[REL] Trigger Maru 1.7.6 (Updated 24Jan08)

[Seadogs]

Thanks Duci now get some sleep!

[Aniuk]

Ok back on topic, a quick word about the patch.

the reason it was delayed is because ive been adjusting the zones.cfg file.



Now, in my opinion, the reason for sinking mechanics mods is twofold:
1.) to make ships sink more realistically
2.) to make ships harder to sink, with the overall bottomline intent, to reduce tonnage.

Reducing tonnage to more realistic levels has always been one of my intents, and ive gone about this in many ways. From a slightly ramped up AI, to taters campaign scripting, and now, a more realistic sinking mechanics based on wernersobes work.

This zones file ill be introducing, is a bit of a departure from wernersobes orginal work, and is behaves very similar to sinking mechanics found Sh3 supermods.

In a nuthshell, the larger the ship is, the harder it will be to sink. Small merchants will still take about 1 torpedo, medium merchants 1 to 2, large merchants will take 3, to 4, to maybe even 5 torpedos. LIkewise captial ships you can expect to take 4 to 6 torpedos, in the case of the yamato, well, your going to have your work cut out for you. Also, the days of sinking ships with 12 or so shots from the deck gun (even with reduced shell damage) is over. An undamaged medium merchant from the one test i ran, will probably take anywhere from 20 to 40 well placed shells to sink.

As an aside, you wont get credit for any sinking until the ship is acutally sliding under the surface. Likewise the jap crew won't jump ship until the ship is well and truly gone. To me, the target destroyed message when the ship was still riding high above the surface was just plain silly.


Ok, gameply wise, Some things to keep in mind.

1.) Deck gun, shoot below the waterline to FLOOD the compartment. You'll need to flood two or more compartments to get a ship to sink. You'll probably need to pump at least 7 to 10 shells at a minium per compartment to start the flooding. If your not shooting below the waterline, your wasting your time. Any holes you punch into the hull and if it should rise above the waterline, it will no longer flood.


2.) For large merchants and above, be sure to check the ships draft and set your torpedo depth about 5 feet above the draft (or 2 feet below it if your gonig for a magnetic shot) Ideally you'll want to get your shots well below the waterline. This will greatly increase your chances of a sinking.

3.) Spread your shots out more. Damage as many compartments as you can. 2 torpedos into the same compartment, isn't going to do you a whole lot of good. Your objective is to cause as much flooding as you can.


Ive about got this thing wrapped up, and so far test results are looking great. Some people will love this, some will hate it, i can't please everybody.

I'm just a "player of the game". Living in the Neterlands and reading your trucker discussion with high interesst. Also the links. I know it's not the reason that you are on this forum. But what's the problem? 90% procent of the time you all are writing about the game and are making high quality stuff. BUT: you all are humans, not machines! As a manager on what you would call: the Army corps of Engineers I am enjoying a friday afternoon free from work and have a look at the forum. You're expertise in modding the game is so highly appreciated by me, that I can only admire all of you for your contributions. So once in a while you fire a dud torpedo on another subject. I can skip it, if it's annoying, i can read it if I like. For me there is no reason to apologize for being a human! (and perhaps just a little bit egoistic, I'm professionally iterested). Have a nice weekend and if you are tired of it all) DIVE DIVE!! (like I do sometimes when the real world is just a little bit heavy). And if it matters: your work is more than pleasing for me (although you make it more challenging) Kind regards.

[ReallyDedPoet]

Nice post Aniuk :yep:

Welcome to SUBSIM :up:


RDP

[Aniuk]

Nice post Aniuk :yep:

Welcome to SUBSIM :up:


RDP

Thanks! It's fun, challenging and breathtaking to learn and play SH4:know:

[MaxenThor]

I've just returned to port and have been able to install TM 1.6 but am unable to find the "added speed chart map/pull down mod by Captain Cox" that is mention in the Change Log. I looked every where I know to look and have been unable to find it. The only additional Mods that I have added are those suggested by Ducimus except for the Ship Power Pack 2. Am I not looking for it in the right place? Thanks for all help and all suggestions.

[ReallyDedPoet]

I've just returned to port and have been able to install TM 1.6 but am unable to find the "added speed chart map/pull down mod by Captain Cox" that is mention in the Change Log. I looked every where I know to look and have been unable to find it. The only additional Mods that I have added are those suggested by Ducimus except for the Ship Power Pack 2. Am I not looking for it in the right place? Thanks for all help and all suggestions.
It is in the main Trigger install, it replaces the grammaphone image, you will see it in the upper left hand corner when you depress the grammaphone button.
Just click on it and drag it into view.

Of note, grammaphone function is still there, just not the image.


RDP

[FooFighters]

Ok now lower the realism settings ya bunch of pansies! :rotfl:

:p :p :D

Nice post Aniuk :yep:

Welcome to SUBSIM :up:


RDP

Thanks! It's fun, challenging and breathtaking to learn and play SH4:know:

Welcome to the club (more dutchies :D )

[MaxenThor]

I've just returned to port and have been able to install TM 1.6 but am unable to find the "added speed chart map/pull down mod by Captain Cox" that is mention in the Change Log. I looked every where I know to look and have been unable to find it. The only additional Mods that I have added are those suggested by Ducimus except for the Ship Power Pack 2. Am I not looking for it in the right place? Thanks for all help and all suggestions.
It is in the main Trigger install, it replaces the grammaphone image, you will see it in the upper left hand corner when you depress the grammaphone button.
Just click on it and drag it into view.

Of note, grammaphone function is still there, just not the image.


RDP
Thank you Reallydedpoet I found it! :up: Much appreciated. :)

[ReallyDedPoet]

I've just returned to port and have been able to install TM 1.6 but am unable to find the "added speed chart map/pull down mod by Captain Cox" that is mention in the Change Log. I looked every where I know to look and have been unable to find it. The only additional Mods that I have added are those suggested by Ducimus except for the Ship Power Pack 2. Am I not looking for it in the right place? Thanks for all help and all suggestions.
It is in the main Trigger install, it replaces the grammaphone image, you will see it in the upper left hand corner when you depress the grammaphone button.
Just click on it and drag it into view.

Of note, grammaphone function is still there, just not the image.


RDP
Thank you Reallydedpoet I found it! :up: Much appreciated. :)

Glad it worked out for you :up: You will see in the bottom right corner four small buttons, they are for the grammaphone.


RDP

[Ducimus]

Almost done... just testing some final tweaks on the large merchants. yippee!

[ReallyDedPoet]

I'm waiting :yep:


RDP

[Ducimus]

Trying to wrap this up before i go to work, one last tweak....

[Snuffy]

Hunh? What? 1.7?!!?

[Subject]

Keep on truckin' :rock:

Have a nice weekend and thanks for your work! I like the idea of picking up a new construction - and the "Find your crushdepth"-order gave me the most intense hour :huh:

Swear I heard the radarman *cough*noob*cough* as I was all over walls looking for leaks...

[ReallyDedPoet]

Hunh? What? 1.7?!!?

Patch :yep:


RDP

[Ducimus]

After spending all damn week one single file, i have to say, phhhhhttt im done... errr.. no im not done.. ive done all that im going to do.

http://www.ducimus.net/sh4/release/TMARU-Patch_1.6.2.7z
(202KB)


This patch addreses two things:

- enviormentals that bugged me. scene.dat, smoke, and the like.

- Improved sinking mechanics.


Theres always soemthign else to do, i thought about retuching the sim.cfg to make night surface attacks eaiser, but people really do not need me to tweak a single variable for them. That, and i dont have the time to properly test it to make sure its not screwing over the AI visuals.

[donut]

Now, in my opinion, the reason for sinking mechanics mods is twofold:
1.) to make ships sink more realistically
2.) to make ships harder to sink, with the overall bottom-line intent, to reduce tonnage.

Reducing tonnage to more realistic levels has always been one of my intents,

Ive about got this thing wrapped up, and so far test results are looking great. Some people will love this, some will hate it, i can't please everybody.

Thxs.,for allowing casual gamers/Pansy's, the ability to reverse engineer,now that we have reached GWX tonnage limits. This is just a game,& tonnage is reward/fun,so sink somting:rotfl:

[ReallyDedPoet]

Thanks Ducimus, and on a Friday at that :rock::rock::rock:


RDP

[holtzbr]

Now go sink some ships.

:up:

[Ducimus]

My adhoc documentation on the improved sinking mechanics.

The primary thing that ive done, was adjust hitpoints, and critical flotation.

Hitpoints for most compartments is 240 hit points now. Critical flotation on many compartments was changed from 0.0, to 0.3, and in some places 0.1 or 0.2

In general, how damage is applied is this.
The game takes the critical flotation as a percentage, and mulitpies that against a compartments hitpoints. This equates the minimum damage that must be applied to that compartment in order for it to start to flood.

WHich, in most compartments in TM 1.6.1, means this:
240 * 0.3 = 72

So at a minimum, 72 points of damage must be applied to a compartment in order for it to start the flood. At 72-73 points of damage, the amount of flooding is mimimual, as for all intents and purposes, it is a small breach. The more damage inflicted past 72 points, the faster it will flood.

Realize that in TM 1.6, most deck gun shells, is as such:
3"/50->HE = 8/20
3"/50-->AP = 6/14
4"/50->HE =12/20
4"/50->AP =10/18

Shell damage can very from 6 and 8 to as much as 20. So to start flooding, you'll have to shoot as many as 9 shells, or as few as 4 shells into a compartment in order for it to START to flood. If you want it to sink faster, you'll have to expend more rounds. Also, keep in mind you'll want to flood mulitple compartments in order to capsize the vessel your firing at. So all told you could spend as many as 20 to 40 shells in order to sink a ship by deck gun fire. Alot depends on the size of the ship as well. NOTE: All deck gun shots must hit BELOW THE WATER LINE in order to flood.


The name of the game, is to sink by flooding, and because ships have compartments, you'll have to be smart about your torpedo placement. All told, for small merchants you'll use 1 torpedo, Medium mercants, 1 to 2 torpedos, large merchants 2 to 3, and in rare cases 4 torpedo's. Destroyers range from 1 to 3 torpedos', and capital warships range from anywhere from 5 to as many as 12 torpedo's.

Also, knowing how damage is applied, id think twice about doing gun duels with a destroyer.

[sneekyzeke]

Thanks for this and everything else, Mr. Ducimus Sir! Hope to see you from time to time...respect :rock:, Zeke.

[tater]

I found the aircraft in the middle of the pacific. It's the nagumo force. The force is not actually in the game (I chnaged it to contact report every few hours and it isn;t there), but the CV airgroup IS there.

Presumably this would happen with every single scripted mission with a CV in the campaign. The missions must be allowed to load based on patrol start dates earlier than the battle to account for long patrols (you'd want to see the midway stuff on RTB, right?). The problem is that SH4 seems to load the CV airgroups at the time Campaign.cfg allows the mission to load. It's like the forces are on the map, but invisible, and the airgroups are just there.

tater

[Ducimus]

http://wilk4.com/humor/img/doh-1.jpg

[tater]

This is a stock issue, BTW.

[Ducimus]

Yeah i figured that. But, now here i went about balancing aircraft attacks based on a bug that allowed planes to be there that shouldnt ahve been there to begiin with.

DOH!

[tater]

I didn't alter the midway force waypoints, so it will be there with the crappy stock midway, just minus 1 CV (and a not remotely historical force ;) ). The only way aroud this is to have all scripted battles have the TFs spawn places where players won't ever be in range of their air, or so close to japan that all the planes won't seem weird.

The simple solution is to drop the CV air groups to zero. Alternately, if they were 1 plane of each type (elanaiba told me on another forum they are planes, not squadrons), the chances of seeing any would be small---which is why in all my testing I've never seen any, I have mine set to 1 of each plane.

tater

[leovampire]

change the entrance and exit dates for the scripted planes and put the repeat level to 0 for a quick fix without opening everything up in mission editor.

[Ducimus]

Too late! :88)

I set my modders hat aside, and hung it on the wall as of this morning.

[tater]

change the entrance and exit dates for the scripted planes and put the repeat level to 0 for a quick fix without opening everything up in mission editor.
You mean make a hole in the CV airgroups by date?

The problem is those load at patrol start like everything else. I can make no CVs have planes from 19420131 to 19420530, but if you start a patrol in that range, you'll not see any planes even during the midway battle.

There is no "repeat."

[leovampire]

send out planes on their own anytime they feel like it but if you script a plane or air group they do what they are told when they are told to do it. So the scripted planes need to be removed just let the carriers do their own thing.

[switch.dota]

Without scripted airplanes you might run into problems when on lifeguard duty.

IMO the best thing to do would be to simply eliminate ASW patrols from CVs. I mean how often were planes sent out from CVs to look for subs?

[leovampire]

not in the mission layers. And back in WWII planes were constantly sent out in good weather as they were heading to their mission point to make sure there were no surprises waiting for them. The best radar there was back then were those scout planes.

[switch.dota]

not in the mission layers. And back in WWII planes were constantly sent out in good weather as they were heading to their mission point to make sure there were no surprises waiting for them. The best radar there was back then were those scout planes.
I find it odd that a single CV can send over 20 planes my way in one day :p

[leovampire]

I don't think anyone has found out yet how the game handles the Carrier's send out the plane's in the way they do. But they will use what ever is available so if a Carrier has 20 zero's they might use them all. The problem is the game is set up so that they are heading in the sub's gerneral direction because the entire game revolves around the sub your in unless they are told to ignor player's sub when set up.

[Jhereg]

Ducimus, do not worry, your latest has the air cover much more realistic feeling than the previous 1.5 etc.:up:

I actually have to be near Japan before I am deluged with Vals, Zeros, and Kates Oh Myyyyy!! Instead of the whole trip over from Midway. Works for me!

Just want to thank you again for all the hard work and effort you and other modders have put in to make this game what it shoulda been.:sunny:

Now enjoy sinking some tonnage!

PS: Some of us do read the readme....LOL

[tater]

There are no scripted planes in the Midway mission. The carriers ARE doing their own thing, but the CVs are not yet spawned.

Only CVs.

This problem is that scripted MISSIONS that contain CVs, put the TF groups in limbo between the campaign.cfg load date, and the actual mission start. As far as I can tell, the CV airgroups are NOT in this limbo, so it acts like an invisible, stationary CV wherever the scripted (non-random) group starts (the origin waypoint).

So what we see in the area between Midway and Tokyo is the airgroups from 4 CVs, and a CVL (Taiyo standing in for Hosho).

So it's Feb 2, 1942 and you go on patrol. Because it's >= 19420201, the Midway battle loads. The ships don't actually spawn in til ~June, but the game needs it on deck in case you have a super long patrol that lasts 4 months (would happen if that date was shorter, doesn't matter). So from the moment you spawn in on patrol, even though no CVs are on the map, the CV airgroups ARE on the map at the starting point of the group scripted to appear in 4 months (or 2 months, whatever).

[tater]

http://mpgtext.net/subshare/708CV%20airgroup%20fix%201.0.rar

That is a quick fix that dumps the CV airgroups to near zero planes. (it actualy drops akitsu to zero since she was not a carrier, rather a ferry).

The problem will still exist, but the chances of seeing planes will be far lower.

This is not unrealistic, at most, a given CV might fly 3 CAP planes at a time, and they'd literally be right over the TF. In SH4, aircraft patrol tot he limit of their range. Search planes from a CV TF would only be launched when they expected the enemy because keeping search planes aloft all the time would do what it does in SH4---it alerts us that CVs are around.

By keeping ~3 planes per CV as a CAP, it encourages you to keep your head down, but isn't insane.

tater

[johntarmac]

on the subject of planes,

i have just done a patrol in the java sea and every few minutes or so(might have had TC on) 2 planes would spawn in the middle of the ocean.

they would circle a couple of times and then fly off westward.

i was hoping to find a carrier but when i wandered over there was nothing to be found

[Ducimus]

http://mpgtext.net/subshare/708CV%20airgroup%20fix%201.0.rar

That is a quick fix that dumps the CV airgroups to near zero planes. (it actualy drops akitsu to zero since she was not a carrier, rather a ferry).

The problem will still exist, but the chances of seeing planes will be far lower.

This is not unrealistic, at most, a given CV might fly 3 CAP planes at a time, and they'd literally be right over the TF. In SH4, aircraft patrol tot he limit of their range. Search planes from a CV TF would only be launched when they expected the enemy because keeping search planes aloft all the time would do what it does in SH4---it alerts us that CVs are around.

By keeping ~3 planes per CV as a CAP, it encourages you to keep your head down, but isn't insane.

tater

You rock! :up:

As an aside, Ive updated the patch with taters fix.
http://www.ducimus.net/sh4/release/TMARU-Patch_1.6.2.7z
Time for me to go play now, I are now retired i are!


http://www.ducimus.net/sh4/retirement.jpg
Good enough for goverment work!

[switch.dota]

That's 3 times now Ducimus. :hmm:

[sneekyzeke]

Thanks guys!:D

[Marka Ragnos]

Thanks Ducimus ;)

And a mirror if needed

http://bsg-online.be/downloads/TMARU-Patch_1.6.2.7z

[JScones]

Yeah if you delete a file from a mod before deactivating the mod, JSGME assume's it was a new file when you finally do deactive it, and removes the file from the active game entirely - result, stock file comes up missing.
I'm surprised the in-game file is ultimately deleted and not simply left behind. I'll do some tests and see if I can make it a bit more "user proof".

BTW, the stock file *should* still be in the MODS\!BACKUP folder, albeit with an extra suffix.

EDIT: Hmmm, in my tests, if I enable mod "A" which has files "B", "C" and "D", and then I delete file "C" from the mod "A" folder *before* disabling the mod, when I ultimately disable the mod, mod "A"'s "C" file remains behind with the file it replaced (if any) staying the in the JSGME !BACKUP folder. This is how I expected it to work - with the file deleted from the mod, it becomes invisible to JSGME, so JSGME doesn't see it when the mod is disabled and thus leaves the modded file behind in the game.

Unless I am misunderstanding the circumstances of the problem? I mean, if you *add* a file to a mod while it is enabled, and a file by that name already exists in the game, then I could understand JSGME deleting it when the mod gets disabled. The file would be deleted because there'd be no backup file to return (because the file wasn't part of the mod when it was originally enabled). Perhaps *this* is the scenario here?

[Snuffy]

I just wanna give 'ol Ducimus a big ol hug ... but ... I think I'll put it off. :up:

"D" you are the man!! :rock: What you have done in compiling TM just blows me away! :yep:

I also want to thank those whose material was added to TM without you guys, TM probably wouldn't be as good as it gets! :|\\

I am appreciative to all you guys and wish I had your patience time and skills.

But I don't, so I'm gonna go sink some ships now. :up:

[Ducimus]

Yeah if you delete a file from a mod before deactivating the mod, JSGME assume's it was a new file when you finally do deactive it, and removes the file from the active game entirely - result, stock file comes up missing.
I'm surprised the in-game file is ultimately deleted and not simply left behind. I'll do some tests and see if I can make it a bit more "user proof".

BTW, the stock file *should* still be in the MODS\!BACKUP folder, albeit with an extra suffix.

EDIT: Hmmm, in my tests, if I enable mod "A" which has files "B", "C" and "D", and then I delete file "C" from the mod "A" folder *before* disabling the mod, when I ultimately disable the mod, mod "A"'s "C" file remains behind with the file it replaced (if any) staying the in the JSGME !BACKUP folder. This is how I expected it to work - with the file deleted from the mod, it becomes invisible to JSGME, so JSGME doesn't see it when the mod is disabled and thus leaves the modded file behind in the game.

Unless I am misunderstanding the circumstances of the problem? I mean, if you *add* a file to a mod while it is enabled, and a file by that name already exists in the game, then I could understand JSGME deleting it when the mod gets disabled. The file would be deleted because there'd be no backup file to return (because the file wasn't part of the mod when it was originally enabled). Perhaps *this* is the scenario here?


Jones, i could be entirely mistaken, OR, im thinking of an older version of JSGME. I've only upgraded to the newest version only recently in the past 3-4 weeks or so.

[Ducimus]

That's 3 times now Ducimus. :hmm:

yea i know... however, watch me not listen to peoples complaints now! :rotfl:

[SpeedyPC]

G'day all,

I've transfer this subject problem in here.

I am getting some error problem when I enable the MOD using JoneSoft Generic Mod Enabler version 1.7.0 - 4, I have download both file from Trigger Maru v1.6 MOD.

File I've download and enable it:

1. REL_Trigger_Maru_1-6
2. REL_Trigger_Maru_GFX_PAK_2_1
3. TMARU-Patch_1.6.2

Than I run the Silent Hunter using the latest v1.3 patch, and I am picking error problem I cannot run the Trigger Maru MOD can you please help.

List of errors file not found:

1. data/menu/gui/layout/replayelements.dds
2. data/menu/gui/recmanual/recmancover.tga
3. data/menu/gui/recmanual/icons.tga
4. data/menu/gui/recmanual/areansel.tga
5. data/menu/gui/recmanual/areasel.tga
6. data/menu/gui/clock.tga
7. data/menu/gui/RecManual/RecManBack.tga
8. data/menu/gui/layout/tbt_1024.tga
9. data/menu/gui/deck gun 4.dds

Thank you.

[Ducimus]

( I guess tech support isn't technically modding. :roll:)



Make sure your install is a clean one, with no previous modifications, and patched to 1.3.
And although it shoudlnt matter, try enabling the mod in the following order

1.) GFX pack
2.) TM 1.6
3) TM patch 1.6.2 <----- this is the only there where i can say 100% for certian that install order matters, always enable this last.

[Navarre]

I have installed TM1.6+patch only and got a strange effect in stormy weather at dusk and at night. There is an overlay of white spots (not the seafoam) over the whole sceen always in direction of view and concentric circles around the camera postion
http://img253.imageshack.us/img253/2531/effectui8.th.png (http://img253.imageshack.us/my.php?image=effectui8.png)

Reinstalled TM 1.5 and the strange effect is gone!

[FAdmiral]

Ducimus, now you see what all the game devs have to go thru after a
game is released. Big difference is: they are getting PAID to do it....

JIM

[Ducimus]

Ducimus, now you see what all the game devs have to go thru after a
game is released. Big difference is: they are getting PAID to do it....

JIM

In addition to real world needs, this is one reason why im bowing out of the modding scene. I find that i no longer have the patience.

[jhelix70]

In addition to real world needs, this is one reason why im bowing out of the modding scene. I find that i no longer have the patience.

Just to add my two cents, your hard work is greatly appreciated by me and i'm sure many others.

:rock:

[switch.dota]

In addition to real world needs, this is one reason why im bowing out of the modding scene. I find that i no longer have the patience.
You've already done a whole lot more than most people. You deserve to enjoy the game. This and other games actually ;)

[Snuffy]

One question if I may ...

Does it seem that the rising and setting of the sun is a little off?

It seemed to me that in vanilla, the sun rose at 0630 and sat around 1900.

I've noticed since 1.3 and TM 1.6+ that the sun now seems to be a late riser in that it shows up around 0915 and sits around 2015.

I've noticed this phenomina for a while now and thought maybe someone has managed a timing sequence for the season ... if that's so, way cool, but I'm curious just the same.

The days I took the timing was March 6, 7, & 8 ...

[donut]

Noticed that also,perhaps day light savings time. sure makes for short nite on surface.:sunny: :rotfl: Looks as though SHIV_GWX,may go unsupported. we hope not !:roll: ?:hmm:

[Seadogs]

Ducimus, now you see what all the game devs have to go thru after a
game is released. Big difference is: they are getting PAID to do it....

JIM

In addition to real world needs, this is one reason why im bowing out of the modding scene. I find that i no longer have the patience.

Well, it is understandable. But great things have happened here and you should be proud of how far this thing has come along. There are some great people around here, we know who they are, I really hope will step up and maintain TM and keep it the dynamicly growing thing that it is. God knows I lack the ability to even tinker with this game. :oops:

Hope to see you pop in from time to time.

[leovampire]

I wish you luck in all your missions and long fruitfull patrol's with a lot of tonnage.

If you ever need anything or feel like testing something in your own game I am working on just yell!

[SpeedyPC]

( I guess tech support isn't technically modding. :roll:)



Make sure your install is a clean one, with no previous modifications, and patched to 1.3.
And although it shoudlnt matter, try enabling the mod in the following order

1.) GFX pack
2.) TM 1.6
3) TM patch 1.6.2 <----- this is the only there where i can say 100% for certian that install order matters, always enable this last.


Thank you :up: finally got it to work as I follow your instruction......now I can go and sink some Japs :rock: :rock: :rock: :rock: :rock: :rock:

[Shiplord]

I have installed TM1.6+patch only and got a strange effect in stormy weather at dusk and at night.
got the same effect, looking weird and horrible, I think it's a wrong manipulation of the camera view matrix. Latest Nvidia driver are very sensitive if not the Microsoft HLSL guidelines for matrix handlings were followed.

[Furb0]

Ducimus,

My thanks and appreciation for your hard work,patience and efforts in releasing this mod to the community, and updating the way you have , I am sorry to read that you are packing it in ( modding that is ) , as you seem to have a talent that most of us envy,,,,,,,.......................... ~S~


see you on the sea's sometime I hope !!!!!

regards Phil aka "furb0":|\\:arrgh!:

[neumanf15]

Ducimus,
Great mod (so far). Thank you.

Ducimus or anyone,
Since I installed the mod (and 1.6.2 patch), my chronometer is way over on the right side of my screen (actually half of it is off my screen), at least on the nav map... I can't recall if I've noticed it on any other screens. Can someone please tell me what section of what file (I think it's 1024x768.ini) I need to edit to fix this?

I'm running 1920x1200 if that makes any difference.

Thanks!

[Archie]

Ducimus,
Great mod (so far). Thank you.

Ducimus or anyone,
Since I installed the mod (and 1.6.2 patch), my chronometer is way over on the right side of my screen (actually half of it is off my screen), at least on the nav map... I can't recall if I've noticed it on any other screens. Can someone please tell me what section of what file (I think it's 1024x768.ini) I need to edit to fix this?

I'm running 1920x1200 if that makes any difference.

Thanks!

I believe that it is meant that way so you can manually click and drag it with your mouse to any part of the screen you prefer, thats what I do, and I run in 1920x1200 as well.

[ReallyDedPoet]

Welcome to SUBSIM :up: neumanf15

Not sure, but it may have to do with your resolution, I am running 1024 X 768 and the chrono is 100% visible.

Probably an easy fix\adjustment for this :yep:


RDP

[neumanf15]

Archie,
You were right. I just needed to drag it. I'd tried before, but I hadn't tried putting my cursor over the edge of the chrono, only the middle. A little experimentation got me the "Move it X" and it's now visible. THANKS!

[aurgolo]

Dear friends,
I just installed TM gfx+ TM 1.6+ patch and everything seems fine at the moment.....:yep:

First of all a big big thank you to anyone who put effort in developing this mod, this is really great......

I also have some quick question to anyone who knows the answer:

I would like to install other mods like: Natural Sinking Mechanics Mod 2.6, Super ship power pack and Balao hi res ver.3, does anyone know if they are compatible with TM?

Another question: I just left brisbane with my balao class sub, had some patrol and would like to come back to install these mods, but when in front of brisbane it only allow me to refit os postpone but not to end the patrol, why? Is it normal? In SH3 was always allowed to end a patrol and come back to base.......

Tks u all and good hunting

andrea

[donut]

Natural Sinking Mechanics Mod 2.6>>T_M1-6 Has Natural sinking mod lite:up:
Super ship power pack Will conflict,some have reported CTD. Due to file changes:damn:
Balao hi res ver.3 you may get away with this,just graphics:lol:
#4 Fermential alternitive :hmm: I'm thinking "single up all lines":rotfl:

[aurgolo]

Ok, thank you.......

do you know something about how to end my patrol at brisbane?.....it only allows to refit or postpone, very strange

[donut]

Ok, thank you.......

do you know something about how to end my patrol at brisbane?.....it only allows to refit or postpone, very strange>>Thinking try Fremantle,"Bon Voyage"!

[aurgolo]

Ok i will
but i started from brisbane and got no messages about change of base, anyway will try

[donut]

Ok i will
but i started from brisbane and got no messages about change of base, anyway will try>>Ck this out :up: http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=113040&highlight=home+port+trick

[aurgolo]

ahahahhaha..........this is crazy....

i will check the careertrack file, thank you man...... i was lost in the ocean

[aurgolo]

sorry, again i have another question,maybe somebody could help me:

playing with triggre maru mod (absolutely great) i realized that the orange pointer on my sub is disappeared, does anyone know how to get it back?

Thanks to everybody gives me some advice...........

andrea

[ReallyDedPoet]

sorry, again i have another question,maybe somebody could help me:

playing with triggre maru mod (absolutely great) i realized that the orange pointer on my sub is disappeared, does anyone know how to get it back?

Thanks to everybody gives me some advice...........

andrea
Make sure you are in port, deactivate Trigger, then go into data\misc folder, in there ( the Trigger Mod ) you will see the Umark file, delete this. When you reactivate T. Maru, your orange maker will be back to stock.


RDP

[Gunner]

Or you can download this one, its a smaller version, not as ugly as stock one
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=113392&highlight=small+orange+marker

[ReallyDedPoet]

Or you can download this one, its a smaller version, not as ugly as stock one
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=113392&highlight=small+orange+marker

Nice Gunner :up:, I was wondering where that was :yep:


rdP

[aurgolo]

thank you a lot, ok i will try...........

but when you say "deactivate" TMaru you mean that with jgsme I should uninstall patch and TMaru mod then delete the umark file and then reinstall TMaru mod + patch?

thank you a lot

A

[Seadogs]

thank you a lot, ok i will try...........

but when you say "deactivate" TMaru you mean that with jgsme I should uninstall patch and TMaru mod then delete the umark file and then reinstall TMaru mod + patch?

thank you a lot

A

Thats it. :up: Basically your just deactivating the mod, which brings you back to stock. You then delete the file from the mod which means it's not "modded out" when you re-activate it.

[Doolan]

Excellent job on TM! I'm loving every second of it. I am, however, a bit frustrated, as merchant routes seem to have changed quite a lot from what I was used to!

I always love playing the underdog, so I normally go for a sugar boat in the asiatic fleet from day 1 of the conflict. I am an enemy of save / load, so I tried 9 different patrols with disastrous results.

For a start, I always got sent to completely silent areas in which there was literally nothing to sink. Two exceptions to this rule were:

Photo recon in Manila (yes, my own base) where two carriers had spawned for some odd reason, and a tour to Luzon that revealed two different task forces on the way (which, with the new sinking mechanics, can't really be engaged with a sugar boat unless you're feeling very very lucky).

9 patrols, no merchant contacts, all warships.

Then I tried a Porpoise and got sent to Luzon again, so I spent a while scouting between two harbors to try my luck. The results were not any better: seven (yes, seven) destroyers / minelayers and, as for merchants, four fishing boats.

Where's everyone gone?

Bear in mind that I don't want a Hollywoodesque patrol full of tonnage and glory (a sugar boat can't do that really) but I'm yet to see anything larger than a sampan, and with the new escort AI my sugar boat has to turn its tail almost every time it sees a destroyer (yesterday, one saw my periscope at dusk from two miles away, and blew me out of the water in the first DC run!)

Where be them ships? :)

P.S: This is on a fresh SH4 1.3 install with TM 1.6, GFX2 and patch 1.6.2 installed in that order, no more mods. Also, I forgot to update with my last three patrols this morning from Cavite: a complete no-joy in Luzon, another in Celebes and yet another task force near Manila. Fired all four fish at a heavy cruiser, one dud, three holes. Two hours later she was still there with a slight listing, and I was getting DCed around by a throng of destroyers that I couldn't quite shake off...

[leovampire]

I am in the same boat as you looking for ships on my first patrol from Manilla.

The closer you get to Honshu the better the pickings because the Jap's havn't branched out much yet. The traffic picks up as they gain more teritory in the game. Another words T.M. was set up to reflect that so as the war and Jap's advance so does the traffic of ships.

[Doolan]

Glad to see I'm not alone in my suffering!

Stubborn as I am, I'll stick to the Asiatic Fleet and the Sugar Boat. For some reason time seems to run slower in the Pacific than in the Atlantic, and I realized my patrols were being rather short, so this time I'll try to spend at least 20 days out there and not return until fuel becomes really low. Maybe a trip or two to the Honshu area will pay off...

[leovampire]

So my crew gains more experience seeing I always start off with a lot of rookies now that we can no longer get 5000 points to start with for setting up the crew.

If it is under a month and I run out of torpedo's I head back reload and refuel then go back out. Without docking just a restock.

If worse comes to worse sink all the invasion transports heading to Luzon to reach your quota of tonage needed for the merchant sinkings. Have to sink a lot more ships and harder with the DD's but it works.

[Doolan]

I followed your advice and headed towards Honshu. About 20 days into my patrol (after a rather inconvenient cargo shipment to the Philippines) I found two merchants, which I sank (the second one took no less than three torpedoes, as the crew refused to abandon it even though she had stopped and her entire bow was under the water).

On the trip back home, I made the huge mistake of radioing Pac informing of my situation. They had the bright idea of sending me further north. After doubting a while, I chose to head there to avoid the renown hit, do the minimum patrol time and head back. Shortly after completing the objective, I spotted a DD, too close for comfort, that I hadn't seen before because of the weather. I crash dived and ducked under the thermal layer as fast as I could, but the guy got lucky and damaged my hull on my way down. I blew ballast to stop diving immediately, but being hit by a charge at 150 feet is not something a S-Boat can take easily. As soon as the flood was under control, a new leak appeared, and a new one after that one. It wasn't long before I was having tea with Davy Jones.

Moral of the story, if you think you have already pushed your S-Boat's luck too far, head back home and keep radio silence. It seems there's somebody in ComSubPac who thinks my S-Boat is a souped-up Gato or something :P

I'll have to start a new career tomorrow and be more careful.

Still, amazing experience. TMaru really makes a difference here.

[FAdmiral]

Rule #1: Stay out of Shallow Water
Rule #2: Never let Anyone, I repeat, ANYONE know where you are

JIM

[aurgolo]

3.) How do i get the mechanical clicking noise back when moving the periscope or TDC horizontaly?

If you like the clicking nose, then just delete the following file from the mod:
data/menu/cfg/dials.cfg


Dear folks i have a quick question,
I followed the instructions trying to get the mechanical noise back but with no success....did anyone experienced the same?

thank you for support, anyway TM is great and really love it......

[ReallyDedPoet]

I followed the instructions trying to get the mechanical noise back but with no success....did anyone experienced the same?

thank you for support, anyway TM is great and really love it......

Make sure you are in port, deactivate Trigger, delete the dials.cfg file, reactivate and you should be good to go.

I have done this, no problems.


RDP

[aurgolo]

Ok il will
the point is that i did not deactivate TM (instructions did not say to do that)

I will and update

ciao, tks

andrea

[ReallyDedPoet]

Ok il will
the point is that i did not deactivate TM (instructions did not say to do that)

I will and update

ciao, tks

andrea
Anytime you modify a mod, be sure that you de-activate first, make sure you are in port as well. We all live and learn here :yep::up:

Good luck with it.

Edit: Wondering if you may have problems when fixing this as you deleted the original as well as the one modded on top of it.


RDP

[capt_frank]

I recently added the new TM to a clean SHIV 1.3 install BUT have the UBI opening screen, the opening movie and the main loading screen that looks like you're looking through binocs at the UBI battleship logo.

Maybe I installed TM in the wrong order?

The main option screen does read "version" 1.3 and I see the Trigger Maru button so it looks like 1.3 is installed a-ok and TM is there, maybe.

Thanks!

[sqk7744]

Hi Ducimus,

I am loving TM 1.6!!! :up::up::up:


Currently, I'm working on creating a Kill Flag skin mod starting with the Tambor class USS Thresher SS200


I got the T01 (1941 part of 1942) and T02 (1943+) done
Please see the following post for more on this> http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=121745

Quick question for you:
Thing is, sometime in early to summer 1942 we receive a conning tower upgrade that just changes the top of the sail by removing the extra skin around the periscopes, leaving the look of the 1943 sail top, but the remainder of the conning tower is still 1941 skin, which we don't have a T01 or T02 skin for, so the game engine just displays a rusty top. ( oh and using TM v1.6 with FooFighters Tambor Hi-res skin )


This might be specific to Tambor 1941, Dec 8 start w/ TM1.6, then after your 3rd War patrol (out of Pearl) in early 1942 you receive a 'partial' conning tower upgrade, that the Tambor does not have a skin to (please see pic below)


Thanks for any input.
Cheers :arrgh!:

http://www.compuglobalhypermeganet.tv/images/sh4/skins/mayjune1942.jpg

[aurgolo]

Thank you Reallydedpoet, i followed ur instructions and now everytinhg is fine...........

I take the occasion to point out something strange i realized by chance: i was reviewing my crew in the management screen and found that in 50% of cases the description tags which appear when the pointer is on the man do not correspond to the man skill.........e.g.: the tag says watchman but the small icon on the man is a propeller which means that he should be skilled in engines.......strange

I also realized that sometimes men show a small arrow which points up, what does it mean?

Anyway i still love SH4 and I will more with TM mod installed

thank u everybody for giving suggestions......:roll:

ciao

a

[ReallyDedPoet]

Thank you Reallydedpoet, i followed ur instructions and now everytinhg is fine...........

I take the occasion to point out something strange i realized by chance: i was reviewing my crew in the management screen and found that in 50% of cases the description tags which appear when the pointer is on the man do not correspond to the man skill.........e.g.: the tag says watchman but the small icon on the man is a propeller which means that he should be skilled in engines.......strange

I also realized that sometimes men show a small arrow which points up, what does it mean?

Anyway i still love SH4 and I will more with TM mod installed

thank u everybody for giving suggestions......:roll:

ciao

a

Glad it worked for you :up:

Not sure on the description tages question :hmm:, someone else may be able to help with this.

The arrow means they are ready to be promoted.


RDP

[NefariousKoel]

I'm guessing there's no easy way to get rid of the "Natural Sinking Mechanics" mod from this?? After seeing how many files have been modded and not sure what Duci did to make them compatible with TM, anyway.

This part in 1.6 seems to be the cause of the unsinking ships issue and not Duci's zones file mod which was probably the only thing that was needed IMO.:shifty:

[Kapteeni Rantala]

RECOMMEND MODS: (if you want the FULL experience )
Silent service graphics mod by Captain Cox:
Thread w/ download links:
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=110756

Captain Midnights CBS news as it happends mod by Captain Cox:
Thread W/ download links:
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=108756
Question, does the game work properly with both your stuff and these two enabled?

[bf2player2006]

One question,

I have patch 1.6.1, do I put 1.6.2 over 1.6.1 so it looks like this:

TMaru 1.6
GFX pack
1.6.1 patch
1.6.2 patch

Or do I have to just enable 1.6.2 and forget about 1.6.1?

[donut]

One question,

I have patch 1.6.1, do I put 1.6.2 over 1.6.1 so it looks like this:

TMaru 1.6
GFX pack
1.6.1 patch
1.6.2 patch

Or do I have to just enable 1.6.2 and forget about 1.6.1?
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=636205&postcount=798

[ReallyDedPoet]

RECOMMEND MODS: (if you want the FULL experience )
Silent service graphics mod by Captain Cox:
Thread w/ download links:
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=110756

Captain Midnights CBS news as it happends mod by Captain Cox:
Thread W/ download links:
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=108756
Question, does the game work properly with both your stuff and these two enabled?



It works with those mods installed :yep:

@ bf2player2006 Welcome to SUBSIM :up:


RDP

[DRAGONFIRE_Sr(AWG)]

Well I'm glad to see Ducimus's work is as well recieved here as it is on the SH4 forums!!

[Kapteeni Rantala]

Excuse me, but I have some issues with Trigger Maru.

Deck gun doesn't seem to do anything really to anything but small ships. Last night I fired all my AP shells at this 6000 ton freighter - no real damage, it seemed (A large fire started in the ship's stern after like 50 shells, but this is far from normal. Rest of the shells did not do seem to do anything). And this ship wasn't the only merchantmen that seemed to have armour of an Yamato class battleship. Oddly, small ships (junks, fishing ships and so on) don't seem to have any problems in taking damage from the deck gun. Torpedoes work fine (when you consider the fact that American torpedoes were not most reliabe early in war).

Command bars seems to be partly messed up and along with the hotkeys (or it might be intentional and I am just confused). Conning tower's command bar ect lacks the button for binoculars, and B-key doesn't respond to binoculars command anymore. I don't know if this is intentional but I don't see a way to use my binoculars now.

Now, I don't know if this is normal, but the AI anti-aircraft gunner doesn't seem to be able to do anything. Everytime my lookout has spotted enemy aircraft I have manned the aircraft-gun with assigned crew member under orders to engage - the AI does its job in selecting the fire commands, but doesn't fire.

Any idea what this is all about?

I am using Trigger Maru with latest patch (both game and Maru), and the only other mods I am using are Silent Service Graphic Mod, Captain Midnight's Sound Mod and Browning .50 Cal mod.

[donut]

Deck gun doesn't seem to do anything really
Make sure your zones.cfg,is from WernerSobe natural sinking mechanics lite.

Layout of the bars is partly messed up , and so are hotkeys
Is intentional and just confused). adjusted to resemble SHIII

the button for binoculars, and B-key doesn't respond to binoculars command anymore.
>>Roll mouse wheel,in Bridge view,or "Tab"

Now, I don't know if this is normal, but the AI anti-aircraft gunner doesn't seem to be able to do anything. Every time my lookout has spotted enemy aircraft I have manned the aircraft-gun with assigned crew member under orders to engage - the AI does its job in selecting the fire commands, but doesn't fire.Any idea what this is all about?
Do you have stations maned in crew slots,below damage control team? & "fire at will" selected ? Hope this helps,this Sim can be a daunting challenge to a new player,welcome aboard mate

[Kapteeni Rantala]

Make sure your zones.cfg,is from WernerSobe natural sinking mechanics lite.
Now I am confused. Give me detailed instructions, please?

Do you have stations maned in crew slots,below damage control team? & "fire at will" selected ?
Yes.

[mrbeast]

The deck gun is only there to tacke small ships that don't warrent a torpedo or to finnish off a larger vessel that you had already damaged with torpedoes and was taking its time sinking.

TM uses a damage model called Natural Sinking Mechanics. This model sinks vessels through flooding, pretty much exclusively, rather than by simply ticking off enough damage points for the ship to sink. This simultes the sinking mechanics that a RL ship would have. A 6000 ton frieghter would easily soak up twice the number of AP shells in RL, unless you hit it under the water line to induce flooding to begin and then it would take a very long time to flood becuse the holes punched by a 4 or 3 inch shell would not be very big.

AP shells are best left for tackling small warships that have some degree of armour plating, they would simply go strait through a merchant without exploding (the game models this). HE is better for merchants it does more damage.

Try to hit more below the water line and the deck gun will be more effective at sinking ships.

As to the AA guns, are you using the 50 cal as an AA gun? If so it has poor elevation so unless the aircraft was coming in low (and they never do this in SH4) the AI gunner would not be able to fire. Select a 20mm cannon next time you finnish a patrol. Otherwise, make sure you have a crew member assigned to the AA gun slot on the crew manager screen.

Probably the best strategy when faced with an enemy aircraft is to crash dive imediately rather than fight it out on the surace (unless you can't dive for some reason eg. damage). A direct bomb hit on your sub can really ruin your day!:down:

TM also remapped the keys try using you mouse wheel to access the binoculars.

[Kapteeni Rantala]

The deck gun is only there to tacke small ships that don't warrent a torpedo or to finnish off a larger vessel that you had already damaged with torpedoes and was taking its time sinking.
Actually, I tend to use it for most targets that lack escort (and real armament)

In any case, I am am not convinced at all that this is the cause for the "pea" deck gun. I fired all my AP shells (full load) at the freighter and then some HE shells - all I got was a fire on the stern and no visible damage. The ship didn't seem to be effected at all. There is no way that a 6000 ton freighter, even if being fired on the hull only (not waterline), could withstand 140 3.5 inch AP shells, let alone same a number of 4.5 inch shells.

[ReallyDedPoet]

Welcome to SUBSIM :up: DRAGONFIRE_Sr(AWG)

RDP

[donut]

#1 Mount 40 mm fwd. Auto man,& select target in deck gun,"fire at waterline","Fire at will". You man 40 mm fwd. ,hit flank,Rake her with all you got! make that water line look like a sieve.It uses up her hit points fast.Under 2,000 yds.you will get shot at,but with the 40 pumping them out she doesn't hit much.:lol: OUCH !:rotfl:

[mrbeast]

The deck gun is only there to tacke small ships that don't warrent a torpedo or to finnish off a larger vessel that you had already damaged with torpedoes and was taking its time sinking.
Actually, I tend to use it for most targets that lack escort (and real armament)

In any case, I am am not convinced at all that this is the cause for the "pea" deck gun. I fired all my AP shells (full load) at the freighter and then some HE shells - all I got was a fire on the stern and no visible damage. The ship didn't seem to be effected at all. There is no way that a 6000 ton freighter, even if being fired on the hull only (not waterline), could withstand 140 3.5 inch AP shells, let alone same a number of 4.5 inch shells.

A 6000 ton ship is a very big merchant. In naval terms, a 3.5 inch gun, is a pea shooter! TM and Natural Sinking Mechanics attempt to simulate RL effects. Its not a case of how many shells you pump into a ship its where you pump them. You could shoot all of the superstructure off the ship and it would still not sink. It would look a mess probably on fire from stem to stern but still floating. The only way it would sink is if you flooded it and 3-4 inch shell holes are pretty small so it would take a long while to sink days possibly.

The deck gun is not the boats primary armament, its torpedoes are. If you're using TM and NSM the deck gun is relagated to being a secondary weapon as in RL.

[theluckyone17]

[quote]In any case, I am am not convinced at all that this is the cause for the "pea" deck gun.

Are you making sure that all your hits (well, as many as possible) are below the waterline?

The reason I asked, is 'cause I've been wanting the deck gun toned *down*. I hit a European liner yesterday with four torpedoes, surfaced, and chased down a large passenger (can't remember the exact class). 6,000 tons, if I remember correctly, or thereabouts. I fired about fifteen to twenty shots, placing them along the length of her starboard side, then got the "enemy ship sunk" message. It took forever to sink.

I believe I heard that this is a result of NSM and the critical hit variable for each compartment... but it's kinda irritating. Why bother taking all this time to line up a torpedo salvo when I can simply surface and fire a few shells?

[tater]

Don't fire the shells.

NSM is being reworked to improve the fidelity vs deck guns. Dunno how this could be added to TM, exactly. I guess look at the patch which added a fixed NSM version, and see what files were in there and do the same with the new version.

Regardless, US deck guns were not used to any great effect sinking ships over 1000 tons.

There was ONE confirmed sinking of a ship over 2000 tons during the entire war with a deck gun (I checked every single attack made in Alden's book). The few over 1000 were barely so.

tater

[aurgolo]

Hy guys,

i am playing TM since 2 weeks and i consider it.....:sunny: FANTASTIC!!!

The main task of TM is to bring you closer to reality nothing more (think about the new SFX), so do not expect a shooting gallery or a helping tool to get more renown, it is just the opposite.........and in this way it hits the target..........

LOVE IT...........!!!

[NefariousKoel]

Just a heads-up.

I uploaded a version of TM 1.62 without the more difficult sinking/damage models and a couple tweaks I've wanted to do such as adding Silent Running and Battle Stations to all stations.

ReadMe and download on this thread:
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?p=643809#post643809

[Kapteeni Rantala]

In naval terms, a 3.5 inch gun, is a pea shooter!
True, then again, merchant vessels are unarmored - which is why there was no need to mount specially large guns on submarines.

The deck gun is not the boats primary armament, its torpedoes are. If you're using TM and NSM the deck gun is relagated to being a secondary weapon as in RL.
Mate, I know what the deck gun is for, and belive me, I do not regard it as the submarine's main weapon - I regard it as a weapon that can and SHOULD be used when wasting a torpedo (on unescorted merchant vessel - as long as it is not massive) seems like a waste of munitions.

You could shoot all of the superstructure off the ship and it would still not sink. The only way it would sink is if you flooded it and 3-4 inch shell holes are pretty small so it would take a long while to sink days possibly.
I have to disagree partly. Flooding would not be only trouble of merchant ship under deck gun's shelling. The shells would sooner or later create fires inside the ship, and belive me, fires around a merchantmen (especially tanker) can have very nasty results (I remember how you could sink merchant ships in Silent Hunter III with relatively few shells, simulating what happens when shells hit on right place and set something on fire that should not be set on fire - thank you GWX)

Can't Silent Hunter 4 simulate the use of deck gun in the same way as Silent Hunter III (Having played heavily modded Silent Hunter III - the almighty GWX, I must say that the effect of the deck guns seems to be more realistic in it, and flooding is simulated too)?

US deck guns were not used to any great effect sinking ships over 1000 tons. There was ONE confirmed sinking of a ship over 2000 tons during the entire war with a deck gun.
Conserning that German 88mm and 105mm deck guns were used with good effect by U-boat skippers to sink a large number of merchant ships which displaced more than 2000 tons (even on American waters) that seems odd.

This is not a pea shooter, people - literally. There certainly were guns of far greater caliber in naval use, but against unarmored merchantmen even 3.5-4.5 inch guns are effective.

http://www.imagehosting.com/out.php/i1130812_uusimaagun.jpg

[mrbeast]

The mounting of only small guns on subs has nothing to do with need, but practicalities. Some subs mounted very large guns but they were not very succesful. Large guns were heavy and caused instability in the boat, were slow to load and use. They caused drag and slowed the boat underwater, besides making the boat easier to detect on sonar (modern subs are smooth and streamlined with the minimum of stantions and protusions precisely for this reason). Small guns could only be mounted because of the limitations of the size of fleet bouts and U boats. If they could have mounted larger guns they would have. Bigger guns=more damage. Nothing to do with the fact merchants are unarmoured.

The deck gun was a weapon of last resort. Submarines make poor gun platforms and carry no appropriate gun laying and ranging equipment beyond the scopes on the gun itself. It exposes the crew and the boat to easy damage by the enemy. Most of all it would give away a boats main weapon: stealth. Sinking a ship takes time so while a sub surfaces and begins to bombard a target, that merchant will be busy radioing its location and the fact that its under attack. A sub skipper was placing his boat under considerable risk attempting to sink targets by gunfire and generally standing orders to sub crews reflected this. Hence it only occured with small targets and to finnish off smaller merchants, usually if they had already been abandoned. Not 6000GRT merchants.

Tankers may well catch fire when hit but that isn't what sinks them. They can burn for days without sinking (remember the burning tanker in Das Boot?). Burnt out, derelict ships were not unknown drifting on the seas, days, weeks even months after they had been attacked and abandoned.

I've been searching for a while and can find no references to U boats sinking 2000+ ton merchants on a reguar basis by gunfire. Most references I can find talk of boats finnishing off ships that had first been crippled by torpedoes, or, refer to very small merchants. After 1943 most U boats discarded their deck guns as they were of little use and replaced them with extra AA guns, if at all.

Deck guns as modeled in SH3 and SH4 are way too effective IMO. They are too accurate, and cause too much damage to be very realistic. TM and NSM attempt to counter this, and are pretty succesful at that. They are attempts to simulate RL effects in SH4. If you want to cruise the seas, gunning down merchants left right and centre then do so, nothing wrong with that at all. Its not for me to say how other people should play their own game. But, IMO, its not realistic or authentic to the way U Boats and fleet boats operated in RL.

[tater]

It's also important to note that deck crews (and gun crews) are virtually invulnerable to anything short of other deck guns. 20mm, 25mm, even 40mm goes do nothing at all to the crew on deck until the sub has taken so many hitpoints damage that it is in grave danger of sinking. I've tested this extensively in an attempt to correct it to no avail.

As a result, there is virtually no reality check on gun engagements. Many japanese merchant ships were armed with AA guns, even if just MGs, and having your deck swept by MG fire was a bad thing in RL. RL merchants would also try to ram subs, and in SH4 they'd be sunk for their trouble, or at the least the sub would be undamaged.

If the Real Deck Gun mod can ever be finished, that will go some way to mitigating the superguns (particularly combined with LBO!).

tater

tater

[Kapteeni Rantala]

I have to disagree, as the former certainly did have to do with the fact that submarines in general carried relatively small guns.

IBigger guns=more damage

That is not very important because one does not specially large gun to attack vessels that are not designed or armored to withstand shelling. Even 20-40mm anti-aircraft guns were used to shell merchant ships (as you can see from this coloured footage http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kYWTt1HuSMc&mode=related&search= ) - although I am not arguing that they were meant for this their AP shells (which were fired in high rate automatic fire) certainly did do damage.

Some subs mounted very large guns but they were not very succesful.

Some submarines that happened to be large enough. In order to mount a large gun (over 110mm) the submarine needs to have enough size - too big gun on too small hull would make the gun unpractical because of what you mentioned, instability. In order to mount something like 127mm-150mm guns you would need a very large submarine - only Japanese submarines sported guns larger than 110mm and all of these submarines displaced more than 2,500 tons.

were slow to load and use.

Obviously.

They caused drag and slowed the boat underwater

All outside armament did, not just the deck gun.

The deck gun was a weapon of last resort.

I disagree, it was weapon to be used when firing a torpedo would seem like waste of munitons.

It exposes the crew and the boat to easy damage by the enemy.

Which is why they were used to attack unescorted merchant vessels.

merchant will be busy radioing its location and the fact that its under attack

Which obviously doesn't help always.

Hence it only occured with small targets and to finnish off smaller merchants. Not 6000GRT merchants.

In the United States Navy.

[quote]Tankers may well catch fire when hit but that isn't what sinks them.

Which is not what I meant. It is not the fire, it is WHAT is on fire (or what can catch fire) and what can happen due to this.

I've been searching for a while and can find no references to U boats sinking 2000+ ton merchants on a reguar basis by gunfire.

No one said anything about "regular basis" (i.e. on every patrol) - I meant to point out that U-boats sinking merchant ships with deck gun was not so uncommon before 1943.

Deck guns as modeled in.... SH4 are way too effective.

Having played the game with the mod which is the title of this topic I dare to disagree.

TM and NSM attempt to counter this, and are pretty succesful at that.

If you consider firing 200 shells, including 140 4.5 inch AP shells at a ship's hull (including waterline) - and the only damage being a small fire on the stern (speed is not reduced and no real indications of damage being taken appear) to be realistic then I don't know what is.

Oddly, only deck guns seems to be effected by this problem - not guns of SAME caliber on AI controlled surface warships (mission modder).

its not realistic or authentic to the way U Boats and fleet boats operated in RL

Leave the U-boats out of this.

http://www.sammlerpoint.de/geschichte/g2163.jpg

Kampf und Untergang der Kriegsmarine, written with the assistance of several former Kriegsmarine personnel, including Grand Admirals Erich Raeder and Karl Dönitz, details the effect U-boats caused at their height with torpedoes and deck guns.

Many japanese merchant ships were armed with AA guns, even if just MGs, and having your deck swept by MG fire was a bad thing in RL.

Of course - and as I have said before I would not attack armed merchant ship (or expect a real-life submarine commander to have done so) with deck gun, but this did not prevent submarine commanders from doing so. Italian submarine Comandante Cappellini sank three merchant ships with deck gun on one patrol, all displacing more than 2,000 tons (5,186, 5,029 and 7,472 tons). Mind you, these were all armed.

[don1reed]

Excellent posts, gentlemen.

Kriegsmarine Doctrine:
U-Boat Commander's Handbook
("U.Kdt.Hdb.")

1942

New Edition 1943

High Command of the Navy

see:

Section V
The Submarine as a Gunnery Vessel.
pp. 81 to 84.

Cheers,

[tater]

The deck gun was a weapon of last resort. I disagree, it was weapon to be used when firing a torpedo would seem like waste of munitons.

Where are the logs of attacks on decent sized merchants. I don;t care in the least about U-boats, SH4 isn't about U-boats, so don't even bother with U-boat examples. Alden's book lists (in tabular form) every single submarine attack made by the USN in WW2. Every one. Sinkings, and damage, and he has entries for attacks by all types of weapons, even mixed attacks. They were simply not used aside from sinking sampans routinely.

It exposes the crew and the boat to easy damage by the enemy. Which is why they were used to attack unescorted merchant vessels.

Not by US submarines they weren't.

Hence it only occured with small targets and to finnish off smaller merchants. Not 6000GRT merchants. In the United States Navy.

SH4 is about the USN. I don't care about the KM in the least except to the extent they went to the bottom. If you want to demonstrate their effectiveness by the KM, count every single deck gun attack made from whatever the equivalent book for the KM is that lists every single attack made compared to post war records from the allies to make sure the claims match real sinkings and get back to me ;)

I've been searching for a while and can find no references to U boats sinking 2000+ ton merchants on a reguar basis by gunfire. No one said anything about "regular basis" (i.e. on every patrol). I am pointing out that it was not as so uncommon for U-boats before 1943. What % of unescorted merchants above 2000 tons were attacked this way? I can get that figure for some time period for the US boats, I just have to count them up.

Deck guns as modeled in.... SH4 are way too effective. Having played the game with the mod which is the title of this topic I dare to disagree.
I still think they are absurdly easy to hit with, and damage and damage control are still pretty simplistic in SH4.

TM and NSM attempt to counter this, and are pretty succesful at that. If you consider firing 200 shells, including 140 4.5 inch AP shells at a ship's hull (including waterline) - and the only damage being a small fire on the stern (speed is not reduced and no real indications of damage being taken appear) to be realistic then I don't know what is. A bugged target DM doesn't indict the entire mod. Regardless, since the smallest ship (merchant) in game is on the large size for anything actually fired upon with deck guns by USN subs, what difference does it make?

US subs didn't attack anything above really small merchants with deck guns. There were very very rare exceptions. So pretty much using your deck gun on anything in SH4 aside from sampans is flatly unrealistic. In virtually never happened. (and many of the "2000 ton" ships attacked by US boats with the DG turned out to be under 1000 tons in actual fact.)

Many japanese merchant ships were armed with AA guns, even if just MGs, and having your deck swept by MG fire was a bad thing in RL. Of course, and as I have mentioned earlier, I would not attack armed merchant ship (nor would I have expected real-life submarine commanders to do so), although this did not prevent submarines from attacking armed merchant ships. Italian submarin Comandante Cappellini sunk three merchant ships with her deck gun, all displacing far more than 2000 tons (5186, 5029 and 7472 tons). And mind you, these were armed ships.
RL skippers in the USN didn;t attack UNARMED merchants of any size with DGs, either.

tater

[mrbeast]

Can you supply any evidence that U boats sank 2000+ ton merchants with gunfire? Name a ship?

[tater]

Can you supply any evidence that U boats sank 2000+ ton merchants with gunfire? Name a ship?

It would be important to specify that they should be merchants attacked with DGs, not oreder to be abandoned, THEN fired upon at their leisure with DGs. IE; maneuvering targets, fighting not to be sunk (which would be all jap ships)

[mrbeast]

Can you supply any evidence that U boats sank 2000+ ton merchants with gunfire? Name a ship?

It would be important to specify that they should be merchants attacked with DGs, not oreder to be abandoned, THEN fired upon at their leisure with DGs. IE; maneuvering targets, fighting not to be sunk (which would be all jap ships)

Thats a good point Tater.:up:

What I should have said was sunk by gun fire 'in action'. That is sub sails up/surfaces and opens fire on manned merchant vessel. Also not a ship previously damaged by torpedoes or other.

[Kapteeni Rantala]

Where are the logs of attacks on decent sized merchants.
I never claimed that the United States Navy's submarines would have sunk more than apparent one 2,000+ ton merchant.

don't even bother with U-boat examples
U-boats are as valid example of deck gun carrying submarines as any other.

I don't care about the KM in the least except to the extent they went to the bottom
I find your statement insulting towards Kriegsmarine veterans (the name's Wallenberg, by the way).

If you want to demonstrate their effectiveness by...
I am not trying to to demonstrate anything else than that deck gun was a potent weapon and for some reason it is not as potent as it should be in my copy of this very interesting game.

Reading your post almost look like that you are hostile/angry to me over this deck gun issue. Rest assired, I am not saying that the United States Navy "sucked" or anything because of what they sank with deck guns.

A bugged target DM doesn't indict the entire mod.
Of course not, and I have never claimed such. I raise my hat and bow deep before modders because of the effort they see trying to improve the game.

since the smallest ship (merchant) in game is on the large size for anything actually fired upon with deck guns by USN subs, what difference does it make?
I am not the United States Navy submarine fleet from World War II? No one is playing the game by "ships sunk historically" book.

So pretty much using your deck gun on anything in SH4 aside from sampans is flatly unrealistic.
Yes - in sense that that's what the deck guns were used historically by the submarines (I am not taking the word sampan literally, of course) - not because you can't sink anything bigger with it.

Can you supply any evidence that U boats sank 2000+ ton merchants with gunfire?
To ask such question sounds silly, conserning that German U-boats sank over 14 million tons of shipping, yet you seem to assume that not a single ship of more than 2,000 tons was sunk by deck gun. I already have named the book to which I partially base my statement (which was written with the assistance of both Grand Admirals, the latter being commander of German U-boat fleet).

Name a ship?

Few examples.

Pan Norway 9,231 tons
Alcoa Guide 4,804 tons.
Korsholm 2,647 tons.

All ships were sunk by U-123.

And as I said, I am not saying anything else than it was very possible to sink "bigger fisher" with deck gun than historically were - the fact that such sinkings were done by navies other than the United States Navy is not relevant, it only proves that they were possible.

[mrbeast]

Solely by gun fire?

My whole point is that it is not typical of submarine warfare anywhere in WWII to attack and sink merchant shipping in this fashion. It runs counter to the whole point of submarine warfare. There may be a handful of examples, but they are atypical of the nature of sub warfare. Hardegen was operating on a totally unprepared coast where ships ran individually with their formation lights on and there was little chance of being intercepted by naval forces.

[Kapteeni Rantala]

Solely by gun fire?
Yes.

There may be a handful of examples
Quite a bit more, although I understand what you mean. Obviously deck gun sinkings were not a large part of any nation's overall succes with their submarines.

My whole point is that it is not typical of submarine warfare anywhere in WWII to attack and sink merchant shipping in this fashion. It runs counter to the whole point of submarine warfare

Of course. I have only been saying that it is very possible, and (I think that this is probably a bug).

Also, I don't want to raise personal grudges over this issue.

[tater]

My point was that if the deckguns are very effective weapons in SH4 they will be used ahistorically. Since they were NOT used in this fashion in RL, making them more effective is a pointless excercise in terms of simulation.

If you want to simulate US sub surface actions, attack sampans. If you want a fantasy game with US subs, go ahaead and use the deck gun. <shrug>

As for the KM, I don't care about KM vets in the least, frankly, if I could rewrite history, not a single u-boat would have survived. I have a german surname, myself, so what. Fighting for ww2 Germany was wrong, period. Every minute the KM lengthened the war cost countless lives on all sides (I suppose we could divide however many tens of millions of dead by the number of minutes in the war to nail down a number). There is no rational way to look at their contribution other than it furthered murder on a frightening scale (in addition to the murder of the merchant sailors directly killed).

I would not insult a modern day player of a ww2 u-boat game for playing the game, they are not the people in the RL period. I have no problems in the least insulting those that aided Nazi Germany by action, or inaction, they deserve it.

tater

[mrbeast]

Kapteeni no one wants to raise any kind of grudge over this, certainly not me. :up:

In fact I've, enjoyed this thread; has been very interesting. Maybe there was a bug concerning that ship, but as Tater says it doesn't mean that TM is unrealistic. I have never said that sinking a ship with deck gun fire was not possible, just that as a percentage of ships sunk it was small and not typical because it was problematic for many reasons as I have outlined in my posts. I'm sure if you asked any retired WWII sub commander what the best way to sink a ship with gun fire was he would echo my comments about location of hits etc, I bet Hardegen was pretty surprised he managed to get way with what he did in U123!

[Kapteeni Rantala]

My point was that if the deckguns are very effective weapons in SH4

Haven't said that they already aren't effective enough for sure, could be just a bug.

Since they were NOT used in this fashion in RL...pointless terms of simulation. If you want a fantasy game with US subs, go ahaead and use the deck gun. <shrug>

As United States submarines were not under orders not to engage enemy merchant ships larger than 1,000 tons with deck gun I have to disagree. And technically all of our campaings in the game are ahistorical or fantasy if you will if you sink something that was not historically sunk.

There is no rational way to look at their contribution other than it furthered murder on a frightening scale (in addition to the murder of the merchant sailors directly killed).

Very interesting words especially when you consider the fact that the United States Navy practiced unrestricted submarine warfare on Pacific and thus was as much a "murderer" as Kriegsmarine is by your words. Your "murder" statement is not valid according to Nuremberg trials where Admiral Nimitz testified on behalf of Grand Admirals Raeder and Dönitz that if they were to be sentenced of your "murder" then him too should be.

I have no problems in the least insulting those that aided Nazi Germany by action, or inaction, they deserve it.
That is a very black and white statement. Go tell that to avarage American veteran and he will tell you something about war - their enemies in general were no different from their them, they were people fighting for their country, and on a battlefield policies aren't the thing in soldier's mind.

If you really want to belive so then go ahead, I can't stop you, but your logic has already been proven false.

[tater]

They lengthened a war for the side responsible for the entirety of casualties in europe. Every death due to ww2 in europe---every single one---was the fault of Germany. No German invasion of Poland (I guess we can count the CCCP in, they are little credited with their cobeligerant status in Poland), no WW2. It's arguable that had Germany not had success early on, the Japanese wouldn't have started the war in the PTO in the first place.

My point was not that they were mass murderers for unrestricted sub warfare, but that they lengthened the war, and every day more died. If the u-boats added 10% to the length of the war, they are responsible for 10% of the total deaths on all sides. The guys fighting to end the war are only responsible for lives they actually took, and only then noncombatants. more than 50% of the japanese merchant marine was officially military (owned outright by the IJA and IJN).

The japanese didn't sign any treaties regarding rules for warfare anyway, all bets were off. I don't buy the "just doing their job" nonsense. At a certain point you have the responsibility to act. The notion that people didn't know what was going on in Germany is plainly wrong, they did, and they chose to look the other way. Guys being just the same on all sides is fine for ww1, but it doesn't cut it in ww2.

tater

[leovampire]

Relax guys supose to be friendly and talking about problems, fix's and people needing help with things related to Triger Maru!

Go on the main page and start a war or discusion there so if people have questions about the mod or need help they can get it.

Please?!


Show some respect for Duciums work and don't start a war on his thread!

Now shake hands!!!!

[mrbeast]

Think this thread is getting a little off topic here.

[Kapteeni Rantala]

EDIT: Indeed, this is getting off topic, and I am willing to stop for my part.

I don't buy the "just doing their job" nonsense.
Neither do I - especially on command level. I am not defending people directly involved in war crimes, but I am not taking part in a crusade against tens of millions veterans on the Axis side who literally were doing their job - fighting for their country, and fighting for his country was not something that you can be accused of according to laws.

The japanese didn't sign any treaties regarding rules for warfare anyway
Right, they did not, but that doesn't give the right to accuse millions of soldier in the country's armed forces. To blame the entire military is absurd and makes things black and white.

One could also accuse the entire United States military, along with her Allies, of all crimes committed during the liberation of Europe (in which one of her Allies, the Soviet Union occupied several countries and annexed territory from Finland - which had been dragged into war by Soviet agression)

more than 50% of the japanese merchant marine was officially military (owned outright by the IJA and IJN).
There's still that another 50% along with a large number of privately owned fishing vessels.

The notion that people didn't know what was going on in Germany is plainly wrong, they did
To some extent, yes, but to claim that 90 million Germans knew about what exactly was going on is absurd. They knew that people were being persecuted - they did not know in masses that people were being gassed, only a handful, thousands of people out of 90 million knews what was going on. If you would hear of reactions of German people who had been told that the camps were "secret military factories and installations" and were later asked by the Allies for help at the liberated camps you would be suprised. Propaganda worked in Germany as it did in other countries, including the United States.

In any case, belive as you will if you really wish to.

[mrbeast]

Very 'On topic'. :hmm:

[Kapteeni Rantala]

I made that note after I had already posted the message, having written it while the two previous ones had already been posted.

[mrbeast]

No problem Kapteeni.:up:

Just think some posts are getting a little heated.

[Kapteeni Rantala]

Now that a new page has been opened, back to the issue.

I don't know, really, if my problem with the deck gun (two pages back) are caused by a bug or the mod, but judging from some comments I'd say its a bug. I will try few things to see if it goes away.

Another issue; although I am aware of the fact that American torpedoes were not most reliable until later in war, is it normal for half of the fired torpedoes almost always to explode before hitting the target with "faulty torpedoes" setting turned on?

[mrbeast]

US torps had many problems initially, depth settings, magnetic detonators, contact detonators you name it!:damn:. Different problems got solved at different times but by around 1943 the Type 14 (the main offender for these problems) had been modified to an acceptable level.

My torpedoes seem too reliable if anything! If your getting half duds its actually better than RL!

[tater]

Sorry for the OT.

US fish were horrible. If they didn't fail with the magnetic pistol, they failed to detonate with anything close to a 90 degree impact on contact.

It;s really hard to tell how terrible they were because US doctrine was also poor. Early on, many attacks were made on sonar alone from 100ft down. Also, the doctrine for the magnetic pistol was to set the fish under the keel. That makes sense, but they set the fish to run 10-15 feet below the keel! They would not have detonated even had the fish not all run 10-12 feet deep. So the fish will only work on magnetic close to the hull, and they all shoot them too deep to work, and on top of that the fish run deep.

So the fish were all running 20+ feet below the keel of the targets (ALL ran 10-12 feet deep, NO early mk 14s ran true to depth, they were all calibrated wrong).

tater

[Kapteeni Rantala]

US torps had many problems initially...

US fish were horrible.

As I remembered, I was just wondering if they were THIS bad.

Ironically, Japan was the only country to have one thing that all countries except she lacked even in 1941-1942 - highly reliable torpedo. Unfortunately for Japanese, the country had overlooked the threat of submarine warfare agains't her.:hmm:

[don1reed]

Can you supply any evidence that U boats sank 2000+ ton merchants with gunfire? Name a ship?

...I know it's OT, but, it seems like an unanswered question...

therefore:

British Steamer, SS Culebra 3044 GRT sunk 35-30N 53-25W

by

U-123, Hardegen, Operation Drumbeat.

Cheers,

[switch.dota]

Just a quick note: you can use TM 1.6.2 with NSM 3.3 - just install them like this: TM 1.6 - TM 1.6.2 patch - NSM 3.3 - (anything else)

[chopped50ford]

I notice the deck gun's ROF has been changed. Almost 1 to 1.5 shots per min. How can you speed it up?

[NefariousKoel]

I notice the deck gun's ROF has been changed. Almost 1 to 1.5 shots per min. How can you speed it up?

I believe the deck gun characteristics are the .sim files in Data/Library/USSubParts/ folder and named for the specific guns.

[tater]

I just checked, the TM reload time is set to 5 seconds.

Do you have the gun MANNED?

Are you at battle stations?

tater

[donut]

On the 5.25 it does seem slow.5 sec.no way.what figure,what file?

[tater]

Library/SubParts/whatever_the_heck_the_deckgun_files_are_called.dat ;)

reload time is 5 on them.

Crew quality changes that.

[chopped50ford]

the new NSM 3.3 has a change to the time to add "realism"

But I just realized after reading these that my crew is green. 2nd patrol and that might be the issue thus far. 20 sec. reload times is what im having. The green bar is close to 3/4 up...not full.

I guess I should blame the 3rd class Petty officer and 1st class seaman who is operating this thing. :)

Oh, cant get minitweaker to open the .sim files for some reason?.!?.:oops:

[tater]

Use S3D, the minitweaker needs to be updated for every patch, S3D just opens it.

[dean_acheson]

tater,
what version of your campaign files are currently bundled with TM? Thanks. :)

[tater]

0.75?

tater

[Sgian Dubh]

To restore the sensor marks the FAQ says to disable Trigger Maru then make some edits.

How do you disable Trigger Maru?

Also, is the living, breathing ocean compatible with this mod?

[chopped50ford]

Use S3D, the minitweaker needs to be updated for every patch, S3D just opens it.

Where can S3D be found. :damn:

Thanks

[donut]

To restore the sensor marks the FAQ says to disable Trigger Maru then make some edits.Are you talking,shp shape.dds files

How do you disable Trigger Maru? Are you using JSGME.,& what version of T_M_*****

Also, is the living, breathing ocean compatible with this mod?LBO.,is in T_M_1.6
Hope this helps:huh:

[NefariousKoel]

Use S3D, the minitweaker needs to be updated for every patch, S3D just opens it.
Where can S3D be found. :damn:

Thanks

There's a link to it in the mods section somewhere... maybe do a search for "S3D mod"?

[WernerSobe]

...US fish were horrible.

...the doctrine for the magnetic pistol was to set the fish under the keel.
but they set the fish to run 10-15 feet below the keel!
They would not have detonated even had the fish not all run 10-12 feet deep.
So the fish will only work on magnetic close to the hull,
and on top of that the fish run deep.
So the fish were all running 20+ feet below the keel of the targets

tater

It smells so fishy here :rotfl:

...sorry couldnt refuse :rotfl:

[tater]

http://mpgtext.net/subshare/789TM%20rec%20manual%20patch.rar

Install this last.

Alternately, you can EASILY fix this by hand because of the dumb error I made.

Uninstall TM with JSGME.

Open up the TM 1.6 folder in MODS. Inside Data is Sea. Inside Sea, open XPC.

There are 3 files that are screwy.

XPC__sil.dds
XPC__sil.tga
XPC__shp.dds

They all have 1 too many _ in them.

Make them:
XPC_sil.dds
XPC_sil.tga
XPC_shp.dds

by deleting 1 _ from each in the file name. That's the entire fix, lol.

Duc and I both looked at that a few times, but after a while the head starts swimming with all the tiny type, lol.

tater

[switch.dota]

I have JUST encoutnered thsi problem, and you release a fix for it. Nice :yep:

[Fish40]

I've been reading this thread for quite some time now, just waiting in the wings. I'm currently useing RFB because I love realism. Unfortunately, it seems for now that RFB is on the back burner indefinitely. I really love the way this mod has developed into a sort of GWX for SH4.

As I said befor, I like the challange of realism, but I also have to have the eye candy! After all, I truly believe that a beautiful looking environment adds hugely to realistic immersion. I notice that this mod contains some of the same mods that I presently use: OakGroove's high res instruments, LeoVampire's LBO, as well as a few I don't use. I'm wondering if it will contain the new Reflections on the water mod when it's ready.

Keep up the great work! I truly believe that after my current patrol is over, this mod is going to get installed. Once again, great job!!:up:

[switch.dota]

You realise that currently TM 1.6.2 + NSM 3.3 provides quite a bit more realism, right?

[aurgolo]

http://mpgtext.net/subshare/789TM%20rec%20manual%20patch.rar

Install this last.




Sorry do i need to go back to port before installing this patch?

ciao thank you a lot

andrea

[switch.dota]

I'm *guessing* you can apply it on the go. Anyway it's not really a big deal if you wait until you end your patrol just to be on the safe side.

[tater]

While it's always a good idea to be in port, I think this one would probably work on the fly since the game is already pointing at the 3 files, they are just misnamed. Make a throw away save first, lol.

[Wilcke]

Did I hose my SH4 install, when I click on the Gramaphone button, I get the chart with the conversions.

I just run the TM 1.6.2 mod.

Wilcke

[ReallyDedPoet]

Did I hose my SH4 install, when I click on the Gramaphone button, I get the chart with the conversions.

I just run the TM 1.6.2 mod.

Wilcke
That is part of the mod, the grammaphone is still there, the buttons are located bottom right corner, scroll your mouse over them and you will see the different functions.

Remember to drag the chart into view with your mouse.


RDP

[tater]

Fish40,

I've been thinking about "realism" for a while. I'm a big fan of RFB, too, BTW.

I think that there are different paths to come to similar outcomes.

TM had as a primary motivation (I believe, though I'd not presume to put words in Ducimus's mouth) making the game more challenging on multiple levels. ASW capability is one, hunting traffic another, and aiming for more realistic tonnages sunk yet another. Visual mods are yet more realism changes.

There is what to many players seems an unintended consequence (it's hard to characterize, but is NOT unintended on Ducimus's part, IMO) that more capable ASW forces the player to behave realistically. I don't think this effect should be underestimated. To the extent you are forced to be careful, you behave more like a real skipper with ~70 men trusting their lives to your decision making.

So while I was originally interested in TM, but didn't consider it flavored to my taste, I have since changed my mind.

I think coming at it from the RFB camp, you might decide that the AI needs to be toned down a little, at least AI_visual at night (tricky since dusk/dawn = night in game). I also think that a DC tweak to a more realistic effective radius (TM is already way closer to reality there than stock, with a radius of 14.5 instead of 40m, while RFB uses 10m) might go a long way. Loads of ashcans, very good chance at living through it, but work the boat not to get shacked!

tater

[aurgolo]

While it's always a good idea to be in port, I think this one would probably work on the fly since the game is already pointing at the 3 files, they are just misnamed. Make a throw away save first, lol.

Thank you, i just started a new mission and, of course, i cannot wait so much time before installing the patch......in any case i will run a save before installing it

tks everybody

Andrea

[Wilcke]

Reallydeadpoet,

Thanks man, I am such a DA at times! After switching so many MODS in and out one wonders if the install is hosed!

Again, thanks!

Wilcke

[ReallyDedPoet]

Reallydeadpoet,

Thanks man, I am such a DA at times! After switching so many MODS in and out one wonders if the install is hosed!

Again, thanks!

Wilcke

Glad to help out as I have been there myself before :yep:


RDP

[Swat]

Hi guys,asking for help,please.I've just installed TM mod for the first time to try it - it's great,especially living/breathing ocean - just love it.Silly question maybe,but where is gramophone?It doesn't appear when I click on it.Thanks for help....Can't sail without my favourite music.

[Wilcke]

I can help...I can help

I just asked this question a few posts ago.

click on the gramaphone and the conversion chart will appear....hover the mouse over the lower right hand border and you will find the gramaphone buttons. Push and enjoy!

Wilcke

[Swat]

Cant't find it...:down:

[NefariousKoel]

Cant't find it...:down:

Should be at the very top left of the screen. You'll see some very small buttons on a pull-down sheet.

[ReallyDedPoet]

Cant't find it...:down:
Below is an example using Captain Cox's Pull Down Mod ( don't pay attention to the other stuff below, just the map ), same concept as Trigger, but it is a map of the Pacific instead of the Conversion Chart. Check out the bottom right hand corner of the map, you will see four buttons, these are for your grammaphone.

Remember to pull this the chart into view when first selecting the grammaphone function from the HUD.


RDP

http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a138/CaptainCox/NAVMAPPIC.jpg

[Swat]

...am blind probably,but.....where is that????:doh: ;)
http://img229.imageshack.us/img229/3598/sh42007092216333431zn9.jpg (http://imageshack.us/?x=my6&amp;myref=http://imageshack.us/)

[Seadogs]

Swat,

I`m willing to bet you are having a high resolution problem. It`s "there" just rendered off screen where you can`t get to it.

Drop your resolution and test.

[ReallyDedPoet]

Swat,

I`m willing to bet you are having a high resolution problem. It`s "there" just rendered off screen where you can`t get to it.

Drop your resolution and test.

By the looks of his screen that may be it :yep:


RDP

[Jhereg]

Swat, if you look here you will find my fix for this, it is the 9th post down.

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=122021

It is just a quick hack job but it works:up:

[Swat]

Thanks all of you,captains!

[ReallyDedPoet]

Thanks all of you,captains!

I take it Swat then it was related to you resolution settings.


RDP

[stabiz]

Great effort, Ducimus!:up: This un-breaks the game.

[neumanf15]

I'm loving TM. Thanks, Ducimus.

Here's my problem though (executive summary):
There are certain places in the ocean that seem to always cause a CTD, starting on my 13TH PATROL. Several times I've had crashes at certain places <100NM east of the north tip of Celebes. Just last night I started getting one WSW of Manila. These CTDs are consistent on both of my computers. I'm running 1.3 with (in order) TM GFX pak, then TM 1.6, then TM 1.6.2, then the 3 month mission rotation fix. Those are the only mods I'm running. I've even tried backing off and removing 1.6.2 and the mission fix.

A guesstimate of my coords at the latest crash is N 14 deg, 20 min, E 119 Deg, 12 min. If I try to go further south or east from there, it crashes. I've been in Manila harbor on my last mission (after CTDs started cropping up...

It is not related to any particular station, submerged or not, TC or not. It seems to be those particular places in the ocean, as everything is rock-solid even in TC 8192 everywhere else.

Here's a link to the post I have been trying to get help on over on the non-mods side of the forum that has some more details: http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?p=652701&posted=1#post652701 My problem starts on the 8th message down.

Anyone have any ideas what might be causing this?

[tater]

TM Campaign Patch 1.1

Thanks to neumanf15 for finding the problem, and even a couple of the groups!

TM campaign Patch 1 fixes a CTD issue that may occur due to a couple groups.

Apply this patch on top of TM with JSGME, it will overwrite the 3 files.

Alternately, you can drop the 3 files in the uninstalled TM Campaigns folder and let them overwrite the files there, then reinstall TM.

Apply on top of TM:

Version 1.2 missed one.[/URL]

[url]http://mpgtext.net/subshare/798TM%201.6%20Campaign%20Patch%201.2.rar (http://mpgtext.net/subshare/691TM%201.6%20Campaign%20Patch%201.1.rar)

tater

[BladeHeart]

Been absent from Subsim for a long time and have only now installed SH4 and preparing to mod it to the extent that I did with SH3; please forgive what may seem like basic questions.... its an age thing.:oops:

After installing TM, the 1.6.2 patch and the 1.2 campaign patch can I install the following 3 on top without causing a conflict (via JSGME)?

NSM 3.3
Reflections On The Water
Captain Cox's Weather Report Mod (Really miss that ability in this game compared to SH3 as I use to keep my own patrol logs)

Thanks.
:lurk:

[donut]

T_M_1.6 patched to 1.6.2 has NSM lite included,ROW.install right over top.Captain Cox's Weather Report Mod, I would install that first ,at top of jsgme:lol:

[BladeHeart]

Donut, thank you. :D

May I ask if it would cause any problems if I was to install the full version of NSM over the lite version included in 1.6.2?

[donut]

but if you do it will take more fish to sink ships,but then you could increase torpex,to 1.5. Tonnage is just to much R/L, but to the casual gamer,It's fun:rotfl: :sunny:Just love painting meatballs on my tower,& broom from shears.

[Forlorn]

I lost overview with all the patches. What do I need to get the latest TM running with tater's and all other fixes?

[RucksackMary]

Helo
Silly question , can i install both Trigger Maru and Real Fleet Boat? the other mods i use are reflection on water, living breathing ocean, right now Real Fleet Boat , Captain midnight CBS news, realistic sinking and silent service graphic mod.

Thanks

[donut]

Helo
Silly question , No point
ThanksRead Stickys.Mary are you fit for military service,that handle:hmm: ??:rotfl: Come aboard mate:shifty:

[RucksackMary]

No my IQ is so low usually i have to dig to find it.

What interested me was the mention on this mod to have heavily modified the AI of the enemy ships, to the point he advice to use it only for very skilled players while reading all the changes of the other mod i had not noticed mention specifically of it.

that's all, i am not a very skilled player, but one can always try to get better.

And over all, thanks to the modders for their work and everyone that work to make the game better, be it testing or suggesting.

[LtCmdrRat]

After playing for a while TM 1.6 I found out that version 1.5 was more suitable for me.
Guys, do you know where i can find old link yo download t.m.1.5? Unfortunately I formatted my hd and lost arhive.
Thank You.

[ReallyDedPoet]

I lost overview with all the patches. What do I need to get the latest TM running with tater's and all other fixes?

Take a look at Post # 928 here, as well the Trigger Maru install order is located in the first post.


RDP

[Uber Gruber]

I installed NSM 3.3 classic over TM patched.....now i'm beginning to doubt whether this is wise, can anyone confirm ?

Cheers.,...

[clayp]

I have TM 1.6 and there is no button for "GENERAL QUARTERS",how do I turn it on?

[donut]

After playing for a while TM 1.6 I found out that version 1.5 was more suitable for me.
Guys, do you know where i can find old link yo download t.m.1.5? Unfortunately I formatted my hd and lost arhive.
Thank You.Your welcome:sunny:

[ReallyDedPoet]

I have TM 1.6 and there is no button for "GENERAL QUARTERS",how do I turn it on?

Do you mean Battle Stations :hmm:


RDP

[clayp]

I have TM 1.6 and there is no button for "GENERAL QUARTERS",how do I turn it on?

Do you mean Battle Stations :hmm:


RDP

Yes sir....

[donut]

It's on our orders bar?:sunny: Battle stations,that is !(screenie)??

[clayp]

It's on our orders bar?:sunny: Battle stations,that is !(screenie)??

There is no button for battles stations on the bar in my game,TM 1.6,GFX,1.6 patch.....

[leovampire]

It's on our orders bar?:sunny: Battle stations,that is !(screenie)??

There is no button for battles stations on the bar in my game,TM 1.6,GFX,1.6 patch.....

Can you post pics please?

[clayp]

It's on our orders bar?:sunny: Battle stations,that is !(screenie)??

There is no button for battles stations on the bar in my game,TM 1.6,GFX,1.6 patch.....

Can you post pics please?

I will try

http://img340.imageshack.us/img340/3821/sh4img2692007182325250jc6.png (http://imageshack.us)

[clayp]

http://img300.imageshack.us/img300/7098/sh4img2692007183225453gq9.png (http://imageshack.us)

[leovampire]

http://img300.imageshack.us/img300/7098/sh4img2692007183225453gq9.png (http://imageshack.us)

Missing menu file entry's to add them to the hud from the looks of it

[clayp]

Ok then theres nothing I can do about it,thanks for your time...

[leovampire]

Ok then theres nothing I can do about it,thanks for your time...

Download the Battle Stations silent running on all staions Mod and input the changes to your Order's bar.cfg file to get them in there. Just make it as a mod to use with JSGME so you can make changes when needed without screwing up your original order's bar file

[clayp]

Ok then theres nothing I can do about it,thanks for your time...

Download the Battle Stations silent running on all staions Mod and input the changes to your menu file to get them in there. Just make it as a mod to use with JSGME so you can make changes when needed without screwing up your original Menu file.

I dont know how to mess with the files and change stuff....I'll just make do without it....:oops:

[leovampire]

Ok then theres nothing I can do about it,thanks for your time...

Download the Battle Stations silent running on all staions Mod and input the changes to your menu file to get them in there. Just make it as a mod to use with JSGME so you can make changes when needed without screwing up your original Menu file.

I dont know how to mess with the files and change stuff....I'll just make do without it....:oops:

That I can down load I will apply the stuff for you to have it on all station's and get it back to you as a JSGME ready mod.

SORRY CORRECT THAT I NEED Data/Menu/cfg/ order's bar CFg file

Here just use mine you should be fine. this was originaly done by Iceburg I think from what my old mod folder says hope I am correct. It is JSGME ready.

http://files.filefront.com/Orders+Bar+CFG+for+Battlesrar/;8652575;/fileinfo.html

[clayp]

Ok then theres nothing I can do about it,thanks for your time...

Download the Battle Stations silent running on all staions Mod and input the changes to your menu file to get them in there. Just make it as a mod to use with JSGME so you can make changes when needed without screwing up your original Menu file.

I dont know how to mess with the files and change stuff....I'll just make do without it....:oops:

That I can down load I will apply the stuff for you to have it on all station's and get it back to you as a JSGME ready mod.

SORRY CORRECT THAT I NEED Data/Menu/cfg/ order's bar CFg file

Leo I'm sorry I started and got you involved..I have no way to get the files to you,I think thats what you are saying..Please dont worry about it you have more then enough to do..Thanks for the offer...:)

[leovampire]

Ok then theres nothing I can do about it,thanks for your time...

Download the Battle Stations silent running on all staions Mod and input the changes to your menu file to get them in there. Just make it as a mod to use with JSGME so you can make changes when needed without screwing up your original Menu file.

I dont know how to mess with the files and change stuff....I'll just make do without it....:oops:

That I can down load I will apply the stuff for you to have it on all station's and get it back to you as a JSGME ready mod.

SORRY CORRECT THAT I NEED Data/Menu/cfg/ order's bar CFg file

Leo I'm sorry I started and got you involved..I have no way to get the files to you,I think thats what you are saying..Please dont worry about it you have more then enough to do..Thanks for the offer...:)

No worries if I can help I try. Just use mine and you should be set.

http://files.filefront.com/Orders+Bar+CFG+for+Battlesrar/;8652575;/fileinfo.html

[ReallyDedPoet]

Ok then theres nothing I can do about it,thanks for your time...
Download the Battle Stations silent running on all staions Mod and input the changes to your menu file to get them in there. Just make it as a mod to use with JSGME so you can make changes when needed without screwing up your original Menu file.
I dont know how to mess with the files and change stuff....I'll just make do without it....:oops:
That I can down load I will apply the stuff for you to have it on all station's and get it back to you as a JSGME ready mod.

SORRY CORRECT THAT I NEED Data/Menu/cfg/ order's bar CFg file
Leo I'm sorry I started and got you involved..I have no way to get the files to you,I think thats what you are saying..Please dont worry about it you have more then enough to do..Thanks for the offer...:)
No worries if I can help I try. Just use mine and you should be set.

http://files.filefront.com/Orders+Bar+CFG+for+Battlesrar/;8652575;/fileinfo.html

Nice work on this LV, give it a shot clayp, you will get onto this stuff :up:


RDP

[lumat83]

Hi everyone

I've 2 problems with your mod (I've activated only this one)

- The delay for reloading batteries is very long with the S18 class : more than 24 hours from 25% to 100%
- The "NoStabilizeView" option doesn't work. Even the option is deactivate, the view is not stabilized.

Are they known problems ?

Thanks for help :)

[tater]

This was posted in another thread, but I thought I'd repost it here, since I was thinking of TM when I wrote it, and I'm actually testing with the full raft of TM sensor/AI modifications (the sensor dats, and sim.cfg/sensors.cgg, etc). I've added some more TM specific comments as well.

I've been experimenting with a DC mod. When finished, it will change, well, all the DC armed ship eqp files, and a few of their dats as well, possibly.

SH4 has 1 DC type. It is roughly an IJN Type 2 (1943+) 162kg 3m/s fall speed DC. The Y and K guns fire it as well since it's the only DC ammo available.

The IJN used the Type 95 early on (100kg, and a 1.9m/s sink rate), and then the Type 2—3 warheads existed for the Type 2, 105, 110, and 162kg. I think the warhead differences between 100-110kg are trivial, so we don't need each type really.

TM makes ASW significantly better than stock, and people sometimes look to tone it down via AI/sensor changes. I think the only AI sensor that likely needs work is the visual since surface attacks are far harder than RL in TM, even moving at low speeds (least in my tests).

One big way to mitigate IJN ASW capability without nerfing the sensors given SH4 limitations is as follows. Note that max depth is not a DC parameter we can mess with, sadly (so no 60m cutoff for early IJN DCs):

One, the SH4 ships have GROSSLY too many DCs loaded. Akizuki carries 240 DCs in SH4, in RL she carried 72. Shiratsuyu has 80 in SH4, in RL she carried 16. The list goes on and on. The solution? Add a bunch of new DC racks with different ammo stocks, and drop the stock Rack, Y and K gun ammo stores to realistic numbers. The only downside is that I'll have to build new eqps for each escort. No biggie.You'll get attacked just as often, but they will run out of ashcans faster (or period, lol).

Two, early in the war, the Type 95 was used with a 100kg warhead. The later Type 2 had a 162kg warhead available. Adding a lower strength warhead would make early war less dangerous.

Three, the DC explosion radius needs to drop to realistic values from the insane stock value of 40m. Redwine's mod does, as does TM and RFB. A few of the new DC racks should drop type 95 DCs with smaller warheads---smaller destructive power as well as smaller radius than even the reduced radius stock weapons. Since TM already does this, this is a somewhat moot issue, but I reposted it anyway.

So far, in my experiments, it is much easier to evade 36 DCs dropped by a good escort with TM sensors enabled than 80 to 240 :D . Combined with smaller explosions and radii (they type 95s I have set to a little more than half the TM radius), you get hammered, then they run out. With an ~6-10m radius, they really need to shack your boat to hurt it. Right now I'm trying to tweak a few things like the depth precision so the escorts don't blow themselves up. Sadly, the detonation depth parameter doesn't work (it's overwritten by other AI things). If it worked as stated, I could make early IJN DCs blow up between 30 and 60m, then later 30 and 90m.

I think that DC "improvements" (meaning reduced effectiveness and reload numbers) go a long way to fixing IJN ASW to make it more realistic. It's a great fix because you still need to evade and fight the boat because if they DO hit, it's usually pretty ugly fast.

The only real issue left, IMO, is tweaking the AI visual to permit well executed night attacks without making them too easy.

tater

[lumat83]

Hi everyone

I've 2 problems with your mod (I've activated only this one)

- The delay for reloading batteries is very long with the S18 class : more than 24 hours from 25% to 100%
- The "NoStabilizeView" option doesn't work. Even the option is deactivate, the view is not stabilized.

Are they known problems ?

Thanks for help :)

For the second problem, I've found the solution : The options in the briefing room :)

But for the delay, I think that is a little too great and not very réalist.

[Hawk_345]

well i hear alot of good things from this mod, so im thinking about trying it.

what are the main improvements and/or changes this mod does? does it afect FPS in a significant way? how well does it work with existing mods such as capt cox mods, ROW, and tater's new campagne layers?

[ReallyDedPoet]

well i hear alot of good things from this mod, so im thinking about trying it.

what are the main improvements and/or changes this mod does? does it afect FPS in a significant way? how well does it work with existing mods such as capt cox mods, ROW, and tater's new campagne layers?
It is a great mod, it is slanted towards realism, so don't expects the number of contacts that are in Stock, as well AI is ramped up nicely. Install Trigger first than ROW, I experienced no real slowdowns with it. It incorporates tater's mod as well as a number of C. Coxs.

It has a great read-me, FAQ, check it out ( this will also give you an idea regarding mods, what are incorporated, where potential conflicts with your current stuff may be ) and then make your decision.

I will end with this, I installed ROW over Trigger a few days ago and had probably my best patrol since I started playing SH4, I am not talking tonnage, but rather total game experience.


RDP

[Hawk_345]

alright, thanks for the info, i will try it now when i get the chance.

[ReallyDedPoet]

alright, thanks for the info, i will try it now when i get the chance.

Let us know Hawk how you make out :yep:


RDP

[subcpo]

Two questions...After dropping Fleet Boat and loading TM...


1. My fuel gauge stays at 100. I went Flank from Pearl to Midway and it stayed at 100.

Found my answer to question two.

[ReallyDedPoet]

Two questions...After dropping Fleet Boat and loading TM...


1. My fuel gauge stays at 100. I went Flank from Pearl to Midway and it stayed at 100.

Found my answer to question two.

Is unlimited fuel by chance checked off in your install?


RDP

[tater]

In the realism options, it is not set globally from the main menu. The campaign difficulties override it. You need to click on the radio in the office to customize the settings.


tater

[Hawk_345]

Well im thinking of trying this mod really soon, just one more question, you said it inlcudes taters mod, you mean the improved campagne layers, if so is it the most up to date version?

[tater]

It's the version most up to date when TM 1.6 went to bed.

I plan on updating the campaign at some point. I really need to just gut it out and get it where I'm somewhat happy with it.

After I get that done, I have some more radical plans for it in mind, but I want to wait til I have a semi definitive version out for TM so people that don't feel like going through the looking glass aren't hosed :D

tater

[ironkross]

I've been away from the game for awhile, but getting back into
SH and I wanted to use TM. I am impressed by how everything looks. One question, are ships harder to sink? I ask because I wanted to check out the gameplay, so I played the sub school's torp training. I hit the cruiser with three of four front torpedos and swung around for two more shots. I waited for the reload and fired more as the tubes reloaded since by now the cruiser was stationary. After a total of eight hits the cruiser was still afloat 24 hrs later. I read that the AI was harder in TM and that is OK, but if the shiips are this unsinkable it may not be what I wanted.

[donut]

We are modded up with T_M_1.6 reverse engineered,to get ship shape files back.With added mods: ROW,NSM_lite,& 1.5-X-Torpex.They go down well to our taste.:lol: :sunny:http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=650194&postcount=1
For starters>>http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=531082&postcount=1

[LukeFF]

What file setting controls how fast the torpedo doors are opened? Before installed the mod I noticed there was a slight delay after pressing the keyboard button, but now the doors open instantaneously. I'd like to have that slight delay back.

[ironkross]

We are modded up with T_M_1.6 reverse engineered,to get ship shape files back.With added mods: ROW,NSM_lite,& 1.5-X-Torpex.They go down well to our taste.:lol: :sunny:http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=650194&postcount=1
For starters>>http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=531082&postcount=1 Ahoy Cptn Donut. I will certainly give those a try. And thanks a bunch for the quick reply. :up:
- BTW my second try at sub school, same scenario, I guess one of my torps fizzled out b/c it blew a hole in my boat. :oops:
[EDIT]Link to NSM_lite please? I can't find it in the NSM thread or with search.

[donut]

We are modded up with T_M_1.6 reverse engineered,to get ship shape files back.With added mods: ROW,NSM_lite,& 1.5-X-Torpex.They go down well to our taste.:lol: :sunny:http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=650194&postcount=1
For starters>>http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=531082&postcount=1 Ahoy Cptn Donut. I will certainly give those a try. And thanks a bunch for the quick reply. :up:
- BTW my second try at sub school, same scenario, I guess one of my torps fizzled out b/c it blew a hole in my boat. :oops: Circle runner,don't-cha-know:dead: :damn:
[EDIT]Link to NSM_lite please? I can't find it in the NSM thread or with search.Pick,ROW Light Zone's Special Effect's (http://files.filefront.com/ROW+Light+Zones+Special+Ets7z/;8696589;/fileinfo.html) install over T_M_1.6/GFX/Patch_1.6.2,or..Download: http://files.filefront.com/NSM26zip/;8100796;;/fileinfo.html (http://files.filefront.com/NSM26zip/;8100796;;/fileinfo.html):sunny:

[ironkross]

We are modded up with T_M_1.6 reverse engineered,to get ship shape files back.With added mods: ROW,NSM_lite,& 1.5-X-Torpex.They go down well to our taste.:lol: :sunny:http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=650194&postcount=1
For starters>>http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=531082&postcount=1 Ahoy Cptn Donut. I will certainly give those a try. And thanks a bunch for the quick reply. :up:
- BTW my second try at sub school, same scenario, I guess one of my torps fizzled out b/c it blew a hole in my boat. :oops: Circle runner,don't-cha-know:dead: :damn: Of course it's the old circle runner trick, sorry about that chief. :rotfl:

[EDIT]Link to NSM_lite please? I can't find it in the NSM thread or with search.Pick,ROW Light Zone's Special Effect's (http://files.filefront.com/ROW+Light+Zones+Special+Ets7z/;8696589;/fileinfo.html) install over T_M_1.6/GFX/Patch_1.6.2,or..Download: http://files.filefront.com/NSM26zip/;8100796;;/fileinfo.html (http://files.filefront.com/NSM26zip/;8100796;;/fileinfo.html):sunny: NSM lite was in a different thread, I just didn't read thru to the end, thanks again.

[neumanf15]

Not sure what is causing this new problem... I've completed 22 patrols, but I noticed on the last patrol that things were repeating themselves (news-wise)... Then I looked at my patrol log and saw that I had two patrols starting on January 30, 1945. I tried to take another mission and noticed this:
http://www.mediafire.com/imgbnc.php/c21e5159a4b7acab5155ffef55d057fe2g.jpg (http://www.mediafire.com/imageview.php?quickkey=clycmnbitxg&thumb=6)

I feel like I'm in some weird combinationof the Philadelphia Experiment and Groundhog Day!

Anyone know how to fix this? I'd really like to finish the war.
(http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/%3Ca%20href=)

[Iliaz]

Hi, sorry if i kinda break the on going controvery, but i got a quick question about Trigger Maru.

Is the Living Breathing Ocean Mod implemented in the 1.6.3 Patch, and if yes, is it the latest version (1.3)? If not, does LOB 1.3 run with Trigger Maru 1.6.3?

Hope someone is as kindly to enlight me :sunny:

P.S. Awsome Mod btw.!

P.P.S. Sorry 'bout the butch'rin' of the english language "but me no english no good, sir."

[Angrykirill]

Hey guys,

my specs: 1 gig DDR2 ram, Nvidia media accelerator 950, Pentium DC T2130 1.86ghz (1mb cache, 533mhz FSB)

How well will this run the mod? I am considering upgrading to 2gig of ram (its cheap nowadays).

thanks in advance Kirill

[ReallyDedPoet]

Hi, sorry if i kinda break the on going controvery, but i got a quick question about Trigger Maru.

Is the Living Breathing Ocean Mod implemented in the 1.6.3 Patch, and if yes, is it the latest version (1.3)? If not, does LOB 1.3 run with Trigger Maru 1.6.3?

Hope someone is as kindly to enlight me :sunny:

P.S. Awsome Mod btw.!

P.P.S. Sorry 'bout the butch'rin' of the english language "but me no english no good, sir."
Trigger has LBO, but not latest version. LBO has since morphed into the great Reflections on Water Mod or ROW. It can be installed over Trigger, there are screenshots on how to do this, here is the first post from the ROW Thread:
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?p=650194#post650194

Check out the JSGME Screenshot for directons on how to do this. By the way, welcome to SUBSIM :up:


RDP

[neumanf15]

Hey guys,

my specs: 1 gig DDR2 ram, Nvidia media accelerator 950, Pentium DC T2130 1.86ghz (1mb cache, 533mhz FSB)

How well will this run the mod? I am considering upgrading to 2gig of ram (its cheap nowadays).

thanks in advance Kirill
Can you even run SHIV with onboard video? Based on this, I'd be surprised: *Supported Video Cards:
ATI® RADEON® 9600/9700/9800, X300 to X850, X1300 to X1800
NVIDIA® GeForce™ 6200/6600/6800/7800
That being said, I'd say that anything that can actually run SHIV SHOULD be able to run TM... I didn't really note any slowdown from installing TM, but I've got dedicated graphics.

[minsc_tdp]

I have TM 1.6 installed with ROW installed on top of that. I believe ROW overwrites some of the TM files.

So if I want this patch and want it to be JGSME friendly, do I need to:

1. Remove ROW
2. Remove TM
3. Apply the patch to existing TM folders
4. Install TM
5. Install ROW and overwriting?

If these files have zero conflict with ROW then I could skip steps 1 and 5.

[AVGWarhawk]

Not sure what is causing this new problem... I've completed 22 patrols, but I noticed on the last patrol that things were repeating themselves (news-wise)... Then I looked at my patrol log and saw that I had two patrols starting on January 30, 1945. I tried to take another mission and noticed this:
http://www.mediafire.com/imgbnc.php/c21e5159a4b7acab5155ffef55d057fe2g.jpg (http://www.mediafire.com/imageview.php?quickkey=clycmnbitxg&thumb=6)

I feel like I'm in some weird combinationof the Philadelphia Experiment and Groundhog Day!

Anyone know how to fix this? I'd really like to finish the war.



This does not have anything to do with ROW as it is textures. What other mod are you running if any? If it is Trigger Maru post it in that thread and see what the fellas have to say about it.

[AVGWarhawk]

It's the version most up to date when TM 1.6 went to bed.

I plan on updating the campaign at some point. I really need to just gut it out and get it where I'm somewhat happy with it.

After I get that done, I have some more radical plans for it in mind, but I want to wait til I have a semi definitive version out for TM so people that don't feel like going through the looking glass aren't hosed :D

tater


Go Tater Go! This mod you are working on is a big improvement.

[tater]

While we wait for patch 1.4, here is a mod with a stock and a TM version:

DL, and full README in this thread:
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=123307

The skinny for TM users:
What IJN DCs 0.91 will do to gameplay:
This mod will probably result "easier" gameplay for TM users overall. This is because the number of DCs that will be dropped on you before the escorts run out is much reduced from the stock game. Take Akizuki. In stock, she carried 240 DCs. In IJN DCs 0.91 she has 80 (should be 72 in RL, but I erred on the side of a little too many where possible). Minekaze had 80 before, now she has more like 36. Other ships have greater variability over time (fewer early war, more as it progresses).

As for lethality... vs TM, you will see more damage per hit (but fewer DCs dropped). The early war DCs are now about what you are used to in RFB/TM. The later war (1943+) large type 2 DCs are more lethal. Their min damage is slightly higher than what you are used to, and the max is ~50% higher. (ave is 270 damage vs the stock TM DC which averages 200)

One-hit kills are still extremely unlikely in my testing with the type 95s and light type 2s (there were in stock TM, too). They are a little more likely with the large type 2 DCs.

Overall, I would think of this mod as a realism mod for TM. It also functions as a way to mod the game a little easier while keeping the stock AI sensor mods. You will face grave danger from the DCs, but they will run out faster allowing you to escape to fight another day.

Install this last after other TM patches.

tater

[neumanf15]

Not sure what is causing this new problem... I've completed 22 patrols, but I noticed on the last patrol that things were repeating themselves (news-wise)... Then I looked at my patrol log and saw that I had two patrols starting on January 30, 1945. I tried to take another mission and noticed this:
http://www.mediafire.com/imgbnc.php/c21e5159a4b7acab5155ffef55d057fe2g.jpg (http://www.mediafire.com/imageview.php?quickkey=clycmnbitxg&thumb=6)

I feel like I'm in some weird combinationof the Philadelphia Experiment and Groundhog Day!

Anyone know how to fix this? I'd really like to finish the war.


This does not have anything to do with ROW as it is textures. What other mod are you running if any? If it is Trigger Maru post it in that thread and see what the fellas have to say about it.
Umm... This IS the TM thread.

[leovampire]

I have TM 1.6 installed with ROW installed on top of that. I believe ROW overwrites some of the TM files.

So if I want this patch and want it to be JGSME friendly, do I need to:

1. Remove ROW
2. Remove TM
3. Apply the patch to existing TM folders
4. Install TM
5. Install ROW and overwriting?

If these files have zero conflict with ROW then I could skip steps 1 and 5.

So I can not answer your question at the moment. But you could PM Duciums or Tater to ask them directly seeing no one is answering your question yet. When I get a chance I will download it and see what is going on but until then the other avenue is your best bet.

[leovampire]

Not sure what is causing this new problem... I've completed 22 patrols, but I noticed on the last patrol that things were repeating themselves (news-wise)... Then I looked at my patrol log and saw that I had two patrols starting on January 30, 1945. I tried to take another mission and noticed this:
http://www.mediafire.com/imgbnc.php/c21e5159a4b7acab5155ffef55d057fe2g.jpg (http://www.mediafire.com/imageview.php?quickkey=clycmnbitxg&thumb=6)

I feel like I'm in some weird combinationof the Philadelphia Experiment and Groundhog Day!

Anyone know how to fix this? I'd really like to finish the war.


This does not have anything to do with ROW as it is textures. What other mod are you running if any? If it is Trigger Maru post it in that thread and see what the fellas have to say about it.
Umm... This IS the TM thread.

Is this after the patch they made available for T.M. or before?

[MONOLITH]

While we wait for patch 1.4, here is a mod with a stock and a TM version:

DL, and full README in this thread:
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=123307

The skinny for TM users:
What IJN DCs 0.91 will do to gameplay:
This mod will probably result "easier" gameplay for TM users overall. This is because the number of DCs that will be dropped on you before the escorts run out is much reduced from the stock game. Take Akizuki. In stock, she carried 240 DCs. In IJN DCs 0.91 she has 80 (should be 72 in RL, but I erred on the side of a little too many where possible). Minekaze had 80 before, now she has more like 36. Other ships have greater variability over time (fewer early war, more as it progresses).

As for lethality... vs TM, you will see more damage per hit (but fewer DCs dropped). The early war DCs are now about what you are used to in RFB/TM. The later war (1943+) large type 2 DCs are more lethal. Their min damage is slightly higher than what you are used to, and the max is ~50% higher. (ave is 270 damage vs the stock TM DC which averages 200)

One-hit kills are still extremely unlikely in my testing with the type 95s and light type 2s (there were in stock TM, too). They are a little more likely with the large type 2 DCs.

Overall, I would think of this mod as a realism mod for TM. It also functions as a way to mod the game a little easier while keeping the stock AI sensor mods. You will face grave danger from the DCs, but they will run out faster allowing you to escape to fight another day.

Install this last after other TM patches.

tater



Tater..... Thank you. :up:




.

[neumanf15]

Not sure what is causing this new problem... I've completed 22 patrols, but I noticed on the last patrol that things were repeating themselves (news-wise)... Then I looked at my patrol log and saw that I had two patrols starting on January 30, 1945. I tried to take another mission and noticed this:
http://www.mediafire.com/imgbnc.php/c21e5159a4b7acab5155ffef55d057fe2g.jpg (http://www.mediafire.com/imageview.php?quickkey=clycmnbitxg&thumb=6)

I feel like I'm in some weird combinationof the Philadelphia Experiment and Groundhog Day!

Anyone know how to fix this? I'd really like to finish the war.


This does not have anything to do with ROW as it is textures. What other mod are you running if any? If it is Trigger Maru post it in that thread and see what the fellas have to say about it.
Umm... This IS the TM thread.
Is this after the patch they made available for T.M. or before?
I'm running 1.6.2 with Tater's campaign fix.

[SteveW1]

Ducimus has done another update and has posted it on the Ubi Forums.

Link:
http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/6421019045/m/1191029895

Looks like the cat woke up I guess:lol:

[Rockin Robbins]

Ducimus has done another update and has posted it on the Ubi Forums.

Link:
http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/6421019045/m/1191029895

Looks like the cat woke up I guess:lol:

What a tragedy that he had to publish over there first.:-? Hope to see you back here soon Ducimus!:up:

[Gunner]

Yep R.R., looks like Duci been secretly working on an udate for TM and from what I read on the imrovements he made, Luved it :rock:

[donut]

Ducimus_Rapax (http://javascript<b></b>:void(0))
http://www.ducimus.net/sh4/shawshank.jpg
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/platform_images/blank.gif (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/6421019045/m/1191029895?r=1191029895#1191029895)Posteddocument. write(''+ myTimeZone('Thu, 18 Oct 2007 01:27:15 GMT-0700', 'Thu October 18 2007 01:27')+''); Thu October 18 2007 01:27 Despite the upcoming patch/upgrade (which i suspect wont surface for another month or so), i decided to tweak TM for a few reasons.

1.) The NSM version that i used. It had a few problems with it. I tried to fix one of them, and compensate for the other. In the end, it just didn't work out well. It was a source of alot of complaints and i agree. I am not updating to a new version of NSM because
a.) in light of patch 1.4, i thought it best to pull it from TM and save myself a headache later on.
b.) Other then more realistic deck gun effectiveness, TMaru doesn't really gain any tangible benifit from NSM. This is not to say that NSM is a bad mod, or needless mod. It is infact, an awesome mod. But right now, its just not meshing very well in the overall sceme of things in Tmaru.

2.) I got tired of seeing all this confustion about installation order. So i opted to make TM, ROW compatiable. So its very simple now, from top to bottom, this is the installation order now (although you can install ROW mods any order you wish):

quote:
ROW Objects Reflections vs1
ROW Ship Reflections vs1
ROW SUB Reflections vs_2
ROW Textures VS_2
ROW Classic Sea Foam
REL_Trigger_Maru_GFX_PAK_2_2
REL_Trigger_Maru_1-6-4



In simpler terms, Install ROW first, then TM GFX pack, and then TM 1.6.4. No more overlaying patches to deal with.

3.) Im going to be going offline in a couple weeks, and moving to a new domicile. During that time its liable to be a week or two before i get broadband back, and ill need something that i can play offline.



Heres the (updated) change log:quote:


// Made TM ROW compatible
- removed files conflicting with ROW
- intergrated scene.dat, materials.dat, and particles.dat from ROW.
- Row cloud mod, and light_zones_special not neccessary
- copied row sub reflections for german uboat into TM, You will get the following file conflicts, it is ok to overwrite:

"Turm9c_3_hd.dat" has already been altered by the "ROW SUB Reflections vs_2" mod.
"NSS_Uboat9.dat" has already been altered by the "ROW SUB Reflections vs_2" mod.
"NCVE_Akitsu.dat" has already been altered by the "ROW Ship Reflections vs1" mod.


//intergrated TMpatch 1.6.3 into the main mod.

// removed erronous data/sea/sea directory. (oopsy!)

// Ensign Dinsdale, renamed to Ensign Parker. (Sailor Steve @ subim.com - you win)

// Reverted to ship damage/sinking system to modified stock mechanics used in TM 1.5

//changed sub availbility dates for pearl harbor flotilla for Gato and Balao to 1942-03-01, and 1943-03-01. This will hopefully resolve any "transfer not available" problems when ending the new construction missions. WARNING: Do not transfer before you have completed all sea trials. What will happen is you'll still have a sea trial to complete, but have to leave from pearl harbor to complete it.


// repeat patrol fix where missions are rotated every 3 months is now the default installtion. See "repeat_patrol_fixes.rtf" in the support directory for details.

// added minor ship equipement corrections (missing guns, etc) by tater

// added IJN type 13 radar fix:
removes the broken type 13 air radar that acts as surface radar in error. Also removes other radars from ships that should not have them (sampans, etc), and corrects radar dates. Mod by tater and LukeFF

// added Akitsu rudder fix, mod by Jace 11



Things that i tried to do in this version but failed:

1.) Removing the target destroyed (or "shes going down) sinking message. I can remove the message itself, but i can't find the timestamp the game places before the acutal message. But if i can't remove the timestamp, there really is no point in removing the message because once you see the timestamp, you know you got him.

2.) I tried upping the light factor to make night surface attacks more feasible. Initial testing was not promising, and i subsequently scratched the idea for now.


In the future, theres only two things id really like to do. Get a better visual sensor implentation for the AI, and maybe modify the sub physics to behave more realisticly. Without getting into too many details, personnaly i prefer a negative boyancy approach. This way you can bottom the boat if you want. Time will tell i guess, it all depends on what works. Some variables and tricks from Sh3 do not behave the same in SH4. Anyway I see myself doing one, MAYBE two more revisions after patch 1.4, but i am making no promises on either:
- A patch compatabilty version,
- then later a revamp AI visual sensors and/or sub phyiscs.


Known issues:
- Gramaphone not displaying properly when the game is run at really high resolutions.
- I used what i think is a 12KM max visible distance scene.dat (from ROW) in this version. So you, the player will see smoke on the horizon, or ships out at that range. I did not adjust the visual sensors for the crew nor the AI, which is still tuned to around 8-9KM. So if you see a ship in the far distance, but your watchcrew doesnt spot tell around 8,000 meters, don't panic. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif


Hmm, what else, oh yeah, a d/l link would help i guess.

(93.5 MB, mod is split in two sections as always, i just compressed them both at the same time is all)
http://files.filefront.com/REL+Trigger+Maru+164+FULL7z/;8824414;/fileinfo.html (http://files.filefront.com/REL+Trigger+Maru+164+FULL7z/;8824414;/fileinfo.html)

http://www.ducimus.net/sh4/sh4_sig.jpg
The US Submarine Service was comprised of less then 1.6% of all US Naval personnel in the Pacific. Yet accounted for 54% of the 10 million tons of military and merchant shipping lost by the Japanese during WW II.

[Ducimus]

Since my bannation has lifted, ive updated the front page. Changelog as cited by donut is as follows:


// Made TM ROW compatible
- removed files conflicting with ROW
- intergrated scene.dat, materials.dat, and particles.dat from ROW.
- Row cloud mod, and light_zones_special not neccessary
- copied row sub reflections for german uboat into TM, You will get the following file conflicts, it is ok to overwrite:

"Turm9c_3_hd.dat" has already been altered by the "ROW SUB Reflections vs_2" mod.
"NSS_Uboat9.dat" has already been altered by the "ROW SUB Reflections vs_2" mod.
"NCVE_Akitsu.dat" has already been altered by the "ROW Ship Reflections vs1" mod.


//intergrated TMpatch 1.6.3 into the main mod.

// removed erronous data/sea/sea directory. (oopsy!)

// Ensign Dinsdale, renamed to Ensign Parker. (Sailor Steve @ subim.com - you win)

// Reverted to ship damage/sinking system to modified stock mechanics used in TM 1.5

//changed sub availbility dates for pearl harbor flotilla for Gato and Balao to 1942-03-01, and 1943-03-01. This will hopefully resolve any "transfer not available" problems when ending the new construction missions. WARNING: Do not transfer before you have completed all sea trials. What will happen is you'll still have a sea trial to complete, but have to leave from pearl harbor to complete it.


// repeat patrol fix where missions are rotated every 3 months is now the default installtion. See "repeat_patrol_fixes.rtf" in the support directory for details.

// added minor ship equipement corrections (missing guns, etc) by tater

// added IJN type 13 radar fix:
removes the broken type 13 air radar that acts as surface radar in error. Also removes other radars from ships that should not have them (sampans, etc), and corrects radar dates. Mod by tater and LukeFF

// added Akitsu rudder fix, mod by Jace 11


If you have any feedback, you'll find me on the other forums. Its not that i prefer those forums, theres just no interpersonal drama for me to avoid there is all.

[LukeFF]

Duci, I saw you post on the Ubi forums that the gramophone somtimes will not display right with your mod when run at high resolutions. I'm having this exact problem with my installation. Is there a way to fix it?

[Ducimus]

LV pointed a out a fix to me before, but i lost the link to it. (otherwise id have put it in). I think its just a simple positional coordinate fix thats related to CC's pulldown map mod, of which, i used for the speed/time conversion chart.

edit:

Think i found it. Shame i couldnt search for it earlier. Oh well.

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=647263&postcount=9

[LukeFF]

LV pointed a out a fix to me before, but i lost the link to it. (otherwise id have put it in). I think its just a simple positional coordinate fix thats related to CC's pulldown map mod, of which, i used for the speed/time conversion chart.

edit:

Think i found it. Shame i couldnt search for it earlier. Oh well.

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=647263&postcount=9

Hmm, that didn't work. Where is the default texture for the gramophone stored?

[Jhereg]

Hi Luke FF, do not know why it did not work for you but the default textures for the Gramophone are stored in your JSGME backup directory and also the original 1024x768.ini.

What resolution are you running at?

I tested at 1920x1200 and at my normal 2560x1600 and it works.

Here is a link to the whole thread http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=122021

I had made a fix for one with Better Scopes 1.3 and one without Betterscopes.

HTH:)

[Uber Gruber]

If Gramaphone not displaying in high resolutions then go to here and make changes suggested in the 9th Post Down: http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=122021

[blockhead48]

Since installing this mod...the latest version with the patches, the outside view that travels along with the sub doesn't seem to be working, y'know the view you access from either the comma "," or, full stop "." key.
Any ideas whats causing that....or any answers to reactivating that function?:-?

[donut]

11.) How do i get the next/ previous camera back?

The easiest way is to open the /data/cfg/commands.cfg in tmaru. Search for " [Cmd50] " Your looking for these two blocks:


[Cmd50]
Name=Camera_on_next_unit
Ctxt=1
;Key0=0xBE,,">"
Page=0x34000000,3714

[Cmd51]
Name=Camera_on_prev_unit
Ctxt=1
;Key0=0xBC,,"<"
Page=0x34000000,3714

Simply remove the semicolon placed in front of the key assignment, and you have the next/previous cameras back.