Is there an option for realistic sink speeds?

[thewumpus]

I remember this was an option with SHIII, but can't seem to find it in SHIV. Default sink speeds seem way too fast to be accurate. Also watching planes slide off the decks into the water is humorous..seems more like freefall through air speed. Probably can be fixed in a mod, but just wondering if my noob self just isn't looking for the setting in the right place.

[Gigalocus]

in my manual it says you can tick this on under realism, along with realistic vunerability and no noise meter and finally no weapons officer assistance ... is this in any one elses? (pg 5 - 6)

[-Pv-]

Lots of stuff in manual not implimented in game. Hold-overs from SH3 and wish list items that never got coded or were buggy at release so were disabled.

What IS a realistic sinking speed anyway? Every ship is going to sink at a different rate. Maybe you are too good and you're decimating those small ships with no trouble? I see others posting ships are too hard to sink and want a mod to fix that. This indicates to me that one reason people are getting different experiences is they are not all attacking with the same technique, same number of torps, same ship sizes at the same time in the war from different distances and weather. Even two ships of the same type may not ALWAYS sink at the same rate. And, despite your best efforts, not two torps will hit exactly the same way and in the same place. All torpedos had TNT warheads at the beginning of the war and in 1943, Torpex was introduced which split large ships in two with one hit under the keel.

So, if you decide every 4000 ton ship should sink with one torpedo that hit at the water line in the center in 4 minutes, 30 seconds, would this be realistic? No. I've read many real-world patrol reports of ships going down so fast the sub crew didn't even get a chance to see it. They see the hit, and no ship afterwards. Some ships had excellant damage control talent and others the DC peeps would jump ship when fired on.

It's human nature to want everything simple and predicable. We should get up in 65 degree weather with no rain, and go to bed in 74 degree weather. The planet should not heat up or cool down. The sun should not have cycles and storms. There should be no hurricanes or tornadoes. The garbage pickup should be always at 7:30 not 7. When the Zorg pokes his head around the corner at level two, I should be able to nail him every time with the gatling gun in one trigger pull.
In the real world, torps miss and hit. Some ships never sank and some went down in seconds. Making the world totally predicable might give you the game you want, but it wouldn't be a simulation based on an historical model. Satisfaction would diminish as people realised they were all having the exact same experience every time. There would be nothing to look foward too. No stories to tell. No long-term playability. Who would want to code a game like that? If the entire purpose of the game was to satisfy the expectations of 14 year olds who had no knowlege of history, never saw the ocean, never been on a ship, never watched any documentaries or talked to war veterans, what kind of game would it be?

Rather, this is a game of depth you can still play and appreciate when you grow up and learn about the world. It can demonstrate how complex and unique the WWII experience was for your fathers and grandfathers. The dedication to solving very difficult problems while someone was trying to kill you and solving these problems on a massive scale involving years, millions of people, thousands of miles on limited resources all while not fully understanding all that was going on. If this game gets people interested in doing some research on the real war, you'll find it was not all cut and dried like the classroom. There were heros who through a few minutes of unexpected determination turned the course of battles and history and massive mistakes made costing thousands of lives in moments. Don't be so quick to mod absolutely everything and turn the game into Wonder bread. The devs produced these SH games because they have a love of what the game represents. See if you can learn to appreciate why they try to present this affection to us again and again for our entertainment.
-Pv-

[R3D]

its a little odd to see the yamato sink from 3 torps, last night i got a hit on the far edge of the stern and one up on the tip of the bow and the third i managed to plant right under the smoke stacks.. it sank like a brick.

i seriously doubt it should have been such an easy kill, and i wasnt really trying very hard at all, let alone sunk like a dead weight. :down:

made a wallpaper though :rotfl:

[Sailor Steve]

Yes, SH3 had a 'Realistic Sinking Times' option, but it wasn't realistic at all. Even with it enabled, ships sank within one minute or they didn't sink at all. The NYGM and GWX mods made it better, but it still needs an overhaul by the devs. I'm surprised SH4 isn't better.

[Tetsuo Shima]

Lots of stuff in manual not implimented in game. ...

... The devs produced these SH games because they have a love of what the game represents. See if you can learn to appreciate why they try to present this affection to us again and again for our entertainment.
-Pv-

Calm down, you. He asked for lengthier sinking times, not a lecture; I don't remember him mentioning completely pre-determined automated sinking times at all. Appreciate your opinion on modding, I try to shy away from it myself to be honest, but I think the developers would be happy to see their community help give the game the best chance it can get.

[-Pv-]

Since the Yamato was sunk by carrier planes and not torpedos, we don't know how many it would take to sink it. The Shinano super carrier which was built on the same hull was likely taken out by one torpedo hitting at just the right angle to push a support through a boiler. Although several torps were fired at it, only one penetrated. You should complain it took too many.

No one is forced to read my rants. I see a lot of other rants here. One man's opinion is another man's lecture. If no one wants to read counter-opinion, they should not post in public or just skip everything with my name on it.

Archerfish web pages:
http://www.ussarcherfish.com/index1.htm
http://www.answers.com/topic/japanese-aircraft-carrier-shinano
-Pv-

[thewumpus]

Thanks for the responses. At least one of you appears to be under the impression that I am talking about how hard it is to sink a ship. This is not the case. I am specifically referring to how quickly a ship sinks which has already taken enough damage to do so.

I don't want a predictable model. Obviously some ships simply go down in seconds. I want variety. I want the "possibility" that it could take more than 20 seconds, and at the moment I do not appear to have that.

I remember the "realistic sink speed" check box in SHIII and the difference was seconds with it unchecked, and sometimes seconds, even up to a few minutes with it checked. Every ship I have sunk in SHIV has taken mere seconds to be completely submerged. I would prefer this to be more realistic. That's all I'm asking. I have no problem using mods to accomplish this, but would prefer this to be addressed by the Devs. After all, they are the ones calling this a Simulation.

[-Pv-]

I don't have the same experience you do. Some ships I have attacked have taken less than a minute and some have taken hours. I have no way of judging how much damage should have sunken any particular ship. I figure it's enough damage when it sinks. I have seen WWII pictures of ships where there was no identifiable shape left to them and stern or bow shot off and they made it to port.

Your observation is correct. No instant sink cheat checkbox in the options.
Maybe the whole game is stuck on quick sink mode and we cannot uncheck it?
-Pv-

[Tetsuo Shima]

Thanks for the responses. At least one of you appears to be under the impression that I am talking about how hard it is to sink a ship. This is not the case. I am specifically referring to how quickly a ship sinks which has already taken enough damage to do so.

I don't want a predictable model. Obviously some ships simply go down in seconds. I want variety. I want the "possibility" that it could take more than 20 seconds, and at the moment I do not appear to have that.

Precisely.

Agreed on your point about the devs addressing the problem. Given that there are problems on both extremes, (i.e. ships sinking too fast, and, conversely, some ships just plain refusing to sink) it sounds to me (although, I'm in no way an expert in this field) like it's going to take a little more than basic modding to even the whole sinking mechanic thing out. In that respect, the devs are probably best placed to working out the whole thing.

[SingeDebile]

i agree in general the boats sink way to fast (this is not a comment on weather or not they are too easy to sink... thats a completly seperate issue)

i believe that for "gameplay reasons" they made the boats sink faster for your own satisfaction, which i can understand to a point... but it should be a toggled option, i personally think it would look cooler to have the half a dozen ships i sunk all floating around and slowly sinking.... (if a ship in general took 5min to sink this was considerd very fast... even when a ship is split in half the air pockets in both halves make the ship take a 'long' time to sink.... minutes not secondes)

on top of teh fact that this game begs to be played at a slow pace... there is not reason to have these fast sink times unless your playing with all the realisim options off

[SingeDebile]

Thanks for the responses. At least one of you appears to be under the impression that I am talking about how hard it is to sink a ship. This is not the case. I am specifically referring to how quickly a ship sinks which has already taken enough damage to do so.

I don't want a predictable model. Obviously some ships simply go down in seconds. I want variety. I want the "possibility" that it could take more than 20 seconds, and at the moment I do not appear to have that.
Precisely.

Agreed on your point about the devs addressing the problem. Given that there are problems on both extremes, (i.e. ships sinking too fast, and, conversely, some ships just plain refusing to sink) it sounds to me (although, I'm in no way an expert in this field) like it's going to take a little more than basic modding to even the whole sinking mechanic thing out. In that respect, the devs are probably best placed to working out the whole thing.

there is still a possibility that the ship sink times are treated as "ship is destroyed" "start ship sink animation" so that in effect you could find the sink animation and just make the above water part of the animation take much longer (keeping the underwater freefall the same)

[Tetsuo Shima]

The ships sink in 'animations'? I thought the game incorporated, for want of a better phrase, ragdoll physics?

[HannesGM]

Since the Yamato was sunk by carrier planes and not torpedos, we don't know how many it would take to sink it. The Shinano super carrier which was built on the same hull was likely taken out by one torpedo hitting at just the right angle to push a support through a boiler. Although several torps were fired at it, only one penetrated. You should complain it took too many.

No one is forced to read my rants. I see a lot of other rants here. One man's opinion is another man's lecture. If no one wants to read counter-opinion, they should not post in public or just skip everything with my name on it.

Archerfish web pages:
http://www.ussarcherfish.com/index1.htm
http://www.answers.com/topic/japanese-aircraft-carrier-shinano
-Pv-

But then again, the Shinano did not have proper damage control at the time she sank. Iirc, there were alot of watertight doors missing, thus negating the effect of watertight compartments. Naturally one torpedo was enough. Still took her 7 hours or so to sink. So by all rights, and with a properly working damage control team, a Yamato class ship shouldn't sink from just one torpedo hit.

And yeah, I too think that sinking times are ridiculously short as it is right now. It would be ok if it just happened every odd time to a ship, but not with this consistency.

[7Enigma]

Since the Yamato was sunk by carrier planes and not torpedos, we don't know how many it would take to sink it. The Shinano super carrier which was built on the same hull was likely taken out by one torpedo hitting at just the right angle to push a support through a boiler. Although several torps were fired at it, only one penetrated. You should complain it took too many.

No one is forced to read my rants. I see a lot of other rants here. One man's opinion is another man's lecture. If no one wants to read counter-opinion, they should not post in public or just skip everything with my name on it.

Archerfish web pages:
http://www.ussarcherfish.com/index1.htm
http://www.answers.com/topic/japanese-aircraft-carrier-shinano
-Pv-
But then again, the Shinano did not have proper damage control at the time she sank. Iirc, there were alot of watertight doors missing, thus negating the effect of watertight compartments. Naturally one torpedo was enough. Still took her 7 hours or so to sink. So by all rights, and with a properly working damage control team, a Yamato class ship shouldn't sink from just one torpedo hit.

And yeah, I too think that sinking times are ridiculously short as it is right now. It would be ok if it just happened every odd time to a ship, but not with this consistency.

Agreed. The odd "split in 1/2 hit" every once in a while seems fine, but all to frequently these things just up end and rocket to the bottom. I've followed them down sometimes to the bottom (>1000m) and its just unrealistic how quickly it occurs even once completely submerged. There would still be quite a bit of trapped air to give bouyancy so that it would be more gradual.

The worst IMO is our own subs sinking after minor/moderate damage is done. It just don't happen this way in a sub even if a whole station becomes flooded (and sealed off). Having 20% flooding would not cause the death spiral being modeled here, and it really takes away from the tension of a more realistic slow trip to the bottom (until another area gave out).

[Camaero]

Yeah, I noticed our subs sink like a rocket ship when they start goin down! Would be nice to give our damage control boys a little more time to fix things.

[Faamecanic]

What IS a realistic sinking speed anyway? Every ship is going to sink at a different rate. Maybe you are too good and you're decimating those small ships with no trouble? I see others posting ships are too hard to sink and want a mod to fix that. This indicates to me that one reason people are getting different experiences is they are not all attacking with the same technique, same number of torps, same ship sizes at the same time in the war from different distances and weather. Even two ships of the same type may not ALWAYS sink at the same rate. And, despite your best efforts, not two torps will hit exactly the same way and in the same place. All torpedos had TNT warheads at the beginning of the war and in 1943, Torpex was introduced which split large ships in two with one hit under the keel.

-Pv-

10+ Torps into ANY ship (the first 3 under her keel) is enough to sink 5 ships... but even with holes in her, no rudder, and no props...she kept steaming 7 kts with the convoy :nope: Not real.

I think the poster was refering to when you DO get a ship that starts to sink she goes under too quickly...everytime. It seems like the damage model is all or nothing. Either you hit that magic hit point number and she goes down in minutes, or she goes deck awash but still keeps going.

I much prefer the damage model with GWX as even though a ship may be listing hard to one side or the other, you never know if she is going down. And you never see a ship rocket to the bottom unless you get a lucky hit and break her back.

[DirtyHarry3033]

Thanks for the responses. At least one of you appears to be under the impression that I am talking about how hard it is to sink a ship. This is not the case. I am specifically referring to how quickly a ship sinks which has already taken enough damage to do so.

I don't want a predictable model. Obviously some ships simply go down in seconds. I want variety. I want the "possibility" that it could take more than 20 seconds, and at the moment I do not appear to have that.

I remember the "realistic sink speed" check box in SHIII and the difference was seconds with it unchecked, and sometimes seconds, even up to a few minutes with it checked. Every ship I have sunk in SHIV has taken mere seconds to be completely submerged. I would prefer this to be more realistic. That's all I'm asking. I have no problem using mods to accomplish this, but would prefer this to be addressed by the Devs. After all, they are the ones calling this a Simulation.

Wumpus, I have a great variety of sink times so far. Tonight I finished up a "photo recon" mission into Hiroshima Harbor, I was very lucky to arrive during a raging thunderstorm. Only found 2 ships, a Shokaku CV and a Fubuki DD. Took a pic of the Shokaku, mission completed!

Despite being in the heart of Nippon, I decided to see if I could take down the CV and still get away. One torp did it, she turned turtle in less than 3 minutes much to my suprise. I was watching the DD as she went down, DD didn't budge an inch but was sweeping my area with searchlights. So I set up an attack on the DD, nailed her good and 45 minutes later she was still afloat but down by the bow. (Still totally motionless, I didn't like that, I guess the IJN high command didn't order her to weigh anchor and attack?)

Anyway, it took another couple torps to sink her. So in my experience anyway there is a great variety in how fast a ship sinks.

DH

[sea enemy]

But then again, the Shinano did not have proper damage control at the time she sank. Iirc, there were alot of watertight doors missing, thus negating the effect of watertight compartments. Naturally one torpedo was enough. Still took her 7 hours or so to sink. So by all rights, and with a properly working damage control team, a Yamato class ship shouldn't sink from just one torpedo hit.

You're right about Shinano. At it's sinking, it was sailing in what ammounted to holiday cruise conditions-the watertight doors that were functional were left open, and barely a skeleton crew aboard....Unthinkable lapse in judgement, but..I'm sure it wouldn't have figured much in the long run anyways..A high concept 'carrier depot' dosen't do you much good without a carrier force to augment.

On the Yamato class, the numbers don't lie ...Musashi took some 19 aerial torpedoes (600lb torpex-same as sub Mk.14) and 17 500lb/1000lb bombs.

the Yamato class does get hosed in SH4..It explains this in the manual..Every class seems to have 'hit points' (pg74 in US manual) BB's have 7, DD's have 1, etc.
It dosen't really calculate it on an individual ship by ship basis, or so the manual would lead you to believe.

But, hey..I guess it's technically 'arcadey' to even see a Yamato underway anyways..


ON a side note about sinking times: I saw a mod note about adding realistic ship sinking times to the config, and tried this..Didn't really notice a difference (didn't in SH3 either)
Ideally, I suppose you put 'realistic' at 4 minutes, or so..

[Grotius]

I agree with the original poster that there should be more variety in the speed with which a ship sinks after it has already been "destroyed" in game terms. Every time I've gotten the "enemy ship destroyed" message, the ship has sunk within a minute or two. I would expect that sometimes a doomed ship would sink this fast; but sometimes I would expect it would sink slowly, gradually, inexorably, over a much longer period.

[joea]

But, hey..I guess it's technically 'arcadey' to even see a Yamato underway anyways..




Actually both Yamato and Mushashi were hit and damaged by subs during the war. Nothing that threatened them sinking nut still.