GWX (Grey Wolves eXpansion Mod)

[Philipp_Thomsen]

Sorry... I couldn't resist...

[Kpt. Lehmann]

@ lehmann :rotfl: :rotfl:


And the post #3000 IS MINE!!!! MUAHAHAHA! :|\\

Sorry... I couldn't resist...

LOL! You are nuts! :doh: :lol: ;)

You do know that right???:arrgh!:

[Paajtor]

omg lol:roll:

[darius359au]

Ok , Im not sure if this is a bug but thought I'd post and let the GWX team know - I was in AM01 early December 39 when i came across a small convoy with a V&W Destroyer and 2 Auxilliary Cruisers ,when I first saw them I though it was 2 liners :D,I fired 2 torp each at the cruisers but 3 self-destructed with one hit that killed a cruiser.I went deep and silent after that seeing that the Destroyer was coming my way but this is when the strangness happened , listening on the hydraphone I kept getting a funny noise return , hit f12 to have a look and The second Aux cruiser instead of running is circling with the destroyer hunting me :o

This is on GWX 2.0 with no other mods installed.

[Philipp_Thomsen]

@ lehmann :rotfl: :rotfl:


And the post #3000 IS MINE!!!! MUAHAHAHA! :|\\

Sorry... I couldn't resist...

LOL! You are nuts! :doh: :lol: ;)

You do know that right???:arrgh!:


No, youre wrong, Im not nutz... Im waaaaaaay worse! :rotfl:

[Red Heat]

I just ask for some help, nothing more...
But any away...my U-boat is ready to sea beyong GWX2 war flag!

Good day!

[KeptinCranky]

Darius this isn't all that inexplicable, an auxiliary cruiser is a warship after all so it will help in the hunt, even if it shouldn't because it doesn't have any depthcharges...these things happen.

wait till you do a black sea patrol and an entire russian convoy does exactly the same thing once you hit one of the ships :D and that includes the passenger liner you hit doing DC runs

[Jimbuna]

I wonder if it's hard coded because it's scripted as a warship :hmm:

[darius359au]

Darius this isn't all that inexplicable, an auxiliary cruiser is a warship after all so it will help in the hunt, even if it shouldn't because it doesn't have any depthcharges...these things happen.

wait till you do a black sea patrol and an entire russian convoy does exactly the same thing once you hit one of the ships :D and that includes the passenger liner you hit doing DC runs
Yeah , thats what I was thinking , atleast it doesn't have any D/C's - you'd run out of wall space counting before it ran out of charges ;)

[JerM]

when you say

1. Create a fresh/brand new installation of GWX patched to version 1.4b

does that mean reinstall sh3 then patch it to 1.4 and then run gwx2?

right now i have sh3 1.4 gwx 1

[Kpt. Lehmann]

when you say

1. Create a fresh/brand new installation of GWX patched to version 1.4b

does that mean reinstall sh3 then patch it to 1.4 and then run gwx2?

right now i have sh3 1.4 gwx 1

It means to 'remove all traces' of your previous installation of SH3... preferably using the disk to uninstall it, followed by manual deletion of any remaining SH3 files.

Afterwards, reboot your system and install SH3 from scratch. Patch to 1.4b and then apply GWX 2.0 (and the armed trawler fix referred to on the first post of the 2.1 update thread.)

If residual files from a previous installation remain, they will very likely cause you problems when you attempt to apply GWX 2.0.

GWX 2.0 COMPLETELY replaces GWX 1.0

[JerM]

:up: got it! thanks!:yep:

[Kpt. Lehmann]

:up: got it! thanks!:yep:

Coolio!

Happy huunting und don't shoot zee whales!!! :up: :up: :up:

[TopcatWA]

Been playing SH4 for awhile then decided to come back to SH3 GWX & give version 2 a go. No problems on installation of expansion & set the expansion up for English Language, but find that the Recognition Manual & Museum is in French. Is there anyway to fix this? I have looked at all the data files to see if they are defaulted to French Language configeration but didn't find any.
BTW. Great improvement on version one. Well done to all concerned:up: :up: :up:

[Kpt. Lehmann]

Been playing SH4 for awhile then decided to come back to SH3 GWX & give version 2 a go. No problems on installation of expansion & set the expansion up for English Language, but find that the Recognition Manual & Museum is in French. Is there anyway to fix this? I have looked at all the data files to see if they are defaulted to French Language configeration but didn't find any.
BTW. Great improvement on version one. Well done to all concerned:up: :up: :up:

Sounds like you may have enabled the French language optional mod by mistake.;)

Just double click on the JSGME icon that the GWX installer placed on your desktop. (It looks like a gear cog.) Then disable the "GWX - Fix French" optional mod.

Secondarily, for best results... go into your in-game menu and set speech for German and use English text. (subtitles) We put a LOT of work into the German speech bits to make it more immersive.

Just make the changes above and then go crashdive to see what I mean. (You'll leap out of your skin.):arrgh!:

[danlisa]

I've noticed, through the last few pages of this thread, that there are a lot of new members, posters or people I've not seen frequent the SH3 boards before.

I'd just like to say, that is very cool and goes to cement our feeling that what we're doing is worthwhile.

Guy's, welcome to GWX enjoy it and thank you for your support.:up:

Felt that needed special mention.:yep:

[Paajtor]

Secondarily, for best results... go into your in-game menu and set speech for German and use English text. (subtitles) We put a LOT of work into the German speech bits to make it more immersive.

I already said this elsewhere, but indeed....the person(-s) who worked at this audio, did an excellent job.
Especially the volumes blend-in nicely with the rest of the environmental audio.

[bigboywooly]

Darius this isn't all that inexplicable, an auxiliary cruiser is a warship after all so it will help in the hunt, even if it shouldn't because it doesn't have any depthcharges...these things happen.

wait till you do a black sea patrol and an entire russian convoy does exactly the same thing once you hit one of the ships :D and that includes the passenger liner you hit doing DC runs
Yeah , thats what I was thinking , atleast it doesn't have any D/C's - you'd run out of wall space counting before it ran out of charges ;)

We did toy with the idea of giving DCs to some cruisers
Not auxilary but Town class IIRC
They do exhibit escort properties - although the game doesnt let you select them as escorts in mission editor

On the 9th, south, southwest of Utveer in 60-48.5N, 04-20E, at 1006 light cruiser EDINBURGH dropped depth charges on a submarine contact. Light cruiser GLASGOW dropped depth charges at 1052 in 60-45N, 04-25E.

http://www.naval-history.net/xDKWW2-4001-10JAN01.htm


Light cruiser GLASGOW attacked a submarine contact east of Copinsay in 58-54.5N, 1-23W.

Light cruiser EDINBURGH, in company with GLASGOW, attacked a submarine contact three hours later east of Duncansby Head in 58-33N, 1-51W.


http://www.naval-history.net/xDKWW2-4001-10JAN02.htm

[Col_Klink]

Hey, I only check my email occasionally, used mailwasher, saved the subsim newsletter, then deleted the damn thing. Said in there about a nice little update to GWX 2.0. Have not noticed a sticky. What gives?

[dbf574]

Great looking mod:rock: Just started playing again after about 8 months. No problems getting the mod via GameShadow, but beware... the mod is installed into a separate folder by itself:huh: . Anyway, since I was restarting I decided to go through the Academy and during the convoy exercise noticed that while the sonarman was reporting the contacts bearing, ie: angle numbers increasing - therefore contact would be going from left to right, when I'd take a peak via F12 found that the contact was actually going from right to left (bearing angles decreasing). Has anyone else noticed this problem, and if so is it only in the Academy?

[Kpt. Lehmann]

Great looking mod:rock: Just started playing again after about 8 months. No problems getting the mod via GameShadow, but beware... the mod is installed into a separate folder by itself:huh: . Anyway, since I was restarting I decided to go through the Academy and during the convoy exercise noticed that while the sonarman was reporting the contacts bearing, ie: angle numbers increasing - therefore contact would be going from left to right, when I'd take a peak via F12 found that the contact was actually going from right to left (bearing angles decreasing). Has anyone else noticed this problem, and if so is it only in the Academy?

Hmmm odd. We didn't do anything that would reverse sensor reports. That is handled by the game engine itself.

Will keep an eye out for it... but probably won't be able to correct it if it is a persistent problem with SH3.

That's a new one for me though.:huh:

[donw]

dbf574
Is it possible your sub was turning when these reports were being made?

[TopcatWA]

Been playing SH4 for awhile then decided to come back to SH3 GWX & give version 2 a go. No problems on installation of expansion & set the expansion up for English Language, but find that the Recognition Manual & Museum is in French. Is there anyway to fix this? I have looked at all the data files to see if they are defaulted to French Language configeration but didn't find any.
BTW. Great improvement on version one. Well done to all concerned:up: :up: :up:

Sounds like you may have enabled the French language optional mod by mistake.;)

Just double click on the JSGME icon that the GWX installer placed on your desktop. (It looks like a gear cog.) Then disable the "GWX - Fix French" optional mod.

Secondarily, for best results... go into your in-game menu and set speech for German and use English text. (subtitles) We put a LOT of work into the German speech bits to make it more immersive.

Just make the changes above and then go crashdive to see what I mean. (You'll leap out of your skin.):arrgh!:

Thanks Kpt. Lehman. Problem fixed & I see what you mean by the German speech.!!!!!:|\\ :|\\

[Kpt. Lehmann]

Cheers Teddals!

Happy hunting.:up: :up: :up:

[dbf574]

dbf574
Is it possible your sub was turning when these reports were being made?

No, in fact I was creeping on a steady course while a destroyer was searching for me and while I had my sonarman read out his (the destroyer) position, the destroyer would be going from screen right to left but the bearings relayed by the sonarman would have had him going screen left to right... note: but once he'd cross my bow to my port (the error would only occur while the contact was on the stbd beam to bow area), the bearings correlated. I've never experianced this before, through the initial appearance of SH-III, with IUB mod or at any other time:hmm: . Maybe the problems only at the Academy, I'll find out when I start my campaign this weekend.:arrgh!:

[ghost raider]

I have been playing SH3 version 1.4b with SH3 Commander and various mods for a year or so and it has all worked well. Last week I installed GWX 2.0 into SH3, adding the GWX SH3 Commander changes and the suggested mods with JSGME.
I have an 2.50 gigahertz AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core processor, 2048 MB Memory,NVIDIA GeForce 8600 GT graphics card.
Initially I was very impressed with GWX (especially the music and the harbour traffic) but when I realised that there were no engine sounds as the submarine moved, I looked to the Subsim forum for an answer.
Someone with a similar problem had mentioned uninstalling and reinstalling everything. I decided to do the same but then I battled to get the game to uninstall. Eventually (after three frustrating hours) I managed to remove SH3 entirely. I reinstalled SH3 from my DVD and the game worked well. I then tried to add the patch but now it will not load and keeps stopping because it cannot verify the version of certain files: (SilentHunterIII\data\Menu\Data\de_hlp.txt, en_hlp.txt). I downloaded a fresh patch but had the same result.
Can anyone offer some advice please?

[Madox58]

Could you post that in white?
My eyes can't read the black.
Sorry.

[Paajtor]

Hightlight the text...works well. :)
*thx Poet

[Madox58]

Ahh, much better, Thank you!!
:rock:
Ok, when you un-install, some files and folders are left behind.
You MUST do a manual delete of them before doing a re-install.
The best way to un-install is to use the SH3 DVD to un-install.

[Kilhmar]

Hi good Volk! Kilhmar signing in. :)

First let me express my unadulterated adulation for this great mod and the people who made it. It has completely changed SH3 from an ok game to a truly masterful simulation!


However, I got myself into a bit of trouble (easy to do in this game ;)) and discovered to my disbelief a few game play problems (IMHO). Having read the last 50 pages of this thread I now know the reason for some of them, but I'm getting ahead of myself ... first the trouble I got my self in:

STORY
There I was in my IXb in the spring of 1940, merrily shelling a hapless coastal freighter just off the east coast of Britain when, lo and behold an ASW trawler comes charging to the rescue. I don't fancy a gun duel with the gunboat, nor can I dive to relative safety in the shallows, so I quickly finish of the freighter and run at flank speed.


"Flugzeug gesichtet!" - My weapons officer yells and points to the sky. "Uh-oh", this was bad. I order the men to man the flak guns and they scramble ... just in time to open up on the two approaching Hawker Hurricane IIc's before they drop their bombs. "POM POM POM" - the FlaK 30 cannon pummels 20 mm pain at the incoming attackers. Thanks to a last minute hard-over maneuver der Tommy's bombs miss my big boat by a distance far too short for comfort, and not totally surprising my AA fire was ineffective. Just how ineffective it really was I did not yet know, so I kept going.

My gunners opened up on the returning fighters before I could spot them in the sky; here they come again. Suddenly my men screamed in terror as they were shredded by gunfire from the quad-cannon armed planes not yet invented, and damage reports were coming in from all over the boat. "Verdammt ... VERDAMMT!" - How can this be?! My pressure hull has the thickness of the frontal armour of a Panzer III tank; the best British anti tank gun at the time had trouble penetrating that much steel, let alone a 20 mm aircraft gun, especially with the HE ammo they used. I immediately ordered the Chief to dive my rice paper sub to periscope depth. No longer able to run I had to fight the ASW trawler.


I ordered flank speed and turned my boat into the charging gunboat. Set my torpedoes to 2 metres and 44 knots. I charged right at him, I needed to shoot him in the face. When my sonar operator reported the gunboat was less than 1000 metres away I opened the tube, raised the periscope, locked-on and FIRE! Half a minute later I'm rewarded by an explosion and a great plume of water shooting into the air from the trawler's bow. "TREFFER!" - the crew cheers, but to my surprise and utter astonishment the gunboat kept coming! Dumbfounded for a moment I watch as the little ship opened up with all the guns it could bear on me. Regaining my senses I lowered the periscope amidst a hail of small calibre gunfire and ordered my boat to take evasive maneuvers. As the ASW trawler passed overhead, just aft of the sail, I kept saying to myself "why is this happening to me?". The damage from the DC's was not critical and my damage control team was already working hard to patch the boat up. Again I raised the periscope and after a brief, but frantic search found the pesky gunboat in my sights. I opened tube six and waited until the target was more than 300 metres away ... LOS!


The torpedo ran true and exploded amidships on the trawler. The crew cheered ... again. The little ship was now on fire from bow to stern, but still refused to sink! Bloody hell ... either someone's replaced my torpedoes' warheads with firecrackers, or that gunned-up fishing boat's got the armour belt of a battleship! Quickly scanning the sky I pray the planes have gone and order to surface the boat. Live or die, I'm going to shell that gunboat!

As the sail broke the surface and my watch crew scrambled ... teleported to the bridge, I grabbed my watch officer and threw him to his station. I then ordered him to man the deck gun and then jumped into the gunner's seat myself; this was personal. As soon as I got there the enemy pocket battlefishingboat started shooting, but I quickly silenced her guns with 105 mm death. Now dead in the water and after I had fired an unknown number of shells into her waterline the gunboat finally succumb to her wounds. My WO reported that she was going down, and for the third time now the crew cheered. I saluted the incredibly staunt enemy vessel as she sank. When her bow disappeared beneath the waves I set a course for home ... nervously scanning the sky for anti-tank autocannon armed flying tanks.

The End.




Now, as I've already stated I have read the last 50-or-so pages of this thread and now understand why my AAA was completely unable to protect me. However I have not seen any posts conserning the incredibly though ASW trawlers. At first I though it was a fluke, but later I had to fight another ASW trawler and again two torpedo hits failed to sink her ... and this time she sank me. ;)

Has anyone else experienced this or am I just incredibly unlucky?

Also, as some other people have requested in perhaps a not completely polite way ... is there a way to make my AAA more effective? As someone mentioned earlier 120-ish aircraft were shot down by u-boats, probably in similarly desperate situations like mine. I understand the reasoning behind the way they are, but it's not my cup of tea. I like to have the option to shoot back, even if the odds are long. If it is not too complicated to explain I would very much appreciate some community help in getting my guns back in action. :)


I also read that there was a problem with the Elco torpedo boats. If I may be so bold as to offer a suggestion, I would suggest removing the troublesome Elco from the game altogheter. There are so many different units missing from the game that one more will not make a difference; and its existence is inconsequencial in any case. In the campaign it can be replaced with another unit, like an armed trawler or some other armed ship to offer the same level of protection along the coast. Just a friendly suggestion.


In closing I'd like to again offer my gratitude to the developers of this greatest of the great mods. How you find the time and stamina to undertake such a feat is beyond me! :up:

[1480]

I have been playing SH3 version 1.4b with SH3 Commander and various mods for a year or so and it has all worked well. Last week I installed GWX 2.0 into SH3, adding the GWX SH3 Commander changes and the suggested mods with JSGME.
I have an 2.50 gigahertz AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core processor, 2048 MB Memory,NVIDIA GeForce 8600 GT graphics card.
Initially I was very impressed with GWX (especially the music and the harbour traffic) but when I realised that there were no engine sounds as the submarine moved, I looked to the Subsim forum for an answer.
Someone with a similar problem had mentioned uninstalling and reinstalling everything. I decided to do the same but then I battled to get the game to uninstall. Eventually (after three frustrating hours) I managed to remove SH3 entirely. I reinstalled SH3 from my DVD and the game worked well. I then tried to add the patch but now it will not load and keeps stopping because it cannot verify the version of certain files: (SilentHunterIII\data\Menu\Data\de_hlp.txt, en_hlp.txt). I downloaded a fresh patch but had the same result.
Can anyone offer some advice please? I had the exact same problem, do the UNINSTALL with the game disc in the drive. Do the uninstall from the SH3 "pop up" rather then the windows way in the control panel. Good luck! And when prompted by the wizard, dump all off the files.

[Abd_von_Mumit]

Kilhmar - welcome Mate! Excellent story, I've read it even though I wasn't going to, I just started to scan your text to check what it is about... Read it all. Thanks. :up:

[Jimbuna]

Welcome aboard Kilhmar.....good to see your enjoying the GWXperience :arrgh!:

[ReallyDedPoet]

Welcome to SUBSIM :up: Kilhmar


RDP

[von Sybe]

Moin moin fellow submariners!

This being my first post, I would like to congratulate the GWX team on the the fantastic 2.0 Mod.

I consider myself somewhat of a WWII history buff, particularly on our common subject. Having played SHII and later III for years, in my humble opinion only now is the potential of the Sub marine simulation being fulfilled. The original SHIII seems but a Beta version.

Vielen Dank!!!

[ReallyDedPoet]

Welcome to SUBSIM :up: von Sybe

Enjoy your stay :yep:


RDP

[Kilhmar]

Thank you gentlemen. :)

[Jimbuna]

Moin moin fellow submariners!

This being my first post, I would like to congratulate the GWX team on the the fantastic 2.0 Mod.

I consider myself somewhat of a WWII history buff, particularly on our common subject. Having played SHII and later III for years, in my humble opinion only now is the potential of the Sub marine simulation being fulfilled. The original SHIII seems but a Beta version.

Vielen Dank!!!

Welcome aboard Kaleun :arrgh!:

[ghost raider]

Many thanks privateer and 1480 for the helpful suggestions. Apologies for the original black text. Obviously deleting the remaining folders was key to a successful uninstall.
I have reinstalled SH3 and GWX2 and it is all working, including the engine sound (although I think it is still too quiet for a submarine interior).
The GWX mod is a work of art, adding greater dimension to SH3. My thanks to the GWX team for all their hard work. :up:

[Kilhmar]

Never mind guys, I figured it out. Just have to make new tweak files for all the new aircraft and I'll make planes killable again ... difficult and dangerous, but killable. ;)

[Kpt. Lehmann]

Never mind guys, I figured it out. Just have to make new tweak files for all the new aircraft and I'll make planes killable again ... difficult and dangerous, but killable. ;)

Well, one could certainly argue that they are already quite 'killable.';) They are far from invulnerable in GWX.

However, if you'd like them soft and easy to shoot down... more power to ya.:ping:

In terms of the 'simulator' aspect though... they will not be made soft for the GWX mod itself.

I'm sure you understand.

[donw]

Hey B Boy...either empty out a PM slot or come up on TS for a min! :p

[Kilhmar]

Never mind guys, I figured it out. Just have to make new tweak files for all the new aircraft and I'll make planes killable again ... difficult and dangerous, but killable. ;)
Well, one could certainly argue that they are already quite 'killable.';) They are far from invulnerable in GWX.

However, if you'd like them soft and easy to shoot down... more power to ya.:ping:

In terms of the 'simulator' aspect though... they will not be made soft for the GWX mod itself.

I'm sure you understand.


When you need several magazines of direct hits to shoot down a Hurricane they are simply not killable, at least not with early war guns. The Hurri will kill you with machine guns long before you manage to get enough hits on him. I do not consider this very realistic, but as always YMMV.

As for the "simulator" part: That was never on the table to begin with. I just wanted a bit of help modding my own game. Yet ... I had to work it out myself.

[Jimbuna]

Never mind guys, I figured it out. Just have to make new tweak files for all the new aircraft and I'll make planes killable again ... difficult and dangerous, but killable. ;)
Well, one could certainly argue that they are already quite 'killable.';) They are far from invulnerable in GWX.

However, if you'd like them soft and easy to shoot down... more power to ya.:ping:

In terms of the 'simulator' aspect though... they will not be made soft for the GWX mod itself.

I'm sure you understand.


When you need several magazines of direct hits to shoot down a Hurricane they are simply not killable, at least not with early war guns. The Hurri will kill you with machine guns long before you manage to get enough hits on him. I do not consider this very realistic, but as always YMMV.

As for the "simulator" part: That was never on the table to begin with. I just wanted a bit of help modding my own game. Yet ... I had to work it out myself.

We do our best to offer all the tech support required for GWX. However, we have RL jobs which means we have to make allowances and as such we are not always available.
There have been a lot of queries since the GWX2.0 launch, many by people who want to tweak the mod to their own taste or degree of realism.
I'm sure you'll understand when I say that GWX was developed the way we liked it, and as such, priority must be given to those who like playing the mod the way we intended it to be played.
I'm pleased your sorted http://www.psionguild.org/forums/images/smilies/wolfsmilies/pirate.gif

[onelifecrisis]

KL, you need to empty your inbox again! :)

[Kpt. Lehmann]

To anyone else concerned about the Hurricane in GWX.

It is small, very fast, and even harder to hit. In testing most close range shots missed. THIS is what makes the Hurricane seem so tough.

It does not take many hits to shoot it down. The trick is simply achieving the hits in the first place.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion... but do keep in mind that they are just opinions.

Besides, shooting it out with aircraft wasn't a viable option for U-boats in real life.

For a time, the U-boat force was ordered to remain surfaced and fight off aircraft attacks.

The order was soon rescinded though due to the consequences.

[Wildhawke11]

Although it was the spitfire that was a better fighter plane in the battle of Britain it was its tight turning circle that made it the better fighter plane. The older hurricane although not being able to turn quick at speed was a much tougher plane and often limped home with loads of damage on it. This is a fact. How do i know ?. I was born in 1939 when the war broke out and later in life i spoke to a older friend who was in the RAF at the time.
Rock On GWX

PS
If i had seen your last post before i posted this KPT i would have held back LOL

[Kilhmar]

Jimbuna and Kpt. Lehmann, no offence was intended gentlemen. Though I had hoped some friendly soul would at least point me in the right direction, say “use SH3 Mini Tweeker to modify the aircraft's .zon files”. Those ten words would have saved me the better part of a day’s tinkering and testing, but I guess it was too much to ask from this community; you people seem pretty touchy about these things. ;)

Running the risk of sparking off a major debate … Kpt. Lehmann when you say that “shooting it out with aircraft wasn't a viable option for U-boats in real life” it is both true and false depending on circumstances. It is true that fighting off aircraft was not a viable option in a strategic sense, but it certainly was viable in a tactical sense.

Earlier in this thread Albrecht von Hesse wrote, and I have little reason to doubt him, that: ”121 aircraft shot down by 97 individual U-boats for the loss of 31 U-boats either sunk during the attack or due to being located by other forces shortly afterwards and sunk. (http://uboat.net/history/aircraft_losses.htm) (http://uboat.net/history/aircraft_losses.htm%29)”. 31 U-boats lost for 121 aircraft is a horrible loss ratio simply because a U-boat is far more valuable than an aircraft both in resources spent on production, training and lives lost. However it also means that when the U-boats actually fought back instead of just trying to dive away the U-boats won roughly 3 out of 4 engagements, with a victory or draw going to the aircraft in only 1 out of 4.

Assuming that those statistics are correct it is quite clear that it was strategically completely unviable for the KM to have their U-boats fight off air attacks. However those statistics also show that when forced to fight the U-boats had a pretty good chance to win and survive a fight against aircraft. However towards the end of the war I doubt that this was still the case.


Now … not unlike most forums I’ve visited I see a lot of ignorant and simply wrong information being posted. That’s just the nature of the intardnet I suppose ;). Like .50 cal rounds being able to puncture the pressure hull of a U-boat for instance; complete hogwash. Even with the most modern MP NM140 round (developed and made by NAMMO Raufoss in Norway btw.) which uses a tungsten carbide hardcore can only penetrate 11 millimetres of steel. Still 11 mm of steel is more than most APC’s and American snipers have had great success against lightly armoured Iraqi vehicles using this ammunition. WWII .50 cal API ammo had nowhere near the penetration to damage a U-boat’s pressure hull. Even the mighty Panzer VI (Tiger) had no more than 25 mm thick top armour, and the USAAF’s .50 cals most certainly didn’t shoot trough that.

Even the post directly above shows a typical “Discovery Channel” lack of accuracy. The Spitfire did in no way turn tighter than the Hurricane. The Hurricane was on par with the F4F in terms of turning circle. What made the Spitfire the better fighter was its greater speed, which rivalled the 109E-4, but I won’t elaborate on that here. Aircraft is my first love, subs my second, and I have been embroiled in too many week-long discussions on really geeky stuff like sparkplug-fouling in the DB 605A running on 1.42 ata of manifold pressure in 1943 to argue Spits, Hurris and 109s on a U-boat forum. ;) There are other, more appropriate forums for that.

Again, I don’t mean to offend anyone. Each to his own … it’s just a game.

[Jimbuna]

No offence taken.....we are all entitled to an opinion.....enjoy the game and have a nice day http://www.psionguild.org/forums/images/smilies/wolfsmilies/thumbsup.gif

[Kilhmar]

Thanks. You too Sir. :up:

[Wildhawke11]

No offence taken.....we are all entitled to an opinion.....enjoy the game and have a nice day http://www.psionguild.org/forums/images/smilies/wolfsmilies/thumbsup.gif

Short but very good answer Jim Boy.

[Wildhawke11]

*Each to his own … it’s just a game*

Even better remark from you Kilhmar :)

[Julius Caesar]

I sure wouldn't slug it out with an aircraft after seeing this video of LB-24/LB-30 attacking U-Boat with .50 Machine guns:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NnYaqhdbydw

[Kilhmar]

Nice video Julius Caesar, thanks for sharing. :)

I wouldn't want to be in front of a .50 cal in any situation. However despite the impressive water plumes and incendiary flashes those .50's didn't do much more than possibly damage one of the flak turrets. The rest of the strikes would be ineffectual.

[joea]

Nice video Julius Caesar, thanks for sharing. :)

I wouldn't want to be in front of a .50 cal in any situation. However despite the impressive water plumes and incendiary flashes those .50's didn't do much more than possibly damage one of the flak turrets. The rest of the strikes would be ineffectual.

Ok, how thick was the U-boat's pressure hull anyway? :hmm:

You do know that machine guns could wreck all sorts of stuff like antennas, maybe even the KDB hydrophone heads...and for tanks anti-tank rifles as well as MGs were useful for damaging vision slits (I saw a cool German training video that showed Panther crew carried extra vision blocks in case one was damaged.) and exhaust ports etc.

[Julius Caesar]

Hull of VIIC was around 18.5 mm (0.73 in).

[donw]

I saw a cool German training video that showed Panther crew carried extra vision blocks in case one was damaged.) and exhaust ports etc.

:hmm: They any relation to Panzer crews? J/K Mate :D I ran around in Army M-113 APC's for a while, and yea, we also had extra vision blocks on board.

[joea]

I saw a cool German training video that showed Panther crew carried extra vision blocks in case one was damaged.) and exhaust ports etc.
:hmm: They any relation to Panzer crews? J/K Mate :D I ran around in Army M-113 APC's for a while, and yea, we also had extra vision blocks on board.

:rotfl:No they were really Panzer crews in Panther (Pz V) tanks in a film showing how to fight Soviet infantry.

Here it is:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-4JQbgccR4Y

[Jimbuna]

I sure wouldn't slug it out with an aircraft after seeing this video of LB-24/LB-30 attacking U-Boat with .50 Machine guns:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NnYaqhdbydw

Probably the most fitting way to add clarity and understanding to the never ending confusion some people have for the destructive effect cannon fire can have on a U-boat http://www.psionguild.org/forums/images/smilies/wolfsmilies/thumbsup.gif

[Kilhmar]

I sure wouldn't slug it out with an aircraft after seeing this video of LB-24/LB-30 attacking U-Boat with .50 Machine guns:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NnYaqhdbydw
Probably the most fitting way to add clarity and understanding to the never ending confusion some people have for the destructive effect cannon fire can have on a U-boat http://www.psionguild.org/forums/images/smilies/wolfsmilies/thumbsup.gif

I wonder why you would say that? The video showed no cannon fire (.50 cals are not cannon), nor did it show any damage done. A lot of water splashes and a few incendiary flashes yes, but no evident damage done to the U-boat.

Also you should always take these video clips with a grain of salt. I don't know if it was an outtake from Discovery or a WWII propaganda film, but it shows us three distinctly different U-boats. In the first U-boat scene the U-boat is clearly diving, its turm just about to be submerged. The second (very brief) U-boat scene shows a smaller U-boat, probably a VII with a small turm maneuvering on the surface. The third and final U-boat scene shows a mid-late war IX with a large turm configuration being strafed. The fate of these U-boats remain unknown since we don't actually get to see any of them being sunk.

Always remember that wartime footage was filmed for a purpose, and that purpose seldom had anything to do with the truth.

[Penelope_Grey]

Oh... I see the effect of heavy machine gun fire on U-Boat hulls is still be thrashed out... I don't get, why people think aircraft are unkillable... I'll post a screenshot from my log of the two aircraft I destroyed shortly no. Great trophies they are.:up:

[Kilhmar]

Does anyone here know how thick the gun shields of U-boat flak guns were? I know the army Flakpanzer versions had between 20 and 25 mm thick gun shields, but this sounds perhaps a bit excessive for a U-boat installation.

[Dreamer]

Is anyone else having difficulties loading save games with GWX2? I'm down to resigning myself to never try loading save games as they virtually always crash at the "not so long ago" screen. Tell me I'm not the only one almost willing to roll back to GWX 1.03 because of this frustration.

[donw]

Not had that trouble mate...

[Kilhmar]

A cute anectodal: :)


"After a fruitless search pursuing two fading sonar contacts in the mid-South Atlantic narrows, Tripoli and her group returned to Recife on 11 September for provisioning and fuelling. Underway again two days later, TG 47.7 headed out to conduct another search—this time along the estimated track of two U-boats slated to rendezvous for refuelling. One of the target U-boats was U-1062, a "Milch Cow" bound from Penang, Malaya, with a cargo of valuable petroleum products for the German war effort. Ordered to fuel U-219, outward-bound for the Far East, U-1062 prepared to rendezvous with her smaller sister boat in the South Atlantic narrows—directly in the path of the Tripoli escort group.

Passing to the westward of the Cape Verdes, TG 47.7 made rendezvous with the Mission Bay (CVE-59) escort group to conduct a joint hunter-killer operation against the two enemy boats. Round-the-clock searches by prowling, radar-equipped Avengers continued with unrelaxed vigilance until 40 minutes after sunset on 28 September, when a TBF piloted by Lt. William R. Gillespie, USNR, reported a definite contact with the surfaced U-219 only 11 miles from the enemy's estimated track.

Gillespie went in to conduct a low-level rocket attack, but heavy flak slapped the intrepid airman's plane and crew into the sea. Another Avenger, drawn to the battle, braved the maelstrom of flak to conduct another rocket run and also dropped depth bombs, while a Wildcat strafed the twisting and turning U-boat which struggled desperately to dodge the harassing attacks by the American planes.

Indeed, U-219 emerged from the fracas unscathed; but U-1062 did not enjoy similar good fortune. Fessenden (DE-242), one of Mission Bay's screen, homed in on sonobuoy indications on 30 September and killed the "Milch Cow" with a four-charge pattern. In the meantime, U-219 was not yet out of the proverbial woods— one of Tripoli's Avengers dropped depth bombs on the fleeing boat on 2 October. Keen-eared American sonar-men felt that they had definitely "killed" the submersible, but postwar accounting showed that U-219 had escaped to Batavia, Java."

[Genferret]

I wonder why you would say that? The video showed no cannon fire (.50 cals are not cannon), nor did it show any damage done. A lot of water splashes and a few incendiary flashes yes, but no evident damage done to the U-boat.

Also you should always take these video clips with a grain of salt. I don't know if it was an outtake from Discovery or a WWII propaganda film, but it shows us three distinctly different U-boats. In the first U-boat scene the U-boat is clearly diving, its turm just about to be submerged. The second (very brief) U-boat scene shows a smaller U-boat, probably a VII with a small turm maneuvering on the surface. The third and final U-boat scene shows a mid-late war IX with a large turm configuration being strafed. The fate of these U-boats remain unknown since we don't actually get to see any of them being sunk.

Always remember that wartime footage was filmed for a purpose, and that purpose seldom had anything to do with the truth.

What do you mean by "evident" damage? If you're looking for huge gaping holes, then those you won't see, however, even a .50 would have devastating effects upon the pressure hull of a U-boat, keep in mind it only takes one hole to compromise the pressure hull and make it less effective. Holes such as that wouldn't be evident in that video because they wouldn't be huge, but each hole would have compromised the hull integrety further. Enough of those small holes and you might as well not have a pressure hull since it wouldn't be able to do it's job at all.

I really wish I still had copies or links to all the documentation I had bookmarked back when I played World War II Online. The effectiveness of aircraft guns vs. ground vehicles was always a huge topic of debate.

Here are a couple of pages I managed to find on the WarBird's forums that list the armor penetration values of some of the common aircraft guns.

http://img59.exs.cx/img59/919/ap19az.jpg
http://img59.exs.cx/img59/9960/ap23wz.jpg

Also, keep in mind that no matter what you see in movies regarding the cannons on aircraft, you're not always going to see big explosions or such. Cannons on aircraft usually had several different types of ammo. Some would fire HE (High Explosive) rounds, some fired AP (Armor Piercing) rounds, and some would fire a mixture of the two (3 AP rounds followed by 1 HE or something similiar to that). AP rounds hitting would show no explosion on impact, meanwhile HE rounds would.

Really, in a U-boat, there's no reason outside of the training mission that you should be sitting on the surface exchanging blows with an aircraft.

[Kilhmar]

What do you mean by "evident" damage? If you're looking for huge gaping holes, then those you won't see, however, even a .50 would have devastating effects upon the pressure hull of a U-boat...

I'm sorry but that simply isn't true. The .50 cal isn't even close to have enough power to penetrate the pressure hull of a U-boat.

[Genferret]

What do you mean by "evident" damage? If you're looking for huge gaping holes, then those you won't see, however, even a .50 would have devastating effects upon the pressure hull of a U-boat...
I'm sorry but that simply isn't true. The .50 cal isn't even close to have enough power to penetrate the pressure hull of a U-boat.

Might want to re-read the thickness of a pressure hull and then look at the document I linked you to again that lists the penetration rate of the .50 cal.

I'll give you a hint, someone listed the pressure hull thickness higher up, and it was less than 20mm.

[Kilhmar]

You might want take those documents with a grain of salt and read my post on modern armour piercing rounds. The IX had 22 mm thick pressure hull, and the VIIc/41 had 28-33 mm thick pressure hull.

I have some very detailed listings and after action reports on sinking of subs by US aircraft. None of the strafing attacks seriously damaged the U-boats, but sometimes cleared the deck allowing other aircraft to attack with bombs or rockets.

Here are a few examples:

U-966, 10 November 1943 (shared)
Type: VIIC Laid Down: 1 May 1942, Blohm &
Voss, Hamburg
Commissioned: 4 March 1943, Oblt. Eckehard Wolf
Commander: Oblt. Eckehard Wolf
Career: Assigned: March 1943–July 1943, 5th
Flotilla (Kiel) training; August 1943 –
November 1943 9th Flotilla (Brest)
Successes: None
Fate: Sunk 10 November 1943 in the Bay Biscay
near Cape Ortegal, Spain, by American and
Czech aircraft bombs in one of the longest
surface battles of aircraft against a U-boat in
WWII. At 0800, a VB-105 PB4Y-1 Liberator piloted
by Lieutenant L. E. Harmon was alerted
by an RAF aircraft of a radar contact near the
coast of Spain. Harmon located the surfaced
U-boat and made two strafing attacks. Heavy
AA fire damaged his aircraft and forced him to
break off the attack. An RAF fighter then dove
to attack the submarine. Harmon made a third
strafing attack, but had to break off afterwards
due to a fuel shortage. Lieutenant K. L. Wright
of VB-103 located U-966 near Ferrol at 1040
and delivered a strafing and depth charge attack.
Intense AA fire drove him off and he,
too, had to depart the target for lack of fuel.
Lieutenant W. W. Parish and crew then arrived
on the scene. A depth charge attack was conducted
in cooperation with a rocket-firing RAF
Liberator at 1230. The submarine was abandoned
by its crew after running aground at
Oritiguiera, Spain. The German crewmen
were quickly picked up by nearby Spanish
fishing vessels and interned in Spain.



Type: IXC Laid Down: 24 September 1940,
Deutsche Werft, Hamburg
Commissioned: 20 October 1941, Oblt. Georg
Staats
Commander: October 1941–November 1943,
Kptlt. Georg Staats (Knights Cross)
Career: Six Patrols; assigned: October 1941–June
1942, 4th Flotilla (Stettin); July 1942–November
1943 10th Flotilla (Lorient)
Successes: 14 ships sunk for a total of 74,087 tons
Fate: Sunk 12 November 1943, north of Cape
Ortegal, Spain, in position 46°00'N, 07°30'W,
by U.S. bombs (VB-103). 57 dead (entire crew
lost). Lieutenant (jg) Brownell made a night
attack on a submarine. His PB4Y-1 Liberator
was apparently heavily damaged by the Uboat’s
AA fire and crashed into the sea with
no survivors. The next day, two oil slicks
were spotted, about five miles apart. Postwar
examination of German records indicates that
he sank U-508.



U-598, 23 July 1943
Type: VIIC Laid Down 11 January 1941, Blohm &
Voss, Hamburg
Commissioned: 27 November 1941, Oblt.
Gottfried Holtorf
Commander: November 1941–July 1943, Kptlt.
Gottfried Holtorf
Career: Assigned: November 1941–July 1942, 8th
Flotilla (Danzig); July 1942–July 1943, 6th
Flotilla (St. Nazaire)
Successes: Two ships sunk for a total of 9,295
tons; one ship of 6,197 tons damaged
Fate: Sunk 23 July 1943, in the South Atlantic near
Natal, in position 04°05'S, 33°23'W, by U.S.
bombs (VB-107). 44 dead, one survivor.
Lieutenant (jg) Waugh, flying PB4Y-1 Liberator
aircraft 107-B-6, attacked the surfaced U-boat
in conjunction with a second squadron aircraft
flown by Lieutenant William R. Ford, sinking
the submarine. Waugh’s aircraft apparently
sustained damage during the attack, plunging
into the sea after his bombing pass with the
loss of all hands. The submarine’s identity was
confirmed by the sole survivor as U-598.



U-174, 27 April 1943
Type: IXC Laid Down: 2 January 1941, AG Weser,
Bremen
Commissioned: 26 November 1941, Fregkpt.
Ulrich Thilo
Commander: November 1941–March 1943,
Fregkpt. Ulrich Thilo; March 1943–April 1943,
Oblt. Wolfgang Grandefeld
Career: Assigned: November 1941–July 1942, 4th
Flotilla (Stettin); July 1942–April 1943, 10th
Flotilla (Lorient)
Successes: Five ships sunk for a total of 30,813
tons
Fate: Sunk 27 April 1943, south of Newfoundland,
in position 43°35'N, 56°18'W, by U.S. bombs.
53 dead (entire crew lost). A VP-125 aircraft attacked
U-174 on the surface near Cape Race.
The U-boat heavily damaged the PV-1 Ventura
with its 20-mm AA guns before sinking.



U-604, 30 July 1943
Type: VIIC Laid Down: 27 February 1941, Blohm
& Voss, Hamburg
Commissioned: 8 January 1942, Kptlt. Horst
Höltring
Commander: January 1942–August 1943, Kptlt.
Horst Höltring
Career: Six patrols; assigned: January 1942–July
1942, 5th Flotilla (Kiel); August 1942–August
1943, 9th Flotilla (Brest)
Successes: 6 ships sunk for a total of 39,891 tons
Fate: Lieutenant Commander Thomas D. Davies
and crew spotted a fully surfaced submarine
during a coastal barrier sweep northeast of
Bahia. The U-boat crew attempted to fight it
out with 20-mm AA fire, but the bow guns of
the Ventura quickly cleared the decks of the
submarine, allowing Davies to make a perfect
drop with four Mark 47 depth charges athwart
the still surfaced U-boat. The submarine, U-
601, submerged after the attack then surfaced
again at a 60-degree angle with the screws out
of the water. The U-boat then submerged
again. Later, German prisoners of war indicated
that the damage to the U-boat was so
severe that it had to be scuttled on 11 August
1943. The U-604 crew was taken aboard U-
185 and U-172 (during the sinking



U-615, 7 August 1943 (shared with VB-130)
Type: VIIC Laid Down: 20 May 1941, Blohm &
Voss, Hamburg
Commissioned: 26 March 1942, Oblt. Ralph
Kapitzky
Commander: March 1942–August 1943, Kptlt.
Ralph Kapitzky
Career: Assigned: March 1942–August 1942, 8th
Flotilla (Danzig); September 1942–August
1943, 3rd Flotilla (La Pallice)
Successes: Four ships sunk for a total of 27,231
tons
Fate: Sunk 7 August 1943, in the Caribbean southeast
of Curacao, in position 12°38'N, 64°15'W.
Lieutenant (jg) John M. Erskine, pilot of a
PBM-3S Mariner of VP-204, attacked the surfaced
U-615 on 6 August, causing moderate
damage. The squadron aircraft maintained
contact with the submerged submarine and
kept it down over night. On the morning of
the 7th, Lieutenant Anthony R. Matuski spotted
the U-boat when it surfaced and made an attack
run. His aircraft was damaged by return
fire and crashed with the loss of all hands.
Lieutenant Lewis D. Crockett, flying a VP-204
Mariner, located the U-boat and conducted a
bomb run that further damaged the vessel, but
resulted in severe damage to his aircraft from
AA fire. He remained on the scene until
Lieutenant Holmes, pilot of a PV-1 Ventura of
VB-130, arrived to assist him. The two aircraft
conducted a coordinated bombing and
strafing attack. Lieutenant (jg) John W.
Dresbach, in a VP-204 Mariner, arrived and
made a bombing and strafing attack on the Uboat.
This attack resulted in mortal wounds to
the pilot, Lieutenant Dresbach, and the final
blow for the submarine. A U.S. Navy destroyer
from Trinidad reached the area the next morning
and rescued forty-five of the U-boat’s crew
of 49.



U-572, 3 August 1943
Type: VIIC Laid Down: 15 June 1940, Blohm &
Voss, Hamburg
Commissioned: 29 May 1941, Kptlt. Heinz
Hirsacker
Commander: May 1941–December 1942, Kptlt.
Heinz Hirsacker; December 1942–August
1943, Oblt. Heinz Kummentat
Career: Assigned: May 1941–August 1941, 3rd
Flotilla (Kiel); August 1941–August 1943, 3rd
Flotilla (La Pallice)
Successes: Six ships sunk for a total of 19,323
tons, one ship of 6,207 tons damaged
Fate: Sunk 3 August 1943, northeast of Trinidad,
in position 11°35'N, 54°05'W, by bombs from
a PBM-3S Mariner of VP-205. 47 dead (entire
crew lost). Lieutenant (jg) C. C. Cox attacked
U-572 on the surface and was shot down during
the bomb run with the loss of all hands.



I have never read or heard of a U-boat being sunk or seriously damaged by strafing alone.

More documentation can be found at www.history.navy.mil (http://www.history.navy.mil)


Unfortunately the power of the .50 cal has been greatly exaggerated in popular media.

[Storabrun]

What is up with the unkillable planes in...:oops: Never mind, this will actually be about something else if that is allowed in this thread;)

I have been waiting for the 23/29 flottilla to become available. Sure enough, in september 1941 it's there and I request transfer and it was approved. Strange thing is that when I click the map it says "base moved to brest" or something like that and I end up at 0 0 which is a bit south east of Freeport.

I have GWX 2.0 with light harbour traffic and some other mods but they are graphical in nature.

[Kpt. Lehmann]

...I have been waiting for the 23/29 flottilla to become available. Sure enough, in september 1941 it's there and I request transfer and it was approved. Strange thing is that when I click the map it says "base moved to brest" or something like that and I end up at 0 0 which is a bit south east of Freeport.

I have GWX 2.0 with light harbour traffic and some other mods but they are graphical in nature.

Hi Storabrun,

The situation to which you refer is conclusive evidence that you have a file conflict. This occurs when the base coordinates in the Flotilla.cfg are different in comparison to the base coordinates in the LND file.

The most likely causes are:

a) Loading a save file from a previous version of GWX
b) Failing to completely remove residual files from previous installations of SH3
c) Incompatible or incomplete mod installation (However inadvertant it may be.)

Secondarily, given the above situation, you should also assume that other files in your installation are also suspect/corrupt/incorrect.

As unfortunate and as aggravating as it may be, the only way to cure the situation is to reinstall SH3+GWX 2.0 from scratch after paying special attention to the removal process.

First, completely uninstall SH3 USING THE GAME DISK... then visit your Program Files/Ubisoft/SilentHunterIII directory and delete all remaining GWX material. (There should be a fair bit of it as the GWX mod is over 1 gigabyte expanded.)

Then REBOOT your system before initializing the installation process again. You must follow the directions in the "Getting Started" section of the GWX manual to the letter.

I wish the answer was a more pleasant one for you, Storabrun. However a moment's pain now, will save you loads of frustration later.



Is anyone else having difficulties loading save games with GWX2? I'm down to resigning myself to never try loading save games as they virtually always crash at the "not so long ago" screen. Tell me I'm not the only one almost willing to roll back to GWX 1.03 because of this frustration.

Dreamer, what you've described is also evidence that you now have a "mixed" installation. This would be especially true if you attempted to apply GWX 2.0 directly over the top of GWX 1.03 instead of placing GWX 2.0 one a brand new clean installation of SH3 patch to version 1.4b. As a result, rolling back to verision 1.03 would be equally difficult as completing an accurate installation of GWX 2.0.
Unfortunately, my advice to you is the same as to Storabrun.

[Madox58]

What Kpt. said above is probably 90% of most problems in all threads.

You MUST have a VIRGIN install!!!
No roll backs,
No "I uninstalled 1.03 but"
No excuses!!!

If she ain't pretty and proper?
You got all kinds of VD problems!
(Very Disappointing!)

[Albrecht Von Hesse]

You might want take those documents with a grain of salt and read my post on modern armour piercing rounds. The IX had 22 mm thick pressure hull, and the VIIc/41 had 28-33 mm thick pressure hull.

I have some very detailed listings and after action reports on sinking of subs by US aircraft. None of the strafing attacks seriously damaged the U-boats, but sometimes cleared the deck allowing other aircraft to attack with bombs or rockets.

. . . . . . .


I have never read or heard of a U-boat being sunk or seriously damaged by strafing alone.

More documentation can be found at www.history.navy.mil (http://www.history.navy.mil)


Unfortunately the power of the .50 cal has been greatly exaggerated in popular media.

Although the .50 caliber is quite powerful, yes, it probably couldn't penetrate the pressure hulls. Thing is, the light hull, ballast tanks, and fuel tanks weren't so thick. They never saw the pressure differential that the pressure hull would and did, and so weren't thick-walled at all. .50 caliber would most certainly penetrate that and, once your tanks were perforated, well . . . that might not sink you (and probably didn't) but it sure would prevent you from submerging, as you wouldn't be able to effectively blow the tanks once you'd gone down to any depth. And once you were stuck running surfaced . . .

The problem is, as Kpt. Lehmann and the others have mentioned before, is that they're stuck both with the game engine (which is hardcoded) and that so many individual things are interconnected. Mess with one and that can have disturbing (and unrealistc) effects elsewhere. In a perfect world the .50 caliber would, at best, sweep your deck of personnel (ick!) and damage the light hull and prevent you from submerging. However, I don't think there is any way they can mod the damage effects to duplicate that without making some horrendous effects elsewhere.

If you want to see just how devestating a .50 caliber aircraft attack can look like, watch this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NnYaqhdbydw I warn you now: it's really hideous.

In a perfect world, yes, the .50 caliber most likely wouldn't do the internal damage that it does now. Unfortunately, the SHIII game engine and hard codes seem to be less than perfect. :doh: :dead:

(By the way, excellent job of research there!)

[Dreamer]

Dreamer, what you've described is also evidence that you now have a "mixed" installation. This would be especially true if you attempted to apply GWX 2.0 directly over the top of GWX 1.03 instead of placing GWX 2.0 one a brand new clean installation of SH3 patch to version 1.4b. As a result, rolling back to verision 1.03 would be equally difficult as completing an accurate installation of GWX 2.0.
Unfortunately, my advice to you is the same as to Storabrun.

The previous attempt was indeed over a clean, new installation and I'm currently trying it again after following the install directions (yet again) from your site. I'll let you know how it goes as I've just hit "load" on another new save game.

Thanks for the help.

[Madox58]

Right.
It is historically proven the .50 call would punture dive tanks and ballist
tanks at the very lest.
With out those being in near perfect working order?
Your in a world of hurt.
The game engine does not allow us to make a call as to if hull
means dive tanks or ballist tanks.
So we do the best we can within the limits we have to work with.
If you can do better?
Please do so and teach me!!
I'd love that!!
If you just want to complain?
Push this button.
http://i108.photobucket.com/albums/n12/privateer_2006/Pen.jpg

[Pablo]

Does anyone here know how thick the gun shields of U-boat flak guns were? I know the army Flakpanzer versions had between 20 and 25 mm thick gun shields, but this sounds perhaps a bit excessive for a U-boat installation. Hi!

Most U-boat guns of any type did not have a shield. Flak without shields include all 2cm single and double mounts, as well as the U-boat version of the 3.7cm SKC/30.

John Campbell (Naval Weapons of World War II. Conway Maritime Press: 1985) gives a thickness of 12mm for the 2cm Vierlings L38/43 (that's "Flakvierling" for those of you playing Silent Hunter III) used by the Kriegsmarine.

Pablo

[Dreamer]

Re-installing the whole deal yet again seems to have solved the crashing issue for me. I've been able to load two individual saves two times each with no problems. Wooo! Now to go do my first OLC GUI / GWX patrol...

[Metus]

I am playing GWX 2.0 since released and have to say it's great. Actually it was the first time for me that I really want to play a modded game instead of the original :up: .
Reading some threads about CTDs when loading saved games mostly crashing while or shortly after showing the "Noch nicht so lange her" text, I decided to tell about my experience: It seemed to be a quite random crash - killing my nerves in 11 Feindfahrten - but especially often after sinking a ship shortly/minutes ago. Actually I could solve the problem now simply by deactivating the Enhanced Damage Effects mod. No crashes so far in the 12th.
In fact I like the EDE Mod and hope it will work for me in 2.1 :)

[Jimbuna]

Re-installing the whole deal yet again seems to have solved the crashing issue for me. I've been able to load two individual saves two times each with no problems. Wooo! Now to go do my first OLC GUI / GWX patrol...

Congratulations :up: ........yet further testimony to the fact that the vast majority of problems are caused by faulty installations, and most of the remainder by user/player adding additional incompatable content.

[Mikey_Wolf]

I think what most people forget is U-Boat pressure hulls were flexible rather than completely solid, if they were totally solid, they run the risk of cracking under the pressure the deeper they go.

.50 cal bullets are armour piercing, ripping through a U-Boat would be no problem, if you rake up the ballast tanks you are stuffed, no more diving.

Also, you can fight it out with planes in GWX quite well, but if you are expecting to emerge unscathed - don't. lol Expect to be trashed in the attempt. :know:

[Sailor Steve]

I finally was able to look at my computer again, and loaded up GWX2. Kiel is lovely, what with surrounding cities and docks and Graf Zeppelin sitting there in all her glory (not to mention only one lighthouse:up: ).

I used the the 'Kiel Out' auto-nav, and ran aground about 3/4 of the way through. Is this one of the problems caused by not doing a complete delete/reinstall? I ask because for the present I'm just poking around and experimenting, and I keep a stock/1.4b Data folder handy for quick switches. I'll do the full deed before I embark on a real career.

I also remember reading that some people have experienced slow rising at all stop at periscope depth and slow sinking at deeper depths, and thought this sounded pretty cool, but when I tried it nothing happened. Same question as above.

[donw]

Steve...It's important that you select the "route out" of the canal as soon as your game opens...if your boat moves at ALL...from wave action or whatever, it can throw you off just a tiny bit, which sounds like what may of happened. I'm up to Mar 41, anticipating a move to brest in June, and have used it everytime, and not had a problem.

However, I do recall pulling out of the slip once, forgetting about that, took the boat back into the slip and trying to set those waypoints again...and it was all botched up...so set it as soon as you can.

Can't help with the buoyancy issue..sorry

[danlisa]

Steve, you should have left Kiel by the other route, if only to see the Memorial (FYI try to see it at night).

donw is correct, the auto plot must be used before moving out of your dock.

FYI, don't do what I did the other day, autoplot the route and then not tell the NO to follow plotted route.:damn:

Must feel good to be back at sea.:arrgh!:

[Storabrun]

A dot on the map at the starting location in Kiel would solve this, wouldn't it? Just like the dot used for inbound.

[donw]

A dot on the map at the starting location in Kiel would solve this, wouldn't it? Just like the dot used for inbound.
It might...but if your bearing has changed one tiny bit...it'll still be botched ;)

autoplot the route and then not tell the NO to follow plotted route.:damn:
:rotfl:Boy!...does that sound familier!

[Sailor Steve]

I did that as well, and only corrected it when I noticed I was well past the first plot point.:rotfl: The odd part is I didn't actually run aground until several game-hours later. As I said, I was more than halfway through the Kanal when it happened.

And yes, though I'm not even close to actually playing a career yet, it does feel good; especially as I'm finally able to get back to work on my own 'mod'. Also, though I took the Kanal route, I did 'fly' over to the Memorial.:sunny:

GWX2 is beautiful to look at and a bear to get used to. I tried 'Happy Times' and was spotted almost instantly! While I was grousing about it I did some thinking: In AOD I always waited until I was about 5000 meters from a convoy before diving. Being spotted at 9000 meters was upsetting, but then I realized that that's fairly close to 10,000 yards, which is only five nautical miles, and any navy lookout worth his salt should at least have chance of spotting a surfaced sub at that range on a clear day. After all, Rodney opened fire on Bismarck at more than twice that, and that was a choppy, overcast morning. Granted, a submarine isn't a battleship, but still... :rock:

[Jimbuna]

Must bring back memories of your very first patrol all those years back (SH years) ;)

[deadparrot]

I recently recieved an Email from subsim that got interested in playing again. Especially after reading this forum about the GWX 2.0 mod.

Problem is that I can't seem to get it installed. In SH3 I can see version 1.4 in the corner. The patch from ubi to 1.4b doesn't work so I asume the 1.4 in the corner means I already have it.

I used the files on files filefront. After just a minute or two I get a message saying "startcampaign.tga (source file is corrupted)"
abort, ignore, cancel"

Probably I need to download one of them again? If so wich one?

[donw]

Probably I need to download one of them again? If so wich one?

Use the hash program to compare whats shown on the GWX download website...and what you have...

That will allow you to narrow down to which is corrupted..(if any or all)

[Jimbuna]

I recently recieved an Email from subsim that got interested in playing again. Especially after reading this forum about the GWX 2.0 mod.

Problem is that I can't seem to get it installed. In SH3 I can see version 1.4 in the corner. The patch from ubi to 1.4b doesn't work so I asume the 1.4 in the corner means I already have it.

I used the files on files filefront. After just a minute or two I get a message saying "startcampaign.tga (source file is corrupted)"
abort, ignore, cancel"

Probably I need to download one of them again? If so wich one?

It sounds like your disc already has the patch included.

I'm not sure which FF files your referring to, but if your getting a corrupted file warning you may want to consider uninstalling everything (via your disc) and perform a reinstall.
It could save you hours of hard work. :hmm:

9 times out of 10 it's not the files you've d/l but the fact your initial install was not on a 100% unmodded game install.

[bigboywooly]

Could just be a corrupt D\L
Happens

Check the hashs
Easiest and quickest way to find a rogue file

[Storabrun]

First, completely uninstall SH3 USING THE GAME DISK... then visit your Program Files/Ubisoft/SilentHunterIII directory and delete all remaining GWX material. (There should be a fair bit of it as the GWX mod is over 1 gigabyte expanded.)

Then REBOOT your system before initializing the installation process again. You must follow the directions in the "Getting Started" section of the GWX manual to the letter.


Thanks for the help, I'm trying this now. I have a suggestions though. Maybe you could update the online manual when you release 2.1? I did read those instructions but it said nothing about using the game disk, instead the windows tool to remove programs is mentioned (which by the way had no recollection of SH3 ever beeing installed to my system). Not that it matters to me, but it might just save you from answering questions like mine for the umptenth time;)

[Kilhmar]

You might want take those documents with a grain of salt and read my post on modern armour piercing rounds. The IX had 22 mm thick pressure hull, and the VIIc/41 had 28-33 mm thick pressure hull.

I have some very detailed listings and after action reports on sinking of subs by US aircraft. None of the strafing attacks seriously damaged the U-boats, but sometimes cleared the deck allowing other aircraft to attack with bombs or rockets.

. . . . . . .


I have never read or heard of a U-boat being sunk or seriously damaged by strafing alone.

More documentation can be found at www.history.navy.mil (http://www.history.navy.mil)


Unfortunately the power of the .50 cal has been greatly exaggerated in popular media. Although the .50 caliber is quite powerful, yes, it probably couldn't penetrate the pressure hulls. Thing is, the light hull, ballast tanks, and fuel tanks weren't so thick. They never saw the pressure differential that the pressure hull would and did, and so weren't thick-walled at all. .50 caliber would most certainly penetrate that and, once your tanks were perforated, well . . . that might not sink you (and probably didn't) but it sure would prevent you from submerging, as you wouldn't be able to effectively blow the tanks once you'd gone down to any depth. And once you were stuck running surfaced . . .
Hi Albrecht Von Hesse, and thank you for your reply. I agree that a .50 cal should penetrate the outer hull of a U-boat and the ballast/fuel tanks given close to a 90 degree angle on the plating. A well conducted strafing run should at least result in some shots being able to penetrate.

However, the U-boats were machines of war and designed to absorb some damage and still function. I have read countless reports from U-boat crews (mostly allied prisoner interrogation reposts) where they dived with ruptured ballast tanks and used pressurized air to keep the trim right. Sometimes they had to use running air-torpedoes (!) to recharge the air tanks while diving so they wouldn’t run out due to the heavy use of air to keep the ballast tanks from flooding.

Also both the VII and IX series of boats had a “security” ballast tank that was located inside the pressure hull. Even with all other ballast tanks flooded the U-boat would be able to keep positive buoyancy, as long as there was no other flooding inside the U-boat. Of course controlling the dive would be increasingly difficult.

A type VII U-boat had 5 main ballast/fuel tanks (two being port and starboard, 7 tanks in all) (fuel tanks would be used as ballast tanks when empty or in emergency when they still had oil in them, including internal fuel tanks), in addition to a number of smaller auxiliary tanks and trim tanks: (Number indicates tank size in cubic metres. (1 cubic metre of water equals about 1 ton.))

M.B.T. No. 1 30.70

Fuel Ballast No. 2 (Stbd & Port) 22.60

M.B.T. No. 3 47.75

Fuel Ballast No. 4 (Stbd & Port) 26.60

M.B.T. No. 5 25.15

Fuel Regulating 9.45

Ballast Regulating 15.36

Quick Diving Tank 4.45

Internal F.O. Tank No. 1 37.90

Internal F.O. Tank No. 2 32.80

Lub. Oil Tank 6.50

Dirty Oil Tank .79

Lub. Oil Sump Stbd .80

Lub. Oil Measuring Tank .80

After Trim Tank 3.55

Forward Trim Tank 3.60

Torpedo Compensating Tank No. 1 2.35

Torpedo Compensating Tank No. 2 5.75

Torpedo Compensating Tank No. 3 5.75

Potable Fresh Water No. 1 2.63

Potable Fresh Water No. 2 .47

Potable Fresh Water No. 3 .79

Sanitary Tank No. 1 .76

Sanitary Tank No. 2 .49

Wash Water Tank .49


Trough an interconnecting system of pipes and valves most of these tanks could be used as ballast tanks in an emergency. A type IX boat had nine main ballast tanks port and starboard in addition to 6 fuel tanks. It would take a pretty determined and prolonged set of strafing runs with .50 cals to significantly damage a U-boats ability to dive.


After digging up the reports from my hard drive (which is increasingly messy ;)) I thought I’d recount some of the 133 page report on U-172, a type IXc that was sunk by a US destroyer.

Interesting note on the turm configuration and flak armament:

MODIFIED BRIDGE STRUCTURE

A. Gun Platforms: Two, second being on same level as after part of Bridge.

B. “Air Raid Shelter”: An armored shelter of plate about 15 mm. thick, 1.5 meters high was built into the inboard bridge fairing on the starboard side just forward of the main induction. It accommodated 3 men and afforded good protection from M.G. fire at angle usual from aircraft. A smaller “shelter” for the C.O. was built into the bridge fairing on the port side. (5 and 6 on Plate A.)

C. The section of the Bridge forward of the periscope mounts was lowered 10 cm. to permit the twin 20 mm. guns to fire forward. (See X on Plate A.)
The crew left by the Bow, the Conning Tower and the Galley Hatches. Reports differed as to guns manned, but seemed to agree that the Captain shot at the destroyers with an M.G. 81. He claimed to have caused a few casualties with his fire. The destroyers returned the fire and killed the only men lost by U-172. All hands had gotten out, but only 46 were saved.

The destroyers made some direct hits on the U-boat. It was claimed that the armor plated Bridge was not pierced, but the Hydrogen Bottles for inflating the R.D.B. were set afire by shell fire. She went down with her hatches open and her motors/generators going at full speed. It was repeatedly stated that U-172 was not scuttled.



DETAILS OF VARIOUS GUNS, AMMUNITION, AND STOWAGE

105 mm. – On U-172’s last patrol, 90 rounds of 105-mm. ammunition were carried, of which 36 rounds were stored in containers on upper deck. Only one kind of ammunition for this gun was carried. It was called Zonenmunition, consisting of H.E./A.A. shells. The projectiles had red marking. The fuze was not set in advance, but would have been set as the projectiles were about to be used. Ready-use locker was abaft the gun. The cover of the locker was hinged at the sides and opened in the middle. It held four rows of nine shells each in steel containers. U-172 never fired any of this new 105 mm. ammunition.


This ammunition has a pointed head. The shell is said to have a muzzle velocity of 1,200 meters per second as against 900 meters for the old type. The explosive power of the shell is said to be 8 times that of the old kind. The point of the shell is made of lead and its effect on the type of armor plate in use on Wellingtons and Liberators is said to be amazing. The prisoner who gave this information had seen tests carried out on the captured wrecks of Wellingtons and Liberators at 2,000 meters. The ammunition is distinguished by the death’s head painted on the shell. The very powerful explosive, which is a liquid glycerin derivative (he is not quite certain on its being a liquid), is a new invention of the I.G. Farben at Cheminitz.

Although the 105-mm. gun could be used as an A.A. gun, elevation was stated to be not over 65 degrees. The gun had to be depressed after each shot for loading.

On patrols other than the last, armor-piercing projectiles with time fuze and impact detonation were provided, as were also incendiary shells with impact detonation. On the third patrol this ammunition was used in the 105-mm. gun against two aircraft which were attempting to attack. (The planes were successfully driven off by combined fire from all of U-172’s deck guns.)

20-mm. twin mounts. – The twin 20-mm. guns could fire over the bridge forward at a minimum elevation of about 20 degrees. There were no armored shields for these guns.


The magazine inserts for the twin mounts were so arranged that only one man was necessary for loading the two guns. The gun on the left received the magazine from above, the other from the right side.

20-mm. quadruple mount. – The quadruple mount is “toed” in so that the fire concentrates at 2,000 meters. This cannot be regulated on board but is determined in the construction of the gun. Fire is opened at 2,000 meters. Ammunition is self-destroying at 2,500 meters.

Prisoners stated that the newest type of 20-mm. quadruple mount is a new Hanomag gun capable of being elevated and trained by one man. This type was not carried aboard U-172.

Armored shields for U-172’s 20-mm. quadruple mounts were of a thickness varying from a minimum of 8 mm. to a maximum of 16 to 18 mm.

U-172 carried 80,000 rounds of 20-mm. ammunition. Extra stowage space was provided by the omission of one of the torpedoes usually carried in the Stern Compartment. In its place 20-mm. ammunition was stored.

Clips for the 20-mm. guns could be rapidly and efficiently loaded by a “magazine filling machine”. This apparatus, which first began to be supplied to U-boats in the summer of 1943, can be used only for 20-mm. ammunition. It is a simple mechanical device. Shells are fed in the top, a lever is moved back and forth, and the magazine is filled very quickly. U-172 carried two of these. Loading sequence was one H.E. with tracer and one A.P. with tracer, alternately.


H.E. shells were blunt-nosed and had yellow marking with red stripe. A.P. shells had pointed nose, blue markings. Both types had tracer. No other 20-mm. ammunition was carried. Ready use ammunition containers on Platform I and II were all round with screw tops.


Finally an account of the battle from one of the German officers of U-172:

On 12 December 1943 about 10.20 (German Time) an aircraft of undetermined type was sighted to starboard while on course 1800. It was seen at a distance of about 4-5,000 meters and quite high. Inside the boat the command “Man the A.A. guns!” was given. The aircraft flew past the boat at a considerable altitude. As the aircraft neared, fire was opened from the twin mounts and M.G. 81’s. The Watch Officer now sighted a second aircraft and recognized them as single motored. When, after fire had been opened, the aircraft continued their course, the Captain gave the order to dive. The boat submerged about 10.30 (G.T.) to 80 meters. The Captain believed he had identified the aircraft as seaplanes.

About 1100 hours propeller noises were heard on the hydrophones. The Captain ordered the Engineer Officer to go to periscope depth. In spite of the good weather (about sea force 3, and medium ground swell) the boat could not be controlled and shot to the surface. The Captain, who was at the periscope, gave orders to go to 80 meters in order to regain control of the boat; he had seen nothing through the periscope. Just why the boat had shot up from periscope depth could not be discovered; since their departure it had shown peculiarities of trim and displacement. It was the assumption of the Captain that the propeller noises heard were of a convoy from the African Coast. He set course towards these noises. After a while, however, the Captain felt the search not to be safe, since the propeller noises constantly changed course. So the U-boat went to 160 meters depth at slow speed and again took up course 1800. Towards 1300 hours, the first series of depth charges detonated. These were not well placed. This first series was followed every 8 or 10 minutes, by others, which were better placed each time.

Now the situation was clear! The boat, meanwhile, had gone to 190 meters and now changed course according to the propeller noises. After several depth charge patterns, the upper deck containers burst and the boat became heavier. In spite of immediate correction of displacement, the boat continued to become heavier. The Engineer Officer presumed a loss of oil. Soon the constant increase in displacement could no longer be equalized by the bilge pump. Tank 5 had to be blown and an attempt was made to maintain the prescribed depth by partially blowing the tanks. Also both compasses were no longer operating so that it was impossible to control their course. Drinking water had also become unusable through the entrance of seawater. It was the intention of the Captain to surface by night, after the depth charging had let up, in spite of the full moon and calm weather, and to try to escape on the surface. This was the sole possibility. About midnight the boat surfaced. It had a strong list to port. On the bridge were the Captain, his Executive Officer, the Boatswain, a mate and a rating.

On first inspection of the horizon no shadow was to be seen. The boat, tried during the blowing, to make off out of the moon. After a short time, the Boatswain reported “Shadow off the port quarter”. Since the shadow was broad and did not get underway it was assumed that their U-boat had not been noticed. At first the Captain wanted to get away by using the motors/generators, but then decided to use the Diesels. One Diesel, however, was not usable on account of loss of lubricating oil, so the boat ran full speed on one Diesel in the aforementioned direction. The Executive Officer kept his eye on the shadow and soon determined that it was moving. It remained broad, however, and did not head toward the boat. Soon, however, the destroyer did turn toward the U-boat and tried to force her to the moonlit side, which maneuver was successful. It was impossible to keep any sort of exact course for the U-boat since no compass was usable. The Captain now ordered an Aphrodite (anti-radar balloon) sent out (which was useless since the boat had already been sighted). The destroyer was gaining fast since the U-boat still had only one Diesel working. It was hopeless to try to escape on the surface. The Captain ordered a T-5 to be shot and to submerge again.

It was impossible to fire a T-5 using the T.D.C., because the T.D.C. was out of order. Aim had to be taken by changing the course of the U-boat. Meanwhile the destroyer began firing with light guns. The shots fell short. After a few rounds the destroyer began to turn somewhat, or so it appeared from the U-boat. The destroyer was now about 3,000 meters distant and began shooting with high explosive shells which overshot (about 200 meters over the starboard side). Then the T-5 was discharged and the boat submerged. The miss of the T-5 was blamed on board on the failure of the listening device of the torpedo, caused by previous shock. During the short surface run the air had been brought up to 60-70 kg/cm2. There were only a few depth charge attacks until the morning (13 December). But then the regular patterns started again. It was again necessary to blow diving tank No. 5 in order to maintain trim, which required a lot of air. Therefore, the air supply had to be increased to about 80(?) kg. From an air torpedo in the Bow Compartment. Meanwhile the boat continued to get heavier and could only be held in trim at half speed. It was running at a depth of 180 – 200 meters by the depth gauge, which indicated an actual depth of about 220 – 230 meters, since the depth gauge registered less on account of the overpressure in the boat.

After further depth charging the bilge pumps went out of order, but there was a possibility of fixing them. From the constant shocks the torpedoes in forward tubes II and IV began to run. In order to adjust this situation it would have been necessary to go to 80 meters and send out the torpedoes. But this too was impossible because of the increasing accuracy of the depth charges. At about 1700 (German Time) the boat had become so heavy that depth could only be maintained by going at “3/4 speed”. Added to that the negative buoyancy tanks flooded. This added 10 tons of weight. The air had dropped to 47 kg/cm2 and the possibility of further pumping was gone, since the pumps could not be repaired. These were only the most important items of damage and the chief reasons which compelled the Captain to consider giving up the boat. After conferring with the Engineer Officer, the other officers and the Division Warrant Officer, it was agreed that under the overwhelming circumstances the boat would have to be abandoned. Above all, the depth charges were constantly hitting closer, and the patterns became more and more frequent. The Captain gave the order to don life jackets and the diving lungs. The boat was taken to 50 meters from which depth the tanks were blown and they shot to the surface. Just before the Captain opened the hatch he gave the order “All hands out of the boat!” The time was about 1820 (German Time).

These were tough boats. :)

[Kilhmar]

… If you can do better?
Please do so and teach me!!
I'd love that!!

I have been contemplating on making a more realistic (IMHO) mod to GWX, with special emphasis on anti-air capabilities and damage adjustments to small calibre guns. I will have to see if I can find the time…

[Pablo]

Steve...It's important that you select the "route out" of the canal as soon as your game opens...if your boat moves at ALL...from wave action or whatever, it can throw you off just a tiny bit, which sounds like what may of happened. I'm up to Mar 41, anticipating a move to brest in June, and have used it everytime, and not had a problem.

However, I do recall pulling out of the slip once, forgetting about that, took the boat back into the slip and trying to set those waypoints again...and it was all botched up...so set it as soon as you can.
Hi!

There is another way to work this: if you've left the dock before you remember to ask the navigator to plot a "Kiel Outbound" path, just set a navigation point back in your starting dock, and then ask the navigator to add the "Kiel Outbound" path starting from that point. Once the Kiel outbound path is laid in, just delete the navigation point in the dock (unless you fancy turning around inside the dock) and just proceed to the first point of the outbound path plotted by your navigator.

Pablo

[TarJak]

I finally was able to look at my computer again, and loaded up GWX2. Kiel is lovely, what with surrounding cities and docks and Graf Zeppelin sitting there in all her glory (not to mention only one lighthouse:up: ).


Great to hear that you are back on deck Steve!:up:

[wunderlich]

Have you guys been able to fix the battery recharge bug that the stock SH3 had?
I was playing GWX 2.0 and my diesel engines were destroyed. I tried to take advantage of this bug and get back to base submerged, but the batteries no longer recharged when the boat was surfaced. So I assumed that you had found a way to fix that bug. Is this correct or was there something else wrong with my boat that I didn't notice?
If you really have fixed it... wow! You have done amazing job again!

This leads to another question. In SH3 it is not possible to hide from the enemy's sonar by diving to the bottom of the sea. I suppose Ubisoft didn't design that kind of feature. I'm not that familiar with sonars and how they work, but wouldn't it be reasonable to assume that if the boat is lying in the bottom it would be slightly harder for the enemy to detect it?
I really don't know anything about modding and how difficult it is, but it seems to me that you guys can do almost anything. So would it be possible to fix this "bug"? I think it would add a little bit of realism to the game (which already is incredibly realistic, thanks to the GWX team ;) ).

[Pablo]

This leads to another question. In SH3 it is not possible to hide from the enemy's sonar by diving to the bottom of the sea. I suppose Ubisoft didn't design that kind of feature. I'm not that familiar with sonars and how they work, but wouldn't it be reasonable to assume that if the boat is lying in the bottom it would be slightly harder for the enemy to detect it?
I really don't know anything about modding and how difficult it is, but it seems to me that you guys can do almost anything. So would it be possible to fix this "bug"? I think it would add a little bit of realism to the game (which already is incredibly realistic, thanks to the GWX team ;) ). Hi!

The Silent Hunter III game engine does not factor in the sea bottom when determining whether you will be detected by passive hydrophones or active sonar. U-boats could be (and were) detected while resting on the bottom - they're usually much larger than the underwater terrain, and that conning tower plus the hull stands out like a sore thumb above a soft, sandy seabed.

The ability of ASW vessels to detect ships or submarines resting on the bottom is indicated by the number of wrecks ("accidental but permanent submarines") depth charged during the war because they were detected by active sonar.

Pablo

[Storabrun]

So would it be possible to fix this "bug"?

Actually I don't think that can be regarded as a bug, and maybe not even a missing feature in this game. If I recall correctly the main reason the sonar ping is reflected by the sub is not the hull itself but rather the air inside it. The bottom is not made of air so it wont cloak the sub much.

[Kpt. Lehmann]

… If you can do better?
Please do so and teach me!!
I'd love that!!

I have been contemplating on making a more realistic (IMHO) mod to GWX, with special emphasis on anti-air capabilities and damage adjustments to small calibre guns. I will have to see if I can find the time…

With regards to your complaints about machine guns versus U-boats:

Hull integrity loss to "smaller caliber weapons" is not unique to GWX. Infact GWX mitigates it rather well IMHO... without turning the U-boat into a "Tiger Tank."

SH3 does not distinguish between the pressure hull, and vital components mounted/stored/attached to points outside the pressure hull.

As a result, some hull integrity is lost in any attack damages vulnerable components, like the deck guns, flak guns, periscopes, snorkel components, GHG or KDB hydrophone pickups, air intake trunking for the diesels, spare torpedoes, ballast tanks, fuel oil saddle tanks, the UZO/scope heads, etc. Therefore, there is no way to protect the hull integrity of the U-boat from machine gun fire without also making these historically vulnerable items immune as well.

It's the result of a hard-coded design decision, and we've chosen not to mess with it given that fixing the vulnerability issue that has existed since stock Silent Hunter III would cause new invulnerability issues.

These are our justifications for not fiddling with vulnerability to MG fire in GWX in part, and explains why we did not worry about how much armor is penetrated by 0.50-caliber MG fire at various ranges, distances, and impact angles.

A .50 caliber round does not need to fully penetrate the pressure hull or component thereof, to cause a loss of structural integrity, or other serious problems relating to the optimal functionality of a U-boat.

A U-boat's function is not to remain on the surface in an effort to duke it out with aircraft or any surface unit that may cause harm to said U-boat. Whether or not you feel that any given element as modded in GWX is "unrealistic" or not is in actuality irrelevant. Arguably, GWX functions to illicit an appropriate response in the player causing him/her to think more like an actual U-boat commander... "I may win any individual engagement... but aircraft are extremely dangerous and I must dive."

It is after all, a U-boat simulator... not a flight sim.

Aircraft gunnery as presented in GWX causes the desireable effect of suppressing flak crews, to assist aircraft as they run in to drop bombs, aerial DC's (which were largely non-functional in stock SH3), fire rockets, and/or 57mm cannon shells that serve to cause the "REAL" damage to your boat in GWX. Whatever 'hull integrity damage' you suffer from strafing is quite negligeable in the face of follow-on attacks by other ordnance.

In testing, the aircraft damage models were generally designed to withstand only 1.5 attack runs against a a player U-boat mounting only 2x Flakzwillings sitting in a flat sea (an UNUSUALLY stable firing platform/condition) ... with just a smidge of additional durability for multi-engined aircraft... and any additional armor plate they might have carried. (Which was comparatively minimal indeed given the need for reduced weight in favor of range endurance of patrol aircraft.) Aircraft usually DID survive an attack run in the face of AA fire... probably owing to the fact that the U-boat is not a very stable firing platform... at least in comparison to an aircraft.

Momentarily disregarding 'historical facts' and discounting as to whether or not one source or another should be deemed valid OR 'definitive' as you appear to present with your postings... a game does not/cannot work much at all like real life. If we were to fully take into account real life matters, we'd need mainframe computers to run the simulation... to include such things as mettalurgical reactions to temperature, corrosive effects of seawater, etc etc etc.

Personally, I see the U-boat damage model as being quite forgiving as it is in GWX.

Given the limitations of a game system, you will find it a necessity to make small compromises in light of farther reaching effects. It would appear that you are not aware that the smallest caliber weapon in SH3, and subsequently GWX, is the 20mm. It is this same 20mm that is used universally in SH3/GWX for everything that may employ a 20mm weapon.

Additionally, what you fail to recognize is a massive and complete revision of the air coverage in SH3/GWX (for the sake of historical accuracy) and the composition of air attacks against player U-boats. Did you play stock SH3 for any length of time? If you have, then you can recall attacks from 12 Wellingtons at a time... 6 Catalinas...etc etc. Air coverage/attack composition certainly plays into the same equation as weapon damage values and damage modelling.

I think the most important thing that one can attempt to achieve, is to cause an historical behavior and and attempt to reproduce historically plausible/logical survival probabilities, disregarding what settings (historically accurate or not) you need to adjust to obtain those end-effects. Generally speaking, the GWX development team and testing crew share this view.

Furthermore, the Silent Hunter devs (to their credit) left us an adjustable skeleton that modders can manipulate. As 'simulator players' can, and often do become their own worst enemies by 'rivet counting'... if you feel you can do better, by all means do so.

We often help other modders and/or non-modders reach their aims. Though quite often we do so in private these days... as that is our way following the cumulative fatigue of 2 1/2 years of 'debating' different aspects of 'realism' as we have modded/researched/implimented it in GWX.

(If you feel our sources aren't viable... read the bibliography section of the GWX manual.)

At one time or another, virtually every aspect of GWX has come under fire as being 'unrealistic' for 'this reason' or 'that reason.' Still, individuals come to this particular thread with a sense of entitlement and a disrespectful attitude... to demand that we fix it for them or give them specific information on how to mod a given element when there is an entire forum here in which to deliberate such matters. Though we are often quite happy to assist players to fully enjoy their installation... it is not our responsibility to do so. Neither is it unreasonable for us to first explain our methodology when it comes to why we did one thing or another. Often understanding a thing, is better than further file modifications that will likely generate undesireable side-effects in unexpected places elsewhere in the game.

We've given the best of ourselves in an effort to model the entire U-boat war... not just The Battle of the Atlantic. Without a doubt, each and every GWX user will find one element or another that they aren't happy with... reasonably or unreasonably. We've addressed each important aspect logically and have struck a balance with platform limitations that we must accept.

Before continuing onwards to discuss such matters as the manufacturing disparities of various ammunition, I invite you to start your own thread... and to discontinue hijacking this one.

You have stated your opinions and carried out your arguments... and we have modelled matters in-game to meet our equally valid interpretation of available data resources... in light of game limitations that you have not accounted for.

[Sailor Steve]

So would it be possible to fix this "bug"?

Actually I don't think that can be regarded as a bug, and maybe not even a missing feature in this game. If I recall correctly the main reason the sonar ping is reflected by the sub is not the hull itself but rather the air inside it. The bottom is not made of air so it wont cloak the sub much.
Actually there are several accounts of submarines using the bottom to very good effect, most notably the US S-36, which lay on the bottom on three separate ocassions, all three times baffling the enemy's active sonar.

[Jimbuna]

So would it be possible to fix this "bug"?

Actually I don't think that can be regarded as a bug, and maybe not even a missing feature in this game. If I recall correctly the main reason the sonar ping is reflected by the sub is not the hull itself but rather the air inside it. The bottom is not made of air so it wont cloak the sub much.
Actually there are several accounts of submarines using the bottom to very good effect, most notably the US S-36, which lay on the bottom on three separate ocassions, all three times baffling the enemy's active sonar.

Absolutely correct, in RL terms, however.......As said on so many occasions previously......the parameters imposed upon us ingame do not model or reflect this.
The limitations placed upon us by the game engine dictate.....we have what we have.

[Dreamer]

OK, now I've got a whole new issue that is either due to GWX or OLC GUI but not one I've seen reported before. When approaching an enemy harbour I start to get glitches on programs and system files running in the background. It'll start with some kind of sound dll error and then another system dll error and then font and text size will change in firefox. While this is happening, in game the sounds slowly fade. They come and go and finally disappear entirely.

Finally, if I'm not out of the game quick enough (say, within the next 15 minutes) I get more and more errors with my startup-programs monitor telling me that all kinds of basic system functions are asking to start up with each boot which they are supposed to do anyway. When I exit SH3, most of it goes back to normal. I get no more errors and the fonts are back to the way they should be. I then have to reboot to resume normal computer operations.

This is a new, clean installation of SH3 1.4b with GWX2 and OLC GUI installed but no other mods. Absolutely nothing has changed with my system physically or system-wise since running SH3 with GWX 1.03 this past summer with no errors.

Help again!

Thanks

Martin

[deadparrot]

Probably I need to download one of them again? If so wich one?
Use the hash program to compare whats shown on the GWX download website...and what you have...

That will allow you to narrow down to which is corrupted..(if any or all)

Thx 4 t info.

You were right. 4 out of 7 didn't come trough.:down: verdammt nogmahl!

I'll try 2 find a torrent somewhere. That'll be a first. A legal torrent download:lol:

[Jimbuna]

Probably I need to download one of them again? If so wich one?
Use the hash program to compare whats shown on the GWX download website...and what you have...

That will allow you to narrow down to which is corrupted..(if any or all)

Thx 4 t info.

You were right. 4 out of 7 didn't come trough.:down: verdammt nogmahl!

I'll try 2 find a torrent somewhere. That'll be a first. A legal torrent download:lol:

THE 'OFFICIAL' ONE http://www.psionguild.org/forums/images/smilies/wolfsmilies/pirate.gif

http://files.filefront.com/GWX2+torrenttorrent/;9266788;/fileinfo.html

[donw]

You were right. 4 out of 7 didn't come trough.:down:
9 times out of 10 it's not the files you've d/l but the fact your initial install was not on a 100% unmodded game install.
:D Love it when I beat the odds! Maybe I need to go visit the local Casino :hmm:
:rotfl:

[Bonfleck]

I'm sure this info is listed somewhere already but the seach feature for the forum doesn't seem to be very effective for me. I'm curious if A; my stock 1.4b career files can be transplanted to a GWX version and where are they located precisely?, B: If I can have two versions of SH3 installed on my machine (a stock one and a GWX version) and if so how? and C: If there are any hot keys or scenarios I should stay away from that might cause a game to crash or lock up? So far my only lock up occurred when attacking a ship at anchor in a harbor. Upon viewing the target in the UZO when the torpedo impacted I had the "lock" button pressed and that's when my game did the jitterbug lock-up requiring a reboot. Also, any advice for using the search feature so I don't have to bother people with questions that have been answered a dozen times would be great. Thanks, B

[donw]

B: If I can have two versions of SH3 installed on my machine (a stock one and a GWX version) and if so how?
I'm sorta busy Mate, but can help with this one...this is taken from the download section here on Subsim.com..

MultiSH3 (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/../subsim_files/patches05/MultiSH3.zip) (278KB): this utility that will change the folder name in My Documents that Silent Hunter 3 uses to save campaign and career information. It does this by patching a file in the game's root folder called FileManager.dll. Stock SH3 is hard-coded to save this information in a folder called My Documents\SH3, but given the large number of supermods and other mods it may be desirable to be able to separate careers by saving them in different folders. For example, you might want to have a stock SH3 1.4b installation, a TGW installation and an NYGM installation, each with their own career information.

The obvious benefit of this is that it prevents any possible confusion over which campaigns and careers belong to which installation. Mod developers may find it useful to have a known safe copy of SH3 and one or more development copies, each completely separate. Gamers may find it useful to be able to remove, repair or update supermods without having to uninstall the lot and start again (anyone who has needed to modify their Grey Wolves installation should see the benefit of this immediately).

And let me clarify something real quick...it does not change the folder name in my documents..You need to make a folder there, for your 2nd version of SH3 to use...(it HAS to be 3 characters long only)...then...run this program (from within the game folder that is to be your alternate install)...and it will adjust the game to save your career data to this new folder

[Kpt. Lehmann]

Just to add to DonW's bit:

Bonfleck, old careers from previous installations of SH3 or GWX are not compatible with GWX 2.0.

[donw]

C: If there are any hot keys or scenarios I should stay away from that might cause a game to crash or lock up?

I might as well throw my 2 cents in on this last one... ;)

For every problem that someone here has encountered, 10 others have said it's never happened to them. So the best we can offer, is post as much of "your" particular issue here, and somebody I'm sure will jump in and try to help you find a solution.

As for your posted lockup, I don't recall reading about anybody else reporting a lockup under those conditions, so you'll just have to wait for it to occur again, and post here as much info as you can...the mission name, or career...list all the mods you have loaded..exactly what you were doing at the time...and anything else you can think of to allow us to track it down

[Jimbuna]

I'm sure this info is listed somewhere already but the seach feature for the forum doesn't seem to be very effective for me. I'm curious if A; my stock 1.4b career files can be transplanted to a GWX version and where are they located precisely?, B: If I can have two versions of SH3 installed on my machine (a stock one and a GWX version) and if so how? and C: If there are any hot keys or scenarios I should stay away from that might cause a game to crash or lock up? So far my only lock up occurred when attacking a ship at anchor in a harbor. Upon viewing the target in the UZO when the torpedo impacted I had the "lock" button pressed and that's when my game did the jitterbug lock-up requiring a reboot. Also, any advice for using the search feature so I don't have to bother people with questions that have been answered a dozen times would be great. Thanks, B

Here's a few pearls of wisdom from my archive re: multiple installs http://www.psionguild.org/forums/images/smilies/wolfsmilies/thumbsup.gif

Install of Multiple Versions

1)Complete a fresh install of SH3 + 1.4b as normal.
2)Create a copy of the program folder & rename as required.
3)Install your mod of choice to the renamed version.
4)Create and rename shortcuts as required.
5)Use MultiSH3 to create separate save locations for each install.

SH3 Commander & Multiple Installs
It is recommended to have a separate install of Commander for each different install of SH3.
1)Install SH3Commander and rename the program folder to suit.
2)Rename each SH3Cmdr shortcut as required.
3)You will need to use the l: switch to point SH3Cmdr to the right installation.

Here's an example of the l: switch for dual installs, just tailor it to fit.....

Right click on the SH3Cmdr shortcut & choose properties.

Target
"C:\Program Files\SH3 Commander-GWX\SH3Cmdr.exe" /l:"C:\Program Files\Ubisoft\Silent HunterIII-GWX"

Start in
"C:\Program Files\SH3 Commander-GWX"

[Bonfleck]

Thanks mates..........Ahoy! B:up:

[Kilhmar]

At one time or another, virtually every aspect of GWX has come under fire as being 'unrealistic' for 'this reason' or 'that reason.'
GWX is in no way “under fire” from me. It is an astounding achievement and a great improvement of the game. I just don’t agree with a few of the choices you have made; I’m sure you’ll agree that pleasing everybody with everything is quite impossible.


Before continuing onwards to discuss such matters as the manufacturing disparities of various ammunition, I invite you to start your own thread... and to discontinue hijacking this one.
Don’t worry, this will be my final post in this thread.


You have stated your opinions and carried out your arguments... and we have modelled matters in-game to meet our equally valid interpretation of available data resources... in light of game limitations that you have not accounted for.
I have accounted for the game limitations that I have encountered. However I have already made a number of successful tweaks to my game, and I plan to do some further testing. I will see if I can find time to make a JSGME mod out of it. And as for when I started playing SH3 … when you were browsing the PC game section and found SH3 I was racking up tonnage in the Atlantic ;). I pre-ordered the European version (with Star Force and everything, curse them!). I’ve been using GWX 1.0-1.3 since you guys released it and I’ve been very pleased with what you have done for the game. I’ve only just recently decided to join the SH3 community since I was quite involved in WWII air war communities, but now that I have toned my involvement a bit down over there… :)

“The GWX team believes “realism” is in the mind of the beholder.”

So true.

[Jimbuna]

“The GWX team believes “realism” is in the mind of the beholder.”

I'm a member of the team your refering to and attaching such a blanket subjective label to http://www.psionguild.org/forums/images/smilies/wolfsmilies/pirate.gif

Which definition of 'realism' are you subscribing to here ?

1) An opposed to nominalism, the doctrine that genera and species are real things or entities, existing independently of our conceptions.

2) Interest in or concern for the actual or real, as distinguished from the abstract, speculative.

3) The doctrine that universals have a real objective existence.

4) The doctrine that objects of sense perception have an existence independent of the act of perception.

I'm really quite intrigued here :hmm:

One of the doctrines in life I purposely adhere to is: 'None of us are as clever as all of us'

Mutual self respect and tolerance go a long way in this community of ours.

We all owe it to each other.

Don't presume to think and speak on my behalf.

But most importantly of all........................KINDLY STOP BAITING .....your brief posting history is quite revealing.

If you've issues around the GWX mod, that's fine.....change it to suit.

Just get on with it or play stock or another mod.....the choice is yours.

I wish you well in whatever choice you decide upon http://www.psionguild.org/forums/images/smilies/wolfsmilies/thumbsup.gif

[onelifecrisis]

mutual self respect

Is that something for people who have multiple personality disorder? ;) :p

[Kilhmar]

Um ... Jjimbuna, - “The GWX team believes “realism” is in the mind of the beholder.” - is a direct quote from the GWX 2.0 manual. Which is why I used the quotation marks.

If you do not subscribe to that motto then that is your business, but you should at least be aware of what is written in your own manual.



Your comments on my person and my "posting history" is quite unfair and certainly not appreciated.


Good night.

[Jimbuna]

Um ... Jjimbuna, - “The GWX team believes “realism” is in the mind of the beholder.” - is a direct quote from the GWX 2.0 manual. Which is why I used the quotation marks.

If you do not subscribe to that motto then that is your business, but you should at least be aware of what is written in your own manual.



Your comments on my person and my "posting history" is quite unfair and certainly not appreciated.


Good night.

I am fully aware of the source of the quote.

The context of your use of the quote is what I believe to be questionable.



http://www.fonefunshop.co.uk/forum/images/smilies/gdnight.gif

[Kpt. Lehmann]

I have accounted for the game limitations that I have encountered. However I have already made a number of successful tweaks to my game, and I plan to do some further testing. I will see if I can find time to make a JSGME mod out of it.

WONDERFUL!!! :up: :up: :up: :up: :up:


And as for when I started playing SH3 … when you were browsing the PC game section and found SH3 I was racking up tonnage in the Atlantic.

LOL! Didn't take long for your thinly veiled condescension to become overt.
Not only are your above comments irrelevant... but speculative.:lol:


I pre-ordered the European version (with Star Force and everything, curse them!). I’ve been using GWX 1.0-1.3 since you guys released it and I’ve been very pleased with what you have done for the game. I’ve only just recently decided to join the SH3 community since I was quite involved in WWII air war communities....

Be that as it may... no matter how much icing you slather on that cake... there's still needles in it... and we're not biting.;)


“The GWX team believes “realism” is in the mind of the beholder.”
So true.

Contextualization and cherry-picking at its best. Nice try. Though, I think that when we place it in its natural surroundings... clarity and logic return.

From the currently available GWX Manual: (Top of page 86)









The GWX team believes “realism” is in the mind of the beholder. There are very few (if any) people playing Silent Hunter III, with or without modifications, that have personal experience in submarine warfare as it was practiced during World War II, let alone personal experience in a U-boat in combat. Realism is therefore whatever one can glean from interpreting other sources and representing them to the player within the limitations of the Silent Hunter III game engine. “Reality” for a U-boat commander meant they paid for their mistakes with their lives; not wishing to enforce this extreme sanction on the gaming community, we have tried to provide a game that is enjoyable to play while also being realistic enough to give a taste of the life of a U-boat commander.



Now to clear away any obfuscation resulting from baiting and trolling:

With regards to your complaints about machine guns versus U-boats:

Hull integrity loss to "smaller caliber weapons" is not unique to GWX. Infact GWX mitigates it rather well IMHO... without turning the U-boat into a "Tiger Tank."

SH3 does not distinguish between the pressure hull, and vital components mounted/stored/attached to points outside the pressure hull.

As a result, some hull integrity is lost in any attack that damages vulnerable components, like the deck guns, flak guns, periscopes, snorkel components, GHG or KDB hydrophone pickups, air intake trunking for the diesels, spare torpedoes, ballast tanks, fuel oil saddle tanks, the UZO/scope heads, etc. Therefore, there is no way to protect the hull integrity of the U-boat from machine gun fire without also making these historically vulnerable items immune as well.

It's the result of a hard-coded design decision, and we've chosen not to mess with it given that fixing the vulnerability issue that has existed since stock Silent Hunter III would cause new invulnerability issues.

These are our justifications for not fiddling with vulnerability to MG fire in GWX in part, and explains why we did not worry about how much armor is penetrated by 0.50-caliber MG fire at various ranges, distances, and impact angles.

A .50 caliber round does not need to fully penetrate the pressure hull or component thereof, to cause a loss of structural integrity, or other serious problems relating to the optimal functionality of a U-boat.

A U-boat's function is not to remain on the surface in an effort to duke it out with aircraft or any surface unit that may cause harm to said U-boat. Whether or not you feel that any given element as modded in GWX is "unrealistic" or not is in actuality irrelevant. Arguably, GWX functions to illicit an appropriate response in the player causing him/her to think more like an actual U-boat commander... "I may win any individual engagement... but aircraft are extremely dangerous and I must dive."

It is after all, a U-boat simulator... not a flight sim.

Aircraft gunnery as presented in GWX causes the desireable effect of suppressing flak crews, to assist aircraft as they run in to drop bombs, aerial DC's (which were largely non-functional in stock SH3), fire rockets, and/or 57mm cannon shells that serve to cause the "REAL" damage to your boat in GWX. Whatever 'hull integrity damage' you suffer from strafing is quite negligeable in the face of follow-on attacks by other ordnance.

In testing, the aircraft damage models were generally designed to withstand only 1.5 attack runs against a a player U-boat mounting only 2x Flakzwillings sitting in a flat sea (an UNUSUALLY stable firing platform/condition) ... with just a smidge of additional durability for multi-engined aircraft... and any additional armor plate they might have carried. (Which was comparatively minimal indeed given the need for reduced weight in favor of range endurance of patrol aircraft.) Aircraft usually DID survive an attack run in the face of AA fire... probably owing to the fact that the U-boat is not a very stable firing platform... at least in comparison to an aircraft.

Momentarily disregarding 'historical facts' and discounting as to whether or not one source or another should be deemed valid OR 'definitive' as you appear to present with your postings... a game does not/cannot work much at all like real life. If we were to fully take into account real life matters, we'd need mainframe computers to run the simulation... to include such things as mettalurgical reactions to temperature, corrosive effects of seawater, etc etc etc.

Personally, I see the U-boat damage model as being quite forgiving as it is in GWX.

Given the limitations of a game system, you will find it a necessity to make small compromises in light of farther reaching effects. It would appear that you are not aware that the smallest caliber weapon in SH3, and subsequently GWX, is the 20mm. It is this same 20mm that is used universally in SH3/GWX for everything that may employ a 20mm weapon.

Additionally, what you fail to recognize is a massive and complete revision of the air coverage in SH3/GWX (for the sake of historical accuracy) and the composition of air attacks against player U-boats. Did you play stock SH3 for any length of time? If you have, then you can recall attacks from 12 Wellingtons at a time... 6 Catalinas...etc etc. Air coverage/attack composition certainly plays into the same equation as weapon damage values and damage modelling.

I think the most important thing that one can attempt to achieve, is to cause an historical behavior and and attempt to reproduce historically plausible/logical survival probabilities, disregarding what settings (historically accurate or not) you need to adjust to obtain those end-effects. Generally speaking, the GWX development team and testing crew share this view.

Furthermore, the Silent Hunter devs (to their credit) left us an adjustable skeleton that modders can manipulate. As 'simulator players' can, and often do become their own worst enemies by 'rivet counting'... if you feel you can do better, by all means do so.

We often help other modders and/or non-modders reach their aims. Though quite often we do so in private these days... as that is our way following the cumulative fatigue of 2 1/2 years of 'debating' different aspects of 'realism' as we have modded/researched/implimented it in GWX.

(If you feel our sources aren't viable... read the bibliography section of the GWX manual.)

At one time or another, virtually every aspect of GWX has come under fire as being 'unrealistic' for 'this reason' or 'that reason.' Still, individuals come to this particular thread with a sense of entitlement and a disrespectful attitude... to demand that we fix it for them or give them specific information on how to mod a given element when there is an entire forum here in which to deliberate such matters. Though we are often quite happy to assist players to fully enjoy their installation... it is not our responsibility to do so. Neither is it unreasonable for us to first explain our methodology when it comes to why we did one thing or another. Often understanding a thing, is better than further file modifications that will likely generate undesireable side-effects in unexpected places elsewhere in the game.

We've given the best of ourselves in an effort to model the entire U-boat war... not just The Battle of the Atlantic. Without a doubt, each and every GWX user will find one element or another that they aren't happy with... reasonably or unreasonably. We've addressed each important aspect logically and have struck a balance with platform limitations that we must accept.

Before continuing onwards to discuss such matters as the manufacturing disparities of various ammunition, I invite you to start your own thread... and to discontinue hijacking this one.

You have stated your opinions and carried out your arguments... and we have modelled matters in-game to meet our equally valid interpretation of available data resources... in light of game limitations that you have not accounted for.

[melnibonian]

Well Said Kpt :yep: :up:

[Barbac]

Dear Kpt. Lehmann,

As a new comer in this forum, here is an occasion for me to sincerely congratulate you and the GWX Team for the amazing work you did with GWX2.0. Since I am in, this great game gets better day by day to play though it takes much time for me to improve myself in manual targeting ;) .
Playing GWX is an absolute immersion that allows me to experience something very special with this game for the very first time I must say.
Furthermore guys, you and some top modders deserve all the glorious cheers from that community !!!

:up:
Barbac

[melnibonian]

Welcome to SubSim Barbac :up:

Enjoy your stay here and your GWX eXperience :yep: :up:

[Barbac]

Welcome to SubSim Barbac :up:

Enjoy your stay here and your GWX eXperience :yep: :up:

Thx dear melnibonian for your welcome !
So many interesting things to know, learn, share and enjoy as a Kaleunoob :yep:

Barbac

[onelifecrisis]

I'm playing:
GWX 2.0
GWX 2.0 Armed Trawler Patch
GWX - Enchanced Damage Effects
OLC GUI 1.2.1
OLC Night Sky Fix (GWX 2.0/16km Atmosphere)
SH3 Commander 2.7 (with updated GWX2 config files)
SH3 Weather 1.5

In the screenshot below, note the flag (Norway, unless I'm mistaken) and the date. Shouldn't this ship have it's lights on?

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2314/2230854484_c6d963a43a_o.jpg

[Jimbuna]

Most of the neutrals are lit up but there are also versions in the roster that are unlit.
Don't want to make your decisions automatically do we :lol:

[onelifecrisis]

Most of the neutrals are lit up but there are also versions in the roster that are unlit.
Don't want to make your decisions automatically do we :lol:

Ah! A bit of an uncertainty factor? Nice. :up:

[Kilhmar]

“The GWX team believes “realism” is in the mind of the beholder.” I'm a member of the team your refering to and attaching such a blanket subjective label to
I did not refer to any team, the manual did, and I did not attach any lable. I simply quoted a part of your team's philosophy that I happen to agree with.



“The GWX team believes “realism” is in the mind of the beholder.” Don't presume to think and speak on my behalf.
I don’t and I have never done so. If you think otherwise than please quote me doing so.





And as for when I started playing SH3 … when you were browsing the PC game section and found SH3 I was racking up tonnage in the Atlantic. LOL! Didn't take long for your thinly veiled condescension to become overt.
Not only are your above comments irrelevant... but speculative.
You asked…


Did you play stock SH3 for any length of time?
… and I answered. My reply was part tongue-in-cheek with smilies and everything. But if you want to talk about condescending behaviour look no further than you own post directed at me:

Additionally, what you fail to recognize… …in light of game limitations that you have not accounted for. Still, individuals come to this particular thread with a sense of entitlement and a disrespectful attitude... to demand that we fix it for them or give them specific information on how to mod a given element when there is an entire forum here in which to deliberate such matters. Though we are often quite happy to assist players to fully enjoy their installation... it is not our responsibility to do so. Momentarily disregarding 'historical facts' and discounting as to whether or not one source or another should be deemed valid OR 'definitive' as you appear to present with your postings...
You presume to know what I do or do not recognize. I have never asked (or demanded as you say) that you or anyone else do anything to change your mod. Yet you accuse me of doing so. And you presume to speak on my behalf with regard to how I value source information.

And you say I am condescending.





I pre-ordered the European version (with Star Force and everything, curse them!). I’ve been using GWX 1.0-1.3 since you guys released it and I’ve been very pleased with what you have done for the game. I’ve only just recently decided to join the SH3 community since I was quite involved in WWII air war communities.... Be that as it may... no matter how much icing you slather on that cake... there's still needles in it... and we're not biting.
The needles are in your head, not my “cake”. I have been nothing but courteous and polite, careful not to bruise fragile egos, but despite your claims of “equally valid interpretation of available data resources” my interpretations supported by first-hand sources have been met by wall-of-text rebukes, excuses, accusations and demeaning comments.




“The GWX team believes “realism” is in the mind of the beholder.”
So true. Contextualization and cherry-picking at its best. Nice try. Though, I think that when we place it in its natural surroundings... clarity and logic return.

From the currently available GWX Manual: (Top of page 86)


The GWX team believes “realism” is in the mind of the beholder. There are very few (if any) people playing Silent Hunter III, with or without modifications, that have personal experience in submarine warfare as it was practiced during World War II, let alone personal experience in a U-boat in combat. Realism is therefore whatever one can glean from interpreting other sources and representing them to the player within the limitations of the Silent Hunter III game engine. “Reality” for a U-boat commander meant they paid for their mistakes with their lives; not wishing to enforce this extreme sanction on the gaming community, we have tried to provide a game that is enjoyable to play while also being realistic enough to give a taste of the life of a U-boat commander.

Yes, “realism” is truly in the mind of the beholder. A philosophy I wholeheartedly agree with. That something which was praise from me somehow is twisted into a slight shows just how fragile your egos are. In your defence it is not uncommon for developers and modders to be very protective of their work.

Now after this post your collective egos probably need stroking. Luckily there is no lack of fanbois to do that here.

"Because GWX team think so". I understand. "Holy cow" is untouchable. Got it.
Indeed.

[Jimbuna]

Most of the neutrals are lit up but there are also versions in the roster that are unlit.
Don't want to make your decisions automatically do we :lol:

Ah! A bit of an uncertainty factor? Nice. :up:

Yep, theres plenty of that in store for the future ;)

Just sailed out of Trondheim whilst testing 2.1 and got the shock of my life http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v499/c_jane24/Smileys/4_6_100.gif



http://www.psionguild.org/forums/images/smilies/wolfsmilies/bubblegum2.gif

[Jimbuna]

“The GWX team believes “realism” is in the mind of the beholder.” I'm a member of the team your refering to and attaching such a blanket subjective label to
I did not refer to any team, the manual did, and I did not attach any lable. I simply quoted a part of your team's philosophy that I happen to agree with.



“The GWX team believes “realism” is in the mind of the beholder.” Don't presume to think and speak on my behalf.
I don’t and I have never done so. If you think otherwise than please quote me doing so.





And as for when I started playing SH3 … when you were browsing the PC game section and found SH3 I was racking up tonnage in the Atlantic. LOL! Didn't take long for your thinly veiled condescension to become overt.
Not only are your above comments irrelevant... but speculative.
You asked…


Did you play stock SH3 for any length of time?
… and I answered. My reply was part tongue-in-cheek with smilies and everything. But if you want to talk about condescending behaviour look no further than you own post directed at me:

Additionally, what you fail to recognize… …in light of game limitations that you have not accounted for. Still, individuals come to this particular thread with a sense of entitlement and a disrespectful attitude... to demand that we fix it for them or give them specific information on how to mod a given element when there is an entire forum here in which to deliberate such matters. Though we are often quite happy to assist players to fully enjoy their installation... it is not our responsibility to do so. Momentarily disregarding 'historical facts' and discounting as to whether or not one source or another should be deemed valid OR 'definitive' as you appear to present with your postings...
You presume to know what I do or do not recognize. I have never asked (or demanded as you say) that you or anyone else do anything to change your mod. Yet you accuse me of doing so. And you presume to speak on my behalf with regard to how I value source information.

And you say I am condescending.





I pre-ordered the European version (with Star Force and everything, curse them!). I’ve been using GWX 1.0-1.3 since you guys released it and I’ve been very pleased with what you have done for the game. I’ve only just recently decided to join the SH3 community since I was quite involved in WWII air war communities.... Be that as it may... no matter how much icing you slather on that cake... there's still needles in it... and we're not biting.
The needles are in your head, not my “cake”. I have been nothing but courteous and polite, careful not to bruise fragile egos, but despite your claims of “equally valid interpretation of available data resources” my interpretations supported by first-hand sources have been met by wall-of-text rebukes, excuses, accusations and demeaning comments.




“The GWX team believes “realism” is in the mind of the beholder.”
So true. Contextualization and cherry-picking at its best. Nice try. Though, I think that when we place it in its natural surroundings... clarity and logic return.

From the currently available GWX Manual: (Top of page 86)


The GWX team believes “realism” is in the mind of the beholder. There are very few (if any) people playing Silent Hunter III, with or without modifications, that have personal experience in submarine warfare as it was practiced during World War II, let alone personal experience in a U-boat in combat. Realism is therefore whatever one can glean from interpreting other sources and representing them to the player within the limitations of the Silent Hunter III game engine. “Reality” for a U-boat commander meant they paid for their mistakes with their lives; not wishing to enforce this extreme sanction on the gaming community, we have tried to provide a game that is enjoyable to play while also being realistic enough to give a taste of the life of a U-boat commander.

Yes, “realism” is truly in the mind of the beholder. A philosophy I wholeheartedly agree with. That something which was praise from me somehow is twisted into a slight shows just how fragile your egos are. In your defence it is not uncommon for developers and modders to be very protective of their work.

Now after this post your collective egos probably need stroking. Luckily there is no lack of fanbois to do that here.

"Because GWX team think so". I understand. "Holy cow" is untouchable. Got it.
Indeed.

Kilhmar

This thread is now deteriorating to a level that it was not intended to. In less than 20 posts you have managed to undermine the hard work and effort of a group of very talented people who have, in some cases given 2 1/2 years of much of their spare time to this community, in order that so many can enjoy what is IMHO one of the best submarine simulations yet released.

If that (as I suspect) was your intention, you have succeeded.

The obvious purpose of this thread was to give the community the opportunity to discuss the GWX mod and also act as a kind of platform to assist people with their technical queries.

I presume Neal and or a moderator or two are studying this thread.

I sincerely hope this thread is not locked because so many people view and as such get some form of enrichment from it.

You have been asked politely to start a thread of your own and desist from hijacking this one.

Give it a bit of thought.

If you wish to continue your discussion, why not consider using the PM function.

I read what you say about egos........but of course, egos can't be massaged in PM's can they.

If you would like to have a verbal conversation, come onto our TS server:

82.39.85.56:8767............the password is 'wolf' and I'm there right now.

None of jimbunas smilies I'm afraid.....just plain common adult good advice.

[Kilhmar]

Jimbuna, I entered this thread with no intentions other than thanking you people for your efforts and to seek help adjusting the anti-air aspect of my game, however it turned in to a purse fight pretty quick. The .50 cal discussion should have been taken elsewhere, but as it so often happens it wasn't. Attack my arguments if you must, but please refrain from these personal attacks. I have been careful (or thought I was) to sugarcoat everything that could possibly be construed as criticism because I have been forewarned about you people before coming to this forum ... but I had no idea!

If you people are willing to end this here and now, then I have no objections. There are no valid reasons to continue this or to close this thread. If I have offended you then I apologize, because that certainly was not my intention.

[Kpt. Lehmann]

Jimbuna, I entered this thread with no intentions other than thanking you people for your efforts and to seek help adjusting the anti-air aspect of my game, however it turned in to a purse fight pretty quick. The .50 cal discussion should have been taken elsewhere, but as it so often happens it wasn't. Attack my arguments if you must, but please refrain from these personal attacks. I have been careful (or thought I was) to sugarcoat everything that could possibly be construed as criticism because I have been forewarned about you people before coming to this forum ... but I had no idea!.

You were simply rebuffed, (very graciously at that) and you followed up with personal attacks.

If you people are willing to end this here and now, then I have no objections. There are no valid reasons to continue this or to close this thread. If I have offended you then I apologize, because that certainly was not my intention.

Several posts ago, you stated that you'd made your final post. We responded and were happy to leave it at that.

Apparently that wasn't truly your intention. Whether or not you agree with or concur with our methodology/logic/sources is irrelevant.

Just as you, or any other modder, we modify our work based on our interpretations of the facts as limited by the game engine.

You have now leveled personal attacks against myself, the team, and have attempted to discredit the work we've done. Asking us to drop the matter that you initiated certainly reveals your arrogance and sense of superiority. Furthermore, it implies that you have no respect whatsoever for the collective intelligence or approach to problem-solving that this team has.

Filibustering, long-winded posting, and efforts at coercion will change nothing. We owe you nothing. GWX is given to all who choose to use it, free of charge. No one puts a gun to your head and orders you to use it as a whole or in part.;)

Once again... I will reitterate the standpoint of the GWX development team for the sake of clarity.

I have accounted for the game limitations that I have encountered. However I have already made a number of successful tweaks to my game, and I plan to do some further testing. I will see if I can find time to make a JSGME mod out of it.

WONDERFUL!!! :up: :up: :up: :up: :up:


And as for when I started playing SH3 … when you were browsing the PC game section and found SH3 I was racking up tonnage in the Atlantic.

LOL! Didn't take long for your thinly veiled condescension to become overt.
Not only are your above comments irrelevant... but speculative.:lol:


I pre-ordered the European version (with Star Force and everything, curse them!). I’ve been using GWX 1.0-1.3 since you guys released it and I’ve been very pleased with what you have done for the game. I’ve only just recently decided to join the SH3 community since I was quite involved in WWII air war communities....

Be that as it may... no matter how much icing you slather on that cake... there's still needles in it... and we're not biting.;)


“The GWX team believes “realism” is in the mind of the beholder.”
So true.

Contextualization and cherry-picking at its best. Nice try. Though, I think that when we place it in its natural surroundings... clarity and logic return.

From the currently available GWX Manual: (Top of page 86)





The GWX team believes “realism” is in the mind of the beholder. There are very few (if any) people playing
Silent Hunter III, with or without modifications, that have personal experience in submarine warfare as it was practiced during World War II, let alone personal experience in a U-boat in combat. Realism is therefore whatever one can glean from interpreting other sources and representing them to the player within the limitations of the Silent Hunter III game engine. “Reality” for a U-boat commander meant they paid for their mistakes with their lives; not wishing to enforce this extreme sanction on the gaming community, we have tried to provide a game that is enjoyable to play while also being realistic enough to give a taste of the life of a U-boat commander.





Now to clear away any obfuscation resulting from baiting and trolling:

With regards to your complaints about machine guns versus U-boats:

Hull integrity loss to "smaller caliber weapons" is not unique to GWX. Infact GWX mitigates it rather well IMHO... without turning the U-boat into a "Tiger Tank."

SH3 does not distinguish between the pressure hull, and vital components mounted/stored/attached to points outside the pressure hull.

As a result, some hull integrity is lost in any attack that damages vulnerable components, like the deck guns, flak guns, periscopes, snorkel components, GHG or KDB hydrophone pickups, air intake trunking for the diesels, spare torpedoes, ballast tanks, fuel oil saddle tanks, the UZO/scope heads, etc. Therefore, there is no way to protect the hull integrity of the U-boat from machine gun fire without also making these historically vulnerable items immune as well.

It's the result of a hard-coded design decision, and we've chosen not to mess with it given that fixing the vulnerability issue that has existed since stock Silent Hunter III would cause new invulnerability issues.

These are our justifications for not fiddling with vulnerability to MG fire in GWX in part, and explains why we did not worry about how much armor is penetrated by 0.50-caliber MG fire at various ranges, distances, and impact angles.

A .50 caliber round does not need to fully penetrate the pressure hull or component thereof, to cause a loss of structural integrity, or other serious problems relating to the optimal functionality of a U-boat.

A U-boat's function is not to remain on the surface in an effort to duke it out with aircraft or any surface unit that may cause harm to said U-boat. Whether or not you feel that any given element as modded in GWX is "unrealistic" or not is in actuality irrelevant. Arguably, GWX functions to illicit an appropriate response in the player causing him/her to think more like an actual U-boat commander... "I may win any individual engagement... but aircraft are extremely dangerous and I must dive."

It is after all, a U-boat simulator... not a flight sim.

Aircraft gunnery as presented in GWX causes the desireable effect of suppressing flak crews, to assist aircraft as they run in to drop bombs, aerial DC's (which were largely non-functional in stock SH3), fire rockets, and/or 57mm cannon shells that serve to cause the "REAL" damage to your boat in GWX. Whatever 'hull integrity damage' you suffer from strafing is quite negligeable in the face of follow-on attacks by other ordnance.

In testing, the aircraft damage models were generally designed to withstand only 1.5 attack runs against a a player U-boat mounting only 2x Flakzwillings sitting in a flat sea (an UNUSUALLY stable firing platform/condition) ... with just a smidge of additional durability for multi-engined aircraft... and any additional armor plate they might have carried. (Which was comparatively minimal indeed given the need for reduced weight in favor of range endurance of patrol aircraft.) Aircraft usually DID survive an attack run in the face of AA fire... probably owing to the fact that the U-boat is not a very stable firing platform... at least in comparison to an aircraft.

Momentarily disregarding 'historical facts' and discounting as to whether or not one source or another should be deemed valid OR 'definitive' as you appear to present with your postings... a game does not/cannot work much at all like real life. If we were to fully take into account real life matters, we'd need mainframe computers to run the simulation... to include such things as mettalurgical reactions to temperature, corrosive effects of seawater, etc etc etc.

Personally, I see the U-boat damage model as being quite forgiving as it is in GWX.

Given the limitations of a game system, you will find it a necessity to make small compromises in light of farther reaching effects. It would appear that you are not aware that the smallest caliber weapon in SH3, and subsequently GWX, is the 20mm. It is this same 20mm that is used universally in SH3/GWX for everything that may employ a 20mm weapon.

Additionally, what you fail to recognize is a massive and complete revision of the air coverage in SH3/GWX (for the sake of historical accuracy) and the composition of air attacks against player U-boats. Did you play stock SH3 for any length of time? If you have, then you can recall attacks from 12 Wellingtons at a time... 6 Catalinas...etc etc. Air coverage/attack composition certainly plays into the same equation as weapon damage values and damage modelling.

I think the most important thing that one can attempt to achieve, is to cause an historical behavior and and attempt to reproduce historically plausible/logical survival probabilities, disregarding what settings (historically accurate or not) you need to adjust to obtain those end-effects. Generally speaking, the GWX development team and testing crew share this view.

Furthermore, the Silent Hunter devs (to their credit) left us an adjustable skeleton that modders can manipulate. As 'simulator players' can, and often do become their own worst enemies by 'rivet counting'... if you feel you can do better, by all means do so.

We often help other modders and/or non-modders reach their aims. Though quite often we do so in private these days... as that is our way following the cumulative fatigue of 2 1/2 years of 'debating' different aspects of 'realism' as we have modded/researched/implimented it in GWX.

(If you feel our sources aren't viable... read the bibliography section of the GWX manual.)

At one time or another, virtually every aspect of GWX has come under fire as being 'unrealistic' for 'this reason' or 'that reason.' Still, individuals come to this particular thread with a sense of entitlement and a disrespectful attitude... to demand that we fix it for them or give them specific information on how to mod a given element when there is an entire forum here in which to deliberate such matters. Though we are often quite happy to assist players to fully enjoy their installation... it is not our responsibility to do so. Neither is it unreasonable for us to first explain our methodology when it comes to why we did one thing or another. Often understanding a thing, is better than further file modifications that will likely generate undesireable side-effects in unexpected places elsewhere in the game.

We've given the best of ourselves in an effort to model the entire U-boat war... not just The Battle of the Atlantic. Without a doubt, each and every GWX user will find one element or another that they aren't happy with... reasonably or unreasonably. We've addressed each important aspect logically and have struck a balance with platform limitations that we must accept.

Before continuing onwards to discuss such matters as the manufacturing disparities of various ammunition, I invite you to start your own thread... and to discontinue hijacking this one.

You have stated your opinions and carried out your arguments... and we have modelled matters in-game to meet our equally valid interpretation of available data resources... in light of game limitations that you have not accounted for.

[Kilhmar]

Yes I see now that you really do live for these purse fights Kpt. Lehmann as I've recently been told. Your reputation precedes you I'm sorry to say.

I have said my piece and won't give you the pleasure of continuing this.

*Ende*

[donw]

*Ende*

I sure hope so!! :roll:

[Kpt. Lehmann]

Yes I see now that you really do live for these purse fights Kpt. Lehmann as I've recently been told. Your reputation precedes you I'm sorry to say.

I have said my piece and won't give you the pleasure of continuing this.

*Ende*

As much as you may like to personalize the last six pages of conversation to make it "all about Kpt. Lehmann"...


You have now leveled personal attacks against myself, the team, and have attempted to discredit the work we've done. Asking us to drop the matter that you initiated certainly reveals your arrogance and sense of superiority. Furthermore, it implies that you have no respect whatsoever for the collective intelligence or approach to problem-solving that this team has.

You have received logical responses inspite of all efforts by you to derail this thread. If you are unhappy with our responses, you do not have to respond to them.

Just leave it be and do your own thing.

[Jimbuna]

Righteo then......returning to normal transmission. http://www.psionguild.org/forums/images/smilies/wolfsmilies/pirate.gif


Coming to a monitor somewhere near you soon.............. http://www.psionguild.org/forums/images/smilies/wolfsmilies/thumbsup.gif

http://img255.imageshack.us/img255/4826/sh32008012615155349ml7.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

[Dowly]

Bf "Spotted Dick" 109? :88)

[Voyd]

Most of the neutrals are lit up but there are also versions in the roster that are unlit.
Don't want to make your decisions automatically do we :lol:
Ah! A bit of an uncertainty factor? Nice. :up:
Yep, theres plenty of that in store for the future ;)

Just sailed out of Trondheim whilst testing 2.1 and got the shock of my life http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v499/c_jane24/Smileys/4_6_100.gif



http://www.psionguild.org/forums/images/smilies/wolfsmilies/bubblegum2.gif
"Shocking"...now that's what I'm talking about!! :rock:

[Konovalov]

Righteo then......returning to normal transmission. http://www.psionguild.org/forums/images/smilies/wolfsmilies/pirate.gif


Coming to a monitor somewhere near you soon.............. http://www.psionguild.org/forums/images/smilies/wolfsmilies/thumbsup.gif

Well thank goodness for that. :yep: Normal service resumes with the usual generous serving of jimbuna emoticons. :rock: :rock: :rock: Well dealt with gentleman for not taking the bait or loosing your collective rags. :yep:

Almost forgot to mention that I have returned to SHIII and GWX after about a six month absence. Photography hobby has been taking up much of my time. :oops: Anyway I got straight to removing my SHIII install completely along with GWX 1.3 and SHIII Commander 2.7. Said goodbye to my campaigns that I hadn't touched for months. :cry:

An hour later and I had a fresh install of SHII patched to 1.4 and modded with GWX 2.0 and SHIII Commander 2.7 (GWX 2.0 files) . As to my first nights cruising out of Kiel 1939 in my Type II what can I say other than cool. :|\\ Never thought or expected GWX to get much better. Obviously I was wrong big time. Have to rush off now but suffice to say GWX 2.0 will keep me busy in SHIII for many months to come. When I find the time I will post a more detailed report of my new GWX 2.0 experience. Thanks guys. :up: Now isn't it about time you guys took a big holiday. :sunny:

[Jimbuna]

Bf "Spotted Dick" 109? :88)

LOL http://www.psionguild.org/forums/images/smilies/wolfsmilies/thumbsup.gif

[Jimbuna]

Righteo then......returning to normal transmission. http://www.psionguild.org/forums/images/smilies/wolfsmilies/pirate.gif


Coming to a monitor somewhere near you soon.............. http://www.psionguild.org/forums/images/smilies/wolfsmilies/thumbsup.gif

Well thank goodness for that. :yep: Normal service resumes with the usual generous serving of jimbuna emoticons. :rock: :rock: Well dealt with gentleman for not taking the bait or loosing your collective rags. :yep:

Almost forgot to mention that I have returned to SHIII and GWX after about a six month absence. Photography hobby has been taking up much of my time. :oops: Anyway I got straight to removing my SHIII install completely along with GWX 1.3 and SHIII Commander 2.7. Said goodbye to my campaigns that I hadn't touched for months. :cry:

An hour later and I had a fresh install of SHII patched to 1.4 and modded with GWX 2.0 and SHIII Commander 2.7 (GWX 2.0 files) . As to my first nights cruising out of Kiel 1939 in my Type II what can I say other than cool. :|\\ Never thought or expected GWX to get much better. Obviously I was wrong big time. Have to rush off now but suffice to say GWX 2.0 will keep me busy in SHIII for many months to come. When I find the time I will post a more detailed report of my new GWX 2.0 experience. Thanks guys. :up: Now isn't it about time you guys took a big holiday. :sunny:

Welcome back Konovalov....the team really appreciate positive feedback http://www.psionguild.org/forums/images/smilies/wolfsmilies/thumbsup.gif

[Rotary Crewman]

Right, I tried to unstall GWX2 about a month ago and had nothing but trouble getting it to work (Would load SH3 but I couldn't enter a mission). So I gave up and went back to various other mods to try and get close to GWX and failed.

Now I'm currently downloading GWX2 again and want to make sure I get it right in the installation process.

Delete SH3\docs from My Documents
Fresh install of SH3 1.4b (Do I start the game up to create a sh3\data folder in My Documents or not?)
GWX2

Then go for it? (With the SH3 commander cfg optional files to add too)

[Kpt. Lehmann]

RC,

Just to be on the safe side before you attempt to install GWX 2.0... first go ahead and use your SH3 disk to uninstall SH3 before you go and delete any residual mod files etc. Using the disk to uninstall will ensure that residual SH3 files are outta there.:up:

After you DL the GWX files... run the MD5 checks on them as described on the GWX website FAQ.

Gotta run. Lots of school stuff to deal with tonight.

[Chad]

Once I complete downloading all the .bins and stuff, do I need to download anything for SH3 Commander to work with GWX2.0 ?

Thanks! :rock:

[Dowly]

Once I complete downloading all the .bins and stuff, do I need to download anything for SH3 Commander to work with GWX2.0 ?

Thanks! :rock:

Yes, the SH3Cmdr file for GWX 2.0 can be found from the GWX website, down there bottom of the page in download section.
http://gwx.mysite.orange.co.uk/

[Voyd]

Hello All,

I've been dorment on this board since my SH2 days when I found this community when I was working on a dynamic mission generator back in 2002. Anyway, I played SH3 when it first came out, but like many quickly felt that it was a little rushed out of the door...not enough to ruin the experience, but enough to become more and more annoyed with the small things. Some of the mods available were a great addition, but I eventually stopped playing entirely due other interests. Fast forward to last week...I checked my mail and the Subsim newsletter that I usually skim over alerted me to the GWX 2.1 update lurking on the horizon...wait a minute...there was a GWX 2 :o? GWX 1 for that matter? Yeah, I was totally clueless!! After reading all of its specs and checking out the screen shots and video, I was hooked. I quickly downloaded all of the necessary files and spent a couple of hours finding my SH3 DVD and set off on my mission by following the following recipe:

(1) CLEAN SH3 1.4b installation + (1) GWX 2.0 Installation + (1) SH3 Commander 2.7
GWX 2.0 Patch = Pure Amazement and Elation :sunny:.

I've been playing for over a week now w/ none of heartaches or frustration that some of the gents have been posting about, and can only relay an extremely positive experience thus far. I'm waiting patiently (well for the most part :roll:) for GWX 2.1 and Racerboy's SH4 for SH3 Effects GWX upgrade, but other than that what I have running at the moment along with some of the other great mods that can be found are keeping me busy and content.
I also wanted to add that it is the love and passion of ALL of the SH3 modders as well as all of the player input that has enabled them to create such awesome content. If it was a monetary motivation, we'd no doubt be stumbling about in a muck of infinate patches and frustration...and forget about all of those personal requests from the players...the only thing "personal" at that point would be the personal checks that the modders would most likely not be accepting as for payment of it all. Fortunately for us all, that is not the case. I know I'm digressing, but I am just trying to convey my appreciation to everyone here at Subsim...not just for the mods, but for the type of community that exists here...it's quite refreshing. GREAT job all :up:...

Godspeed & Sink 'em All,

Voyd

[donw]

(1) CLEAN SH3 1.4b installation + (1) GWX 2.0 Installation + (1) SH3 Commander 2.7


Howdy Voyd and welcome back! One thing I don't see mentioned here, is the additional SH3 Commander update needed strickly for GWX 2. Its a zipped file with 4 .cfg files enclosed, that need to be inserted in the cfg folder of Commander...overwriting whats there now.

Also, make sure you get the "GWX Armed Trawler" Mod...(I assume you are using JSGME)...without this, meeting up with an AT'r "could" give you CTD's

I would hate to see your perfect batting average start to slip with failures based on this omission. :up:

Smooth sailing Mate! :D

[Penelope_Grey]

Hi there Voyd and welcome back to subsim. Glad to see you are loving your Silent Hunter III experience. And also, you have everything set up perfectly there! :up: Well done.

donw has raised a good point, you should go and grab the CTD fix here it stops the armed trawler crashing the game whne you tangle with them.

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=128097

Other than that, 2.1 is in the pipeline, and so I hope you will stick around for the download party there! :D

[fat jez]

I just wish there was a fix for the crew to surface cruise mode crash :(

Somehow I think that is beyond even the skills of the GWX team :(

I did notice one of the destroyers blow his stern off with a depth charge attack whilst I was prowling around the coast of America last night, which was slightly annoying as I was maneuvering to put a torpedo into his side at the time :D

Still, I'd have to say that if it wasn't for GWX, I'd have given up on SH3 a long time ago, so thank you! :up:


Cheers,
Stephen

[Jimbuna]

Move the crew manually.....the error is a stock bug. :hmm:

The destroyer captain was most probably a noob :lol:

[fat jez]

Move the crew manually.....the error is a stock bug. :hmm:



Oh, I know about the bug. The problem is a classic case of me clicking before thinking to move the crew.

On a slightly different note, around 1942, are the American Destroyer crews modelled such that they are relatively inexperienced? I've noticed it's a lot easier when being hunted by them to out-maneuver them and send a torpedo with their name on it to sink them than it is with the British crews. I wondered if they would become more elite as the war went on?

Cheers,
Stephen

[donw]

around 1942...I've noticed it's a lot easier when being hunted by them to out-maneuver them

You're just getting more skilled Mate! :up:

[Voyd]

Thanks for the welcome, Don and Pelelope, as well as for filling me in on the "GWX Armed Trawler" Mod I missed :up:.



One thing I don't see mentioned here, is the additional SH3 Commander update needed strickly for GWX 2

donw
For what its worth, I did mention the patch for SH3 Commander...



(1) CLEAN SH3 1.4b installation + (1) GWX 2.0 Installation + (1) SH3 Commander 2.7
GWX 2.0 Patch = Pure Amazement and Elation :sunny:.

Voyd
I've got the bug again and will be playing for the foreseeable future. My programming/scripting experience has grown considerably since my SH2 modding days, so I may just have to give it a go again :).


Have Phun and Hunt Safe,

Voyd

[Rotary Crewman]

Right I have GWX 2 finally working fine. When I do a single mission or career the game runs fine.

However, even with the correct cfg files in the correct place for SH3Commander I always get a CTD when loading SH3 through SH3Commander. It happens before the main menu appears.

Also, extremely long load times are now occurring (Around 7-10 minutes per mission when it used to be about 3-5 on stock with a few mods). Is this normal due to the enhancements?

[donw]

extremely long load times are now occurring (Around 7-10 minutes per mission when it used to be about 3-5 on stock with a few mods)

Aye Mate...5-7 minutes load times have been reported to be the norm on "average" systems...and can vary somewhat either way depending on what you have under the hood, (and running in the backround)..

As for the SH3 Cmdr issue..if you are sure you have the right patch files installed...can't help ya there...you'll have wait for a better guru to come along :up:

[Kpt. Lehmann]

Cool!!! Another Texan!!! Welcome Voyd! :up: :up: :up:

Rotary Crewman, yessir longer loading times are normal with GWX due to the volume of added material. Hopefully, we've made it worth the wait.

[Jimbuna]

Move the crew manually.....the error is a stock bug. :hmm:



Oh, I know about the bug. The problem is a classic case of me clicking before thinking to move the crew.

On a slightly different note, around 1942, are the American Destroyer crews modelled such that they are relatively inexperienced? I've noticed it's a lot easier when being hunted by them to out-maneuver them and send a torpedo with their name on it to sink them than it is with the British crews. I wondered if they would become more elite as the war went on?

Cheers,
Stephen

As the war progresses the escort crews gain experience and eventually become veteran and elite http://www.psionguild.org/forums/images/smilies/wolfsmilies/pirate.gif

[fat jez]

As the war progresses the escort crews gain experience and eventually become veteran and elite http://www.psionguild.org/forums/images/smilies/wolfsmilies/pirate.gif

Damn, this fox will have to get more cunning if he wants to get into the hen house then :up:

Cheers,
Stephen

[donw]

Cool!!! Another Texan!!!

:hmm: Hmmm..

My Marine Corps DI stated emphatically that the only thing that comes outta Texas are steers and que**s. Which one are you two?? (We already know about Neal!) :rotfl:

[Kpt. Lehmann]

Cool!!! Another Texan!!!

:hmm: Hmmm..

My Marine Corps DI stated emphatically that the only thing that comes outta Texas are steers and que**s. Which one are you two?? (We already know about Neal!) :rotfl:

:p :p :p

Speakin' fer maself... I'd be a 'steer.'

LOL, I got the same treatment in Army bootcamp. The movie "Full Metal Jacket" had just been released and basically everything out of the drill sargeant's mouths was a one-liner from that movie.

I think they sat up late at night practicing their Lee Ermie impressions.:lol:

[donw]

I got the same treatment in Army bootcamp.

The Army has a bootcamp? Thought I read somewhere that was like...2 weeks at Lake Tahoe...or maybe it was Waikiki?? :p

[Voyd]

My Marine Corps DI stated emphatically that the only thing that comes outta Texas are steers and que**s. Which one are you two?? (We already know about Neal!) :rotfl:

LOL...the most loaded question I've been asked in a while. Let's see here :roll:...I'm not the latter, so given the two options, I guess that'd make me a 'steer.' Well, a 'faux-steer'...let's just say that it wouldn't stand up in court...well maybe it would if Caladonia was called to the stand :p (my first Mel Brooks reference of the new year)!! A loaded question always deserves a loaded answer...

Take Care,

Voyd

P.S: Thanks for the welcome, Kpt. Lehmann...looks like the Texans are being flanked from all sides today...lol.

[Jimbuna]

My Marine Corps DI stated emphatically that the only thing that comes outta Texas are steers and que**s. Which one are you two?? (We already know about Neal!) :rotfl:

LOL...the most loaded question I've been asked in a while. Let's see here :roll:...I'm not the latter, so given the two options, I guess that'd make me a 'steer.' Well, a 'faux-steer'...let's just say that it wouldn't stand up in court...well maybe it would if Caladonia was called to the stand :p (my first Mel Brooks reference of the new year)!! A loaded question always deserves a loaded answer...

Take Care,

Voyd

P.S: Thanks for the welcome, Kpt. Lehmann...looks like the Texans are being flanked from all sides today...lol.

Remember the Alamo!! http://imgcash2.imageshack.us/img134/9742/angry8se2.gif ......and throw the Mexican out of the plane first http://www.psionguild.org/forums/images/smilies/wolfsmilies/whistle.gif

[donw]

looks like the Texans are being flanked from all sides today...lol.

Nahhh...I just like to pull the Kpt's chain from time to time...to help keep his mind off all the other Scheiße he deals with here... day.. after day.. after day.. after...
:lol:

[Rotary Crewman]

Thanks for the replies about the loading times. Glad to see I'm not alone!

I managed to sort out SH3C, I installed the suicide trawler patch and also the update for SH3C and it seems to work.

Now just need to get those ASW Trawlers to leave the freighters alone :nope:

[Kpt. Lehmann]

I got the same treatment in Army bootcamp.

The Army has a bootcamp? Thought I read somewhere that was like...2 weeks at Lake Tahoe...or maybe it was Waikiki?? :p

I WISH!!! I was there for eleven weeks!

Maybe you are thinking of the Air Force. :lol: :lol: :p

[Sailor Steve]

Took a quick peek at the 'Navigation' tutorial - schnellboots with random camouflage; schnellboots with no camouflage...

Cool!:rock:

[Madox58]

Watch the Freaking Army!!!
:shifty:
They told me Military Aircraft couldn't land once airborne
so I jumped outta the danged things for 4 years!
:o
Freakin LIARS!!!
:roll:
:rotfl:

[onelifecrisis]

Gents (and Lady)

Something you might want to fix in 2.1...

The environment (sky/ocean) colour maps (TGA's stored in the SkyColorXXX.dat files in data\Env\) are different in the GWX2 16km atmosphere mod to what they are in the default GWX2 (8km) files. See the screeny below for an example.

Scapa Flow Mission, start location, time: 21:56 (looking to port)

8km on left / 16km on right
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2217/2235265205_5f1e54389d_o.jpg

Personally I think the darker (16km) colours are more realistic ;)

[Kpt. Lehmann]

Will look into it OLC. Thanks. (Might leave as-is though too.)

@Privateer: I know what you mean. From the arty standpoint... how could we be sure that we were aimin' at the badguys.:huh:

I mean... considering how many lies a recruiter will tell ya to get you IN the army... ... and considering that the army brass tells the recruiters what to do....

ITS ALL A PACK OF LIES!!! :shifty:

For all I know... we were blowing up shopping malls and churches!

Our only feedback was "target destroyed... good job."

"Enemy infantry in the open" my butt!

:lol:

[Flashback... 1993... Great Salt Desert... Dugway proving grounds... this really happened... my launcher was lead firing unit for the MLRS platoon I was in... and following the platoon leader's hummer.]

Hey LT...!!! Didn't you say that the old NBC test ranges were marked off with dye dropped by aircraft?

Yes Sargeant! Why do you ask?

... The Nerve Agent alarms are going off in here!

[Lieutenant turns white as a ghost... and reaches for test kit.]

... Lt. looks at reading... throws test kit on the ground... grabs another test kit... hands shaking.

60 seconds pass... Lt. throws kit on ground... faces the convoy... and sends the most terrifying hand-signals and verbal warning you will ever see or hear...

"GAS GAS GAS!!!"

90 more seconds pass... and I find myself in full chemical gear, yelling through my gas mask on the radio and trying to make myself understood to a disbelieving Battalion Operation Center...

... because the desert had just received its 100 year rains... washing the dye away... and because we followed a Lieutenant who said, "We're supposed to go this way" right smack-dab into an old Nuclear-Biological-Chemical weapons impact range.

Moral of the story... the Army LIES!!! :shifty:

Second moral of the story... "Lieutenant! With all due respect sir... Please STEP AWAY from the map! You aren't old enough to look at that yet sir! Maps are very bad for you sir and may cause cancer without prior instruction in special handling precautions."

[Venatore]

considering how many lies a recruiter will tell ya to get you IN the army... ... and considering that the army brass tells the recruiters what to do....
Moral of the story... the Army LIES!!!
You mean to tell me after almost 20yrs in the Army; I've been lied to....:o Damn; I knew that recruiter bloke looked shifty back in 1988:shifty:

:damn:

[Kpt. Lehmann]

Yep. Venatore. We've been had! :damn: :lol:

[Venatore]

I new there was something strange about my life; now that I know its all lies this is all starting to make sense......:hmm:

It reminds me of..........http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0_8Zq_iWuFg&feature=related

[Kpt. Lehmann]

I new there was something strange about my life; now that I know its all lies this is all starting to make sense......:hmm:

It reminds me of..........http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0_8Zq_iWuFg&feature=related

EXACTLY!!!

Though it only took me SEVEN years to figure it out instead of TWENTY!!! :lol: :lol: :p ;)

We were SLAVES in the MATRIX!!!:stare: :lol:

Did we take the blue pill or the red pill though?:o

[Venatore]

They gave me a green pill and said we will feed you, new clothes, give you a room, you will travel the world, play with big toys and all we ask in return is your soul ;)

I thought gee thats not a bad trade off, I'm only 18 yrs old, I'll never grow old, I'll meet new friend and those "Recruit Instructors will be really nice guys to get to know..http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=68Yv2NPAJ_w&feature=related

Bloody green pill :shifty:

[onelifecrisis]

Will look into it OLC. Thanks. (Might leave as-is though too.)

(darth vader voice)

I FIND YOUR LACK OF CONCERN DISTURBING, CAPTAIN.

;)

OK, but can you at least say which of the two is correct? I mean is GWX intended to be light at night, or dark?

[Rasher]

Exactly what i thought Venatore, when i joined the RAF.:yep:

Not so much nice places anymore:down:

Rasher

[Kpt. Lehmann]

Will look into it OLC. Thanks. (Might leave as-is though too.)

(darth vader voice)

I FIND YOUR LACK OF CONCERN DISTURBING, CAPTAIN.

;)

OK, but can you at least say which of the two is correct? I mean is GWX intended to be light at night, or dark?

Both were intended to be "light" due to differences in monitors that typically made for darker display on LCD monitors.

Apparently it has escaped notice until now... including by myself.

Being a graphic issue, it takes second-seat to coding issues. Assuming the ENV file TGA's can be ported from the 8km default visibility mod to the 16km visibility mod... it should be no problem. If there is more to it... We'll see what happens.

(Darth Lehmann voice)

Pray I don't alter the deal.

http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f117/KptLehmann/lackeys.jpg

[Rotary Crewman]

Exactly what i thought Venatore, when i joined the RAF.:yep:
Not so much nice places anymore:down:


I think I must be lucky in my work then! :hmm:

[donw]

I know the "Crew" must feel the same way...but what a VERY pleasent relief to see this thread finally start to settle down! :up:

[Jimbuna]

I know the "Crew" must feel the same way...but what a VERY pleasent relief to see this thread finally start to settle down! :up:

[/URL][URL="http://imageshack.us"]http://img297.imageshack.us/img297/5105/amenbu1.gif (http://imageshack.us)................. http://img120.imageshack.us/img120/9071/51wl8.gif

[1480]

Is the original game to blame for my fortunate patrol or do I give you guys the credit? I had a DD force me deep, the first time I saw it on free view, it had it's DC racks. I had to do the funky chicken a few times so I was too busy to look topside, but 15 mins later he goes away when my SO picks up two WS contacts that are close. I decide to pop up to take a looksy and 2000 meters away I see 2 auxillary cruisers streaming. I set up a two eel snap shot and score on the lead ship. I see that the DD ain't too happy and dive again. I look in the free view and see the DD again now w/out it's back racks. Yee Haw. I set up on the second and 2 WS's worth over 27,000 tons. I'm running GWX2 with the Uboat1-2 for fwiw. BTW the armed forces could learn a thing or two about deception from my employer, the cpd.

Additional: I decided to tie up loose ends and torp the V/W class DD. Both times I CTD when I connected with an eel. Any ideas, Thanks.

GWX - 16km Atmosphere
GWX - Captain America's Officer Icons
GWX - Enhanced Damage Effects
GWX - Late War Sensors Snorkel Antennas
GWX - Lite Harbor Traffic
GWX - No Medals on Crew
GWX 2.0 Armed Trawler Patch
U-Boat 1.2 For GWX 2.0 (IO)
Optional Menu 5
Campaign Screen optional
Library
Improved Wave Textures
RealWeatherFixMod

Update: I took out all the mods after armed trawler patch, same CTD when I torped the rackless DD.

[Abd_von_Mumit]

I hope you have no doubt I enjoy GWX - in fact I can't imagine SH3 without it. Marvellous game ("mod" seems to be too unsignificant name for what you achieved).

But I got a problem with GWX. :) The problem is the lousy escorts just sink in storms. Last two patrols were a good exemplum - weather went worst ever, storm, rain and all possible. Recently I started to play "more real" when it comes to convoys, so I try very hard to keep contact, never loose the prey, never stop my attack, never stop reporting to BdU and so on. This means the convoy doesn't cross the ~40 km radius around my U-Boot, and this means the ships never recover after taking damage. And they take damage easily in storms.

Excerpts from my Captain's log:
- Patrol A:
Nov 1 1940, 0210: Hydrophone contact established.
Nov 1 1940, 0223: Ships sighted.
Nov 1 1940, 0244: Rammed by an escort out of nowhere, little damage.
Nov 2 1940, 1800: Port escort identified as Hunt I Class destroyer. Lead escort: V&W Classes destroyer.
Nov 2 1940, 1940: Numerous sounds of sinking ships around.
Nov 2 1940, 1950: Only two warhips seem to be looking for us. Strange.
Nov 2 1940, 2150: Spotted by a Hunt I Class, submerging.
Nov 3 1940, 0040: Spotted by a V&W Classes, crash diving.
Nov 3 1940, 0956: Aft escort identified as a Town Class destroyer.
Nov 3 1940, 1158: A sinking ship spotted, most probably a destroyer, reason of sinking unknown. Most probably this was the aft escort Town Class one.
Nov 3 1940, 1725: Must have been spotted, a Town Class destroyer seen dropping DC's somewhere in the mist, 4 km aft.
Nov 3 1940, 1830: Convoy consists of: 5 Small Merchants, 6 Small Freighters, 1 Medium Tanker, 3 Coastal Freighters, 1 Intermediate Tanker, 1 Town Class destroyer.
Nov 3 1940, 1847: [after another attack] No escort seem to pursuit us. Strange.
Nov 3 1940, 1939: Surfaced, convoy still visible.
Nov 3 1940, 2302: Floating debris seen, for sure it's not from a ship we damaged.
Nov 4 1940, 0011: [after another attack] No escorts heard by hydrophones.
Nov 4 1940, 0742: A ship spotted on our way back. No torpedoes but the two external, but unable to reload due to heavy storm. Closing to investigate.
Nov 4 1940, 0816: The ship is a sinking British Tramp Steamer, almost for sure one from the convoy we pursuited.

- Patrol B:
Dec 13 1940, 1405: Hydrophone contact established.
Dec 13 1940, 1550: Convoy sighted. Right flank escort is an A&B Classes destroyer.
Dec 13 1940, 1644: Lead escort is a Hunt II Class destroyer.
Dec 14 1940, 0446: [after quitting the convoy] Met a crippled A&B Classes destroyer, torpedoed, sunk.
Dec 14 1940, 0452: Heading to another crippled A&B Classes destroyer. No idea what happened to these two, possibly a crash.


These two A&B destroyers are the only two warships I attacked in my 5th career, as I usually don't engage warships. These two were visibly damaged, with their bows down and afts up (screws almost above water), going at 1-2 knots, hardly able to move (but still alive, they repeatedly shot flares). I'm sure I haven't torpedoed them before, it must have been the weather.

Do you think anything could be done about that? That spoils the game quite much I think, it makes following convoys for long periods a bit... not what one would expect. :)

[Madox58]

@1480

Were any other ships present when you hit the V&W?
Were they armed?
I just spend the weekend fixing somethings.
I torpedoed 4 V&W's at the same time,
with the Enhanced damage mod activated.
No CTDs.
:up:

[1480]

@1480

Were any other ships present when you hit the V&W?
Were they armed?
I just spend the weekend fixing somethings.
I torpedoed 4 V&W's at the same time,
with the Enhanced damage mod activated.
No CTDs.
:up:
One armed auxillary cruiser, twice, once when the V&W was solo. Mind you the depth charge rack must have blown itself off in the initial DC run. It is the only thing I can think of. I mirrored this question on the AT fix mod thread, since wasn't the original problem with the CTD when the escort would drop DC's at shallow depth, blowing off their own racks (I know hard coded in SH3)? :88) Four V&W's? You sir are my hero. I usually crawl into fetal position and hum Amazing Grace...

[ryanwigginton]

Just want to report a CTD. First patrol early war, passing between Dover and Calais. It's happened twice now, each time with a different GPU driver. And both times it was when I clicked on the crew configuration button 'surface cruise'. :-?

[Kpt. Lehmann]

Just want to report a CTD. First patrol early war, passing between Dover and Calais. It's happened twice now, each time with a different GPU driver. And both times it was when I clicked on the crew configuration button 'surface cruise'. :-?

Hi RW,

Unfortunately, you've run into a very old stock SH3 bug. Using the cruise mode/crew configuration buttons on the F7 screen has been reported for quite some time as causing consistent CTD's for some users.

In the past, the only effective remedy suggested by the community has simply been to advise users not to use the cruise mode/crew configuration buttons.

This issue is not unique to GWX.

To all users: The cruise mode/crew configuration buttons are found to the left of the cursor in the screenshot below.
http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f117/KptLehmann/cruisemode.jpg

[ryanwigginton]

Hi Kapitan, and thank you sir.

Although I don't argue that this is a stock issue, I have used the button many times before on this same machine without problems. Just not sure what it is I've changed. :hmm:

Anyway, even if uninstalling GWX2.0 were to solve the issue it certainly isn't an option. And I would just like to take this opportunity to congratulate the team on their fine work. It's only recently I've returned after having defected to the Americans for a good period. :shifty:

[Jimbuna]

Hi Kapitan, and thank you sir.

Although I don't argue that this is a stock issue, I have used the button many times before on this same machine without problems. Just not sure what it is I've changed. :hmm:

Anyway, even if uninstalling GWX2.0 were to solve the issue it certainly isn't an option. And I would just like to take this opportunity to congratulate the team on their fine work. It's only recently I've returned after having defected to the Americans for a good period. :shifty:

You don't need to have changed anything.....the problem is an intermittent one.

Best to drag your crew one at a time to your desired location.

[danurve]

1.03 question please.
Anyone have a still usable link for the 1.03 manual? On break at work looking for info on some jazz. thanx.

[Paajtor]

link for 1.03 manual (http://isaf.us/gwx/) (and the other 1.03 stuff)

[CWorth]

Most probably wont even remember me but after nearly a year of not playing due to being bitten by the World of Warcraft bug I am back to playing SH3 again...though still play WoW.

It is great to see the work you have put into this mod since I last played with it.Keep up the great work and look forward to further updates you may have planned.

[bigboywooly]

Most probably wont even remember me but after nearly a year of not playing due to being bitten by the World of Warcraft bug I am back to playing SH3 again...though still play WoW.

It is great to see the work you have put into this mod since I last played with it.Keep up the great work and look forward to further updates you may have planned.

Of course we remember you :up:
Welcome back
Geez that year flew by then - doesnt seem that long ago last saw you on here
Gulp

[Jimbuna]

Most probably wont even remember me but after nearly a year of not playing due to being bitten by the World of Warcraft bug I am back to playing SH3 again...though still play WoW.

It is great to see the work you have put into this mod since I last played with it.Keep up the great work and look forward to further updates you may have planned.

Crikey!! who could ever forget you of all people!! http://imgcash6.imageshack.us/img231/1076/shockedvi8.gif

j/k http://img132.imageshack.us/img132/7581/thumbsupmz4.gif

Welcome back matey http://www.psionguild.org/forums/images/smilies/wolfsmilies/pirate.gif

[Madox58]

@CWorth

Gettysburg eh?
:rock:
Been there the last 5 years on the 4th of July weekend for Bike week!
:rock:
Even got married there 2 years ago and stayed at "The Farnsworth House"
Eastside, Bonnieville Inn, (not in Gettysburg but a short ride away).
Hmmm,
Is it July yet!!!!
:up:

[TheeMahn]

@CWorth

Gettysburg eh?
:rock:
Been there the last 5 years on the 4th of July weekend for Bike week!
:rock:
Even got married there 2 years ago and stayed at "The Farnsworth House"
Eastside, Bonnieville Inn, (not in Gettysburg but a short ride away).
Hmmm,
Is it July yet!!!!
:up:
A sad day when I have to chase you down, I checked my email no links... Do you still need help with the installer? You will have to get me a copy of the game so I can verify it works / how much trouble it would be to write etc.

TheeMahn aka Shady ;)

[moscowexile]

I've been driven to distraction for over a week now with a problem that baffles me: I finished and saved a first mission and the following day sailed out from Wilhelmshaven on my 2nd and all was working fine. I thought I'd solved all the problems that I had experienced in the past few months by updating my Pentium IV computer so that it has now the following specifications:

Physical memory - 1.535 Gb

Video driver - ATI Radeon HD 2600 series, 512 Mb

The computer graphics ran like a dream on SHIII, SHIV and other computer memory demanding games, but then...

Outward bound for the Shetlands a took a look at the chart: The grid reference numbers were illegible, broken up; my sub position appeared like some cross-hatching doodle of black lines, as did all the ports and cities.

This is not a fault with the modded SHIII, I'm sure: I've deleted and reloaded the modded game until I've gone crazy; I've scoured the registry for trash but to no avail; I loaded the stock SHIII (bought in the UK last August) and the same thing happens.

So really, this query is out of the domain of this thread and forum: it's a PC problem.

But has anybody any advice?

Viele Grüße aus Moskau!

[donw]

Ummmm maybe..
Tell us more about your RAM memory...Is it 2 seperate cards...one being 1G and the other 500M ??

I've read of several problems occuring when the 2 cards are not matched. I don't think it's too big of an issue if they are different byte size...but what IS important is they must be the same type...ie..PC133...PC 2100..PC2700..PC5400..etc etc etc

You see...each one of those operate at different clock frequencies...as in the examples above would be 133Mhz..266Mhz..333Mhz..667Mhz...etc

It is critical that memory cards be matched in this respect

[Wiley_Wolf]

Hi all,

I'm posting here as a last resort to see if any of you guys or gals can help me as im fast running out of idea's ......and sanity

I have bought a copy of silent hunter III (budget title by Focus) recently (UK DVD) I presume its already patched to 1.4b because when i load up the game it's showing v1.4. It doesnt have the disc auth checker software on it like the original boxed game did so will run without the disc in the drive.

I have installed and played the game 'out of box' as it comes, no mods and everything is fine, i can start a mission in 1940 onwards from any base in any boat.

When I install GWX2 everything installs fine (not tried it with commander yet) I can start a career in a type IIA in Kiel in 1939 and everything is fine, game loads up no problem on every patrol and runs ingame fine....... until I get to 1940 (June i think it was), then everything appears to be fine until I accept a new patrol, I get the loading screen come up, the one with the red progress bar at the bottom, the progress bar get right to the end (bout a centimeter short) then it stays there for about 4 mins, at the point where it would normally go to the black screen with the 'not so long ago' message it stays blank then comes up with a windows error box saying ' SHIII has encountered a problem and needs to close' giving me the option to report to microsoft?? It does this on every carreer i try to start after 1940, no matter which boat i choose or flotilla.

I have tried everything i can think of below-

tried selecting different years and different boats after 1940 as new careers (still same problem)

uninstalled game and mod completely from system and manually removed any files left behind on system.

reinstalled game and mod (from the bin files i all ready had) - same problem.

checked bin files with jsmd5m tool, all fine

uninstalled the game and mod files

reinstalled the game and re-downloaded the mod from a different source (gameshadow), installed again - same problem

I have downloaded latest drivers for card (G-Force 7600GS)

I've tried defraging my drive.

I honestly now cant think what the problem could be , the game works fine out of the box but not with GWX2 some it must be something mod related? Im running an athlon 2.4 gig processor and have 1Gig ram and a G-Force 7600gs with windows XP, when the game runs , it runs fine.

[Jimbuna]

Download the MD5 Programme from the GWX website (click on my sig) and check all your GWX2.0 files are okay. :arrgh!:

[donw]

checked bin files with jsmd5m tool, all fine

Think he already stated he did that Jim ;)

[Jimbuna]

checked bin files with jsmd5m tool, all fine

Think he already stated he did that Jim ;)

Right :oops:

It can only mean you have a little sh*t left over off a previous install then (assuming of course you've never added any additional external mods).

Uninstall again......BUT USE THE GAME DISC :up:

[moscowexile]

Ummmm maybe..
Tell us more about your RAM memory...Is it 2 seperate cards...one being 1G and the other 500M ??

I've read of several problems occuring when the 2 cards are not matched. I don't think it's too big of an issue if they are different byte size...but what IS important is they must be the same type...ie..PC133...PC 2100..PC2700..PC5400..etc etc etc

You see...each one of those operate at different clock frequencies...as in the examples above would be 133Mhz..266Mhz..333Mhz..667Mhz...etc

It is critical that memory cards be matched in this respect
You might just have nailed the gremlin there! It's not two memory cards that I have installed, but three! The two that came with the computer 3 years ago totalled 512 Mb; I took one of them to a reputable dealer on an electronics megamarket here and asked if I could have two more like it so as to make up a 1 Gb RAM. He said that the firm that makes such cards no longer manufactures that specification but he added that he could sell me a 1 Gb card made by the same outfit. I asked if I could use the two cards that I already had so as to make up the RAM to 1.5 Gb and he said I could. But thinking back now, he didn't really seem that sure: he was just happy to have made a sale, I guess.

I'll whip out those two little rascals in a trice and report back.

Thing is, though, why do my other heavy-on-RAM games work flawlessly? I'm talking about "Rome Total War" with a ""Rome Total Reality" mod, whose size is comparable to that of GWX 2.0, "Medal of Honor- Airborne" and "Spider-Man 3", amongst others.

Ps I've just read about WileyWolf's problems with a "Focus" issue of SH3 bought in the UK. That's the same as I bought over there last August. Could be a disc problem: corrupted files. However, my problem only started on the onset of my second mission outward bound from Wilhelmshaven.

[donw]

Thing is, though, why do my other heavy-on-RAM games work flawlessly?
Maybe because Ubisoft is not one of the best software developers out there? I don't know mate...What I DO know is SH3 is filled with funny little "quirks" that pop up all the time. Some have been dealt with and work-arounds made...and some have not.

Pull out those 2 256's and let us know what happens ;)

[moscowexile]

I pulled the smaller cards out and there was no change: illegible grid references on the chart, rectangular cross hatching for ship and sub positions, likewise for harbours, and rectangular white water around the sub instead of a wake.

Everything else works fine.

[hajopu]

I had the same problem with my computer.
Please try this: disable the "write combining" in the windows system.
Good luck.

hajopu

[donw]

moscowexile
Hopefully some video guru's here will jump in and give a hand...
This definately sounds like either a vid driver or settings issue now...try lowering the settings...and if no joy, either see if there are newer drivers..or if you already have them...then roll back to older ones..

I know that sounds screwy...but its the only way to rule out that being the issue.

[moscowexile]

I tried the "write combining" adjustment: no joy.

I've tweaked and twiddled all over the PC but to no avail; I've used numerous register cleaners, sifted through the reg manually, defragmented, formatted the D drive on which my games programs are situated, reloaded Windows XP on top of the present one, and nothing has worked.

The baffling thing is that all my other games, including SH4 and the "Call of duty" and "Brothers In Arms" series, run flawlessly on my outfit; more tellingly, I believe, is that other copies of SH3 that I have (Russian versions and English ones that I bought here and used with the German language option) also run perfectly; the problem is that I can't mod these latter copies of SH3 with GWX as they are, not surprisingly, pirated copies: it is extremely difficult to find a non-pirated copy in this neck of the woods. That is why I bought a genuine SH3 last August during one of my very extremely rare visits to my homeland. This latter copy also worked flawlessly until I started my second mission last week. The publisher of that copy, "Focus", is the same that published the copy that WilyWolf reports as giving him problems.

All the above seems to indicate that it is my copy of SH3 that is at fault...

Yet I still find this hard to believe.

I'll try it out on another PC and see if it works there.


The only other thing that I can grasp at as regards solving this mystery is that my troubles started after I had loaded SH Commander, which program I immediately rolled back and deleted when this graphics hitch began.

[Jawster]

Great work!

[The Munster]

Welcome hajopu and Jawster, enjoy the GWXperience :up:

[wsabean]

I have a problem loading gwx it keeps asking for disk and wont load can anyone tell me what im doing wrong

[bigboywooly]

I have a problem loading gwx it keeps asking for disk and wont load can anyone tell me what im doing wrong

Loading or installing ?
If installing make sure ALL the bin files are in the same folder as the exe

Welcome aboard :up:

[Jimbuna]

Welcome aboard matey http://www.psionguild.org/forums/images/smilies/wolfsmilies/pirate.gif

Follow the instructions on the GWX website to the letter (accessible from my sig) http://www.psionguild.org/forums/images/smilies/wolfsmilies/thumbsup.gif

[kjuice]

Hi, I have re installed sh3 and patched it up to 1.4. Then I have installed the GWX and it all went well. When I tried to run it, it gave me a "cannot run" code 87. I could not find it in forums. anyone know what it is?

[moscowexile]

To update may tale of woe: I can now tell you that the glitch that I'm suffering from must be because of the driver I'm using (ATI 8.1 for a Radeon HD 2600 Pro AGP card), which driver I was advised to download by Game Shadow. (I was, in fact, advised of this possibility several days ago by donw.)

I've at last managed to check out my bought in England and already updated to 1.4b stock SH3 on another PC and it runs fine: it doesn't run correctly on this PC that I'm now using (illegible grid numbers and vessel markers on the chart), but it did before I downloaded and installed the above mentioned driver. Previously I used a Radeon 9550 card and an ATI 7.1 driver: the game ran, though somewhat jerkily at times, because I then had only 512Mb RAM. I now have 1.5Gb RAM and I changed the video card and then the driver, which, hopefully, through a process of elimination, sems to be the culprit of my present extreme withdrawal symptons that I have been suffering from as a result of the present non-accessability of my favourite relaxation activity: GWX cold turkey I'm talking about, and it's hell!

In addition to the glitch as regards the grid numbers, the intro film is now a garish blue and green and red impressionist work of art, though the graphics for the game proper are fine, apart, that is, from the grid numbers.

I'm going to change to the 7.1 driver and see what happens.

I will keep you posted about developments so that my present unfortunate condition, should it occur with other shipmates, be quickly remedied by the cure that I have been seeking for almost a fortnight now, which cure, I shall, hopefully, soon inform you of.

[donw]

fortnight?...:hmm:..hmmmm
..counts on fingers..runs out of fingers!
..takes off shoes..counts..
2 Weeks!!!

I would have KILLED somebody or something by now!! :rotfl:

Get those vid drivers rolled back Mate! Universal rule of video drivers: Never ever use the most latest...always go back 2 or 3 versions till they get the creepy crawlers smashed! :up:

[moscowexile]

At long last I've fettled it!

I have suffered hell these past 16 days trying to fathom out what had gone wrong with my system and finally came to the conclusion earlier this evening that my computer was sound, as were my drives, video card and stock version of SH3. So I concluded that I must have made an adjustment some time or other over a fortnight ago that had thrown a spanner into the works resulting in the graphics glitch on my chart.

Then suddenly, about an hour ago: EUREKA!

I remembered having, for some reason or other, chosen the option not to compress drive D (where my games folder is) in order to save disc space. This function is in the options of the disc drives: left click "My Computer" - right click a disc drive - left click "options". I remember choosing not to compress the D drive so as to see what would happen. Nothing happened, I thought, until I next loaded a saved game outward bound from Wilhelmshaven and I totally forgot about my "adjustment" to the D drive onthe previous day.

One thing that I discovered during my recent trails and tribulations is that my new Radeon HD 2600 Pro AGP video card is not (or wasn't until a couple of weeks ago) supported by ATI. When you download the latest drivers from ATI, they do not recognise this hardware: you have to download a modified ATI driver from "Saphire", the manufacturer of said card. It's a long, involved story why; if you're interested how to get by this irritating non-compatibility problem, it's all there on Google.

But enough of this! At long last I've got the taste of salt on my lips and the stench of diesel fumes in my nostrils.

Gott straf England!

;)

[Alex]

Glad to know that you got your problem sorted, mate !! Enjoy the GWXperience ! :up:

[donw]

Outstanding! I can finally get a good nights sleep, as this problem has been bugging me as bad as you! :rotfl:

Good job Mate! :up:

[Madox58]

You say you chose NOT to compress?
None of my drives are compressed as compression slows loading time
due to de-compression times.

Is your game run from a compressed drive then?

[DirtyACE]

I've noticed something interesting lately. It's regarding officer's uniforms. Correct me if I'm wrong but GWX2.0 has added uniform designs, like the elite black uniform. I just noticed it after enlisting a new watch officer because my old one got arrested for being drunk :lol: (I'm not kidding, that's what SH3Cmdr told me). Anyway, I was on the bridge and noticed this new guy wearing the black shirt (or whatever it is) and dark pants, plus his cap was dark too. So was this something included in the 2.0 version? I'm asking because I had the elite uniforms mod installed in the 1.03 version and not sure if somehow it affected 2.0, even though I completely uninstalled everything before making a fresh install.

The other thing is that my game crashed durring my 2nd patrol but I have no idea why. I know certain situations in the game do cause save game crashes, like saving while being submerged but I was surfaced. I did sink a ship though, and after getting the confirmation message that it was going down I saved my game. Was it because I was too close to the wreckage, did that affect the save or something? I tried restarting from the save but it kept CTD, so I had to restart the patrol.

[Madox58]

Yep.
2.0 uses the elite Uniforms.
Not sure about the saves CTD'ing
There may be many reasons for that.
We may have also fixed some of those reasons already for 2.01

[moscowexile]

You say you chose NOT to compress?
None of my drives are compressed as compression slows loading time
due to de-compression times.

Is your game run from a compressed drive then?
Aye! A fortnight ago I had unchecked the box along which is stated: "Compress drive to save disk space".

The result was a graphics glitch, but only on an updated 1.4b stock SH3.

I re-checked said box yesterday evening and the glitch vanished.




As regards loading time, since installing 1.53 Gb RAM and a Radeon HD 2600 Pro AGP video card, the game loads up at breathtaking spead when compared to the time taken when I had 512 Gb anda Radeon 9550 card.

I am now running on a compressed D drive and churning across the North Sea bound for the coastal waters of Perfidious Albion.

Update February 14th 2008

It came back - the glitch that is - when I restarted my mission the following day.

I hit ctrl-alt+delete, left clicked "my computer", right clicked the icon to get "options" and de-checked the compress drive option. Back to the game. The problem had gone. So then I realised that it couldn't be the compress option that's the cause: the fault went when I decompressed, returned, and went gain when I compressed.

I saved the game, rebooted and reloaded the mission. The glitch was there again. So this time I hit ctrl+alt+delete but then returned to the game without adjusting D drive compression: the fault had gone.

This happens all the time now: when I load, the fault appears; I switch off the picture by bringing in the task manager, do not use the latter and switch it off, and return to the game; the fault has gone.

There is something amiss in my display, but what it is I just cannot fathom out... and it BUGS ME!!!!

[lorcan3]

Well Kapitain Lehman, I fixed my problem. I loaded SH3,all the patches, The GWX 2.0 and hit GWX 2.0.exe to run the program. Boy, I'll tell you what! You folks went all out and made the game even better than it was with the exra ships and planes and stuff! Kudos to you and the crew! Hoo hoo hoo!
Now the bad news. I was playing the carrer mode and here I was heading off to New York in a beautiful IXB U-Boat with radar, hydrophones,new crew, etc. I decided to play some music on the gramaphone. Neat tunes I must say. But then the game froze and the song sounded like a broken record. This has happened 3 times since I donwloaded it this morning. My computer has a Pentium 4 3.2 GHZ chip, 2 Gigabytes of memory, 300 Gigabytes on my hard drive unused, Nvidia 6800 vid card w/updated driver and soundblaster Audigy2 zx sound card.:damn: :arrgh!:

[Robis.S]

Hi there Kaleuns. I am new here. I wanna ask- i have downlouded GWX2 mod, instaled and now i see a little bit of mods like: GWX - 16km Atmosphere, GWX - No Medals on Crew, GWX - Integrated Orders and etc. Where could i find descriptions about this mods with print screens? Thanks and sorry for my bad english.

[HundertzehnGustav]

16 km mod will make you horizont BIGGER
but nothing else will change. just a notmal horizont where you can see much more far away.:D

[Robis.S]

and this one don't understand: GWX - Captain America's Officer Icons.

And one more question, whit GRW2 MOD was folder GWX_2.0_Cfg_4_SH3Cmdr whit files inside: Randomised events.cfg; Ship displacements.cfg; Ship names.cfg; U-boat availability.cfg are this all files MOD's too? Sorry for stupid questions.

[bigboywooly]

and this one don't understand: GWX - Captain America's Officer Icons.

And one more quostion, whit GRW2 MOD was folder GWX_2.0_Cfg_4_SH3Cmdr whit files inside: Randomised events.cfg; Ship displacements.cfg; Ship names.cfg; U-boat availability.cfg are this all files MOD's too? Sorry for stupid questions.

Those 4 cfgs need to go in C:\Program Files\SH3 Commander\Cfg
Overwrite the ones in there already

[HundertzehnGustav]

These files are for the SH3 Commander program, not for the SH III Game.

[Robis.S]

what is SH3 Commander program? :oops:

[Jimbuna]

what is SH3 Commander program? :oops:

http://www.users.on.net/~jscones/software/products.html

[Chad]

Lorcan, what's you're operating system? Sometimes Vista has problems.. If using xp, make sure the compatability of the .exe you are using is not set to be compatable with Windows 95,98,2000, or ME.

Also, try waiting it out, I know it'll give you a migraine, but my system freezes up like that every now and then, but only for 5-6 seconds at max!

[ReallyDedPoet]

Welcome to SUBSIM :up: Robis.S


RDP

[Robis.S]

when i will install Commander ant Ship names.cfg, will then show names of ship in game? Cause now types of ships identiefied as UNKOWN

[Robis.S]

Welcome to SUBSIM :up: Robis.S


RDP
thanks, this game i play about 1.5year, but dicided just today register here :arrgh!:

[Jimbuna]

Welcome to SUBSIM :up: Robis.S


RDP
thanks, this game i play about 1.5year, but dicided just today register here :arrgh!:

Wise decision http://www.psionguild.org/forums/images/smilies/wolfsmilies/pirate.gif

Welcome aboard matey http://www.psionguild.org/forums/images/smilies/wolfsmilies/thumbsup.gif

[Sailor Steve]

Now it's my turn to feel like an idiot. I've searched under every category I could, and I know I saw this not long ago, but for the life of me I can't find it now: is there a way to shut the Watch Officer up while in port? I know I can just remove him from his post, but I don't remember him being this annoyingly talkative in the past. Sometimes he'll repeat the same ship over and over.

I'd shoot the guy, but I know his replacement will be just as bad.

[edit] Oops, 'nother question: I've put my favorite Bf-109 skin into the textures folders, and it doesn't show up. How do I fix this?

[lorcan3]

:damn: I don't know about the rest of you lads, but I have a problem here in GWX paradise. I told you about the skipping then the program shuts down and then it asks if you want to report it to Microsoft. Here's another. When you go to load your external reserve torpedoes from the OUTSIDE of the sub, the screen flickers and the torpedoes displayed in the slots for the external reserves disappear. The screen flickers again and they reappear. Sometimes the screen does NOT flicker, your torps do NOT reappear BUT your still listed as carrying those torpedoes. This makes one hell of a mess when you need to get home, your men are about as useful as tits on a bull, and your sub is pretty tore up. Help me out on this one please because when you go out on your next mission, those two or more external slots that you tried to download earlier are still USLESS! I use windows XP, have a pentium 4 chip at 3.2 GHZ, 2gigs of mem, 300 gigs of hard drive space, a NVIDIA 6800 video card with updated drivers and a soundblaster Audigy 2 ZS with updated drivers.

[Sailor Steve]

I've looked at it enough now to have one more complaint. I remember when the first version came out, and the testers were joking about being seasick. I appreciate that the mod is good enough to cause that reaction, but I think it's a bit much. Sitting in Wilhelmshaven is a battleship, and it rocks like a rowboat! Maybe it's just me, but I've never seen a ship move like that, even a destroyer. It might not be that there's too much movement, but there is no question it's way too fast.

Is there any way I can change it, if just for myself?

[Sailor Steve]

Oh, and a positive thing: I loaded up the 6-Dials Simfeeling mod, and as advertised it removed everything from the map...including the Kiel in-out waypoints and lines! The good news is, when I selected the Navigator and hit 'Kiel Out', the lines were back!

Awesome!:rock:

[donw]

Lorcan3
The rest of us Lads, (at least this one), have no problems at all with reloads, so lets attempt to find out what "your" problem might be.
Has it always been this way, from the first time you loaded GWX?
Have you always had the hardware, and "updated" drivers that you specified?

[lorcan3]

That I have. Everytime I have to reload from external reserves, the screen flashes, the torpedos disappear, it flckers again and they reappear. Sometimes the screen only flickers once and the torpedo disappear for good for the rest of the ENTIRE game! I have a flat panel monitor 21 inches.
Even though the torpedos disappear, you still are carrying that number if torpedos of which you can do nothing about. you can't load them, can't do anything.Recently I patrolled Sector CA near New York with no luck. So I decided to venture into the Harbor. I sank 2 troopships, 1 Clemson destroyer, 1 ceramics class passenger liner, 1 large tanker and 1 medium cargo ship. On the way out I was harrassed by 2 elco torpedo boats whick I sank with my deck gun and then had to dive to periscope depth to try to evade a 4 stacker destroyer. I TRIED to load my external storage torpedos which disappeared! So I twisted and turned (with 5 feet under my keel) until I lost him and went home. Much to my chagrin, when I checked my torpedo loadout, the two external storage located on the stern ( my boat is a IXC) were blank!So I had to start a new carrer over again.:damn:

[Jimbuna]

This sounds like a very old bug that was sorted a long way back.....what version of GWX are you using and what external mods have you installed http://img255.imageshack.us/img255/621/thinkbigsw1.gif

[bigboywooly]

then had to dive to periscope depth to try to evade a 4 stacker destroyer. I TRIED to load my external storage torpedos which disappeared! So I twisted and turned (with 5 feet under my keel) until I lost him and went home

You cannot load from external tubes submerged

Ok what other mods are you running ?

When you CTD to desktop you are faced with this screen

http://i60.photobucket.com/albums/h22/bigboywooly/ScreenHunter_168-1.jpg

Click on the blue text " click here "
And you will get this screen

http://i60.photobucket.com/albums/h22/bigboywooly/ScreenHunter_169-2.jpg

Have highlighted the error - simdata.dll in this case
Next time you CTD can you post the error
simact.dll
kernel.dll
sh3exe etc

Helps narrow down the problems

[Sailor Steve]

It's funny: I get that "Encountered a problem and needs to close" message every time I play...right after I exit the game.:rotfl:

It's never caused me any problems, so I've always ignored it.

[Rasher]

Hi

Since I've started using GWX 2.0, I've noticed that TC is so slow it makes the game too slow to enjoy. I spend ages waiting for the boat to get out of the Kiel Canal then it only speeds up once imn out in the ocean. Near land the game really crawls. Does anyone know a way to speed the TC up or make it smoother? Also does anyone know a good fatigue to use, I used Rub x1 as it gave a nice drop in fatigue over long period but only problem was that crewmen didnt recover in quarters. Is there a way to make crewmen recover in their quarters when using Rub x1 Fatigue Config? All answers appreciated as Im now at the point of packing it in. I have changed my hardware from an AMD XP Athlon to a Dual Core Athlon running at 1.6 Ghz and an 8600GT Nvidia Card. Surely game should run faster or is it the upgrade from GWX 1.03?

Thanks

Rasher

[donw]

Near land the game really crawls.
SH3 Commander allows you to set time compression near land to any desired value Mate...it also allows several variations of crew fatigue management...give it a try. :up:

[Subtype Zero]

Also does anyone know a good fatigue to use, I used Rub x1 as it gave a nice drop in fatigue over long period but only problem was that crewmen didnt recover in quarters. Is there a way to make crewmen recover in their quarters when using Rub x1 Fatigue Config?Yes, there is a way to make your crew slowly recover fatigue, but it requires editing some text files. I haven't done this for awhile so I'll have to do some looking around and then get back to you later tonight. It's very easy to do, though, so don't give up just yet!

[Subtype Zero]

Rasher, your computer is very similar to mine (AMD dual core @ 1.8, NVidea 8600GT, 1Gb Ram) so it should run fine without many problems once you get out of the port area. If it is still too slow in port, try using the GWX Lite Harbor mod to decrease the air and sea traffic.

I found the adjustments for crew fatigue. I will assume you are using SH3 Commander, which makes making the adjustments very easy. Here is the procedure: Navigate to your SH3 Commander\Cfg folder and look for the Crew fatigue models.cfg file and open it with a text editor. Follow the instructions at the top of the file for adding your own fatigue model.

As for specific settings, start out with my settings, which follow. Mine are based on the Rub model instead of the Rub X 1 TC model, but you can try either one. Just copy either Rub or Rub X 1 TC as described at the top of the Crew fatigue models.cfg file and paste it to the end of the file. Number the new model with the last number of the model just above plus 1 and add a new description after Desc= . Finally, copy the following lines over the matching lines of the just copied model:

CREW_0|FatigueMax=0.75
CREW_0|FatigueStep=0.0175 ;was .02
CREW_1|FatigueMax=0.70
CREW_1|FatigueStep=0.0175
CREW_2|FatigueMax=0.70
CREW_2|FatigueStep=0.0175
CREW_3|FatigueMax=0.65
CREW_3|FatigueStep=0.015 ;was .01
CREW_4|FatigueMax=0.65
CREW_4|FatigueStep=0.015
CREW_5|FatigueMax=0.60
CREW_5|FatigueStep=0.015
CREW_6|FatigueMax=0.65
CREW_6|FatigueStep=0.0125 ;was .015
CREW_7|FatigueMax=0.65
CREW_7|FatigueStep=0.0125
CREW_8|FatigueMax=0.65
CREW_8|FatigueStep=0.0125 The important variable is FatigueStep. In the original Rub models, this variable is set to 0, so the crew never recovers fatigue. I found that setting this value between .0125 and .0175 gave me the best results, but you can tweak them to your own liking (you might want to raise them slightly). By comparison, notice that the stock SH3 values range between .05 and .2

These settings will allow your crew to experience fatigue but then slowly recover if they are regularly rested in quarters. Good luck and let me know how you like these settings.

[Sailor Steve]

I have a 3 Ghz Pentium 4 with only 512MB of RAM, plus a Radeon card, and mine runs reasonably well, only dragging when things get really extreme. I couldn't use the Lite Harbor version - watching the sights in the harbor is what I live for.:oops:

[lorcan3]

I'm using GWX 2.0 and I loaded it from Kpt. Lehmans site. I'm ONLY running the GWX 2.0:ping: I tried loading the torps from external storage WHILE on the surface. I did serve in the Navy you know but harpoon cruise missles work much better or torpedos mk 46 mod 0 acoustic .

[Sirkam]

The missing external reserves torpedoes is a SH3 stock bug, it appears when you load too many torpedoes to the internal reserves. I dont noticed that bug with the GWX 2.0.