An equation with a proportion in it

[Adder_Noir]

Dear All,

After the great help I received last time I couldn't think of a better place to be asking this question.

Thanks to you guys the formula for acquiring the angle for the Destroyer's deck guns is now well in place and seems to be bringing back nice results under calculator tests.

However I have another (and the last) problem to deal with. To accurately set the pitch angle of the deck guns I'll need something better than the crude gauge provided by the game's manufacturers. Hope is here however in the form of the range setting.

One can adjust the range of the sight using two keys - one for greater, one for less - and it moves the sight up or down without altering the angle of the deck gun for compensation purposes.

I checked it out against a distant object (whose distance from the ship I've measured accurately for later use) and found that when you align the sights on the top of the building at 0 degrees, and compensate downwards to the base of the building the range increases from 10m to 2120m. The next time (a direct repeat of this) it goes from 2120-3720m and then from 3720-5070m. So there's a difference of:

2110m Pass 1
1600m Pass 2
1350m Pass 3

Which means I presume there is some kind of proportion involved in the equation.

So what I'm after is another formula which is more simple this time as it doesn't involved trig, which allows gunners to accurately set their pitch angle using the range readout. Problem being as I've just described it's not a linear scale. Has anyone got any ideas as to how I could go about this? I'm not asking you to do the work, just shove me in the right direction

Thanks again

 

[Adder_Noir]

I've just checked and acording to the calculations it should be a linear scale. The required angle for a flat shot for 6,000m is twice that of
3,000m and so on.

It would appear that there is some form of non-linearity in the game's behaviour here. If find anything else out I'll let you know.

 

[Adder_Noir]

Just thought I'd let you know what's been going on. It appears the programmers have included a form of air resistance which retards shells whilst they're in the air. This would explain the behaviour exhibited When I've figured it all out I'll write a document detailing it all and I'll host it on the web so you have a look at it. If I get stuck again I'll be back on here to bother you all

Thanks again.