View Full Version : So Ive sunk the Yamato 5 times...
Packerton
04-19-07, 07:28 PM
Yeah, Japan must have ALOT of Resources to spare >_>
WWSandMan
04-19-07, 07:50 PM
Perhaps it was the Yamato, the Musashi (Yamato's sister ship) and a whole bunch of really big mirrors? :rolleyes:
SteamWake
04-19-07, 08:44 PM
Know what ... I dont belive you.. post the log ... prove it.
mookiemookie
04-19-07, 08:52 PM
And if you can prove it, then turn off auto targeting. :|\\
... and realistic torpedos.
-Pv-
Lucky you, i'm yet to see it.
Battle over realism versus game play i guess. Personally i'd rather have multiple Yamato's compared to only having one per career. :hmm:
I'd rather have no Yamatos at all rather than 5 per career. In real life there was one Yamato for about 500 careers.
Can't please everyone I guess. Of course they could probably make it a selection in difficulty to have 'Realistic Unit Numbers' or something but I have a feeling the DEVS already have a bit on their plate.
kiwi_2005
04-19-07, 09:19 PM
I spotted it once on my way back to base, had just use up all torpedoes, and i certainly wasn't going to take it on with the deckgun (although that thought did enter my mind :rotfl: ) so all i could do is watch it sail pass. And what a huge scary beast it is!
This ship would probably take 6 or more torpedos:hmm:
I think if we had no targets there would be more complaints than you could imagine. Most games are engineered to reward the player with lots to do and plenty of rewards for continuing to play the game. It also saves development time if they didn't have to create absolutely every individual ship in the IJN navy in order to have anything like the historical number of targets. Some realism is more than I'm willing to pay or wait for. After all, it took 10 years of waiting for me, to even get to this point and frankly, I was wondering if I was going to live long enough to see it (maybe never- if the UBOAT fanatics had had their way.)
I was hearing SO much wealping... it would be way too easy, not enough challenge, US subs were too powerful to be fun, NO one would buy it. etc...
"I spotted it once on my way back to base, had just use up all torpedoes, and i certainly wasn't going to take it on with the deckgun (although that thought did enter my mind :rotfl: ) so all i could do is watch it sail pass. And what a huge scary beast it is!
This ship would probably take 6 or more torpedos:hmm:"
The Shimano super carrier which was built on the same hull had four torps shot at it and interviews with it's crew and the sub crew seems to indicate only one torp penetrated and that one torp sank the ship because it struck a support beam that was propelled through a main boiler causing a cascading failure. That hull was massive, but it had flaws. You might get lucky and sink it with one, or unlucky and hit it with everything you have and wait a couple days for it to sink. Over time I expect there will be a lot of stories to tell.
-Pv-
Having the right number of real units in game is critically important, IMO. In the Atlantic, the U-boats were fighting the US and UK. Merchant ships were built in numbers that boggle the mind, the US alone built more merchant tonnage in the first 6 months of 1943 than Japan built merchant ships in total up to the end of the war, for example. The principal combatants seen by U-boats were DEs and DDs. The US built nearly 800 of those 2 types combined during the war, in addition to the large number we started with. Heck, the CVEs seen in the atlantic had ~140 built! 140 #$@%$#$@% carriers.
So in the Atlantic, a gamey world where there are an infinite number of ships to sink is REALISTIC. For any given u-boat commander, he can sink 100k per patrol and guess what, it doesn't matter, we'll build more.
This is simply not true in the PTO.
The current campaign really shows how much was just changing unit types from SH3 and thinking it was fine.
tater
I think if we had no targets there would be more complaints than you could imagine.
No one's suggesting we should have no targets. As many as submarines saw in reality would be fine by me. The problem is that, if anyone's sinking the Yamato five times in a career, that means that in effect we have about 2500 times as many Yamatos out there as there were in reality. Call me crazy but I reckon that's just a tad too many.
Remember, if you're seeing that many more of that kind of target, you're not playing a WW2 sub game - you're playing an arcade shooter that just happens to look like a WW2 submarine game. Some players may not care. I do.
Never mind, modders (as usual) will fix it. Although occasionally it would be nice if we didn't have to.
kiwi_2005
04-19-07, 09:41 PM
Maybe what mode your playing in, would it make a difference? Like Very hard you would see less of the Yamato.
The thing is, Yamato should be that one ship that makes the player think "Oh my God! The Yamato!". It should be rare enough to get a real response out of the player. When it becomes as frequent a sight as a piece of junk mail it loses a whole lot of its impact. I remember in the original Silent Hunter, I saw the Yamato once in all the time I played the game and as I lined up to take my shot at her I was shaking and sweating - that was a huge deal. Seeing it multiple times in every single career makes it just another big ship. This is why it's necessary to make it rare - not just for the sake of realism, but because a rare Yamato makes the game far more fun.
You have a point there Beery. The excitement for running accross a rare ship would be great. I just wouldn't want it so rare I may never come accross it. But 5 times in one career is obviously too much.
kiwi_2005
04-19-07, 10:11 PM
The thing is, Yamato should be that one ship that makes the player think "Oh my God! The Yamato!". It should be rare enough to get a real response out of the player. When it becomes as frequent a sight as a piece of junk mail it loses a whole lot of its impact. I remember in the original Silent Hunter, I saw the Yamato once in all the time I played the game and as I lined up to take my shot at her I was shaking and sweating - that was a huge deal. Seeing it multiple times in every single career makes it just another big ship. This is why it's necessary to make it rare - not just for the sake of realism, but because a rare Yamato makes the game far more fun.
Your next mod Beery:yep: :)
But your right, when i saw the Yamato for the first time i freaked & was annoyed i had no torpedos left! If i see this ship 5/6 times when on patrol i think it will be no big deal.
It will be Yeah wippy do, the Yamato Huh! ive sunk her 3 times now... been there done that.
Spot on, beery!
The problem is that they went to some trouble to make the waypoint paths for the campaign layers, but the actual ships they chose were cookie cutter. They almost exclusively used the "generic" option. There are 4(5) BBs in game, so every single TF has a few BBs, each with a 20-25% chance of being Yamato. And they spawn a new TF for each TF instance every 2 weeks (times maybe 8 TFs not counting scripted stuff). So at any given time there are at least half a dozen or more Yamatos at sea. Makes seeing her mean nothing as beery says.
If they made Shinano that's all it would be, another "GENERIC Carrier" in the .mis files.
tater
Omnissiah
04-19-07, 10:27 PM
The thing is, Yamato should be that one ship that makes the player think "Oh my God! The Yamato!". It should be rare enough to get a real response out of the player. When it becomes as frequent a sight as a piece of junk mail it loses a whole lot of its impact. I remember in the original Silent Hunter, I saw the Yamato once in all the time I played the game and as I lined up to take my shot at her I was shaking and sweating - that was a huge deal. Seeing it multiple times in every single career makes it just another big ship. This is why it's necessary to make it rare - not just for the sake of realism, but because a rare Yamato makes the game far more fun.
Yeah, I agree. In all the hours I've burned on SHIV, I've only seen Yamato once. So when I faced it, I had to pause the game and light a cig and wipe the sweat off my palms. It was great!
Not that my preparations did me any good...I fired all six tubes: 5 hits, one dud, no sinkage. :damn: How deep is the keel on those bloody things anyway?
sqk7744
04-19-07, 10:36 PM
Spot on, beery!
The problem is that they went to some trouble to make the waypoint paths for the campaign layers, but the actual ships they chose were cookie cutter. They almost exclusively used the "generic" option. There are 4(5) BBs in game, so every single TF has a few BBs, each with a 20-25% chance of being Yamato. And they spawn a new TF for each TF instance every 2 weeks (times maybe 8 TFs not counting scripted stuff). So at any given time there are at least half a dozen or more Yamatos at sea. Makes seeing her mean nothing as beery says.
If they made Shinano that's all it would be, another "GENERIC Carrier" in the .mis files.
tater
I wonder if you can restrict a specific or unique unit type to a historic waypoint track based on time (mm/dd/yyyy) and location similar to the radio.ini for tuning freqs. (to be simple about it) Then you could always add in the random 2% chance you might see that unit elsewhere. See Below config. So what If you decreased the date range's to her deployments, that might be a start. Could you change frequency to .025? Also could add skin textures for Musashi and create a new class name. I think some Ship modders where trying to do just that.
We know where Yamato berthed at Kure and her voyages, major engagements and final demise off Okinawa. So if your sub's mission is to sink her and she does not sink, the 300+ aircraft are not effective in bombing and torpedoing her, then she could be off the reservation so to speak as random deployment. On the other hand, if one had all the classic ships restricted to their historical tracks all one would need is some accurate WWII documentation to "always" be in the right place at the right time.
I'm up for historical accuracy, but randomness might be fun too, just not every deployment for BB1, the pride of the Japanese Navy. Just my two cents. - Interesting discussion, but I agree that random spawns get old quick for "key capital ships."
[UnitClass]
ClassName=BBYamato
UnitType=11
AppearanceDate=19411216
DisappearanceDate=19451231
DisplayName=JP BB Yamato
[Texture 1]
TextureName=data/Sea/NBB_Yamato/NBB_Yamato_T01.tga
LightmapTextureName=data/Sea/NBB_Yamato/NBB_Yamato_O01.tga
NormalmapTextureName=data/Sea/NBB_Yamato/NBB_Yamato_N01.tga
StartDate=19140101
EndDate=19451231
Frequency=1
[Unit 1]
Name=IJN Yamato
DOC=19411216
DOD=19450407
[Unit 2]
Name=IJN Musashi
DOC=19420805
DOD=19431024
The problem is that there are 65 Battleships in the 34 groups in the Jap_TaskForce.mis files. Each Battleship has a 50% chance of appearing in a task force, so that means that in effect every task force encountered will have a Battleship in it and every fifth battleship is a Yamato, so that means about every fifth task force a player sees will have a Yamato in it.
I think if the percentage chance of a Yamato being in a group was dropped to about 5% that would make the game a bit more believable - you'd maybe see a Yamato once in every couple of careers.
skullman86
04-19-07, 11:00 PM
Haven't even seen it yet.....then again I still haven't completed a patrol and I've had this game since the day after it's release:rotfl:(not counting the quick mission where it appears in a task force).
It needs to be modded so it's more realistic.....I don't care about destroyers and stuff but something like the Yamato needs to be historically accurate because its such an important target, plus it's a friggin beast.It should be nerve wracking when you come across it, not routine :-?.
A 5% chance sounds ideal. I'll be playing this game until SH5 so I should sink it a few times but not often enough for me to treat it like a tanker.
THE_MASK
04-20-07, 12:09 AM
groundhog day
groundhog day
With the amount of members here there will be countless repeats of threads. :know:
sunvalleyslim
04-20-07, 12:46 AM
You said it all Berry........:up: :up: :up:
Note that in the cfg you posted about it has the correct date for Yamato was registered. She never left the inland sea until Midway, however. So that means there are about 6 months where she is appearing (has a chance to appear) in every single TF that asks for a Generic BB (which is all of them that ask for a BB).
It's not just Yamato, though, it's every single warship. There were not many of ANY BB Class. Or CVs total.
From her TROM:
YAMATO, the world’s mightiest battleship, remains at Truk as a “hotel” from 29 August 1942 until 8 May 1943.
So we know where to find her for over 8 months in the middle of the war. Anchored at Truk. 5 days after that she's back in Japan for 3 months.
Charlie901
04-20-07, 01:22 AM
I think if we had no targets there would be more complaints than you could imagine.
No one's suggesting we should have no targets. As many as submarines saw in reality would be fine by me. The problem is that, if anyone's sinking the Yamato five times in a career, that means that in effect we have about 2500 times as many Yamatos out there as there were in reality. Call me crazy but I reckon that's just a tad too many.
Remember, if you're seeing that many more of that kind of target, you're not playing a WW2 sub game - you're playing an arcade shooter that just happens to look like a WW2 submarine game. Some players may not care. I do.
Never mind, modders (as usual) will fix it. Although occasionally it would be nice if we didn't have to.
^^^^^^^^^^
WHAT HE SAID!!!
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
I've just taken a closer look at the Japanese battleships in the game. Three Kongo class ships were missing so I added them into RFB. That should cut down sightings of the Yamato by about a third, so that's a start (for players who use the mod). I'm also wondering if it might be an idea to remove Yamato for the periods when she was undergoing refits?
Were there any other Japanese Battleships that aren't in the game? If so, do they look like any class that is in the game (i.e. could I sneak them in as another existing type)?
The problem is that, if anyone's sinking the Yamato five times in a career, that means that in effect we have about 2500 times as many Yamatos out there as there were in reality. Call me crazy but I reckon that's just a tad too many.
Of course, on the other side of the coin, I think it would be a bit too much to force players to go through 500 careers (which is about the historical number) before they got the chance to sink Yamato or her sister ship Musashi. There's a balance to be struck, and that balance is achieved when a player can be sure of getting at most one shot at a Yamato class battleship during a career and at least one shot in about three careers - just rare enough so that players will be nervous when the battleship appears. Since each career is effectively a universe unto itself, we can enjoy the luxury of having a crack at Yamato more often than real sub commanders did. As long as we balance it so as to keep it to at most one chance per career we satisfy historical accuracy, since one commander (McKinney of USS Skate) did attack Yamato during his career and the same is the case with Musashi (attacked by J.A. Scott of USS Tunny).
In my experience the best times I've had in a game have been when one of those once in a lifetime opportunities comes up. In Red Baron II it was flying in an SE5a and spotting von Richthofen during a campaign; in SH1 it was seeing the Yamato emerge out of a fog bank. These occurrences only give the player that rush of adrenaline if they happen rarely. Too frequent and they become boring - too rare and they become frustrating.
Yeah, Japan must have ALOT of Resources to spare >_>
After using the stadimeter, turn it off.
The problem is that there are 65 Battleships in the 34 groups in the Jap_TaskForce.mis files. Each Battleship has a 50% chance of appearing in a task force, so that means that in effect every task force encountered will have a Battleship in it and every fifth battleship is a Yamato, so that means about every fifth task force a player sees will have a Yamato in it.
I think if the percentage chance of a Yamato being in a group was dropped to about 5% that would make the game a bit more believable - you'd maybe see a Yamato once in every couple of careers.
At the rate we run into taskforces in this >>>>GAME<<<< it seems Japan even melted its Beer cans down into Battleships. :nope:
The only BB class missiong is Nagato (and her sister, Mutsu). They look like maybe Ise the most. They were laid down in 1921.
Actually, Yamato was attacked by more than 1 sub, and she was spotted by others as well.
Yamato's TROM: http://www.combinedfleet.com/yamato.htm (bolded stuff (by me) is an attack, other entries are sighting reports or attacks on other vessels in Yamato's company)
28 August 1942:
Near Truk. YAMATO is attacked by LtCdr (later Vice Admiral) Glynn R. Donaho's USS FLYING FISH (SS-229). Since Donaho's ONI 41-42 "Recognition Manual" does not include the unknown YAMATO-class, he identifies her as a "KONGO-class" battleship. Donaho fires four Mark 14 steam torpedoes and thinks that he sees two hits, but they are premature explosions. YAMATO launches at least one E13A1 "Jake" floatplane to counter-attack. FLYING FISH is bombed and depth-charged by four escorts, but makes good her escape.
25 December 1943:
180 miles NE of Truk. At 0320, LtCdr (later Rear Admiral) Eugene B. McKinney, acting on an "Ultra", is running on the surface in USS SKATE (SS-305). McKinney picks up YAMATO at 27,000 yards. He dives and tries to close, but is unsuccessful until YAMATO turns towards him. He passes down her starboard beam, turns and fires his four stern tubes at her. One or two Mark 14-3A torpedoes hit YAMATO on the starboard hull near turret No. 3 at 10-5N, 150-32E. A total failure of the main armor belt system occurs due to a flawed joint between the upper and lower side protection belts. The upper magazine for No. 3 turret floods. YAMATO takes on about 3,000-tons of water. The transport mission is aborted.
11 January 1944:
At 1800, YAMATO is spotted by USS HALIBUT (SS-232), but the submarine is unable to attack.
14 January 1944:
At 2330, USS BATFISH (SS-310) picks up YAMATO group on radar, then visually, but BATFISH is unable to close the range for an attack.
10 June 1944: Operation "KON" - The Relief of Biak:
1600: Departs Tawi Tawi for Batjan with the MUSASHI, CruDiv 5's HAGURO and MYOKO, DesRon 2's light cruiser NOSHIRO and destroyers. Cdr Sam Dealey in USS HARDER (SS-257), on station nearby, reports the Kon Force leaving Tawi Tawi.
15 June 1944:
YAMATO group is sighted and reported by the USS SEAHORSE (SS-304) east of Mindanao
17 June 1944:
Refuels from the 1st Supply Force's oilers, then joins the Mobile Fleet. Later, the Mobile Fleet is sighted by USS CAVALLA (SS-244) in the Philippine Sea.
23 October 1944: The Battle of the Palawan Passage:
Two American submarines attack Force A. Cdr (later Captain) David H. McClintock's USS DARTER (SS-227) sinks Kurita's flagship, cruiser ATAGO. Kurita abandons ship and is picked from the water by destroyer KISHINAMI. Ten hours later, he transfers to YAMATO and resumes command of the First Diversion Attack Force. Cdr (later Captain) Bladen D. Claggett's USS DACE (SS-247) sinks cruiser MAYA. DARTER also damages cruiser TAKAO. (not an attack on Yamato, but she was there—tater)
21 November 1944:
The YAMATO group is attacked by USS SEALION II (SS-215). KONGO and destroyer URAKAZE are sunk. (not an attack on Yamato, but she was there—tater)
6 April 1945: THREADFIN radios a detailed sighting report of the Attack Force's presence in the Bungo Suido to COMSUBPAC at Guam. The report is intercepted by YAMATO. Later, USS HACKLEBACK (SS-295) also sights the Attack Force and reports, but neither submarine is able to close the range for an attack.
Note that for Yamato there is plenty of steaming around to and from Truk to various places that with radius waypints there would be a decent chance of seeing her, particularly for boats that patrol anywhere between Truk, the Philipines, and Japan.
Then there is Musashi, but they were in company most of the time.
I'm still banging away on the layers, but honestly, I'm loathe to work too hard until we find out what the plans are for any future features (ideally some even halfway attempt at the dynamism the box promises), it's a LOT of work.
tater
The only BB class missiong is Nagato (and her sister, Mutsu). They look like maybe Ise the most. They were laid down in 1921.
I think maybe I'll bung them in under the Ise class - hehe it'll work as a a recognition manual mistake.
AhhhFresh
04-20-07, 09:26 AM
I have only run into the Yamamoto once but it was in a task force with the Musashi (well obviously not really, but I did come across a TF with 2 Yamamotos and at least 3 other BB's).
I can see how that might be a tad unrealistic.
Seminole
04-20-07, 09:27 AM
Know what ... I dont belive you.. post the log ... prove it.
You know, his point was the fact that it is possible to run acoss the Yamato so frequently...not that he sunk 5 Yamatos.
Even if he had been at full "realism" the 5 Yamatos would still be there spoiling the immersion effect, and that I think, was his true complaint. :shifty:
Bilge_Rat
04-20-07, 09:30 AM
Note that in the cfg you posted about it has the correct date for Yamato was registered. She never left the inland sea until Midway, however. So that means there are about 6 months where she is appearing (has a chance to appear) in every single TF that asks for a Generic BB (which is all of them that ask for a BB).
It's not just Yamato, though, it's every single warship. There were not many of ANY BB Class. Or CVs total.
From her TROM:
YAMATO, the world’s mightiest battleship, remains at Truk as a “hotel” from 29 August 1942 until 8 May 1943.
So we know where to find her for over 8 months in the middle of the war. Anchored at Truk. 5 days after that she's back in Japan for 3 months.
That is funny since in my last 1.1 patrol, I entered Truk and sailed around in april 1943, it is totally empty! :rotfl:
I guess we will have to wait until someone creates a campaign layer with Truk as a functioning IJN base!
Yamamoto Isoroku was the PERSON, the Admiral. The SHIP was the Yamato.
As for Truk, it doesn't exist for the japanese in this game. Odd, since it was virtually their "Pearl Harbor."
Seeing Yamato and Musashi together would be pretty typical, as would seeing both of them with the other BBs that happened to be in BatDiv 1 with them from time to time.
mookiemookie
04-20-07, 09:52 AM
The only BB class missiong is Nagato (and her sister, Mutsu). They look like maybe Ise the most. They were laid down in 1921.
I think maybe I'll bung them in under the Ise class - hehe it'll work as a a recognition manual mistake.
Here's a page from an ONI recognition manual of a Nagato: http://lcoat.tripod.com/Nagato.jpg
LobsterBoy
04-20-07, 09:53 AM
If you're going to work on the random appearance of ships, don't forget the US as well. I left Pearl on a patrol and saw a US task force with 2 New Mexico and 2 North Carolina battleships (with escorts, no carriers).
On Dec. 17th 1941 !!!!!!
It seemed they were on their way to the Marshalls.
AhhhFresh
04-20-07, 10:08 AM
Yamamoto Isoroku was the PERSON, the Admiral. The SHIP was the Yamato.
As for Truk, it doesn't exist for the japanese in this game. Odd, since it was virtually their "Pearl Harbor."
Seeing Yamato and Musashi together would be pretty typical, as would seeing both of them with the other BBs that happened to be in BatDiv 1 with them from time to time.
Ah, whoops.
I wasn't sure, but naively I wouldn't have expected them to travel together. Eggs in one basket and whatnot.
The primary rule in warfare is "concentration of force." Any failure to mass forces is the actual problem. So the "eggs in one basket" thing doesn't apply. Spreading out your principal combatants increases their chance of being destroyed in detail.
Look at the Midway attack. Yamamoto spread his attack for into 3 groups incapable of mutual support (no, the Alaska operation doesn't count, it was planned before Midway and while useful as a possible distraction, it was not intended as a distraction). The mind boggles. Had the "Main Body" (the very title of the BB group tells volumes of the IJN's failure to recognize the lesson they taught the world December 7th) sailed with the CVs they could ahve at least added to the volume of AAA fire, and might possibly have sucked up some of the attacks from the air. It also would have given them a better chance to try and force a surface engagement, somethig that was impossible with the Main Body so far behind the CVs.
tater
I didn't see anything where the original poster said he was in career mode ... just that he sunk 5 of em ...
But then what do I know?
Doesn't matter. ALL missions in SH4 pull from the campaign layers. If you make a Midway mission as a single mission, for example, it will superimpose on top of the standing mission in the campaign.
BTW, you can play any single mission, then steam for a base "refit" (should be refuel/rearm") and keep hunting forvever.
If you're going to work on the random appearance of ships, don't forget the US as well. I left Pearl on a patrol and saw a US task force with 2 New Mexico and 2 North Carolina battleships (with escorts, no carriers).
On Dec. 17th 1941 !!!!!!
It seemed they were on their way to the Marshalls.
What are the most important ships to check dates in service for? Just battleships? Battleships & carriers? Cruisers? What ship types will be immediately obviously wrong to the player who knows his stuff? I'd like to fix some of these issues but I'm trying to keep RFB as compact as possible so I really don't want to have to address the entire fleets of all nations.
The campaign layers are just awful thoguh, beery. They have jap merchants sailing to ports that belong to the allies, important places totally AWOL (Truk, for example). Really is a mess.
At a minimal level, I think that for the "RFB" type experience a few things need to be addressed at mimimum.
1. The major combatants need to be FAR more limited. CVs and BBs in other words. Seeing any of them should be special. Random TFs that include them need the oilers expunged and their speeds raised to 15-16 knots---contact of a TF should be frustrating sometimes, "We spotted Yamato, but were not positioned to attack. Made contact report."
2. The combatants most likely to be seen by players need to be more realistic---DDs and below. Fewer of them in the company of merchants, particularly early in the war. Fleet DDs on escort duty should have the same skill level they have guarding a CV---they are the same ships and crews, after all.
3. reduce the contact report stuff for the group properties. The current mod reducign the range that you get radioed data is a good start, but the reality is that the chances of every single convoy, TF, etc making a report in the first place are WAY too high, IMO.
SgtWalt65
04-20-07, 12:58 PM
I spotted it once on my way back to base, had just use up all torpedoes, and i certainly wasn't going to take it on with the deckgun (although that thought did enter my mind :rotfl: ) so all i could do is watch it sail pass. And what a huge scary beast it is!
This ship would probably take 6 or more torpedos:hmm:
6 is right, sunk it last night at about 2am CST ( real life time that is ). Nice spread to, from the bow to the stern. The 1st torpedo hit just forward of the No. 1 Turret and last torpedo hit just under the float planes at the stern. She sank in under a minute and I am at full realism. She just did a fast roll and then went down by the bow. Man that thing has a lot of life rafts. I almost didn't get away, took a lot of damage and had to limp back to Pearl.
Bilge_Rat
04-20-07, 01:45 PM
If you're going to work on the random appearance of ships, don't forget the US as well. I left Pearl on a patrol and saw a US task force with 2 New Mexico and 2 North Carolina battleships (with escorts, no carriers).
On Dec. 17th 1941 !!!!!!
It seemed they were on their way to the Marshalls.
What are the most important ships to check dates in service for? Just battleships? Battleships & carriers? Cruisers? What ship types will be immediately obviously wrong to the player who knows his stuff? I'd like to fix some of these issues but I'm trying to keep RFB as compact as possible so I really don't want to have to address the entire fleets of all nations.
Not having more info, it is hard to comment, but battleships and carriers would be the place to start.
There should be a pretty low chance to run into a IJN carrier TF since they only went out on particular operations, for example AFAIR:
-PH operation nov-dec 41 (6 CV)
-wake op - dec. 41 (2 CV)
-Dutch Indies - jan-mar. 42 ( 2- 4 CV intermittent)
-Ceylon - april 42 (6 CV)
-Coral Sea - may 42 (2 CV)
-Midway - june 42 (4 CV)
-Guadalcanal - aug-nov 42 (2 cv intermittent)
from nov 42 to june 44 - IJN CVs are mostly brought back to japan for training of new air groups, sometimes based at Truk.
-late 43? - Truk is evacuated due to increasing allied air attacks. Combined fleet is moved west. The Tawi Tawi anchorage in the Phillipines was used. The fleet was also based in Singapore to be closer to fuel supplies, but I think that was only from early 44 to nov. 44
-marianas - june 44 - (6 CVs?)
-Leyte Gulf - Oct. 44 - ( 4 CVs?)
After nov - dec. 44, all CVs would have been in Japan.
BBs would basically accompany the carriers either as direct support or in separate accompanying TFs.
BBs operated on their own in the Dutch Indies dec 41- mar. 42, usually as distant support. They carried out a number of night bombardment missions on Guadalcanal in sept-nov. 42.
Apart from those operations you would usually only run into a CV or BB in a TF shuttling between the ports, japan - truk - Tawi Tawi - Singapore;
so sightings were few and far between.
CAs and CLs were different since they were more the workhorse of the IJN.
sqk7744
04-20-07, 03:11 PM
If you're going to work on the random appearance of ships, don't forget the US as well. I left Pearl on a patrol and saw a US task force with 2 New Mexico and 2 North Carolina battleships (with escorts, no carriers).
On Dec. 17th 1941 !!!!!!
It seemed they were on their way to the Marshalls.
What are the most important ships to check dates in service for? Just battleships? Battleships & carriers? Cruisers? What ship types will be immediately obviously wrong to the player who knows his stuff? I'd like to fix some of these issues but I'm trying to keep RFB as compact as possible so I really don't want to have to address the entire fleets of all nations.
Thanks for looking into this Beery! :up:
I sunk 2 yamato class battleships with 80% realism (only external camera left on) in a task force that consisted of 3 yamatos, 2 other BBs, several light cruisers and god knows how many destroyers. This was at night and in a massive storm, so all ships that tried to drop dc on me just overturned, which is another complaint in itself.
Then today I was returning to peral harbor and ran into a friendly task force with battleships and 3 carriers... when I got to midway for a refuel I noticed more battleships and two carriers. I was under the impression that america only had 4 carriers period and almost all of our battleships, but its been so long since Ive actually looked into that type of stuff, so Im probably wrong.
As far as checking the info beery Id just check for the larger ships of america and japan :P BBs and Carriers
Before the Battle of Midway, you should not have even seen 1 Yamato outside the Inland Sea, much less her unfinished sister (not fitted out til the end of September, '42) and the imaginary 3d Yamato, lol.
The US is equally FUBAR, particularly early war. Later there were so many CVs and CVEs that seeing them all over wouldn't be nearly as jarring.
Hartmann
04-22-07, 01:27 AM
The thing is, Yamato should be that one ship that makes the player think "Oh my God! The Yamato!". It should be rare enough to get a real response out of the player. When it becomes as frequent a sight as a piece of junk mail it loses a whole lot of its impact. I remember in the original Silent Hunter, I saw the Yamato once in all the time I played the game and as I lined up to take my shot at her I was shaking and sweating - that was a huge deal. Seeing it multiple times in every single career makes it just another big ship. This is why it's necessary to make it rare - not just for the sake of realism, but because a rare Yamato makes the game far more fun.
yes i´m agree.
in sh1 i only see and sunk the yamato one time in two full careers 1942-1945 :yep: , but it makes it a very special experience.:roll:
i found it one night, zigzaging with a destroyers scort, and in one of this maneuvers it was at 90º , so i can launch 6 torpedoes and turn for another 4.
i think that yamato there is only one, like biskmark .
Actually, just like Bismark, Yamato had a sister ship. (Tirpitz and Musashi respectively.
i think that yamato there is only one, like biskmark .
As Tater said:
Tirpitz
http://www.kbismarck.com/tirpitz.html
Musashi
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_battleship_Musashi
http://www.combinedfleet.com/musashi.htm
Not as famous as their sisters.
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.