One iteration ago I concluded assemble_ship was drawing a non-renderable
collision volume. That named the wrong cause, and decoding the same resource from
every container that holds it settles it:
Stage_S01 172 verts 110 tris 49 x 23 x 42 <- a turret, correct
Stage_S02 172 verts 110 tris 1600 x 2100 x 4800 <- wrong
Stage_S08 same 1600 x 2100 x 4800 <- wrong
Stage_S26 same 1600 x 2100 x 4800 <- wrong
eleven others 49 x 23 x 42 <- correct
Same resource, same vertex and triangle counts, correct in eleven containers and
wrong in three. So the placement is legitimate (e303_wep_01 is a small shared
turret cross-mounted on e101/e106), the original author's vbase-dedup explanation
of the capture's silence stands, and my "dedup would show one, not zero"
objection does not survive -- at its true size the turret is ordinary geometry.
The defect is in the mesh decoder.
The wider point: the decoder can produce wrong geometry WITHOUT declining. The
XBG7 audit counted 814 honest refusals; this is the other kind, silently 100x too
large. A screen for the signature (bounds exact multiples of 50, span > 1000)
flags 22-32 models each in S02/S03/S08/S26/S27, but it also catches legitimate
e_rou_* composite proxies, so that is a candidate list and not a bug count.
Next: diff the anchor scan's chosen vb0 for this resource between Stage_S01 and
Stage_S02 -- same resource, two outcomes -- and turn whatever distinguishes them
into a post-decode sanity check so a silent mis-decode becomes a decline.
Kept from the previous entry: the test can only fail one way, and cross-id
placement is genuinely narrow (2 pairs across 335 ships).
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Did the visual the backlog kept naming as the next step, and it overturns the
conclusion. Rendering e106 from the static assembly and from the baked runtime
capture: the capture has 8 placements, the static assembly 11 -- the same 8 plus
e303_wep_01 x2 and a second e106_eng_01. In the render the destroyer sits inside
a white slab that dwarfs it.
That slab is e303_wep_01: 172 verts, 110 tris, bounds X[-1000,600] Y[-1050,1050]
Z[-2400,2400] = 1600 x 2100 x 4800. A real e106 turret (wep_02_01) is 269x179x417
with 772 tris; the bridge is 105x76x305. So it is not a turret -- it reads as a
collision/trigger volume, and whatever it is the game does not draw it: the e106
capture contains no e303_wep_01 at all.
Why it was missed: assemble_ship treats every rou_* composite node as drawable,
the cross-id mount is documented as intended, and the test asserts
count("e303_wep_01") == 2. The capture's silence was explained as vbase dedup,
but dedup would show one instance, not zero -- and the test walks capture parts
looking them up in the static output, so EXTRA static placements cannot fail it.
Same shape as the earlier include_external gap: a test that can only fail one way.
Scope stated carefully: sweeping 335 ships for "ship-scale span with <400 tris"
flags 20 ships and 58 placements over 28 resources, but ONLY the e106 case is
proven (render + capture absence + geometry). Others may be legitimately large
low-poly parts and need the same three checks.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Mirror handling: the concern was that apply() bakes R*(S*v)+T while the viewer
decides winding from det(m) alone and rotates normals by m alone, so a mirror
encoded as negative SCALE would reflect geometry without flipping winding. It
never happens -- across 1485 assembled parts in all 22 containers there are 22
mirrored parts, every one with det(m) < 0, and ZERO negative or non-uniform
scales. apply_twin_mirrors writes the reflection into m, so the flip always
fires and ignoring s for normals is harmless.
Exhaust cones: the only geometry the viewer invents, drawn at GN_Jet/GN_SJet
frames because the real engine geometry is recessed. Across 335 assembled ships,
192 with exhaust frames, not one cone sits outside its hull bounding box (10% of
span tolerance). Caveat kept in the doc: inside-the-box does not prove a cone is
correctly oriented or sized -- it rules out the reported symptom, no more.
Every mechanism the diagnosis proposed is now eliminated (include_external,
duplicate names, mirrors, cone placement). The visual comparison is no longer
the next step but the only remaining one, and if it agrees the original report
needs re-grounding against a specific ship and expectation.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
build_ship_model resolves each placement with find(|m| m.name == p.resource) --
first match wins -- so a repeated resource name inside a container would draw
the wrong geometry. It cannot happen: decoding every XBG7 resource in all 22
stage containers gives 4603 resources and ZERO repeated names. Per ship it is
tighter still: e106 wants 9 distinct names and decodes exactly 9 models for 11
placements, e105 9 for 9, f105 5 for 6.
Two of the three remaining candidates for the user-reported viewer bug are now
gone (this and include_external), leaving mirror handling and the exhaust cones,
plus the untried visual comparison.
The container sweep also reconciles a number I flagged earlier: the disc has 22
stage CONTAINERS -- Stage_S01..S16 plus Stage_S24..S29 -- i.e. 16 story stages
plus 6 extra. The save screen's 16 STAGE sprites and the notes' "22 stages" are
both right and count different things; neither gets edited to match the other.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
The Stage-02 outcome write-up ended by naming "turrets near the asset must
become targets" as the fix worth ~50% of the escort damage. That was an
inference from a co-presence attribution, not a measurement. Run it and it
does not hold.
Also corrects the run labelling: pilot.py gained the SYLPH_KILL_TURRETS gate
two minutes before mission02 started, so mission02 was already a treatment run,
not a second baseline. Only mission01 (0 of 3968 pilot frames targeting a
turret) is the baseline.
At a common t=428s: baseline 46.9% escort hull, treatment 44.5% and 53.0%. The
two runs of the same arm differ by more than either differs from the baseline,
and the escort still reaches zero at t~590-670s in all three. So the
transferable finding is the power limit: one 430s flight cannot resolve an
effect below ~9 percentage points, and every single-run pilot conclusion,
including this one's, is inside it.
What does reproduce: the assault is scripted (onset 166/167/166s), and the
e007/e010 damage split is 50/50 in all three arms including the one that never
fires at a turret -- so that attribution measures the wave script, not us.
Also records that the viewer's include_external hypothesis in BACKLOG is dead
(it defaults true and is threaded through unchanged).
Tier 3 matched a part to its hardpoint by trailing index, so `e105_brg`
compared "01" == "" against GN_Bridge_01 and fell through silently. The runtime
capture is what exposed it: the game draws the bridge and places it at
[0, 70, -1850] rel e105_bdy_01, and assemble_ship emitted nothing there.
With no index to match on, take the lowest-numbered frame of the category.
Diffing assemble_ship part counts across every container: 34 (stage, ship)
entries gain parts — e102 +2 (bridge and engine), e104 +1, e105 +1, Stages
02-29. ship_audit is unchanged, so nothing regressed, and the capture now agrees
to dT 0.03 / dR 0.000.
Also fixes the diff itself: correlate_frames compared static against a rotation
sampled from the first block, which can belong to another INSTANCE of the class.
Scoped to the position-agreeing cluster, e105_eng_01 goes 1.711 -> 0.000 and
both e106 nacelles to 0.000. The one remaining rotation delta (e106_wep_02_01,
0.134) is a turret whose rotation varies by 0.182 between blocks that agree on
its position — the runtime disagrees with itself more than with the assembler.
The new rotVar column makes that distinction visible.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
A capture at controlled range (ship_capture_close.sh: lock a capital ship, close
on it, F10 per range band) finally draws capital-ship hulls at full detail. Two
correctness fixes were needed before the numbers meant anything:
* one F10 log is ~14 frames with no delimiter, and WV_ref^-1 . WV_p only cancels
the camera within one frame — segment_frames splits on vertex-buffer
recurrence, and correlate_frames cross-checks the blocks against each other
instead of trusting a single shot;
* aggregate by consensus, not median: a stage holds several ships of one class
sharing vertex buffers, so a block can mix two instances.
Result: f105, e105 and e106 reproduce assemble_ship to <=0.43 units in
translation and 0.000 in rotation for every part that does not move. The e106
rules generalise, and the viewer bug report now points at the viewer. Narrow
leftovers: e105_brg is missing from assemble_ship, e105_eng_01 rotation differs
by 1.711.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
The runtime-capture write-up declares static ship assembly exact, but its test
covers exactly one ship (e106). Records what is suspect (engine-cluster rig,
the X-reflect twin heuristic, cross-id turrets), and that the F10 capture is
already the oracle to settle it on a second class.
