TMO + RSRD

[larsonboram]

Are these mods compatable? Plus the patches for RSRD? I seen a few vids with TMO and RSRD but I never actually tried it, perhaps I should after this post

[TorpX]

There are different versions of RSRDC. One of them is for TMO. Just make sure you use the right one. And don't forget the patch.

[larsonboram]

Originally Posted by TorpX

There are different versions of RSRDC. One of them is for TMO. Just make sure you use the right one. And don't forget the patch.

So, TMO overhauled 2-5 mod, + RSRDC_TMO V502 mod, + V5xx patch 1 for RSRD + Fixed CD Sonar for RSRDC, Still dunno what that sonar mod fix's though. Are those the mods i need to have enabled?

[TorpX]

I think that's right, but I am not a TMO player, so you might want to wait until someone can confirm that, or make some suggestions.

The CD sonar fix is so the coastal defense ships (i.e. 'kaibokans') have proper working sonar in the game.

[torpedobait]

Don't forget the small patch for TMO 2.5, else you'll be stuck in a Tambor forever. Not that it's all bad, the Tambor, but Gato and Balao are better. As for other mods, just make sure they state they are TMO 2.5 compatible. I stopped using RSRDC because of the predictability of events. While it was fun for a while to be able to disrupt historical events, it eventually got a bit boring.

[Rockin Robbins]

And don't forget that the meaning of "compatible" for RSRDC isn't "TMO settings preserved and only enemy shipping added."

The definition of compatible that Lurker used is "tramples TMO into the dust, leaving you playing a secret supermod that you didn't consent to and the game won't crash when you're doing this." Before RSRDC you are playing TMO. Afterward you are playing RSRDC. TMO is essentially gone.

What is meant by the word "compatible" in the RSRDC documentation is quite different from what you think the word is supposed to mean.

[Armistead]

Originally Posted by Rockin Robbins

And don't forget that the meaning of "compatible" for RSRDC isn't "TMO settings preserved and only enemy shipping added."

The definition of compatible that Lurker used is "tramples TMO into the dust, leaving you playing a secret supermod that you didn't consent to and the game won't crash when you're doing this." Before RSRDC you are playing TMO. Afterward you are playing RSRDC. TMO is essentially gone.

What is meant by the word "compatible" in the RSRDC documentation is quite different from what you think the word is supposed to mean.

That's hardly true, the most RSRD does is add a great campaign and somewhat weakens the AI. Mods don't trash one another, other than intent of what the maker had in mind, they are very compatible and work well together with no issues.

[Rockin Robbins]

Originally Posted by Armistead

That's hardly true, the most RSRD does is add a great campaign and somewhat weakens the AI. Mods don't trash one another, other than intent of what the maker had in mind, they are very compatible and work well together with no issues.

If "work well together with no issues" means that the game doesn't crash then you are correct.

If "work well together with no issues" means that the game remains TMO then you are not correct. There are enemy AI changes, there are graphics changes, there is almost no realm of the game that Lurker did not enter and muck up with "adjustments." TMO/RSRDC is not TMO at all. It is RSRDC. The list of non-campaign stuff in RSRDC is just sickening. He should just have popped out his own supermod and not pretended to be "compatible" with GFO (Webster did an RSRDC nerf mod to restore most of what Lurker changed), RFB (no reaction at all from the RFB Team even though their mod was decimated), and TMO (ditto. Even Duci's evil airplanes are completely gone with RSRDC).

That is not my definition of a campaign mod. It is not my definition of "work well together with no issues." The game doesn't crash but it overwrites and changes TMO's carefully balanced settings. That leaves you just playing the RSRDC supermod.

[lurker_hlb3]

Originally Posted by Rockin Robbins

If "work well together with no issues" means that the game doesn't crash then you are correct.

If "work well together with no issues" means that the game remains TMO then you are not correct. There are enemy AI changes, there are graphics changes, there is almost no realm of the game that Lurker did not enter and muck up with "adjustments." TMO/RSRDC is not TMO at all. It is RSRDC. The list of non-campaign stuff in RSRDC is just sickening. He should just have popped out his own supermod and not pretended to be "compatible" with GFO (Webster did an RSRDC nerf mod to restore most of what Lurker changed), RFB (no reaction at all from the RFB Team even though their mod was decimated), and TMO (ditto. Even Duci's evil airplanes are completely gone with RSRDC).

That is not my definition of a campaign mod. It is not my definition of "work well together with no issues." The game doesn't crash but it overwrites and changes TMO's carefully balanced settings. That leaves you just playing the RSRDC supermod.

What is your problem, I work "hand and glove" with the TMO developer, to preserve TMO setting

I come by to visit after a number years and I find you "Bad Mouthing Me" !!!!!

[Armistead]

Originally Posted by Rockin Robbins

If "work well together with no issues" means that the game doesn't crash then you are correct.

If "work well together with no issues" means that the game remains TMO then you are not correct. There are enemy AI changes, there are graphics changes, there is almost no realm of the game that Lurker did not enter and muck up with "adjustments." TMO/RSRDC is not TMO at all. It is RSRDC. The list of non-campaign stuff in RSRDC is just sickening. He should just have popped out his own supermod and not pretended to be "compatible" with GFO (Webster did an RSRDC nerf mod to restore most of what Lurker changed), RFB (no reaction at all from the RFB Team even though their mod was decimated), and TMO (ditto. Even Duci's evil airplanes are completely gone with RSRDC).

That is not my definition of a campaign mod. It is not my definition of "work well together with no issues." The game doesn't crash but it overwrites and changes TMO's carefully balanced settings. That leaves you just playing the RSRDC supermod.

That's opinion if you like TMO settings, but if you've looked at RSRD files, it hardly touches anything but the campaign files and some of the platform sensors had some minor changes.

And while TMO is great, the balanced settings are opinion and the intent of the maker, many of us prefer a different approach. For instance, many don't like the env.... I hate the fact one can not do realistic night surface attacks, so I changed the env to where I can get in closer based on light values, no moon nights much closer than full moon nights. They're numerous great mods that work just fine with TMO if you know the intent of the changes...I prefer a harder AI than TMO for sonar values.... it's not rocket science.

You almost always imply modding TMO ruins it, it doesn't work that way, it can improve based on your play style, some like it harder, some like it easier. TMO is merely the work of numerous mods combined with Duci's work. Hell, Duc himself constantly mods his own work...it's no different.

[Rockin Robbins]

You are equating people who modify their own game with mods released to the general public. They are not the same.

If someone is advanced in the mechanism of the game, then they have the ability to tweak individual settings to their own liking. And that is a good thing. It does mean that your game is like no one else's, but you know that and are looking for certain results from the tweaking.

But most people don't spend the time or have the desire to dissect the game to find out how to tweak it themselves. Instead they download mods to do that. When they load up TMO they expect to play the game as Ducimus designed it. And when Joe's Whizzbang Realistic Crew Rack mod is added to TMO and it is specifically touted as "compatible" these users have some assumptions about what "compatible" means.

• It means that the Whizzbang Realistic Crew Rack mod changes the racks to be "more realistic."
• It means also that other game settings are not changed. The sub doesn't change appearance outside the realistic racks. The gameplay is unchanged. The enemy AI is unchanged. The torpedos are unchanged. And so on. They tell everyone they are playing TMO and that actually means something.
• It simply means that "Whizzbang Realistic Crew Rack" mod honestly tells the entirety of the mod's function.

Now, I'm not versed on ALL the RSRDC changes to the game. But it DOES materially change the TMO AI settings. All crews on enemy shipping, both merchant and warship, are changed. The numbers of enemy planes are severely nerfed. Those planes can no longer see you at periscope depth and sometimes even below to bomb you. Enemy detection of your submarine is changed.

Given the above and other changes which are present but I can't at present state with 100% accuracy, Is the player still playing TMO? No. They are playing RSRDC. They may enjoy RSRDC but they tell everyone they play TMO.

It's a question of honesty. There are supermods and there are single purpose mods. When your mod says it's a campaign mod, that's what it should do: change the configuration of enemy shipping in the game. It should not change enemy AI, your torpedoes, your detection effectiveness, your crush depth, periscope characteristice, sub skins, behavior of enemy planes, or anything else but enemy shipping.

If you want to do all that then your mod is a supermod. It should be released that way. I don't even think there's a problem of listing TMO as a dependency, as Traveller's Mod does. It makes clear that it is a difficulty supermod to be layered on top of TMO. That is honest.

The word "compatible" to normal Joe Public does not mean "changes all aspects of TMO and oh yeah, the game won't crash when you use them in combination." To Joe Public it means (and should actually be) "makes the change claimed in the mod title but otherwise I'm playing TMO."

That's why although my game has a modified CapnScurvy's Optical Targeting Correction mod, removing all the recognition manual changes, I'm not going to release a version of OTC that removes that. That's CapnScurvy's mod and he has the right to decide what's in it. CapnScurvy's readme EULA is much like mine and gives users the right to do what they want with, and I arguably would be within his permission to release a modified version of OTC, but out of common decency and a respect for a much better modder than myself, I believe it would be wrong to do that.

TMO is Ducimus' mod and he has the right to decide what's in it. I won't release any modifications to TMO and I won't release any modifications to OTC for the same reason. If you respect modders and you want them to continue staying around to make more mods you don't disrespect them by invading their territory. Removing authorship from their work is the surest way to make them feel unappreciated. If you work for a large corporation you know all about that.

Respecting modders' territory with other mods is essential to maintaining the sense of community we have around here. Nobody was more vocal about maintaining that other mods were not compatible with his mod than Lurker.

At the time I believed that he applied the same standards to himself, but his mod was not comaptible with TMO by the same definition he used to disqualify other mods from compatibility with his.

[lurker_hlb3]

I can see that dealing with people like you is not gonna be successful, you've got it in your head that I'm some kind evil mod maker that's trying to trash everybody else's software! If either the RFB team ( which I was also a member of ) or Ducimus were still active participants in this forum, they would tell you that all the changes and additions that I made to TMO and RFB were with their blessing and support.

Anyway I seem to remember in the past you were one of the good guys that used to support everything that I and the TMO/RFB developers did back in the day especially when we were having our difference of opinion with the GWX ! By the way what turned you into such a big SOB

I can see that my return visit was a complete waste of time, and I doubt that I ever will return here again

[Rockin Robbins]

So what part of what I said did he disagree with and when did my opinion become the opinion of Subsim and a reason to like or dislike Subsim?

Does he not agree that mods should confine themselves to their announced function? Does he disagree with my contention that "compatible" should mean more than "the game doesn't crash when you use the two mods together? Does he disagree that respect for other modders' work means you don't change their mod without making it clear that combining the two mods changes fundamental gameplay settings?

Even the implied meaning that Ducimus thought RSRDC AI and gameplay settings were better than TMO's and somehow Ducimus would abandon hundreds of hours testing and tweaking to thank Lurker for improving the mod seems a bit bizarre.

Like I said, I have no problem with RSRDC Supermod using TMO as a dependency {although I don't see why it wouldn't be better as a standalone mod incorporating interesting parts of TMO. Ducimus would have agreed to that. I don't think Ducimus would agree that killing his evil airplanes was an improvement. I don't believe he would have endorsed the AI changes. Modders get attached to their work you know. Obviously Lurker does.

And I can assure everyone that at no time have I supported everything that he, Ducimus, the RFB Team, Cariotio or anyone else at the SH4 modders Forum did, nor do or did I dislike everything the GWX team did.

[Newinger]

Originally Posted by Rockin Robbins

The word "compatible" to normal Joe Public does not mean "changes all aspects of TMO and oh yeah, the game won't crash when you use them in combination." To Joe Public it means (and should actually be) "makes the change claimed in the mod title but otherwise I'm playing TMO."

Originally Posted by Rockin Robbins

mods should confine themselves to their announced function? (...) "compatible" should mean more than "the game doesn't crash when you use the two mods together? (...) combining the two mods changes fundamental gameplay settings?

Even the implied meaning that Ducimus thought RSRDC AI and gameplay settings were better than TMO's and somehow Ducimus would abandon hundreds of hours testing and tweaking to thank Lurker for improving the mod seems a bit bizarre.

For me this discussion is very interesting, because I'm still trying to decide with which mods I'll stick, and you seem to have a detailed opinion on RSRDC.

I don't quite understand, though, the implication you assert to Lurker's answer ("they would tell you that all the changes and additions that I made to TMO and RFB were with their blessing and support"). I wonder how you infer from the words "blessing and support" the assumption that this implies any acknowledge of improvement given by Ducimus. "Blessing and support" could just be a simple "you want to create a mod that changes settings done by TMO? Sure, go ahead (= blessing), if you need help just ask (= support)", nothing more. When I create an aircraft for X-Plane and somebody does a modification for it, I might not like the goal or the result of his mod, but still help him, because, well, why not? Go and have fun! It does not make the original product any worse. If Ducimus likes or dislikes the changes must not necessarily be part of his "blessing and support"; he may just be relaxed about what other mods do when applied on top of his mod, because in the end it's up to the players to decide is something is enjoyable or not. (Of course I don't know Ducimus. So this is just a guess from my side, in order to point to another possible interpretation).

In addition, I wonder if maybe some of the additional changes RSRDC seems to make are indeed necessary to achieve the main goal. I don't have a deep knowledge about these mods (that's why I'm reading posts like yours), but isn't it possible that removing things like deadlier aircraft or making other changes to AI and gameplay is necessary for a mod that wants to implement historically accurate ship routes and engagements? Maybe without such changes too many other variables would interfere with the very goal of RSRDC (regardless if one agrees with that goal or not). Maybe when a player engages a historically accurate shipping route TMO's deadlier aircraft would just disturb the experience, or make it ahistorical, so they got removed. Just guessing, of course; as I said, I'm not deep into these mods so far. I just feel that your posts argue for one perspective very strongly, without reflecting possible reasons behind the things you criticize. So my understanding of RSRDC - TMO compatibility is, after reading your posts and thinking about it, that "compatible" in this case means "To create the intended effects, RSRDC changes TMO as much as necessary, but as less as possible". Of course I don't know if my assumption is true. Maybe RSRDC really makes changes totally unrelated to its main goal.

In a more user-centric view, my understanding of compatibility would base on the answer to this question: "Do the combined mods offer a consistent and stable gameplay experience". This is a question I always ask myself when addings mods to my SH games. Not just if the game does not crash, but if it is consistent. So if TMO and RSRDC create a consistent gameplay experience from the player's point of view, I'd say they're compatible (regardless if some players don't like this experience, because they don't like the scripted routes and prefer more randomly generated engagements. It can still be consistent.)

This is the hard question and I'd like to know if anybody could give me a detailed answer. Do TMO and RSRDC (and possibly also OTC) offer a consistent experience, or are there contradictions in terms of gameplay and content, technical glitches or real bugs? And if the routes in RSRDC are indeed scripted, isn't the replay value greatly reduced? (On the other hand, I just read a post that even in pure TMO ships follow scripted routes, just that these routes are not historically)...


Edit: And I want to add: If I'm interested in learning about the history and events and strategies and routes of the real history of American submarine war, is RSRDC a good way to do so?

[Rockin Robbins]

Wow! What a wide-ranging post!

I don't quite understand, though, the implication you assert to Lurker's answer ("they would tell you that all the changes and additions that I made to TMO and RFB were with their blessing and support"). I wonder how you infer from the words "blessing and support" the assumption that this implies any acknowledge of improvement given by Ducimus. "Blessing and support" could just be a simple "you want to create a mod that changes settings done by TMO? Sure, go ahead (= blessing), if you need help just ask (= support)", nothing more. When I create an aircraft for X-Plane and somebody does a modification for it, I might not like the goal or the result of his mod, but still help him, because, well, why not? Go and have fun! It does not make the original product any worse. If Ducimus likes or dislikes the changes must not necessarily be part of his "blessing and support"; he may just be relaxed about what other mods do when applied on top of his mod, because in the end it's up to the players to decide is something is enjoyable or not. (Of course I don't know Ducimus. So this is just a guess from my side, in order to point to another possible interpretation).

Of course "they would tell you that all the changes and additions that I made to TMO and RFB were with their blessing and support" to Lurker means that they supported his changes and knew all the changes he made to their work and were in agreement with them. Mind you, Run Silent Run Deep Campaign was sold as a simple addition of historical shipping routes and schedules to each of these mods. It was not sold as a wholesale revision of AI, weapon strength, etc from the submarine's angle. It was sold as a campaign mod to add historical Japanese routing of shipping and warships to the game.

Now there's plenty of room for discussion as to whether that alone is appropriate, because there are different viewpoints about what the word "historical" means. Ducimus came down to the viewpoint that "historical" means that the player's actions are historically plausible. The RFB Team's viewpoint of the word "historical" was that percentage outcomes of conflicts would come out much the same as they did in the war.

Both looking at the same set of data, the RFB Team would say, "of the x hundred depth charge attacks on submarines only a small number of subs were ever sunk. Therefore depth charges should be fairly ineffective." Ducimus said that the essence of simulation is the mindset of the participant. The real submarine sailors were afraid. They acted as if depth charges were dangerous. In order for the player to act with their degree of caution it's necessary that depth charge attacks be dangerous--with an outcome ratio worse than the real conflict. Otherwise players will be Rambos, charging around as if they are impervious---because they just about are.

The same type of discussions took place about AA and deck guns, effectiveness of enemy guns and the like. In the end Ducimus took the position that his mod wasn't a realism mod at all, but a difficulty mod meant to put you in the mindset of real danger that you must overcome. One particularly brilliant achievement was his introduction of "evil airplanes" as I called them. They could see you at or sometimes significantly below periscope depth and ruin your day while you were blind to them and busy setting up your attack plan. Initially I was against the idea and said something like it was his worst idea of all time. He sent me a sample version and when I played it I had to admit that it was brilliant. It meant using the night scope to look for planes as you set up and executed your attacks. And he demonstrated that really happened in the war.

The Real Fleet Boat Team took over the mod from Beery, it's original author, who had gone so far with the outcome ratio theory that you could sit at periscope depth and just let the depth charges rain down on you (I tell you no lie--I did it often) as you raised the periscope to set up the shot. The RFB team put some danger back into the mod and restored the AI to something close to stock. They had some beautiful graphic stuff and an absolutely wonderful S-boat. Far from supporting everything they did I was something of a gadfly to all three efforts: TMO, RFB and RSRDC.

My position on RSRDC at the time (because I didn't know about the gameplay changes Lurker instituted) was there is nothing historical about duplicating the actual ship movements of the Japanese during WWII. After all, determining those ship movements was a dynamic process, taking into account the movements and actions of the American side. However if you just blindly duplicate all the ship movements of the war, it's as if you were making a boxing simulation and loaded up Ali/Frazier II. You're Ali and out comes Frazier. He's punching the place where Ali stood in the real fight, landing and blocking the punches as they happened. But you're not the historical Ali, you're a player! You just stand somewhere else than where Ali stood and beat the snot out of a completely unaware Joe Frazier. Historical movement is not historical. It's a farce, as far as gameplay goes.

Suppose a Japanese port were free during the war and send out a gaggle of unescorted merchies unopposed every day. Well, you just saddle up your sub, lurk outside the harbor in the shipping lane that you know all about but the real war participants didn't and you get served dinner by the nice Japanese every day, don't you? Convince me that is historical. Were it the real war wouldn't they stop sending out unescorted merchies? Wouldn't they call in some ASW to your hidey spot to heat things up for you? Of course they would and putting the Japanese navy in a historical straitjacket is not the answer to making the game more historical from a gameplay standpoint.

In addition, I wonder if maybe some of the additional changes RSRDC seems to make are indeed necessary to achieve the main goal... isn't it possible that removing things like deadlier aircraft or making other changes to AI and gameplay is necessary for a mod that wants to implement historically accurate ship routes and engagements?

Hmmmmmm. Why would making those ships and airplanes more or less capable be necessary to make them travel historical routes? After all, the stock game has a random generator of individual and groups of ships. there's nothing you're going to run into in RSRDC that you won't run into with stock, TMO, RFB or GFO games. Lurker did add some ship types (they were great additions) and produced historical side throwers for depth charges in addition to the roll-off racks on the backs of warships. But we can be confident that because Lurker's AI was different for the versions meant for stock, RFB and TMO games there is nothing requiring that he change the AI from the base mods. He could have added the ships and routes to the game and made NO changes to the AI. I contend that is what he should have done.

One effort I made pretty strenuously while I was "one of the good guys that used to support everything that I and the TMO/RFB developers did back in the day" was to institute some kind of plugin system for supermods. That way the freedom would belong to the player. Do you want the RFB, stock or TMO plotting system? A plugin for each. Do you want the AI super-difficult, pretty difficult, difficult, above average or stock? A plugin for each. Would you rather randomly encounter the enemy (which is what the real sub skippers did) or would you like to chase historical enemy campaigns to tour the Pearl Harbor attack group, the Midway carriers, the Guadalcanal invasion force--choose your poison and see if you could give 'em a bloody nose? Plugins for all!

In effect I was advocating one supermod for all with designed compatible modules that the player could swap in and out at will, rather than saying "well, if you want my evil airplanes all the radar contacts will be plotted as dots." or "enemy AI is pretty doable for a beginner but if you stand too close to the plotting table all the contacts will vanish!" The player would roll his own supermod and all the ideas of all the teams would be on the table in a complimentary way that introduced no conflicts.

I'll leave it there and see if you have questions and we can talk about what you care about rather than what comes out of my keyboard that you might not care about.