Again night attack bug question

[LtCmdrRat]

Does anyone have information about solving bug with night sensors of japanese destroyers. They still can detect me from 5000 yards visually. May be anyone heard about solution of this problem?
Anyway what a sadistic logic to detect periscope in moonless night from 5000 yards???

[Rockin Robbins]

Although in some instances the infared field glasses of the IJN let them do some superhuman feats of detection at night, there were plenty of instances of subs successfully carrying out night surface attacks. In SH4 that is almost impossible. That needs fixing.

I understand the GWX guys fixed it in SH3, but their experience may not translate very well into SH4. It seems like if it did, we'd already have the fix.

And we have to be careful that the fix is not a bigger problem than what it fixes. Case in point: maybe the sonar is too good with a surfaced sub. I can prove that sonar worked on the surface and that operators took screw counts with it while surfaced. I can prove that they continued to man the sonar when the boat was surfaced, showing that they expected to be able to develop contacts in that configuration.

Lets assume the surface sonar is way too good. Do we eliminate it? Seems like a good idea then, doesn't it? BUT an indispensible tool during a surface attack on merchies was the ability to ping the target to obtain accurate range. Oops, we've screwed the pooch, solving one problem by causing a worse one.

Now lets look at the advantage the overly good surface sonar gives you. You have the target clearly painted by radar on your map in both bearing and range. Now your too good sonar gives you the bearing to that target. Big whoopee doo! You already had that! Show me the unfair advantage and I'll eat this disgusting ice cream cone here.

So in the cause of "historical accuracy" do you remove a sensor that gives you no new information and lose the ability to ping and send the range data to the TDC in a night surface attack?

Some actual thought must be taken here. Would we have to unrealistically blind the IJN to make surface attacks possible? Could we throw the baby out with the bath water?

I'm having fun the way things are, right or wrong. If they can fix it I'll jump right in and do surface attacks. If not, I'll just continue having a great time.

Edit: also see Tater's comments about unrealistically good Japanese ASW resulting in much more realistic player behavior and the conflict created by that. Is the game more realistic when the Japanese act realistically and we do unrealistic and foolhardy things never contemplated by sane skippers in the real war, or versa vica, when the Japanese are too good and we act with caution and dread as the real sub jockeys did? Hmmmmmmmmm?

I know! Let's fight about deck gun rate of fire!!!! Pile on!!!!:eek:

[leovampire]

[SensorParameters]
; Sensors Detection Parameters
;Visual.
Visual range factor=0.5 ;[>=0]
Visual fog factor=1 ;[>=0]
Visual light factor=0.8 ;[>=0] Play with this setting till you find a happy medium
Visual waves factor=0.8 ;[>=0]
Visual speed factor=0 ;[>=0]
Visual aspect=0.9 ;[>=0]
Visual enemy speed=0.2 ;[>=0]
Visual noise factor=0 ;[>=0]
Visual sensor height factor=0.5 ;[>=0]
Visual already tracking modifier=600 ;[detection probability modifier], most accurate, once a contact is detected it will lose it very hard
Visual decay time=200 ;[>0] already tracking bonus decay, in seconds
Visual uses crew efficiency=false ;[true or false]

Also adjust the same one in the AirStrike cfg file in the same folder.

Night Modifier=0.2 ;[>0] Modifier on strike probability at night

[Rockin Robbins]

OOOOOOO! a recipe! Thanks Leo!:up:

LtCmdrRat, keep us posted on results, OK?

[LtCmdrRat]

thanks leo!

[leovampire]

Anytime I can help and have the info I do.

[Ducimus]

I think the extra visual sensors i added last version of TM may have helped with this. It varies max visual range based on unit type. Light factor seems to be effecting visual detection distance at night by a percentage of the visual sensors max range.

For example lets say nightime reduces detection range by half the normal (arbitary out of the hat number), then:

50% of 16,000 meters is 8,000 meters
50% of 9,000 meters is 4,500 meters.
50% of 6,000 meters is 3,000 meters.

Reason i mention this is because i couldn't get any profound (albiet some) impact on detection through the sim.cfg. Extra nodes was the more effective solution.

[LtCmdrRat]

Thanks Duci and Leo again.

[LtCmdrRat]

OOOOOOO! a recipe! Thanks Leo!:up:

LtCmdrRat, keep us posted on results, OK?
Leo's recipe is working according last patrol; but I have to have at least 3 positive night engagements to say "its magic!"

Updated: 20/11/07 2nd patrol with late eve - night engagement: seems to work properly

[Rockin Robbins]

Let us know the numbers as soon as you get consistently good results. This is BIG!

Edit: ditto what AVG said. If you can't do it publish the numbers and I'll do the mechanics and give you the credit.

[AVGWarhawk]

Once done, post it as a small mod DD enhancement!!!!!! Make it JSGME ready for idiots like me:D

Every little bit of information found and worked on adds to the pot of total overall supermod proportions........

mostly because I would like to use this mod:smug:

[barndog]

Nailed Three DDs One large and One small Liner COuldn' even see em in the wind, rain and moonless night til within 500 yards. GOt all but one DD and dropped to 200 feet went silent and slipped away

[Rockin Robbins]

Nailed Three DDs One large and One small Liner COuldn' even see em in the wind, rain and moonless night til within 500 yards. GOt all but one DD and dropped to 200 feet went silent and slipped away

That was always possible, even as far back as patch 1.2. Bad weather already made it possible to run inside a convoy without detection. We're trying to do night attacks on a clear moonless or thin crescent moon night. Fun, wasn't it! Imagine how nerve-wracking it will be to do that on a clear night.

[Peto]

The other night I got into 2500 yards on a 0 wind night without getting spotted. I flooded down to the point that I was on batteries and no one else would go on the bridge with me. I'm using the latest Trigger_Maru (1_6_5).

The big trick (I think) is presenting a small profile. Keep your bow pointed at them and keep your speed low. It takes a lot more patience to do a surface attack than a submerged approach IMO. It actually takes me longer. If I hurry, they find me.

History: US Subs learned to attack on the surface but many of their shots were fairly long (2000 plus). The Japanese had very good optics and lookouts. They relied/trusted their lookouts more than they trusted their radar (on the average). There are exceptions to the rule (Tang went between 2 escorts on the surface less than a 1000 yards from each) but exceptions don'y happen often in game--the lookouts are never more tired one night than any other. It'd be nice to factor in a random generator for sensors but I've never figured out a way to do it...

Cheers!!!!

[Ducimus]

>>The big trick (I think) is presenting a small profile. Keep your bow pointed at them and keep your speed low.

:yep:

[baxter]

leovampire said:



[SensorParameters]
; Sensors Detection Parameters
;Visual.
Visual range factor=0.5 ;[>=0]
Visual fog factor=1 ;[>=0]
Visual light factor=0.8 ;[>=0] Play with this setting till you find a happy medium
Visual waves factor=0.8 ;[>=0]
Visual speed factor=0 ;[>=0]
Visual aspect=0.9 ;[>=0]
Visual enemy speed=0.2 ;[>=0]
Visual noise factor=0 ;[>=0]
Visual sensor height factor=0.5 ;[>=0]
Visual already tracking modifier=600 ;[detection probability modifier], most accurate, once a contact is detected it will lose it very hard
Visual decay time=200 ;[>0] already tracking bonus decay, in seconds
Visual uses crew efficiency=false ;[true or false]

Also adjust the same one in the AirStrike cfg file in the same folder.

Night Modifier=0.2 ;[>0] Modifier on strike probability at night



Have people who have tried this found that they are now able to make realistic night surface attacks? I'm thinking of trying it and curious about what others have experienced.

[jazman]

v 1.3 values:

Visual range factor=0.3 ;[>=0]
Visual fog factor=0.95 ;[>=0]
Visual light factor=0.6 ;[>=0]
Visual waves factor=0.6 ;[>=0]
Visual speed factor=0 ;[>=0]
Visual aspect=0.9 ;[>=0]
Visual enemy speed=0.2 ;[>=0]
Visual noise factor=0 ;[>=0]
Visual sensor height factor=0.5 ;[>=0]
Visual already tracking modifier=600 ;[detection probability modifier], most accurate, once a contact is detected it will lose it very hard
Visual decay time=200 ;[>0] already tracking bonus decay, in seconds
Visual uses crew efficiency=false ;[true or false]


Patch 1.4 values that have changed:


Visual range factor=0.5 ;[>=0]
Visual fog factor=1 ;[>=0]
Visual light factor=1 ;[>=0]
Visual waves factor=0.8 ;[>=0]

Visual decay time=250 ;[>0]

[Ducimus]

That looks like the sensors.cfg - which deals with your sensors.

The one that effects the AI is the sim.cfg

[-Pv-]

Using deck awash, low speed, low aspect. Night surface attacks have always been possible. I do it. You just can't get too close and how close you can get depends on the type and quality of the closest vessel.
-Pv-

[THE_MASK]

They can probably hear your props cavitating if you are going faster than 2 or 3 knots . Thats why you have to approach from the front/side slowly .