[REL] Harder Enemy Escorts- Better Sensors

[nvdrifter]

**Updated v1.01 Release!**

Harder Enemy Escorts and Aircraft v1.01 for SH4 v1.1

Mod created by nvdrifter
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Changes/fixes in v1.01:

-made AI hydrophones more sensitive

-made enemy aircraft tougher

-greatly reduced chance of enemy air missions

-increased chance of enemy airstrike on detection.

-reduced depth charge damage blast radius

-increased enemy aircraft cannon accuracy




----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Features of this mod:


-Deadlier enemy escorts:

AI visual, sonar, radar, and hydrophone settings have all been adjusted to be more sensitive



-Less cloaking effect of thermal layers:

No more Star Trek style cloaking device effect after passing thermal layer. Going below the thermal will still lessen the effectiveness of enemy escort sensors, but just not as much now.


-Reduced depth charge damage blast radius:

Enemy depth charges will now be less deadly unless they explode very close to your sub. This was done to simulate the less effective Japanese escorts in WW2.



-Deadlier enemy aircraft:

Enemy aircraft will be more accurate with their cannon fire, but you will now encounter much fewer enemy aircraft because there will now be less enemy air missions. If you are detected by enemy surface ships, there is a good chance an airstrike will be sent to the location where you were last spotted. Enemy aircraft hitpoints and armor ratings have also been increased. If you decide to stay on the surface and fight, be prepared for a challenge.



Some gameplay hints when using this mod:

1) Don't get detected in the first place. This is the best way to avoid being depth charged and possibly killed. Don't let them know you are there.


2) If you are detected, go to silent running, slow down to 2 or 3 knots and try to get below the thermal layer. The deeper you go, the harder it is for the enemy to detect you. If you run at speeds above 3 knots, there is a good chance you will be detected (unless the weather is stormy with rough seas). Avoid shallow waters at all costs.


3) Rough seas and stormy weather is good. Enemy hydrophones, sonar and radar are less effective in rough seas. Use this to your advantage. Be careful if making attacks when the sea is calm. You can be detected much easier.

4) If you spot an enemy aircraft while surfaced, it is advised that you dive crash dive as soon as possible. There is a good chance you will take damage from being bombed.


**Please note that these sensor settings are not exactly the same as GWX's SH3 sensor settings. They are slightly less effective because Japanese escorts in WW II were not as effective as Allied escorts. You can still escape enemy escorts if you are being hunted. It isn't impossible.**


**This mod was based partially on GWX's excellent sensors detection parameters**

Download here: http://hosted.filefront.com/aragorn155/

[CaptainCox]

Cool stuff man. We needed something like this, the vanilla game is simply to easy ;) Great work, thanks.

[nvdrifter]

Cool stuff man. We needed something like this, the vanilla game is simply to easy ;) Great work, thanks.
Be careful when using this mod. They will find you. :o I got lazy when playing vanilla SH4, because the enemy escorts were nearly blind. But with this mod, I have to be really careful now. I hope you enjoy the mod.

[Crosseye76]

Very well done, good stuff there !

[Crosseye76]

1) Don't get detected in the first place. This is the best way to avoid being depth charged and possibly killed. Don't let them know you are there.


And of course, ALWAYS good advice regardless of what Mods a player uses.

This should be a small banner or poster, included with the game, to be put above the monitor of any aspiring SH4 skipper. :up:

[OneTinSoldier]

Great mod. Need to have it to have those Jap Escorts actually act like they're the enemy! :lol:

[kakemann]

Great work!

Thanks a lot! Will download now!

You're the man!:sunny:

[kakemann]

Ok!

Have some bad news again!

Still the same thing about the escorts!

They act like they are cruisers with depthcharges!

I cruised at periscope - flank speed 800 metres right in front of one of them. Calm sea and no fog or rain or anything!

They didn't hear anything!
As I raised periscope they spottet it passed me and deployed depth charges. i continues at flank periscope. They didn't ping once and lost me as soon as the periscope was down!

[nvdrifter]

Ok!

Have some bad news again!

Still the same thing about the escorts!

They act like they are cruisers with depthcharges!

I cruised at periscope - flank speed 800 metres right in front of one of them. Calm sea and no fog or rain or anything!

They didn't hear anything!
As I raised periscope they spottet it passed me and deployed depth charges. i continues at flank periscope. They didn't ping once and lost me as soon as the periscope was down!
I'm not sure what to tell you. The mod does work. I just play tested again, and I got my butt totally kicked in several single player missions ranging from 1942-1944. Most of the enemy escorts were very agressive. Also remember that each escort has it's own crew skill level. Lower skilled enemy crews will be less agressive and might give up easier.

[castorp345]

I got my butt totally kicked in several single player missions ranging from 1942-1944. Most of the enemy escorts were very agressive.

for testing purposes could you please report which single player missions you used and what your percent incidence of survival was?
many thanks!
hc

[castorp345]

:hmm:

ok, thanks for that (and i'll guess i'll defer comments about the results... ;))

cheers
hc

[nvdrifter]

:hmm:

ok, thanks for that (and i'll guess i'll defer comments about the results... ;))

cheers
hc
I deleted my previous post and I have nothing else to talk about with you. You don't ever give up, do you? I don't want or need your opinions. Please go away. :shifty:

[tater]

Not all japanese DDs had surface search radar, particularly early in the war. For subchasers, fewer still. I bet there were nearly none before late '43.

http://www.combinedfleet.com/radar.htm

The most likely type to have been installed is the type13 (air search) or type 22 (air/surface). They type 22 wasn't available until Sept. '44. Honestly, I'd expect no radar on the vast majority of small (smaller than CL) ships before that.

I'm not sure about their SONAR, but I have read that they frequently banged away with the ship moving too fast to get any use out of it.

tater

[Barkhorn1x]

Thanks NVDrifter - your work is much appreciated here.

[castorp345]

I deleted my previous post and I have nothing else to talk about with you. You don't ever give up, do you? I don't want or need your opinions. Please go away.

ya'know, i really don't get it...

i've been nothing but courteous to you, albeit having offered some critical observations of your mod (which you'll note i've refained from in this thread), and yet you've been nothing but rude, pissy, and defensive... what gives? in most spheres of interaction that sort of behavior/response is considered quite unacceptable. the scant critical observations i've offered up have been nothing other than directed towards examining the means and method of making the sim better (to what i feel sure would be everybody's satisfaction), and have decidedly been impersonal in nature; and yet you've consistently reacted as though i (and indeed others) were attacking your person. this, if i may make bold to suggest to you, is a terribly immature way of going about things.

i certainly hold no ill will towards you and will, as you kindly suggest, "go away", but i'd honestly ask you to question your own behavior. i find it quite unfortunate that you seem unable to discuss these sorts of issues dispassionately.

regrettably
hc

:huh:

:confused:

:roll:



:lurk:

[tater]

Out of curiosity, is a mod like this global to all AI ships, or is it class by class (and year), with variation for crew quality?

tater

[xittix]

I deleted my previous post and I have nothing else to talk about with you. You don't ever give up, do you? I don't want or need your opinions. Please go away.

ya'know, i really don't get it...

i've been nothing but courteous to you, albeit having offered some critical observations of your mod (which you'll note i've refained from in this thread), and yet you've been nothing but rude, pissy, and defensive... what gives? in most spheres of interaction that sort of behavior/response is considered quite unacceptable. the scant critical observations i've offered up have been nothing other than directed towards examining the means and method of making the sim better (to what i feel sure would be everybody's satisfaction), and have decidedly been impersonal in nature; and yet you've consistently reacted as though i (and indeed others) were attacking your person. this, if i may make bold to suggest to you, is a terribly immature way of going about things.

i certainly hold no ill will towards you and will, as you kindly suggest, "go away", but i'd honestly ask you to question your own behavior. i find it quite unfortunate that you seem unable to discuss these sorts of issues dispassionately.

regrettably
hc



Castorp345, I would suggest going away also. After reading both this thread and your previous I have come to the conclusion you are a "know it all -wannabe" As for your "modding credentials" I see none other than a post to some blog. Anyone can say they "work" on a project, without valid proof you're just another wannabe know it all.

I would say, go make your OWN mod regarding sensors then come back and tell us how "realistic you made it" ok?

I await your mod :rotfl:

[castorp345]

Castorp345, I would suggest going away also. After reading both this thread and your previous I have come to the conclusion you are a "know it all -wannabe" As for your "modding credentials" I see none other than a post to some blog. Anyone can say they "work" on a project, without valid proof you're just another wannabe know it all.

I would say, go make your OWN mod regarding sensors then come back and tell us how "realistic you made it" ok?

I await your mod :rotfl:


what a wonderfully interesting first post, your having just registered today and all...

:up:

(btw, posting OT and personal is generally frowned upon here, and i feel badly enough for having so woefully hijacked drifter's threads with all this silliness...)

[and oops, i was supposed to be "going away"... ok, off with me now! ;)]

:lurk:

[CCIP]

castorp, I worked with sensor mods - from making and tweaking them myself, to beta-testing them - for the past two years. I can tell you that it's no precise business and needs a lot of work, testing and reporting. nvdrifter is coming at it with the results of previous testing on SHIII in mind, which lends invaluable experience, but obviosly some things will still need work. Perhaps they always do.

I've tested mods for SHIII that made great strides in improving sensors, and some that actually broke a number of them in the process or had unrealistic results. Instead of trying to sting them, I tested and honestly reported my results, encouraging the modder to do this or that and even suggesting possible figures to use in the data files.

What I think offends nvdrifter and others here is the nature of your comments. You're trying to discredit nvdrifter and whatever procedures he might've used in coming up with the mod instead of looking at the mod itself, which it seems you don't even have a proper interest in. If you don't - why don't you just not use it? If you do - please play with it and report what you like and don't like in it. Plain and simple.

Were I mod in this forum, I would have ejected your comments from these discussions already.

[Beery]

Cool stuff man. We needed something like this, the vanilla game is simply to easy ;) Great work, thanks.

Harder is not necessarily more realistic. From what I learned when modding SH3 something like 90% of depth charge attacks were unsuccessful. Not trying to get into a fight here - there's plenty of room for harder mods and easier mods to suit everyone's tastes. Just making an observation on the 'too easy' comment.

[heartc]

I've read the other thread and all I saw was nvdrifter making the claim of more realism and castorp345 asking on what basis. Seems like a legit question to me, as this is a simulation. Instead of engaging in discussion which could have become interesting for everybody and maybe bear some fruit even, the modder immediately felt offended. In my view, it isn't castorp who has an attitude. Anyway, have fun.

[joea]

Not all japanese DDs had serface search radar, particularly early in the war. For subchasers, fewer still. I bet there were nearly none before late '43.

http://www.combinedfleet.com/radar.htm

The most likely type to have been installed is the type13 (air search) or type 22 (air/surface). They type 22 wasn't available until Sept. '44. Honestly, I'd expect no radar on the vast majority of small (smaller than CL) ships before that.

I'm not sure about their SONAR, but I have read that they frequently banged away with the ship moving too fast to get any use out of it.

tater
Good point Tater, we need to readjust our thinking to the Pacific I think.

Kudos to nvdrifter for taking the first steps!!

[CCIP]

Cool stuff man. We needed something like this, the vanilla game is simply to easy ;) Great work, thanks.
Harder is not necessarily more realistic. From what I learned when modding SH3 something like 90% of depth charge attacks were unsuccessful. Not trying to get into a fight here - there's plenty of room for harder mods and easier mods to suit everyone's tastes. Just making an observation on the 'too easy' comment.

More than 90%!

Actually, the real problem I saw in SHIV is not the precision but the sensitivity of the sensors. It's not how accurately they detect you, it's how often they do. From my research, I find that while the Japanese attacks on subs were grossly ineffective for the most part, subs WERE frequently detected and attacked. That's my issue here, really.

From my experience with NYGM mod's sensors in SHIII (IMHO, still the finest implementation of detection issues ever) for example - I very rarely was damaged by an attack; 90% of the attacks didn't even chip the paint off my sub's hull. But I would be detected and chased after almost every attack against escorted targets, and I would have to spend a couple of hours (game time) or more manuevering away from them. While I don't think NYGM's sensors as they were would be appropriate to the pacific, I think it's hardly arguable that the player's sub should not be detected more often and forced to act more cautiously. As it is, the game encourages reckless behaviour.

[Deep Six]

Well done NV will be using this tonight hopefully with my new found skills of manual targeting..Whoot....I just might survive a few rounds with the Japanese....:know:

Just a thought occurred whilst writing this....You know we have a really good basis for reference in an already great game, which unfortunately I do not have anymore.....It came with a great Manual full of really good info..about tactics/radar/sonar....The Japanese catching up and there approach to ASW in
Yup you guessed it.....SILENT HUNTER 1

Did that not have dates and stuff in its pages on when and what happened as regards technology?

Again to Drifter Kudos on the first steps in making SH4 just as good as SH3, but we need a new approach to a differently waged sub campaign that was the Pacific.:rock:

Deep Six.......Keep the good work coming

[clayton]

I'm sorry but I agree with Beery on this one, and BTW I am an expert!!!:know: Harder is not realistic, nor is easily detected realistic! The problem with GWX for example, was not the damage I sustained, very rare anyway since I've perfected silent running / knuckle turns since Gato, but how easily detectable you become when you attempt to get into a convoy or take out a single ship. Just play GWX during 39 - 40 and tell me how realistic that is! The Pacific war was no cakewalk but except for poor torpedo performance during the early war, the Jap defences were fairly easy, at least till 44. Just from what I read mind you!!! I dont like destroyers trolling above me everytime, not detecting me, that's called a bug!!! I do like a semblance of the Pacicfic war. BTW, correct someone via a PM!

[clayton]

Oh and BTW Nvdrifter, guys like you kick-ass for all you do for the community. :rock:

Of course, we bitch, we're simmers for Gods sake!

I like being surrounded by smart-a$$ know-it-all's... That's way SUBSIM is the best on the net. You cant pull the wool over our eyes!

[CCIP]

I'd like to remind everyone though that this is a discussion of a mod, not escort difficulty in general.

It would be nice if you guys posted results of the mod and discussed them in terms of realism instead of going off on rants about what should or shouldn't happen :hmm:

I, for one, will get right to it soon!

[kakemann]

I'm not sure what to tell you. The mod does work. I just play tested again, and I got my butt totally kicked in several single player missions ranging from 1942-1944. Most of the enemy escorts were very agressive. Also remember that each escort has it's own crew skill level. Lower skilled enemy crews will be less agressive and might give up easier.
Sorry!

Just testet on campaign before 1942.
Will try some more!
I haven't tried enough!

Look forward to play with this mod!
Your work is appreciated!

More challenging sensors - thats perfect for me

:up:

[clayton]

I'd like to remind everyone though that this is a discussion of a mod, not escort difficulty in general.

It would be nice if you guys posted results of the mod and discussed them in terms of realism instead of going off on rants about what should or shouldn't happen :hmm:

I, for one, will get right to it soon!

Got it! Cant seem to get off this damn soap box...

Nvdrifter, I played the first version of your mod and I did not notice any change with escorts detecting me. I will install your mod tonight and let you know. I also tried your aircraft mod and I did not notice any change between that and version 1.1. It seems that aircraft can detect you almost too easy in this game. I remember reading about Sub captains during the early war who remained submerged throughout daylight getting relieved because they had aircraft paranoia, but during a SH4 patrol, you have to remain submerged because the Jap aircraft act like allied aircraft during the Atlantic battles of 43 - 44! I guess I'm going to have to break out the Bible (Blair's book) and research just how effective their aircraft were. Did japanese aircraft have rader like their oppenents did?

[kakemann]

Hello again!

Just want to ask - again :oops:

I have tried this mod som more - but I still can't figure it out.
I would really appreciate some feedback because I would love to get this mod working.

I still don't get destroyers after me even when running at flank speed just ahead of them at depth 18 metres.

Did I install it wrong or why isn't it working for me?

I downloaded the three files and overwrited the old ones in the correct directories.

I attached a picture to show what i mean.

In the original game - if I'm dealing with a destroyer for instance i get more than just one big round circle around the diamond. This shows which angles the destroyer "hears" better. Just wondering if the mod changes the destroyer so it loses the ability to hear underwater since it doesn't have these extra indicators to show the angles where it does or does not hear.

Or maybe i'm installing wrong.

Look here:

http://www.kakeprat.no/images/stories/bilder/pic.jpg
As you see on this pic the Fubuki destroyer only has one large circle around - and it seems to me that is why it acts like it is deaf? By the way - all the other destroyers on this picture are crusing at slow speed, and doesn't seem to hear anything ahead of them.

Does anyone else have issues like this? or can someone give me some advice!

Thanks for everything, and sorry for all the questions!

[nvdrifter]

Hi everyone. Thanks for the constructive comments. Please don't ever think that I don't want people's opinions regarding my mods (except castorp155). I also agree with Beery (a great modder) and others here that harder doesn't mean more realistic. But unfortunately, we have only two options in modding escorts... either they detect us, attack and probably damage us or they don't detect us and we don't get attacked. This is really important for people to understand. We cannot mod the AI behavior in SH3 and SH4 because it is hard-coded. So we have to change sensor settings instead. It's kind of a black and white thing. Finding the grey area for AI escort attacks based on sensor detection is almost impossible without access to the AI behavior files. But there are other things I am considering besides changing AI sensor settings... such as reducing depth charge damage blast radius. This way, the sub can still be attacked but the possibility of taking damage from a direct hit is greatly reduced.

Regarding castorp155, I feel that he hasn't contributed anything useful to my threads. All he does is criticize and pick and pick about how my mods are not realistic enough in his opinion. He has had nothing positive or useful to contribute besides his know-it-all attitude. I think he is just a troll trying to stir up trouble. That is why I said 'go away'.

Kakemann, do any of your library files have back-ups files in them? If yes, you have to delete or move them to a different folder. Renaming them isn't good enough. The game will still use the renamed file. I have tested this mod a lot and it always works for me.

[FAdmiral]

I remember in SH2 and SH3 that the players had these same problems
and if I recall, they were corrected in some mods back then. If these
games are that much alike, the modding shouldn't be that much different.
Of course, escorts during the war got better than they were in the beginning
so time has a lot to do with it also....

JIM

[castorp345]

Regarding castorp155, I feel that he hasn't contributed anything useful to my threads. All he does is criticize and pick and pick about how my mods are not realistic enough in his opinion. He has had nothing positive or useful to contribute besides his know-it-all attitude. I think he is just a troll trying to stir up trouble. That is why I said 'go away'.
yeah...
asking questions and trying to get some discussion going about improving the sim is being a "troll" and "trying to stir up trouble"...
:roll:

give it a rest please (pm would undoubtedly be oh-so-much-more appropriate for these shananigans) and come back to reality.

CCIP said:
What I think offends nvdrifter and others here is the nature of your comments. You're trying to discredit nvdrifter and whatever procedures he might've used in coming up with the mod
well frankly i think drifter does a much better job of discrediting himself with this sort of juvenile behavior than i ever could bring to bear on him, but no i never intended to bring any discredit to drifter's efforts...

over and out.

[nvdrifter]

Regarding castorp155, I feel that he hasn't contributed anything useful to my threads. All he does is criticize and pick and pick about how my mods are not realistic enough in his opinion. He has had nothing positive or useful to contribute besides his know-it-all attitude. I think he is just a troll trying to stir up trouble. That is why I said 'go away'.
yeah...
asking questions and trying to get some discussion going about improving the sim is being a "troll" and "trying to stir up trouble"...
:roll:

give it a rest please (pm would undoubtedly be oh-so-much-more appropriate for these shananigans) and come back to reality.

I am ignoring all of your posts from now on.

[nvdrifter]

I remember in SH2 and SH3 that the players had these same problems
and if I recall, they were corrected in some mods back then. If these
games are that much alike, the modding shouldn't be that much different.
Of course, escorts during the war got better than they were in the beginning
so time has a lot to do with it also....

JIM

The individual sensors carried on each ship can also be modded, but I didn't change those settings in this mod. Maybe someone could later for better results. :hmm:

[clayton]

Hi everyone. Thanks for the constructive comments. Please don't ever think that I don't want people's opinions regarding my mods (except castorp155). I also agree with Beery (a great modder) and others here that harder doesn't mean more realistic. But unfortunately, we have only two options in modding escorts... either they detect us, attack and probably damage us or they don't detect us and we don't get attacked. This is really important for people to understand. We cannot mod the AI behavior in SH3 and SH4 because it is hard-coded. So we have to change sensor settings instead. It's kind of a black and white thing. Finding the grey area for AI escort attacks based on sensor detection is almost impossible without access to the AI behavior files. But there are other things I am considering besides changing AI sensor settings... such as reducing depth charge damage blast radius. This way, the sub can still be attacked but the possibility of taking damage from a direct hit is greatly reduced.

Regarding castorp155, I feel that he hasn't contributed anything useful to my threads. All he does is criticize and pick and pick about how my mods are not realistic enough in his opinion. He has had nothing positive or useful to contribute besides his know-it-all attitude. I think he is just a troll trying to stir up trouble. That is why I said 'go away'.

Kakemann, do any of your library files have back-ups files in them? If yes, you have to delete or move them to a different folder. Renaming them isn't good enough. The game will still use the renamed file. I have tested this mod a lot and it always works for me.

Well said, though I wish we could all get along.

Castorp155, I'm an a$$hole, but I'm a consistant one, not a sneaky one! That being said, I think when these guys hear I really like something, they know I mean it - with no hidden agenda.

Nvdrifter: I noticed something with my Guardfish patrol. I'm using stock 1.1 and I just inserted an agent off the coast of Guam. Afterword, I planned on getting a distance away to send a radio message (status report) to see if I get a mission change. I ran into a large convoy, actually I came up from behind it and got some hard RADAR contacts! The kind where each individual ship was displayed on the map, though no visual sightings. I attempted to send a contact report, though I did not get a sent message response, immediatley 3 destroyers turned my way before I had a visual. BTW, crystal clear afternoon! I know, but I wanted to see what would happened. I went to 300 ft at 2 knots and didn't hit a thermal layer. They are still coming up on me when I stopped it to check Subsim. I'll let you know how the attack went as soon as I go back to it!

[clayton]

Ok! So, as soon as the destroyers came into range I crashed dive and went to 300 ft. Rigged for silent running, speed to 2 knots and I turned to the South with them at 180 degrees. The destroyers seemed to go to the spot were I dived and dropped three sets of depth charges. They didn't ping at all! After the charges they raced back to their large convoy which was navigating the straight between Guam and the island just north of it. Now, if their attempt was to keep me down then they were successful. I couldn't catch up after I surfaced, plus my new patrol zone was the Carolinas in the opposite direction anyway. The year was 43 and I was in the Guardfish, a Gato sub! Though I didn't hit a thermal at that depth, I must of been silent enough not to get picked up. Remember, I was a good distace away when I dived, so I gained some distance by the time they got to their last visual of me. Very plausible! Since it was March 43, I'm not sure as to their ASDIC capabilities, but you would think one of the three would have it! All in all fairly accurate though easy. I'm more vexed by aircraft, aircraft that I'm not picking up on RADAR now, though earlier during the patrol, around Wake island, I was. A bug perhaps! All this with just version 1.1

[Beery]

unfortunately, we have only two options in modding escorts... either they detect us, attack and probably damage us or they don't detect us and we don't get attacked.

Very true. This was the case in SH3 too. The trick is to tweak what we can and make the experience of being attacked, the end result of an attack, and career survivability all seem as reasonable as possible. It's a really tricky balancing act and each player has different expectations - whether it's a realistic looking career or an exciting and tense game of cat and mouse in every patrol - so it's impossible to please everyone and often the modmaker's task is a thankless one.

[kakemann]

Kakemann, do any of your library files have back-ups files in them? If yes, you have to delete or move them to a different folder. Renaming them isn't good enough. The game will still use the renamed file. I have tested this mod a lot and it always works for me.

Thanks for your help! :D

I'll try to uninstall the game and check that all files were removed, and reinstall.

Do you guys get more displayed than just the round circle around destroyers - like the original version with this triangle like indicator - which shows were it hears better?

[kakemann]

Hello again!

Just want to ask - again :oops:

I have tried this mod som more - but I still can't figure it out.
I would really appreciate some feedback because I would love to get this mod working.

I still don't get destroyers after me even when running at flank speed just ahead of them at depth 18 metres.

Did I install it wrong or why isn't it working for me?

I downloaded the three files and overwrited the old ones in the correct directories.

I attached a picture to show what i mean.

In the original game - if I'm dealing with a destroyer for instance i get more than just one big round circle around the diamond. This shows which angles the destroyer "hears" better. Just wondering if the mod changes the destroyer so it loses the ability to hear underwater since it doesn't have these extra indicators to show the angles where it does or does not hear.

Or maybe i'm installing wrong.

Look here:

http://www.kakeprat.no/images/stories/bilder/pic.jpg
As you see on this pic the Fubuki destroyer only has one large circle around - and it seems to me that is why it acts like it is deaf? By the way - all the other destroyers on this picture are crusing at slow speed, and doesn't seem to hear anything ahead of them.

Does anyone else have issues like this? or can someone give me some advice!

Thanks for everything, and sorry for all the questions!


Kakemann, do any of your library files have back-ups files in them? If yes, you have to delete or move them to a different folder. Renaming them isn't good enough. The game will still use the renamed file. I have tested this mod a lot and it always works for me.
I tried to uninstall the whole game, made sure all files were deleted (the savegames as well), ran a CClean, reinstalled the game, patched to 1.1 and copied over the three files, but with the same outcome..
The destroyers seemed deaf and the navigation menu showed destroyer diamonds as seen on picture above with just one large circle around (just like crusiers,merchants or battleships).

I did a little experiment and only copied back the original AIsensors.dat, and kept the two other files provided files in this thread and i saw that the destroyers got the old navigation "look" back, see picture:
http://www.kakeprat.no/images/stories/bilder/pic2.jpg

But the sensors seemed like in the original game without this "harder enemy escorts - mod". I guess the important file is the AI sensors file.

Just wondering if someone else has similar experiences. I can't understand what I have done wrong. It seems to me like it could be a small error in the AI sensors.dat file.

Maybe nvdrifter remembers where and how to look in this file?

Thanks a lot!
This game has great potential!

[Mechman]

Sweet. I decided was a bit easy when I went into the battle of Coral sea, and had to haul ass to get a good shot at the carrier, so I ran on the surface at flank speed to get into range. I nearly ran over a destroyer, and took out both fleet carriers without being noticed.

[kakemann]

Sweet. I decided was a bit easy when I went into the battle of Coral sea, and had to haul ass to get a good shot at the carrier, so I ran on the surface at flank speed to get into range. I nearly ran over a destroyer, and took out both fleet carriers without being noticed.

You tried this mod?
The idea is great! Just have to make it work ;)

[CCIP]

One thing I'm starting to note is something funky going on with visual detection. It seems that enemy destroyers, even in daytime, can get within firing range of me without my crew even noticing them. I suspect this is TC-related as well, but still - somewhat annoying.

Did you by chance increase enemy visual efficiency here?

[nvdrifter]

One thing I'm starting to note is something funky going on with visual detection. It seems that enemy destroyers, even in daytime, can get within firing range of me without my crew even noticing them. I suspect this is TC-related as well, but still - somewhat annoying.

Did you by chance increase enemy visual efficiency here?

I set visual efficiencies for both sub ai and enemy ai based on GWX numbers. Both were changed. I will look into it.

[Ducimus]

out of curiousity, did you use GWX's visual settings that reside in the sensors.dat in gwx? if so, i would change it back to stock settings.

Reason is they have a "vampire night vision" bug they've tried to fix there, and its highly dependant on waves and light variables. The sum of it is, its a little too much of a nerf at times. Results in a broken record watch crew and/or watch crew unable to spot things that you can CLEARLY see with your own eyes. I dumped it when i saw my watch crew coudlnt spot a convoy at 6K-7K meters in a 7-8 kt wind at dusk.

[CCIP]

Bingo, it looks like the visual settings for the crew are changed as well. That could explain a few things!

I'm still not convinced by the underwater sensors though; I'm willing to write it off to bad Japanese ASW, but I'm still getting off quite easily. Maybe just luck?

[nvdrifter]

Bingo, it looks like the visual settings for the crew are changed as well. That could explain a few things!

I'm still not convinced by the underwater sensors though; I'm willing to write it off to bad Japanese ASW, but I'm still getting off quite easily. Maybe just luck?

I agree with 'the Duce' ;). Dump the sensors.dat file that is included and see how it works. And I am working on a new version of this mod. Am getting better results so far.

[FAdmiral]

Let me know when your new version is ready. I have created some
missions with the editor just for the purpose of testing enemy ship AI
for correct detect, movement and attack situations....

JIM

[Ducimus]

I'm still not convinced by the underwater sensors though;

As the saying goes, those who do not learn from the past are doomed to repeat it and all that. Don't forget what we learned in sh3 from all those countless hours of testing.

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=351733&postcount=2

Theres more i could add, but i have to have the whole file in front of me, and im probably preaching to the choir anyway. :roll:

[FAdmiral]

Here is a previous post when I tested using no mods:

I made my own mission from the editor for testing purposes in learning
more about how the enemy DDs work. In my first attempt, no mods,
there I was at PD with scope up watching a DD come within 288 (yards or meters?)
of me. Nothing, he didn't see me or detect me?? I sank the Seaplane Tender
he was escorting. All 4 DDs stopped and all I saw was blinking lights and a few
star shells fired. I waited, still doing 5 kts at PD with scope up. After about 10
minutes with nothing happening, I sank a Lt. Cruiser (1 torp was all it took).
Still nothing ?? The DDs didn't seem to know what to do. I was NOT detected
so I assume they were clueless on what action to take. I had set them all to
Veteran in the mission editor. This was on May 5, 1942 at 730 AM in the Coral Sea.
Sun was already up. Another time I tried to stay on the surface till seen and
then went under. This time they acted more like they should. They started
looking for me and dropped DCs in some areas but not close (I was at 200 ft.,
under thermal layer and silent running) At one time, one darted over the top
of me and I thought here it comes but he didn't drop. I was NOT detected.
As of now, I think DETECTION is the KEY element here. Without that, I don't
think the DDs know what to do !! I will continue further testing on this and
will use some of the mods that are supposed to increase DD agression...

I have not installed any mods yet to run the mission again & check for
different results. I will get to that tomorrow with nvdrifters mod

JIM

[Assertor]

So, Sir do you plan a new "mod" ? Or will you leave it with the first version?
I would be interested in an improved one.
Never the less thank you.

[Mechman]

This is nice, they actually fight back a bit now.

[nvdrifter]

So, Sir do you plan a new "mod" ? Or will you leave it with the first version?
I would be interested in an improved one.
Never the less thank you.

I plan on releasing a new version of this mod once it's ready.

[CCIP]

Good to hear!

Indeed I'm not getting detected underwater much. I've been playing for the whole evening, jousting with convoy escorts and patrols in the South China Sea, but so far the only times I've been spotted and/or hit were on the surface.

Gonna go over that nice read by Ducimius again to see what I can tweak in sim.cfg; the rest of this is up to you. I'm sure it's all just a matter of time in finding those right figures :yep:

[nvdrifter]

Good to hear!

Indeed I'm not getting detected underwater much. I've been playing for the whole evening, jousting with convoy escorts and patrols in the South China Sea, but so far the only times I've been spotted and/or hit were on the surface.

Gonna go over that nice read by Ducimius again to see what I can tweak in sim.cfg; the rest of this is up to you. I'm sure it's all just a matter of time in finding those right figures :yep:
I am making hydrophones more sensitive and depth charge blast radius less. Should get a good effect, but still can possibly survive.

I am also now fixing the problem with ships sinking in storms.

[nikimcbee]

I'd like to remind everyone though that this is a discussion of a mod, not escort difficulty in general.

It would be nice if you guys posted results of the mod and discussed them in terms of realism instead of going off on rants about what should or shouldn't happen :hmm:

I, for one, will get right to it soon!

Got it! Cant seem to get off this damn soap box...

Nvdrifter, I played the first version of your mod and I did not notice any change with escorts detecting me. I will install your mod tonight and let you know. I also tried your aircraft mod and I did not notice any change between that and version 1.1. It seems that aircraft can detect you almost too easy in this game. I remember reading about Sub captains during the early war who remained submerged throughout daylight getting relieved because they had aircraft paranoia, but during a SH4 patrol, you have to remain submerged because the Jap aircraft act like allied aircraft during the Atlantic battles of 43 - 44! I guess I'm going to have to break out the Bible (Blair's book) and research just how effective their aircraft were. Did japanese aircraft have rader like their oppenents did?


I think all of this is funny!:roll: We had the excact opposite problem with SH2- the escorts always detected you and would always drop their depth charges right on the money.
Anyway, the Japanese had several problems with ASW.

1. Japanese depth-charges were too small (first part of the war).
2. Japanese didn't drop their depth-charges very deep <200 feet. (see reason above).
3. Japanese didn't take submarine warfare seriously. Their doctrine of fleet scouts vs anti commerance. (They paid dearly for this)


They did have good detection gear! (from Blair's book). Everybody needs to play SH1, those guys got it right I think. So you guys, keep on MODDING, you do great work:rock: . Is it possible to limit how deep they drop the DCs?

[kakemann]

Good to hear!

Indeed I'm not getting detected underwater much. I've been playing for the whole evening, jousting with convoy escorts and patrols in the South China Sea, but so far the only times I've been spotted and/or hit were on the surface.

Gonna go over that nice read by Ducimius again to see what I can tweak in sim.cfg; the rest of this is up to you. I'm sure it's all just a matter of time in finding those right figures :yep:
I am making hydrophones more sensitive and depth charge blast radius less. Should get a good effect, but still can possibly survive.

I am also now fixing the problem with ships sinking in storms.
Great, thanks a lot nvdrifter and the rest of you experienced guys!

I tried to drop the AIsensor.dat file from this package and have tested various missions, but it seems the destroyers act like the unmodded 1.1 game. They can hear, but not very good.

Could it be that the AIsensors file is the "magic file"?

[nvdrifter]

Good to hear!

Indeed I'm not getting detected underwater much. I've been playing for the whole evening, jousting with convoy escorts and patrols in the South China Sea, but so far the only times I've been spotted and/or hit were on the surface.

Gonna go over that nice read by Ducimius again to see what I can tweak in sim.cfg; the rest of this is up to you. I'm sure it's all just a matter of time in finding those right figures :yep:
I am making hydrophones more sensitive and depth charge blast radius less. Should get a good effect, but still can possibly survive.

I am also now fixing the problem with ships sinking in storms.
Great, thanks a lot nvdrifter and the rest of you experienced guys!

I tried to drop the AIsensor.dat file from this package and have tested various missions, but it seems the destroyers act like the unmodded 1.1 game. They can hear, but not very good.

Could it be that the AIsensors file is the "magic file"?

The biggest factor is the sim.cfg :yep:

[Der Graf Von Rudklide]

What is the historical facts ?
Its known that the Japs did not make much of radar until later in the war.

What was the range and how efficent was it ?
How many destroyers and ships used for escort had radar ?
How many subs where sunk by jap escorts compared to thier ASW tactics from 1941 to 45 ?

Going into details, how much ammo did the jap escorts and subhunters use from 1941 -45 compared to thier sinking of subs ?
Weather, time of the day, the look outs position and the chance to spot a sub with the sun in the eyes there is plenty of things to consider.

Using these informations shut make an fairly accurate gameplay in altering enemie behaviour.

[nvdrifter]

What is the historical facts ?
Its known that the Japs did not make much of radar until later in the war.

What was the range and how efficent was it ?
How many destroyers and ships used for escort had radar ?
How many subs where sunk by jap escorts compared to thier ASW tactics from 1941 to 45 ?

Going into details, how much ammo did the jap escorts and subhunters use from 1941 -45 compared to thier sinking of subs ?
Weather, time of the day, the look outs position and the chance to spot a sub with the sun in the eyes there is plenty of things to consider.

Using these informations shut make an fairly accurate gameplay in altering enemie behaviour.
The different sensors for each year are already modelled into SH4.

Yes, few US subs were sunk by Japanese escorts. But most US sub commanders were much more cautious than SH4 players are. ;)

[kakemann]

I'm trying to figure out the sim.cfg contents.

Do any of you know he difference between the hydrophone part and the sonar part? Or what is exactly the difference between hydrophones and sonar?

I guess the sensivity line on one of these two could have some impact on their sensors

I'll try to tweak a bit and see if I get any good results!

Thanks!

[nvdrifter]

I'm trying to figure out the sim.cfg contents.

Do any of you know he difference between the hydrophone part and the sonar part? Or what is exactly the difference between hydrophones and sonar?

I guess the sensivity line on one of these two could have some impact on their sensors

I'll try to tweak a bit and see if I get any good results!

Thanks!

Sonar is active pinging. Hydrophone is passive listening. :arrgh!:

[kakemann]

Thanks!

Read your post about people requesting and not contributing and felt i could try to learn something. Hope to be able to contribute some more. :up:

[nvdrifter]

Thanks!

Read your post about people requesting and not contributing and felt i could try to learn something. Hope to be able to contribute some more. :up:

Of course requests are ok, but we need all the help we can get to improve SH4. :rock:

[FAdmiral]

Patches from the devs are needed to fix bugs and make changes to the game engine & hard-coded elements.
Everything else (plain text files) can & will be addressed by the modders but they almost have to wait till the
devs release the patches first. From what I have observed so far: the AI DDs don't have the detection down
pat in SH4 like the Brit. DDs did in SH3 (actually this could be historical) and I can see that happening early in the
war years. The thing that irks me the most is when you do torp and sink a ship in the convoy they are guarding, the DDs don't seem to have a search plan they impliment in order to find you. Detection is one thing but looking for an enemy sub that just attacked the convoy the DD was guarding is lacking here. In plain words, the DDs in SH4 are just NOT doing their
job right. This may be hard-coded and a patch is needed to fix it. American Sub Doctrine at the start of WW2 in the
pacific was to protect the BB TFs and sink enemy warships (same as Japans). Adm Nimitz changed all that when he
figured that Japan, like England, was an island nation and needed to ship in all the resources to sustain itself. So he
used the German approach to go after the merchant & tanker ships (or convoys later) doing the resupply. I think that
caught Japan off-guard in relation to what American Subs would be doing till at least late in 1942 when they finally
started to catch on....

JIM

[castorp345]

nicely put, Jim!

reminds me of the old adage: "fools rush in where wise men fear to tread"... ;)

i've think you've got it right in that the apparently undesirable asw behavior is ultimately something that's going to have to be corrected on the developer side (and not by porking the sensor systems but rather by their tweaking the ai), and so these sorts of issues should (if they're not already) probably be listed on the bug thread, and supported as well by much user playtesting/feedback and historical evidence (viz joea's research threads ==> http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=109413 & http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=109419) to back-up any claims made and provide a resource not only for potential modders but also to assist the devs in addressing such concerns as might legitimately be raised.

as you say, when the devs have finished their bit, then is the time to see what can be done. in the meantime, more playing and reading!! :D

cheers
hc

[Ducimus]

Figure i'll toss a couple more cents into the ring.

When submerge the AI has two methods to detect you. Active (sonar), Passive (hydrophone)

The AI, unless its changed greatly from SH3 (which i doubt), can only do one of the two at any given moment in time, but can switch between the two in a nanosecond. That said, the AI doesnt ping (switch to active) unless he has reason to.

Passive sonar:
is effected by the state of the sea: ( Waves factor ) and how many RPM's your sub is doing ( Noise factor ), and he can only use this sensor when he's going at or below a given speed ( Speed factor ). So if his speed factor is 15, but hes doing 20 kts, he can't hear squat.


Active sonar is a bit different and was harder to figure out. Active sonar is only used when a series of conditions are met.

1.) Your within his active sonar cone (as defined by the AI_sensors.dat, at least it was in SH3)

2.) Your presenting him a favorable aspect ( Enemy surface factor )

3.) Your doing both 1 and 2 for X amount of time. ( Detection time )

So for example in stock the detection time for active sonar is 20 seconds. 20 seconds is a long time if you consider your own movment or the AI's speedlng along the surface. The result is he might get 1 or 2 pings and then lose contact once you fall under the cone. THen he has to see if you screw up for a full 20 seconds before he can get a ping again. By reducing the contact time in the active sonar alone, you greatly increase the use of active sonar.

Ive explained most of this in other terms here :
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=104377

[kakemann]

I've tested a bit now, altering the sim.cfg file, and I think I'm in to something. By changing the hydrophone sonar sensivity to a higher value - below 1.0 the destroyers seems to have somewhat more sensitive hydrophones. If anyone would like - try to alter this one in sim.cfg with notepad - (of course DON'T FORGET TO BACK UP THE OLD sim.cfg file).

What I did was to change this:

[Hydrophone]
Detection time=1 ;[s]
Sensitivity=0.03 ;(0..1)
Height factor=0 ;[m]
Waves factor=0.5 ;[>=0]
Speed factor=15 ;[kt]
Noise factor=1.0 ;[>=0]
Thermal Layer Signal Attenuation=3.0 ;[>0], 1 means no signal reduction, 3 equals signal reduction to 33%

To this:

[Hydrophone]
Detection time=1 ;[s]
Sensitivity=0.5 ;(0..1)
Height factor=0 ;[m]
Waves factor=0.5 ;[>=0]
Speed factor=15 ;[kt]
Noise factor=1.0 ;[>=0]
Thermal Layer Signal Attenuation=3.0 ;[>0], 1 means no signal reduction, 3 equals signal reduction to 33%

Please post your findings. I'll test some more... :D

[CCIP]

Wow, that's a HUGE sensitivity value.

I am curious whether it will work. Such a shame I don't get to play/test the game for the next, oh, 3 days :cry:

[nvdrifter]

I've tested a bit now, altering the sim.cfg file, and I think I'm in to something. By changing the hydrophone sonar sensivity to a higher value - below 1.0 the destroyers seems to have somewhat more sensitive hydrophones. If anyone would like - try to alter this one in sim.cfg with notepad - (of course DON'T FORGET TO BACK UP THE OLD sim.cfg file).

What I did was to change this:

[Hydrophone]
Detection time=1 ;[s]
Sensitivity=0.03 ;(0..1)
Height factor=0 ;[m]
Waves factor=0.5 ;[>=0]
Speed factor=15 ;[kt]
Noise factor=1.0 ;[>=0]
Thermal Layer Signal Attenuation=3.0 ;[>0], 1 means no signal reduction, 3 equals signal reduction to 33%

To this:

[Hydrophone]
Detection time=1 ;[s]
Sensitivity=0.5 ;(0..1)
Height factor=0 ;[m]
Waves factor=0.5 ;[>=0]
Speed factor=15 ;[kt]
Noise factor=1.0 ;[>=0]
Thermal Layer Signal Attenuation=3.0 ;[>0], 1 means no signal reduction, 3 equals signal reduction to 33%

Please post your findings. I'll test some more... :D

I think the lower the number, the higher the sensitivity. But I could be wrong. ;)

[FAdmiral]

That should be fairly easy to test. Set one test at full 1 and then
run a 2nd test with it set at .001 With that big a difference, there
should be a noticeable difference in DD action...

JIM

[nvdrifter]

I am about to release the next version of this mod.

[kakemann]

That should be fairly easy to test. Set one test at full 1 and then
run a 2nd test with it set at .001 With that big a difference, there
should be a noticeable difference in DD action...

JIM

I did that and found that the DD's seemed more aggressive when i turned to 0.5.

But if more people try we'll definately find out.

Try setting it to 0.5. Or maybe nvdrifter already found out?

:D

[kakemann]

Read Bootsmann's thread about these values here:

http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/857101043/m/3571010205/inc/1


It seems he has some knowledge!

The guy asking in this thread seems to have the opposite problem, but the answers from Bootsmann are interesting even if it is from Silent Hunter 3. Maybe we can learn something all of us?

I've learned quite a lot :up:

[joea]

BTW guys please check this thread out might be useful.

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=109413

[nvdrifter]

**Released!**

Harder Enemy Escorts and Aircraft v1.01 for SH4 v1.1

Mod created by nvdrifter
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Changes/fixes in v1.01:


-made AI hydrophones more sensitive

-made enemy aircraft tougher

-greatly reduced chance of enemy air missions

-reduced depth charge damage blast radius

-increased enemy aircraft cannon accuracy

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Features of this mod:


-Deadlier enemy escorts:

AI visual, sonar, radar, and hydrophone settings have all been adjusted to be more sensitive



-Less cloaking effect of thermal layers:

No more Star Trek style cloaking device effect after passing thermal layer. Going below the thermal will still lessen the effectiveness of enemy escort sensors, but just not as much now.


-Reduced depth charge damage blast radius:

Enemy depth charges will now be less deadly unless they explode very close to your sub. This was done to simulate the less effective Japanese escorts in WW2.



-Deadlier enemy aircraft:

Enemy aircraft will be more accurate with their cannon fire, but you will now encounter much fewer enemy aircraft because there will now be less enemy air missions. If you are detected by enemy surface ships, there is a good chance an airstrike will be sent to the location where you were last spotted. Enemy aircraft hitpoints and armor ratings have also been increased. If you decide to stay on the surface and fight, be prepared for a challenge.



Some gameplay hints when using this mod:

1) Don't get detected in the first place. This is the best way to avoid being depth charged and possibly killed. Don't let them know you are there.


2) If you are detected, go to silent running, slow down to 2 or 3 knots and try to get below the thermal layer. The deeper you go, the harder it is for the enemy to detect you. If you run at speeds above 3 knots, there is a good chance you will be detected (unless the weather is stormy with rough seas). Avoid shallow waters at all costs.


3) Rough seas and stormy weather is good. Enemy hydrophones, sonar and radar are less effective in rough seas. Use this to your advantage. Be careful if making attacks when the sea is calm. You can be detected much easier.

4) If you spot an enemy aircraft while surfaced, it is advised that you dive crash dive as soon as possible. There is a good chance you will take damage from being bombed.


**Please note that these sensor settings are not exactly the same as GWX's SH3 sensor settings. They are slightly less effective because Japanese escorts in WW II were not as effective as Allied escorts. You can still escape enemy escorts if you are being hunted. It isn't impossible.**


**This mod was based partially on GWX's excellent sensors detection parameters**



I have noticed that early in the war, enemy escorts are much less effective due to poorer sensors. As the war progresses, the enemy escort sensors will improve and become more effective.

Download here: http://hosted.filefront.com/aragorn155/

[melendir]

Great mod :)

[kakemann]

Great nvdrifter!

Will test it! :D

[tater]

See also my thread about the aircraft loadouts. They are ABSURD.

The zero carried 2x60kg bombs, or a single 250kg bomb if it was a kamikaze.

All the loadouts are grossly high for bombs. GROSSLY high. The val should have 1x250kg or 1x250 plus 2x60kg (doesn't look like that is an option though).

The Betty carried a single 800kg bomb, or various loads of smaller bombs (3x250, etc)

tater

[nvdrifter]

See also my thread about the aircraft loadouts. They are ABSURD.

The zero carried 2x60kg bombs, or a single 250kg bomb if it was a kamikaze.

All the loadouts are grossly high for bombs. GROSSLY high. The val should have 1x250kg or 1x250 plus 2x60kg (doesn't look like that is an option though).

The Betty carried a single 800kg bomb, or various loads of smaller bombs (3x250, etc)

tater

Thanks for the info. I will look into changing this in a future version.

[tater]

Where is the list of bomb types, and how do I alter it? Or can you simply change the kgs to the real data?

I'm willing to give the loadouts if that'll help.

tater

[nvdrifter]

Where is the list of bomb types, and how do I alter it? Or can you simply change the kgs to the real data?

I'm willing to give the loadouts if that'll help.

tater
Look in each aircraft .cfg file in the Air folder. You'll find them there. I believe you can just change the loadouts in the aircraft .cfg files.

Later Tater. :p

[Assertor]

Great!

Thank you for improving the mod, though I will only use the escort part and not
the "Kick my Ass" Air thingy ;)

[walsh2509]

While I think of all the work you guys put into these mod for us, I am really greatful, but I think we should not get to carried away with turning Japanese DD into bloodhounds just to make it harder. If some want that fine, it is a sim of sub warfare of WWII were are supposed to be playing and the devs and modders try there very best to give us that..

If you take a few minutes to read this, you will see for the most part the Japanese were blind to US subs and there DC's were set to low at 100ft, not until as you will read, someone let that slip that they started to change the depth they set there DC's to, just even them for the most part the DD's didn't know exactly where the sub they were after was postioned. Not until much later did they start to get better at it ...

Pacific Theater

Japan, the United States, Great Britain, Holland, and Australia all employed anti-submarine forces in the Pacific Theater during World War II. Because the Japanese Navy tended to utilize its subs against capital ships such as cruisers, battleships, and aircraft carriers, U.S. and Allied anti-submarine efforts concentrated their work in support of fleet defense.
Early Japanese submarines were not very maneuverable under water, could not dive very deep, and lacked radar. Later in the war, Japanese submarines were fitted with radar scanning equipment. However, these radar-equipped subs were in some instances sunk due to the ability of U.S. radar receivers to detect their tell-tale scanning emissions. For example, Batfish (SS-310) sunk three Japanese radar-equipped submarines in the span of four days. In 1944, U.S. anti-submarine forces began to employ the FIDO (Mk 24 mine) air-dropped homing torpedo against submerged Japanese subs with considerable success.
In contrast, Allied submarines were largely committed against Japanese merchant shipping. As a consequence, Japanese anti-submarine forces were forced to spread their efforts to defend the entirety of their merchant shipping lanes, not only to resupply their forces, but also to continue the necessary importation of war material to the Japanese home islands.
At first, Japanese anti-submarine defenses proved less than effective against U.S. submarines. Japanese sub detection gear was not as advanced as that of some other nations. The primary Japanese anti-submarine weapon for most of WWII was the depth charge, and Japanese depth charge attacks by its surface forces initially proved fairly unsuccessful against U.S. fleet submarines. Unless caught in shallow water, a U.S. submarine commander could normally dive to a deeper depth in order to escape destruction, sometimes using temperature gradient barriers to escape pursuit. Additionally, during the first part of the war, the Japanese tended to set their depth charges too shallow, unaware that U.S. submarines possessed the ability to dive beyond 150 feet.
Unfortunately, the deficiencies of Japanese depth-charge tactics were revealed in a June 1943 press conference held by U.S. Congressman Andrew J. May (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_J._May), a member of the House Military Affairs Committee who had visited the Pacific theater and received many confidential intelligence and operational briefings. At the press conference, May revealed that American submarines had a high survivability because Japanese depth charges were fused to explode at too shallow a depth, typically 100 feet (because Japanese forces believed U.S. subs did not normally exceed this depth). Various press associations sent this story over their wires, and many newspapers, including one in Honolulu, thoughtlessly published it. Soon enemy depth charges were rearmed to explode at a more effective depth of 250 feet. Vice Admiral Charles A. Lockwood, commander of the U.S. submarine fleet in the Pacific, later estimated that May's revelation cost the navy as many as ten submarines and 800 crewmen.[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-submarine_weapon#_note-0)[2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-submarine_weapon#_note-1)
In addition to resetting their depth charges to deeper depths, Japanese anti-submarine forces also began employing autogyro (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autogyro) aircraft and Magnetic Anomaly Detection (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_Anomaly_Detector) (MAD) equipment to sink U.S. subs, particularly those plying major shipping channels or operating near the home islands. Despite this onslaught, U.S. sub sinkings of Japanese shipping continued to increase at a furious rate as more U.S. subs deployed each month to the Pacific. By the end of the war, U.S. submarines had destroyed more Japanese shipping than all other weapons combined, including aircraft.

[castorp345]

thanks for that walsh.

what's the source please?

[walsh2509]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-submarine_weapon

[walsh2509]

Those who think it to easy to get tonnage and its unreal ..

http://www.valoratsea.com/graph.jpg

[Crueak]

where is this new version located at, the link supplied don't seem to have it.

[walsh2509]

If your talking about the tonnage chart I got when I was messing about looking for info on sub warfare in WWII..


http://www.valoratsea.com/main.htm

I didn't get it directly through the menu of this site, but I did a location search of the pic posted and got ..http://www.valoratsea.com/graph.jpg so its in that site somewhere..

I can only go with what I read, if the info is wrong.. sorry!

[fire-fox]

where is this new version located at, the link supplied don't seem to have it.

yep just looked at the readme and its only V1.0 NOT V1.01.

[Immacolata]

I dont want an easy game. I dont care if its not historical, but after having fought against the vicious allies in the Atlantic, I simply refuse to play a turkey shoot. This mod is, as far as I am concerned, about making the game harder. If the historical realism buffs find that offensive, they should perhaps seek their thrills elsewhere.

Never let history get in the way of a good game :rotfl:

[kakemann]

I dont want an easy game. I dont care if its not historical, but after having fought against the vicious allies in the Atlantic, I simply refuse to play a turkey shoot. This mod is, as far as I am concerned, about making the game harder. If the historical realism buffs find that offensive, they should perhaps seek their thrills elsewhere.

Never let history get in the way of a good game :rotfl:

I agree!

[Sailor Steve]

Those who think it to easy to get tonnage and its unreal ..

http://www.valoratsea.com/graph.jpg
Nice overall statement, but individual scores don't reflect that at all.

[PeriscopeDepth]

Those who think it to easy to get tonnage and its unreal ..

http://www.valoratsea.com/graph.jpg Nice overall statement, but individual scores don't reflect that at all.

Yeah, there were some spectacular patrols, but averages were probably closer to 20K or so. A 100K ton patrol was surely possible, but it was better than 99.9% of other patrols.

PD

[FAdmiral]

Historically, the Japanese ASW doctrine couplied with their poor detection
devices left the American subs almost a free hand in sinking merchant ships.
But no gamer wants a game that has no challenge to it. Just to go out and
sink ships right and left with no reprisals will get old and boring very fast.
So if we want a game that leaves us on the edge of our seat like SH3 did
with all its mods, something will have to be done with SH4. The one thing
I have noticed in my testing to date has been: NO SONAR PINGS !!!
I just can't believe that the Japanese DDs did NOT have sonar. The British
had been using it for years against the U-Boats and Japan was not one to
ignore its uses and would have made (or stolen) a copy of their own. As of
yet, I see not posts here about any mods pertaining to the use of sonar?
When I used the .5 setting in the hydrophone mod, I finally got the DDs
to start at least looking for me. They dropped small patterns around the area
but never came close. Only when I left my scope up to attract them, did they
get close enough but then I just scooted away. BUT still, NO PINGS....
I remember in modded SH3, the Brit & American DDs ALL used sonar to locate
U-Boats trying to hide. I think we need to look at sonar to help the hydrophones
locate and prosecute submerged subs !!

JIM

[AntEater]

Who told you the IJN did not have active Sonar?

Sonar was a strange story:
In 1939, pretty much every major nation had it, and each thought it was the only one...
I think Italy was the only major naval power who lacked Sonar in 1939, but I may be wrong.

[CCIP]

Those who think it to easy to get tonnage and its unreal ..

http://www.valoratsea.com/graph.jpg Nice overall statement, but individual scores don't reflect that at all.

Right, and then also divide that 5-odd million ton total by over 250 boats on combat duty in the theater - that gives you just 20,000 tons per boat, in total and for all patrols! And as applause-worthy as it is, it's just slightly above the German average per boat. Given the far more favourable conditions faced by them in the theater, it's not really all that surprising.

[FAdmiral]

What I said was: "I just can't believe that the Japanese DDs did NOT have sonar"
What I am saying now is that in the game, I Hear NO Sonar Pings....
If the AI DDs in the game are not using Sonar, it would account for much of the
DD behaviors I am experiencing....

JIM

[xittix]

I have heard sonar pings twice so far. I could only hear them when I was in the actual command room. ..that horrid "PING..............PING....PING ...PING ..PING PING PING" ....AHHHHHH!!!!!... RIGHT FULL RUDDER!! AHEAD FLANK!!!

I died soon after.

So it is in the game for sure just not used in the attack very often :shifty:. Maybe only certain DD's have it?

[FAdmiral]

Here is part of a quote I read over at SH3 website forum by a person
named Bootman" "You may want to lower the sonar sensitivity to the same 0.01 - at the default 0.03 it's marginally more sensitve (marginally shorter detection time at max range). But don't lower it on hydrophone - perhaps even raise it, to increase the efficiency of your hydrophone" This would infer to me that increasing
the number (0....1) will increase the efficiency of the hydophone, thus moving it
from a .03 to a .5 will let the AI do a better job in detecting your sub. I certainly
got better results when I ran the test yesterday after I changed it....

JIM

[W_clear]

The destroyer artificial intelligence is very low in SH4 , Even not so good as the destroyer inside SH3 with "Harder Enemy Escorts- Better Sensors"MOD .

I don't know it is not a destroyer of Japan as terribly as the destroyer of Britain? or AI of SH4 was not done well.

Mr. nvdrifter ,Can you make AI of SH4 in improve, make appear better AT MOD ?

THX. I am sorry. My English is not too good.:oops:

[kakemann]

I certainly
got better results when I ran the test yesterday after I changed it....
JIM
Thats what I experienced too as said earlier, so if more people experience this - maybe that should be considered in the next version of this mod? I see that it's still set to 0,01 in the hydrophone settings. Why not try 0,5?

Thanks FAdmiral, and thanks again nvdrifter!

[tedhealy]

That valoratsea site has some great charts


http://www.valoratsea.com/tonnage1.htm

http://www.valoratsea.com/subton1.htm

http://www.valoratsea.com/TonxSub.htm

and

http://www.valoratsea.com/JANAC.htm

[FAdmiral]

Check out this thread over in the reg. SH4 forum:

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=109741


Some of these guys heard pings but I NEVER have?? Were they all using
campaign experiences? With my test missions, I had my DDs set to Elite
so I could get the best out of them. So many contradictions here as to
how the AI operates. Could it be that different between campaigns and
single missions? Also it seems from their posts that latter in the war, the
AI gets worse & not better (opposite then in SH3). Are we hearing
anything about this from the dev team?

JIM

[castorp345]

i've been pinged plenty in my s-class during my current campaign (early '42)

[nimitstexan]

I've been pinged, even sunk, in some of the single missions (vanilla).

[FAdmiral]

Another thread with conflicting reports:

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=109747

I just wonder if the game engine if adding some random code
everytime a mission or campaign starts. Its sounding more and
more like it when I read all these posts....


JIM

[sandbag69]

Thanks NVDrifter for this mod.

Created a proper Midway mission based on a book I am reading.

Pre-Mod : I was able to wipe out most of the Jap carriers without any attentions whatsoever from Ships or planes.

Post-Mod same mission: Detected and attacked regularly by Destroyer screen. Marvellous!

Only Possible problem was the Jap airforce went crazy lookin for me. Dropping bombs everywhere. They even succeded in sinking one of their own heavy cruisers by Dive-bombing it. Think they may have been looking for me. Not sure

Anyway thnaks buddy for this Mod.

[FAdmiral]

Now this is really getting comical ! I raise my scope, all near ships will
start firing at it. I lower it and scoot away. All the DDs come to that
area and start blasting holes in the water but I am long gone. I go
somewhere else and do it again. Repeat, they all zip over and blast away.
I did this 6 times and got the same results every time. Never took any damage
and never heard any pings. DDs were all set to "Elite". Althought their
sighting ability was superb, eveything else (Hydrophones & Sonar) STUNK !!
I was always at PD & moving at Std. speed (making lots of noise) Other times
when I had scope down, 3 DDs passed almost right over me (thought collison)
but never knew I was there???

JIM

[MadMike]

Hey, maybe the IJN has supersonic detection equipment...
I've read in some U.S. war patrol reports that Japanese standard operating procedure was to use hydrophones to listen, then use active sonar to get a fix and drop. However, they also used active sonar when screening convoys or task forces.
Will dig though my two dozen reports and see what I can find...

Yours, Mike

[FAdmiral]

The only fix they get on me in this game is visual. If I don't give them
something to see, they just DC the heck out of the ocean where I was
last seen. I would be VERY HAPPY to hear some pinging going on...
BTW, they all seem to be using thier signal blinkers constantly. I wonder
if that is just random blinking or JUST MAYBE morse code??? That would be
a wonderful Easter Egg in the game !!

JIM

[castorp345]

hey admiral
try setting the dd's to 'normal' and see what happens in the same scn...
i'm guessing that the 'elite' settings might somehow be nerfed...

[FAdmiral]

I can't seem to win here (maybe lose would be a better term)
I finally got a DD to drop right on top of me while I was at PD.
It was my end or so I thought. The DCs went right past me
on both sides and exploded below somewhere inflicting NO damage
on my boat whatsoever. I wonder if the realism settings are causing
this strange stuff. I will try again and make more adjustments.
One of these times, I just have to DIE. No Fun without that....

JIM

[castorp345]

jim, are you using redwine's dc mod? (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=109076&page=3)

also, what does your gameplaysettings.cfg look like?

[tater]

Only Possible problem was the Jap airforce went crazy lookin for me. Dropping bombs everywhere. They even succeded in sinking one of their own heavy cruisers by Dive-bombing it. Think they may have been looking for me. Not sure

Anyway thnaks buddy for this Mod.

This is a serious problem with the basic notion of CV ops in the game. the air groups presumably result in a % chance of air attack. In reality, there would be CAP planes (no bombs since zeros didn't carry them) only, and even then a fairly small force per CV, 1, maybe 2 chutai (3-6 planes). What we see (I think) is the whole air group. This is silly since the VB and VT units would be waiting for a target. It took them at least 45 minutes to get a full strike ready under perfect conditions, then a while to launch them. Also, unlike modern CVs, WW2 CVs could either land aircraft, or take off aircraft. They couldn't do both at once. CV ops are complicated, having a CV battle with subs around should probably just be avoided, or a single mission made perhaps with cloned CVs with a special "CAP only" air group... That should be possible, right? Copy a CV, give it a new name, and change the airgroup data? Hmmm...

tater

[FAdmiral]

OK, after not having any luck getting escorts to detect & go after me,
I deceided to do something drastic. I uninstalled the game, reinstalled
it and patched to 1.1. NOW the AI DDs are actually looking for me &
have found me. I am hearing the pings now (never did before). I was
DCed and rammed and it of course SUNK me. Don't know what happened
on the first install. Something just was not right about it. BUT the game
seems to be playing like it should now after the new install...

JIM

[kakemann]

FAdmiral! Thats great!

Now I look forward to the 1.2 patch! :-)

[FAdmiral]

With the new install, I am now getting zig-zag from the TFs & Convoys.
After I torp one, they will speed up and make direction away from me.
Entirely the opposite of the first install where they would come to a
complete stop and just sit there. I don't know why all the difference
between the installs? Somehow, the first one just didn't load all the
game engine or maybe just pieces of it?? Or maybe the patch didn't
install right and messed up the game AI. With the first install, I never ran
the game on the original 1.0 version. Patched it right away....

JIM

[Trout]

I have the same problem when I attack convoys, the ships all stop after I make my first attack!

Does anyone else have the "stopped ship" bug?

Trout

[Sulikate]

Well, I've been pinged several times while evading DDs, but they do seem quite "dumb" compared to GW's AI. (I don't know if this is historicaly correct or not).

just my 2 cents:arrgh!:

[Ducimus]

I guess ill offer more input. While im not "The" authoritive guru on the AI, i do have alot of experience with it.

First, read (or reread) this thread. Its basicaly how the AI works in SH3, and with the exception of thermal layers being intrinsic to the game, SH4 seems no different.

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=104377

The AI_Sensor.dat primarly defines geometry. The sim.cfg does the rest.
If your not getting pinged often, try lowering the max elevation of the sonar cone. I havent looked at it yet, but chances are its entirely too easy to get below the active sonar cone. Once you do, no pining will happen.

With visual detection theres four variables you can play with that really make a difference. (id opt to leave the light, fog, and wave variables alone)

Sensitivity - self explanitory

Surface factor - how much surface area of of an object that must be shown to the AI before it get's a clue.

Speed factor- how fast something has to go before the AI will take notice

detection time - how quick they notice it.


Default surface factor is 400, default speed factor is 15. Thats ALOT. You'd have to be going 16 kts and/or be broadsided to the AI before they'd notice you.

edit: Also of note, the visual section in the sim.cfg also effects your bridge watch. In my own game im running a surface factor of 200 with a speed factor of 9. It just occured to me that increasing the surface to say, 100, i'd probably spot planes sooner ; however it would also make me easier to detect as well.

[kakemann]

Thanks for a great information, Ducimus! :up:

[Hands B]

Is this mod 1.2 compatible ?

Rgds

[FAdmiral]

If anybody is having poor AI performance & no pings and has done an
uninstall and reinstall with the same lackluster AI. Did you check the Registry
after the uninstall. I found that the uninstall does NOT get rid of all the files
in the registry. I deleted 5 manually before I reinstalled. Made a BIG DIF !!

JIM

[Hands B]

Thank you very much for the tip Fadmiral, you made my day :D :up:
I also did a reg clean and found about 15 SH4 related registry entries.
I think I didn't clean it completely, cause when I installed the game again, it didn't ask for the serial, did your game ask for it upon new install ?
Anyway, so far, seems to have solved my game, played career for some minutes, now I've got planes, which I didn't and AI's seem to be much more responsive, escorts are pinging and doing search patterns, merchants and DD's are changing direction trying to escape, much more realistic now .
I've also noticed that clouds are moving much faster now, read somewhere that there's a fix for that.

Rgds

[FAdmiral]

Actually, I have NEVER needed the serial becasue it has never asked for it.
If I remember correctly, you should only need the serial if you are going to
play multiplayer. Another thing I remember on the reinstall is that I had
to delete the old PREFETCH files in Windows or I got an error on the game
install wizard. I just wonder if the first install went bad because of the
install game wizard not doing its job correctly. I hope others will have the
same results that you and I have had...

JIM

[tater]

I cannot believe that anyone would build an updater so reliant on crap like manually deleting registry entries.

[FAdmiral]

Here is a post from "Jester" on another forum regarding the reinstall:

"WOW...something probably didn't go right upon first install (you are right FAdmiral). Upon the reload, the escorts did detect me and pings (what a novelty!) too. DC'd and actually caused damage to me. All patched to v1.2"

It looks to me like more than 1 person had the bad install problem.
As for the registry entries, just remember, we are dealing with Windows...

JIM

[Hands B]

Actually, I have NEVER needed the serial becasue it has never asked for it.
If I remember correctly, you should only need the serial if you are going to
play multiplayer. Another thing I remember on the reinstall is that I had
to delete the old PREFETCH files in Windows or I got an error on the game
install wizard. I just wonder if the first install went bad because of the
install game wizard not doing its job correctly. I hope others will have the
same results that you and I have had...

JIM
Yes, you're right, I was in doubt if I had actually needed the serial when I installed the game, so now I'm sure I didn't
Game seems completely different so far, going to start a new career now, been modding it a bit with sound pack and FTT to get radar working and the other goodies :D
I'm so glad its fixed, up till now all I did was just trying to get it to work at least reasonably well, now I'm really looking forward for my first patrol.
Will keep informed about AI's behavior
Once again, thank you :up:

[t0maz]

Zones.cfg was affected by game patch v1.2
But is is easy to fix it by WinMerge ;)

For those who want fix this file in mod:
Upper changes are few new zones (add this to zones.cfg in mod), after half of file u have modified by mod aircrafts hit points and armor for fuel bunkers so keep this unchanched.

[Kataki]

[Sonar]
Detection time=10 ;[s]
Sensitivity=0.04 ;(0..1)
Waves factor=0.6 ;[>=0]
Speed factor=25 ;[kt]
Enemy surface factor=130 ;[m2]
Lose time=30 ;[s]
Thermal Layer Signal Attenuation=4.816645 ;[>0], 1 means no signal reduction, 5 equals signal reduction to 20

How does the sensitivity factor work? larger number= more sensitive sonar? or Lower number = more sensitive?

[NefariousKoel]

[Sonar]
Detection time=10 ;[s]
Sensitivity=0.04 ;(0..1)
Waves factor=0.6 ;[>=0]
Speed factor=25 ;[kt]
Enemy surface factor=130 ;[m2]
Lose time=30 ;[s]
Thermal Layer Signal Attenuation=4.816645 ;[>0], 1 means no signal reduction, 5 equals signal reduction to 20

How does the sensitivity factor work? larger number= more sensitive sonar? or Lower number = more sensitive?
In my experience a higher sensitivity made the sonar more sensitive. For instance, using 0.09 in my test, the escorts were all over me while submerged.

It's one of the multipliers in the equation so the higher the better.

[THE_MASK]

Sometimes for a clean install i , gulp , reformatted the hard drive . I was told by a technician you should do this every twelve months .

[Mechman]

It depends on how much junk you have slowing your system down. I've had my computer since 2003, and never had to reformat.

[CaptainCox]

Using O&O defrag, set to autofrag...nothing like a clean C drive ;) Also latest BIOS, Chipset drivers...actually always try to use the latest drivers in general.

[kakemann]

In my experience a higher sensitivity made the sonar more sensitive. For instance, using 0.09 in my test, the escorts were all over me while submerged.

It's one of the multipliers in the equation so the higher the better.
0.09 in hydrophones will definately bring a lot more challenge and agressive escorts! By increasing slightly on the sonar sensivity as well - the destroyers are lethal! (0.04 forexample) :D

[tater]

What about on the surface? I have seen TFs I know to be set to "Veteran" ignore me on the surface---the trick is that usually the weather is less than perfect.

I have a feeling that the sea state/weather is a very sensitive modifier to how the AI reacts on the surface. Anyone else seeing the same thing?

[NefariousKoel]

What about on the surface? I have seen TFs I know to be set to "Veteran" ignore me on the surface---the trick is that usually the weather is less than perfect.

I have a feeling that the sea state/weather is a very sensitive modifier to how the AI reacts on the surface. Anyone else seeing the same thing?

I think there's a visual modifier factor for weather somewhere.

Though they might be tweaked, I certainly don't want escorts to sight me within 10 seconds of sighting them like in GWX. :down:

[kakemann]

I Usually feel that the AI seems quite smart if I'm running on the surface. A thing that bugs me is the fact that almost everytime I get rammed by a destroyer, it sinks and i get minimum of damage. Thats not very realistic is it?

[Wilcke]

Every 12 months......thats worse than getting a colonoscopy! IMHO.....my rule build the computer, install OS plus the 1000 patches and updates, install games and play.

Since I upgrade, every 2.5 years, by the time the OS and registry is getting a bit "tattered", its time for a re-install!

I believe in low maintenance, the less you "tweak" the less you break things. Actually I am very impressed with WinXP Pro, I run it on two computers and its just bullet proof!

[t0maz]

There is probably some problem with Waves attenuation value (Compressed Air is running out) -> http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=113316

[IRONxMortlock]

Thanks for the mod, it sounds great.

The only problem is that I don't see it when I follow the link to download it.

Where can I find this mod?

Thanks,

M
________
Burning_Flame (http://www.girlcamfriend.com/cam/Burning_Flame/)

[MaxT.dk]

nvdrifter left this forum deleing all his mods on the way out

[kakemann]

Thanks for the mod, it sounds great.

The only problem is that I don't see it when I follow the link to download it.

Where can I find this mod?

Thanks,

M
If you want harder enemy escorts, and this mod is gone - try out my mod. Signature link... :up:

[IRONxMortlock]

Thanks for the mod, it sounds great.

The only problem is that I don't see it when I follow the link to download it.

Where can I find this mod?

Thanks,

M
If you want harder enemy escorts, and this mod is gone - try out my mod. Signature link... :up:

Thanks mate,

Downloading now!:up:
________
Colorado medical marijuana dispensary (http://colorado.dispensaries.org/)