[REL] Real Fleet Boat 2.0

[OlegM]

OK first of all I am sorry for "bring me the head" - it was an obvious joke and a reference to cult trash 70s movie by Sam Peckinpah (Bring me the head of Alfredo Garcia). See that movie if you can, it's, well, specific.

Now, lets discuss this as adults, someone did something to CVE damage model, because in stock game this ship would explode in a great ball of fire. Incidentally, I would prefer that outcome to what I have seen, for one reason or antoher - in this case it's more realistic!

So my question is who messed with the damage model for CV escorts if it wasn't RFB guys? Someone did....

The thing that irritates me even more than ships taking immense damage is that they never stop.

I remember I did play some version or mod in SH series that actually had ships STOP and go dead in water, or at least slow down, when hit in the propulsion systems, boilers, shafs or whatever. I cannot even remember which mod or SH it was, but since I remember this happening, it seems to be possible to model.

I could live with CVE surviving 3 torps once in a blue moon, but CVE taking three torps (one of them directly in rudder/shaft area) and continuing full speed as if nothing happened - that's beyond ridicolous, you gotta agree.

It appears as if RFB DM takes into account only the flood damage and which compartments are hit. As we all know, Japanese damage control was ATROCIOUS, bulkheads collapsed or were not closed in time, ships went down from secondary or tertialy explosions, accumulated fumes and fuel vapors, all sorts of sh**. It never happens in RFB - ship simply takes water into a damaged compartment and that's that. I never saw critical hits (some people say they're still possible? - maybe, but knowing history of Pacific war they should be more frequent) I never saw secondary explosions, or fuel fumes going off, and the damage control seems to be made of superhumans or robots, who manage to contain flooding to a single compartment even when hit with multiple torpedos.

It's almost as if the stock damage model, however simplified, actually gave more realistic results! There were critical hits, secondary explosions and stuff.... the only thing I didn't like is ships breaking in two (unrealistic but good visual show)

Please, discuss.

[AVGWarhawk]

SH4 is not capable of handling secondary damage due to fire or ammo going off. Would be nice though.

[OlegM]

Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk

SH4 is not capable of handling secondary damage due to fire or ammo going off. Would be nice though.

How come? In stock SH4 you can sink a ship with AA 20mm cannon, by shooting crates on a deck. If some of them contain ammo, it will go off and explode in big ball of fire and sink the ship in a spectacular way.

Isn't that basically a "secondary explosion"?

In any case, I would prefer some ships go down in "exploding ammo crate" way, than to see them survive many torps and chug along at 12 knots. Knowing IJN in Pacific war "exploding crates" - if they don't happen too often as in stock - are actually more realistic!

[lurker_hlb3]

Originally Posted by OlegM

OK first of all I am sorry for "bring me the head" - it was an obvious joke and a reference to cult trash 70s movie by Sam Peckinpah (Bring me the head of Alfredo Garcia). See that movie if you can, it's, well, specific.

Now, lets discuss this as adults, someone did something to CVE damage model, because in stock game this ship would explode in a great ball of fire. Incidentally, I would prefer that outcome to what I have seen, for one reason or antoher - in this case it's more realistic!

So my question is who messed with the damage model for CV escorts if it wasn't RFB guys? Someone did....

The thing that irritates me even more than ships taking immense damage is that they never stop.

I remember I did play some version or mod in SH series that actually had ships STOP and go dead in water, or at least slow down, when hit in the propulsion systems, boilers, shafs or whatever. I cannot even remember which mod or SH it was, but since I remember this happening, it seems to be possible to model.

I could live with CVE surviving 3 torps once in a blue moon, but CVE taking three torps (one of them directly in rudder/shaft area) and continuing full speed as if nothing happened - that's beyond ridicolous, you gotta agree.

It appears as if RFB DM takes into account only the flood damage and which compartments are hit. As we all know, Japanese damage control was ATROCIOUS, bulkheads collapsed or were not closed in time, ships went down from secondary or tertialy explosions, accumulated fumes and fuel vapors, all sorts of sh**. It never happens in RFB - ship simply takes water into a damaged compartment and that's that. I never saw critical hits (some people say they're still possible? - maybe, but knowing history of Pacific war they should be more frequent) I never saw secondary explosions, or fuel fumes going off, and the damage control seems to be made of superhumans or robots, who manage to contain flooding to a single compartment even when hit with multiple torpedos.

It's almost as if the stock damage model, however simplified, actually gave more realistic results! There were critical hits, secondary explosions and stuff.... the only thing I didn't like is ships breaking in two (unrealistic but good visual show)

Please, discuss.

Where is your reproduceable test case?

Provide the following:

Date
Sub class
Type of torpedo used
Location

Or

Upload a test mission that proves your point

[OlegM]

Is this matter of you not believing me, or wanting me to be a tester?

So if I am unable to provide exact answers you'll have easy time dismissing my complaint and concluding that the DM works fine? Is this where we're heading?

I rage-quit after what happened, so no save file, sorry.

Other than that, Balao sub, Mark 23s, summer 1944, somewhere east of Phillipine islands (east of that big southernmost Phillipine island)

Also the task force I met was humungous, at least 5-6 BBs, 4 fleet CVs, some CVEs, CAs, you name it. I thought it's unrealistically huge, but that's probably got to do with RSRDC not RFB.

[lurker_hlb3]

Originally Posted by OlegM

Is this matter of you not believing me, or wanting me to be a tester?

So if I am unable to provide exact answers you'll have easy time dismissing my complaint and concluding that the DM works fine? Is this where we're heading?

I rage-quit after what happened, so no save file, sorry.

Other than that, Balao sub, Mark 23s, summer 1944, somewhere east of Phillipine islands (east of that big southernmost Phillipine island)

Also the task force I met was humungous, at least 5-6 BBs, 4 fleet CVs, some CVEs, CAs, you name it. I thought it's unrealistically huge, but that's probably got to do with RSRDC not RFB.

This has nothing to do with believing you or not. This is a matter of determining the conditions of your problem.

The group you are talking about is from the Battle of the Philippine Sea and it is historically accurate.

I plan to build a test case to test out your claim.

[OlegM]

I have some screenshots if you think you can use them. I just don't know how to attach them to posts?

[lurker_hlb3]

Originally Posted by OlegM

I have some screenshots if you think you can use them. I just don't know how to attach them to posts?

Not required, I have enough info to build a test case.

[Bubblehead1980]

Always remember the modders do this on their own time, they are not paid, have real lives to enjoy/deal with but I assure you they strive to do their best work and eventually it will get done.

For the most part I like the RFB damage model.I think it needs some tweaking because I remember in 2.0 hitting a 1,000 ton freighter, the Taihosan Maru, forget the generic name, just know the name from TMO RSRD, small ship though.ONE torpedo to the midship area at the stack should blow that think up, took 5 torpedos to put one done, 5 come on.Again, I understand though, things cant be perfect yet.Think its just a matter of tweaking the DM to get it just right and insure it takes into account more than just flooding.

I have been learning to mod some things in past few months and its very time consuming and aggravating.Eventually once I know some things, have some small projects in mind but believe they will contribute.


Prob one of my biggest issues is when I check the loadouts of ships in ME, because it does have to do with how they blow up/sink....if they are loaded with fuel or ammo.Drives me crazy when I see most tankers loaded with freight, no fuel.Or when every single ship is carrying AMMO.Not sure if its on purpose or just an oversight but hopefully itll be corrected.Cant change it via the ME in RSRD, messes up the campaign apparently.Not just RSRD but seen this in other mods, diff in RSRD is again, cant change it yourself , easily.

[LukeFF]

Originally Posted by Bubblehead1980

For the most part I like the RFB damage model.I think it needs some tweaking because I remember in 2.0 hitting a 1,000 ton freighter, the Taihosan Maru, forget the generic name, just know the name from TMO RSRD, small ship though.ONE torpedo to the midship area at the stack should blow that think up, took 5 torpedos to put one done, 5 come on.Again, I understand though, things cant be perfect yet.Think its just a matter of tweaking the DM to get it just right and insure it takes into account more than just flooding.

I'll check it out to make sure the DM's working like it's supposed to be.

[OlegM]

Originally Posted by Bubblehead1980

Always remember the modders do this on their own time, they are not paid, have real lives to enjoy/deal with but I assure you they strive to do their best work and eventually it will get done.

I remember in 2.0 hitting a 1,000 ton freighter, the Taihosan Maru, forget the generic name, just know the name from TMO RSRD, small ship though.ONE torpedo to the midship area at the stack should blow that think up, took 5 torpedos to put one done, 5 come on..

I know modders do this on their free time, they are not paid etc etc I have pretty large modding, beta testing and scenario design experience in couple games myself, and I absolutely know it's very time consuming, aggravating and often frustrating. No need to tell me that....

However, I don't think we should go easy on anybody if we are not pleased with the final product of one's work.

A ridicolous result is a ridicolous result, why should I accept the ridicolous result in silence just because I didn't pay for it?? It's not about money, it's about getting the best results from this engine. If it's about money, then let me pay full price for RFB - no problem - will I then have more rights to demand realistic outcomes?

It's tiring to see every mod criticism end with same ole arguments: "it's free", "if you don't like it play something else". On SH5 boards people are very vocally protesting a game that is not even OUT yet, should we go tell them to "play something else" or listen to their complaints if they are valid?

5 torps for small merch is ridicolous. It's ridicolous for a free mod, and would be equally ridicolous for a 300$ professional simulator. RFB is currently the "only game in town" when it comes to relistic mods for SH4. This status brings some responsibility within this community. You can't just mess up the model and use "it's free" as your best argument. RFB guys should accept criticism or they should never have touched RFB at all.

[LukeFF]

Originally Posted by OlegM

RFB guys should accept criticism or they should never have touched RFB at all.

I am accepting criticism. Again, the only warships at this point that have been modded are the destroyers. Other than that, the only aspect of the DM that would affect CVEs is the hit power of the torpedoes.

If you have issues with DM of the ships that have been modded, then by all means let me know which ships are affected and why you think they aren't sinking properly. I (and Observer, who unfortunately hasn't been around lately), have repeatedly tested these ships, but there's always the chance that a slip-up made it into the mod.

And no, ships cannot sink due to secondary damage.

[LukeFF]

Bubblehead1980:

I tested out the Taihosan Maru tonight. It sinks with one hit under the stack in less than 10 minutes.

[lurker_hlb3]

- Problem: Determine the number torpedoes it takes to sink a Taiyo class CVE in RFB and Stock SH4 v1.5

- Test conditions:

Date: 1 June 1944

Sub: Balao Class SS

Target: Taiyo Class CVE

Location: West Coast of South America. This is to ensure no interference from any other units.

Weapons: Mk23 torpedoes

Setup: Balao SS at periscope depth head north a 0 kts. Taiyo CVE bearing 000 at 1000 yards, heading 090 a 0 kts (ship set to “dock mode” in mission editor so it can not move)

Sub targeting set to Auto with periscope locked on center of Taiyo CVE

Torpedo depth set to 10 feet. Torpedo pistol and speed set to default

First torpedo fired with a spread angle set to 0
Second torpedo fired with a spread angle set to 2 degrees left
Third torpedo fired with a spread angle set to 2 degrees right
Fourth torpedo fired with a spread angle set to 4 degrees left
Fifth torpedo fired with a spread angle set to 4 degrees right

Special note: Modified the Balao .upc file to ensure that both Stock and RFB version of the subs had a full load of Mk23 torpedoes.

- General Comments:

There are two files that control the damage model for any unit. First, the units.zon file and system level Zone.cfg file. Neither RFB nor RSRDC changes the .zon file of the Taiyo Class CVE. RSRDC does not change the Zone.cfg, but RFB does. After examining the .zon file for the Taiyo Class CVE to determine which sections of the Zone.cfg that where used, it was found that the only differences between the Stock and RFB was the values for Flood time ( values were on average 3 times that of Stock ) and the addition of “special effects” (explosion and fires). It also should be noted that the “aim points” for the “test case” are near the forward and aft ammo magazines, fuel bunker and engine room. Each of these areas has a 5% chance of catastrophic failure that will cause the ship to sink immediately.

-Test Runs: Conducted ten runs for both Stock and RFB, After firing first torpedo, confirmed hit, then used TC to advance time 15 minutes and observer results, repeated firing torpedoes until ships sinks.

Run one - Stock: 3 Torpedoes / RFB 3 Torpedoes
Run two - Stock: 3 Torpedoes / RFB 3 Torpedoes
Run three - Stock: 2 Torpedoes (catastrophic failure)/ RFB 3 Torpedoes
Run four - Stock: 3 Torpedoes / RFB 2 Torpedoes (catastrophic failure)
Run five - Stock: 3 Torpedoes / RFB 3 Torpedoes
Run six - Stock: 3 Torpedoes / RFB 1 Torpedoes (catastrophic failure)
Run seven - Stock: 3 Torpedoes / RFB 3 Torpedoes
Run eight - Stock: 1 Torpedoes (catastrophic failure) / RFB 3 Torpedoes
Run nine - Stock: 3 Torpedoes / RFB 3 Torpedoes
Run ten - Stock: 3 Torpedoes / RFB 3 Torpedoes

- Conclusion: There is virtually no difference between Stock and RFB in the number of torpedoes it takes to sink a Taiyo class CVE. The only difference noted was it took on average it took the RFB ship 25% longer to sink by flooding.

[Bubblehead1980]

Luke, thanks for checking it out.Maybe a freak thing or I guess being such a small ship I expected it just blow up and go quickly like I read about the small ships doing in RL.Doubt a smallfry could hang out for ten minutes after being sunk you know? I recall that I hit it dead center for one an after an hour was still there, so fired another thinking it would surely sink and didnt, repeated and after a long time and 5 fish, it went down.Maybe just a freak thing, who knows.Still, nice work though