
++++

In the 'Projected' Tab I've added the following:
Remote Sensor Dampener II x1
Tracking Disruptor II x1
(both active)

Suppose you now switch the Information Command Burst II on and off. In that case, you will see that the Sensor Strength bonus will be applied, but not the 'Remote Sensor Dampener / Remote Weapon Disruption Resistance bonus' on the Heavy Beam Optimal Range nor Falloff, neither on the Ship Targeting Range nor Scan Resolution.

image

Please let me know if questions remain, and THANK YOU for an otherwise awesome and very helpful tool!!!

Yours sincerely
Theladio :)

@lunedis
Copy link
Contributor

lunedis commented Apr 8, 2024

Might have something to do with you using raw modules in the projected tab instead of projecting whole ship fittings.

I just tested it using a Crucifier fitting, and while I did not factcheck the actual numbers, the result seems to be working.

Abso base range: 33+10

Abso range with 2 TDs: 6.6+2

Abso range with 2 TDs and EH link: 11.4+3.4

Targeting range also changes accordingly after applying a maulus.

@TheTheladio
Copy link
Author

Thank you for that workaround. :)
I just tested it myself with a random ship with no bonuses instead of the Raw Modules in the 'Projected' tab:
+++
[Reaper, Reaper TD+RSD]

[Empty Low slot]
[Empty Low slot]

Remote Sensor Dampener II
Tracking Disruptor II

[Empty High slot]
[Empty High slot]
+++

This worked like you said and will help me in the future. Thank you.

However, I still believe that it should work with Raw Modules as well.
If that is not possible due to technical reasons in the background, a way to inform the user that it is recommended to use whole fittings in the 'Projected' Tab, instead of Raw Modules might be helpful. I became aware of this, only because I specifically tested it after I realized that the 'Charge Stats' in Pyfa don't mention the 'Applies Effects' either. See below:

Pyfa:
image

Ingame:
image

I will test the other Command Burst Charges accordingly with Raw Modules and Whole Ships since I'm curious now. :)

Thank you for your fast reply.
Cheers
Thel.

@DarkFenX
Copy link
Member

DarkFenX commented Apr 16, 2024

However, I still believe that it should work with Raw Modules as well.

I agree it should. Even if it doesn't work, I am not going to fix it. Projection code in pyfa is a hot mess and I'd prefer not to touch it - lots of effort, high chance to break something, little gain in this case.

(and as usual, i have replacement calculation engine being cooked, so rather put my spare time into it)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants