[REL] RFB/Real Fleet Boat for 1.5

[LukeFF]

If anything, it's the TBT view that should be occluded, since (unlike the captain's foot) it is actually fixed in place and can't look towards the stern.

There was a second TBT typically mounted at the aft end of the fairwater, hence why I've chosen to clip out the sub's superstructure in the TBT camera view.

Binoculars...not sure yet what to do about that. I'm thinking about chucking the whole free camera portion of that view and restore it to a fixed position with a view like the TBT. What do you all think?

[tater]

Free cam is useful for screenshots, and some folks like the clipped binos. <shrug>

[Bosje]

I have to say I love that free roaming bridge camera and the obstructed binoculars
Am I the only one who finds it useful? I mean you can keep track of which bearing you're looking at simply because a part of the bridge or a watchman comes into the view. I think it's great to have to 'walk' to the starboard side of the bridge to be able to take a closer look at that contact which was reported

ah well

does this patch then replace both Rockin Robbins' 'obstructed binoc view' and that recent 'lockfix' mod?

[Paul Roberts]

I have to say I love that free roaming bridge camera and the obstructed binoculars
Am I the only one who finds it useful? I mean you can keep track of which bearing you're looking at simply because a part of the bridge or a watchman comes into the view. I think it's great to have to 'walk' to the starboard side of the bridge to be able to take a closer look at that contact which was reported


To me, the "walkaround" feels unnatural to the point of unrealism: it's too slow and too imprecise, so that the dance of "look-move-look" feels more like operating a loose marionette than stepping around the tower. It seems we have a choice between one seamless look-around (no occlusion), and an artificially slowed molasses-walk-and-look-around. I think the former feels like being a sub captain, while the latter feels like playing a bad mid-90s first-person shooter.

Plus, ending up levitating over open water is a huge immersion-breaker.

Of course, YMMV.

[Rockin Robbins]

does this patch then replace both Rockin Robbins' 'obstructed binoc view' and that recent 'lockfix' mod?

That's what it was intended to do. I don't think they obstructed the TBT like I did but I'll have to check my patch to see that it is the latest. I was offline for over 3 weeks with a power supply failure. For now my answer is that they obstructed the binoculars, the jury is out on the TBT (last night my version of the patch left it unobstructed) and the lock fix is also in the patch.

[flymar]

I like free 'walk' camera but don't like no collisions. Falling out of 3d 'box' - that's lack of realism. I wish more of the 3d equipment was 'clickable'.
As for occluded binoculars - it's not bothering me. I jus switch to TBT or scope.

Another thing - is it possible to switch 'water on screen' effect to something like was in SH3. It was much more smoother and realistic. Now I can see sharp edges.

[vanjast]

Nice to see FF is acting like a humane download site again..:sunny:

[Bosje]

hmm its all a matter of taste of course, as usual

i just keep SHIFT pressed whenever walking around the boat and bridge, doesnt feel awkward at all. And i'd hate to have to give up my strolls across the deck on a late summer's sunset with smooth seas, but that's just me :)

right, i'll give this a go
assuming the patch replaces all previous things, the recommended install order would be:
RFB 1.52
rfb patch 18jan
RSRD v420
tmo plot final
whatever else floats one's boat

correct?

[Orion2012]

hmm its all a matter of taste of course, as usual

i just keep SHIFT pressed whenever walking around the boat and bridge, doesnt feel awkward at all. And i'd hate to have to give up my strolls across the deck on a late summer's sunset with smooth seas, but that's just me :)

right, i'll give this a go
assuming the patch replaces all previous things, the recommended install order would be:
RFB 1.52
rfb patch 18jan
RSRD v420
tmo plot final
whatever else floats one's boat

correct?

Thats the right order. You may wanna pull the menu.txt file from TMO Plot, due to the fact that some contact reports, wont give you a direction. You just have a square to show the contact and nothing to indicate its heading, and I haven't compared it to the one in RSRD420 or the new patch. (will do it tonight...LAZY)

I left it the way it is for my own game, because I'm not the type of skipper who will go chasing something I don't have the upper hand on.

To each, his own.

[Bosje]

well I never had a contact report in RSRD except a radio message about a convoy being somewhere at some time, no boxes on the map. so that is not an issue
currenty i have it set up without TMO plot, the only problem is that it's hard to verify the PK setup, the contact only shows at zoomed out views. which is a luxury the real skippers didn't have either way.
The only time i had a problem like you're describing is when i had a setup of:
RFB
RSRD
OpMon
TMOplot
(i think that was it)
because that resulted in a lot of contact reports without speed and heading

edit: erm i just encountered that very issue, orion2012. i'll try the thing with menu.txt

anyway, I'm liking the patch so far. my rig is not quite capable of the environment though, framerates are struggling in bad weather. but it does look pretty otherwise

two slight problems I noticed:
-I have a functional bearing ring on the binoculars. was that intended or are my files somehow screwed up?
-Sargo observation scope doesn't clear the surface. I remember someone else reporting this a while back. it means you have to set a depth of some 53 feet to be able to use the observation scope. both early and late war

[Paul Roberts]

And i'd hate to have to give up my strolls across the deck on a late summer's sunset with smooth seas, but that's just me :)


"Ship spotted! Dive!"

I lose more cigars that way...

:D

[SaintStyle]

Hi,
is there any way to get the german text back without disabling the mod?
Hope theres just a simple trick to get them back, because i like the mod, but im not the best in english.

[mainexpress]

Is there a realistic career length for your sub skipper in RFB,because i started my current career right after pearl harbor attack in 1941,and im still going and its now march 1945:hmm: just wondering thats all to see if your skipper can retire at any given moment.

[LukeFF]

-Sargo observation scope doesn't clear the surface. I remember someone else reporting this a while back. it means you have to set a depth of some 53 feet to be able to use the observation scope. both early and late war

It works fine here for me. Your scope should be clearing the surface of the water by a large margin.

[LukeFF]

Is there a realistic career length for your sub skipper in RFB,because i started my current career right after pearl harbor attack in 1941,and im still going and its now march 1945:hmm: just wondering thats all to see if your skipper can retire at any given moment.

Nothing can be done to mod the career length.

[Sledgehammer427]

Myself, i have always preferred to tough through the whole war. its the only way to get the feel of the triumph and tragedy.

ive been away for a while, but has the "no-lock" fix surfaced, or is it still somewhere in the depths?

[John W. Hamm]

Hey LukeFF I have been gone for a while and I just DL'ed the latest RFB you and the rest of the team have outdone yourselves :up: thank you so for all the time and effort. I just started a new campaign and on my 2nd patrol... So far it rocks:rock: .

-John W. Hamm

[flymar]

has the "no-lock" fix surfaced, or is it still somewhere in the depths?
I experienced two situations when I lost lock
1) range +10 km
2) surface / night / clear weather / range 800-2000m

I'm not sure if the 2nd is propper behaviour. I could see clear japan flag on the ship, she was also on fire, but can lock it only for about 2 seconds. Also deck gun crew couldn't shoot at it (I could manually).

[John W. Hamm]

has the "no-lock" fix surfaced, or is it still somewhere in the depths? I experienced two situations when I lost lock
1) range +10 km
2) surface / night / clear weather / range 800-2000m

I'm not sure if the 2nd is propper behaviour. I could see clear japan flag on the ship, she was also on fire, but can lock it only for about 2 seconds. Also deck gun crew couldn't shoot at it (I could manually).


You now I didn't think much about it but now that you have mentioned it I have been having this same issue. is this an ongoing problem

[John W. Hamm]

To me, the "walkaround" feels unnatural to the point of unrealism: .



Hmm I have to disagree and agree... yes the way the Camera / walk around works is unrealistic. however it's more unrealistic to not be able to move at all.


I am happy to have the free camera even as unrealistic as it may be...with it I can at least use my imagination to some degree to enjoys strolls around the ship

[mainexpress]

Is there a realistic career length for your sub skipper in RFB,because i started my current career right after pearl harbor attack in 1941,and im still going and its now march 1945:hmm: just wondering thats all to see if your skipper can retire at any given moment.
Nothing can be done to mod the career length.Thats to bad,you cant mod it like SH3 is with Cmdr,Im such a realism freak when it comes to the silent hunter series,I wonder what the average patrols a U.S. skipper did do in world war 2,before they retired or got transfered,id like to find that out,oh BTW this mod is truly awesome,ive had alot of fun with it.

[Paul Roberts]

Here's another "view" question:

Why is it that the event camera is counted against realism in RFB while the external view camera is not?

I always disable the free view. While I love being able to look at the models from all angles, I just know that the temptation to spy on the circling destroyers would be too strong for me.

[XLjedi]

Thats to bad,you cant mod it like SH3 is with Cmdr,Im such a realism freak when it comes to the silent hunter series,I wonder what the average patrols a U.S. skipper did do in world war 2,before they retired or got transfered,id like to find that out,oh BTW this mod is truly awesome,ive had alot of fun with it.

From the books I've read, seems like 3-4 partrols was enough for a US fleetboat captain. By that time you were either an ace and too valuable to lose, or you were ineffective and they'd bounce you out.

The Germans... I think they just kept sending you out until you didn't come back.

[Wilcke]

Myself, i have always preferred to tough through the whole war. its the only way to get the feel of the triumph and tragedy.

ive been away for a while, but has the "no-lock" fix surfaced, or is it still somewhere in the depths?

The folks fixed it, start perusing the thread you will find it.

Happy Hunting!

[Paul Roberts]

Myself, i have always preferred to tough through the whole war. its the only way to get the feel of the triumph and tragedy.

ive been away for a while, but has the "no-lock" fix surfaced, or is it still somewhere in the depths?
The folks fixed it, start perusing the thread you will find it.

Happy Hunting!

Wait--I thought this fix was included in the latest patch. Am I wrong?

[flymar]

I have some issues from today's patrol:
* Can't point up the 50mm browning gun monted on Gato + bathtub effect
* Two pages in recognition book are blank, described as camera target
* Night/surface/short range lock 'bug' confirmed
* SD radar (R 12,000 yds) costs 2000 renown but SD-1 (R 30,300 yds) costs only 500.

Weird surface spotting. I think it's core problem cause have the same with SH3.
- moving with time acceleration
- contact reported
- watch horizon and no ships or smoke, ask about nearest visual contact and 'no visual contacts' answer
- increase TA and once again contact. This time a real one.

[Orion2012]

I have some issues from today's patrol:
* Can't point up the 50mm browning gun monted on Gato + bathtub effect
* Two pages in recognition book are blank, described as camera target
* Night/surface/short range lock 'bug' confirmed
* SD radar (R 12,000 yds) costs 2000 renown but SD-1 (R 30,300 yds) costs only 500.

The two pages listed as camera targets, I believe, are there for Harbor Reconissance missions to snap the pictures, could be WAY off base, don't hold me to it.

As before, may be wrong, but I don't believe you should have access to the .50. (Yet..No sight?!)

Read manual page 36 "Player's Perspective" and see if the so-called "bug" doesn't fall within those parameters.

[RFB Team]

* SD radar (R 12,000 yds) costs 2000 renown but SD-1 (R 30,300 yds) costs only 500.

SD radar was fairly rare, so that's why it costs more. In any event, the renown system is getting a complete overhaul for RFB 2.0.

[flymar]

I have some issues from today's patrol:
The two pages listed as camera targets, I believe, are there for Harbor Reconissance missions to snap the pictures, could be WAY off base, don't hold me to it..
OK. Unfortunately I got only 'binoculars' and 'flag' objectives ... yet:)
As before, may be wrong, but I don't believe you should have access to the .50. (Yet..No sight?!).
Well, I have. Maybe tht's because I've loaded campaign saved with previous version. I wonder how the crew will handle this gun, but I didn't have airplane encounter yet.

[EDIT] Just read a Browning .50 MG v1.1a thread - elevation and bathtub problems are normal with this gun:[


Read manual page 36 "Player's Perspective" and see if the so-called "bug" doesn't fall within those parameters.
I did, and it's not connected. Ships are visible on the map, locable by scope, shootable from 2000m but when at short range (about 800m) TDT lock and 'gun lock' lasts 2 seconds.

[Orion2012]

OK. Unfortunately I got only 'binoculars' and 'flag' objectives ... yet:)

I'm not even sure if there are any recon missions is RSRD, although I think there are, probably rare, like lifeboat missions.

Well, I have. Maybe tht's because I've loaded campaign saved with previous version. I wonder how the crew will handle this gun, but I didn't have airplane encounter yet.

Did you install in port? If so it shouldn't have caused any problems. I believe LukeFF and Co. have plans on redoing the .50 cal for early war before the 20mm AA was installed on the boats.

I did, and it's not connected. Ships are visible on the map, locable by scope, shootable from 2000m but when at short range (about 800m) TDT lock and 'gun lock' lasts 2 seconds.

If your using manual targeting, you could snap off a o'kane shot, and if your using manual targeting, press L key to force a lock then engage the PK. Make sure you set your torpedo setting again after forcing a lock as it will reset the setting you may have already set, then use the spread angle to target different ship loacations. A couple degree spread should be enough for most merchants at a 1000yrd or so. For escourts or DD's 3-5 may be used if you suspect will speed up to avoid. If he's moving left to right make sure you use a sspread moving in front of him if its a DD or such he will easily avoid fish fired behind him by accelerating, if there in front, he will turn and lose some of his speed making him easier to hit.

[ancient46]

There are Recon missions in RSRDC but getting one is rare. For the first time, in my 11th career I finally got a mission other than a sinking one.

The latest version from lurker_hlb3 reduces the sinking missions so the possibility of different missions should increase.

[jazzabilly]

Does one still need the 11_16_08 patch with the latest one?

Thanks!

[scott613]

Speech Recognition ???

Has anyone modified that Speech Recognition program for use with RFB... I see they support TMO and STOCK...

[DaveR]

:o i have tried to install rfb into sh4 1.5. it takes several seconds to gme enable the mods. but when i get into the game, same game, nothing changed. tried ctr-w for weather, nothing. how can one tell if it is enabled? is there another step i forgot? is there step-step instructions somewhere? i.e. manual says unzip in sh4 folder, but gme wants it in folder 'mod'? what i'm i doing wrong?

wish you had used standard rar or winzip rather than off the wall 7up(z).
thanks
dave

[LukeFF]

Does one still need the 11_16_08 patch with the latest one?

negative

[LukeFF]

:o i have tried to install rfb into sh4 1.5. it takes several seconds to gme enable the mods. but when i get into the game, same game, nothing changed. tried ctr-w for weather, nothing. how can one tell if it is enabled?

The loading screens are the most obvious sign the mod is enabled.

wish you had used standard rar or winzip rather than off the wall 7up(z).

7z is not an oddball compression format and is used by common file extraction programs like Power Archiver. We use it for RFB because it compresses files better than Zip or Rar.

[DaveR]

so no help in installing?

[Indy676]

Look into your mod folder, then into the RFB folder. Is ther another RFB folder so you have your problem. In the mod-folder has to be the RFB folder and then the Data subfolder. Is there another RFB folder and then the Data folder so it is one folder to much.
Greets Indy

[Fish40]

These mods need to be installed useing the JSGME utility. Either search the forums for a link, or as they say, "Google is your friend";) Follow the install instructions, and you're on your way to a new SH4 modded experience:yep:

[DaveR]

thanks
this is the structure, as i remembered last night (not at home) and not real file names:
sh4:
mod:
rfb 1.52
rfb patch

now when running gme, load rfb 1.52 first, and as described, takes a few seconds.
then load rfb patch, fewer seconds.
now if thats correct, go to the game and nothing has changed...
is this correct?

[AVGWarhawk]

thanks
this is the structure, as i remembered last night (not at home) and not real file names:
sh4:
mod:
rfb 1.52
rfb patch

now when running gme, load rfb 1.52 first, and as described, takes a few seconds.
then load rfb patch, fewer seconds.
now if thats correct, go to the game and nothing has changed...
is this correct?

Download JSGME here:

http://www.users.on.net/~jscones/software/products-jsgme.html

Open and follow the instructions. Basically, open the program and create a folder in the main SH4 program folder and name it MODS. Extract the mods(RFB 1.52 and patch to this newly created MODS folder. Click on the JSGME icon. A screen will come up showing available mods. Click that mod you want to install first, press the > button on the JSGME interface and it will load the mod. Do the same for the patch. It will prompt, overwrite?. Click yes. Close that out and fire up the game.

[DaveR]

confused..

everything you've said, warhawk, i have done, except, when i clicked to enable the patch, i don't get the overwrite warning.

again, here is what the directory looks like-
programs
: -sh4
:--sh folders....
: --mods
: ---rfb 1.52
: ----data
: ---rfb patch
: ----data

and again, 'gme' see's those directories. click to enable rfb 1.52, takes several seconds, click to enable rfb patch, takes fewer seconds, shows it completed (showing up in right hand window), >but didn't get overwrite message< (which i had read in forum about and also expected it).
:damn:

[AVGWarhawk]

confused..

everything you've said, warhawk, i have done, except, when i clicked to enable the patch, i don't get the overwrite warning.

again, here is what the directory looks like-
programs
: -sh4
:--sh folders....
: --mods
: ---rfb 1.52
: ----data
: ---rfb patch
: ----data

and again, 'gme' see's those directories. click to enable rfb 1.52, takes several seconds, click to enable rfb patch, takes fewer seconds, shows it completed (showing up in right hand window), >but didn't get overwrite message< (which i had read in forum about and also expected it).
:damn:

Ouch brother!

Click this link. Illustrates how to use JSGME:

http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/2881085392/m/3031058373?r=3031058373

[DaveR]

excelent (i hope), try again tonight.
thanks warhawk

[flymar]

* Un7zip rfb and patch to mod folder.
* put JSGME to main game folder.
* Mod using JSGME (and read the help to this awesome utility)
Good luck!

[DaveR]

:sunny: that is.... :o awesome... nice work rfb team...

had down loaded another patch(?), 'rfb_change', is that to be loaded as well?

really like the new tool styles, very helpful.

allthough, i still can't figure out how to edit a marker to leave notes. anyhelp there?

thanks again....

[AVGWarhawk]

:sunny: that is.... :o awesome... nice work rfb team...

had down loaded another patch(?), 'rfb_change', is that to be loaded as well?

really like the new tool styles, very helpful.

allthough, i still can't figure out how to edit a marker to leave notes. anyhelp there?

thanks again....

Glad it worked. Leaving notes, not possible unfortunately. Now, check out this thread http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=146795

See how those tools can help you sink ships.

[DaveR]

the "rfb_change" patch(?)/mod(?)? should it be installed as well?

is there someplace that talks about compatibility between mods?

wil RSRD campaign work with rfb?
thanks
dave

(note: so everyone is aware, my install error, on the 7z files- instead of 'extract to here', i had 'extract to rfb....(folder)'. oops :oops: )

[AVGWarhawk]

Yes, load in this order:

RFB 1.52
RFB patch 1.52
RSRD (the mod that is made for RFB called RSRDC_RFBv15_v420 ) found in the Run Silent Run Deep mod thread

[RFB Team]

Hey guys,

We've isolated and fixed a problem where the Porpoise's surface radar would not work correctly. Download this hotfix below and enable it after the 18Jan09 patch and before any other mods:

http://postdownload.filefront.com/13127017//efb6ca54fca4a1048c17129966afd97576e07217a11394a77f a138b294c29503b9db2f88ebb96f32

[DaveR]

sigh:cry:

installed RSRDC_RFBv15_v420 (wanted to replace some files, noticed some were .wav). on first mission, going to and on station, ran into absoultly nothing, not even an aircraft. even sailed down the coast of okinawa on the surface in broad day light.

on the way back, was passing iwo jima, noticed light house flashing, decide to go look and see if anything there. saved with replay at this point (intent was to review up to this point to see if any targets were ever close). the neat part; it was patchy fog and i was trying to see anything in the port. look outs shotted out contact, swung around to see big ugly destroyer coming out of the fog. crashed dived. as sub dived, took a quick look at the ship, swear it speeded up and turned directly at the sub. as soon as the sub was under, i had sonar track it, after a few minutes it went from medium speed to slow screws. so went back and id the 'destoryer' as a corvet, but it still had more and bigger guns then i had. i decided that this was better than nothing and started to setup a shot.

during this tracking and shot setup, an (what appeared to be) alarm went off. however, it was rather raspy and sounded every 3 seconds. i looked through every menu and couldn't find anything. after about 5 minutes i gave up and reloaded the saved game.

so i'm heading in to start tracking the corvett when i notice that there is a big fire in the port! watching this fire, i noticed that the graphics fps was taking a big hit. so i toned down the graphics settings (they were all at about max). and the fps improved.

i had just made sonar contact (rather, unkown contact at long range), when the sound went crazy. snap, crackle and pops. it seem to happen everytime the crew was about to say something. first came the loud scp's and then the crew's voice would make the statement. i have the volume on crew voice down and their anouncement would still come in soft and clear, but was always preceeded with the scps'. i gave up.

loaded the replay. want to see what the fire was. in port there was another smaller corvett in dock. there was another ship, wasn't sure what, because it was 'in the dock', literally. :rotfl: there was a sound going on, like a ship that was grounding. i'm 'assuming' the game finally decide it was grounded and became wreckage and that was the fire.

not seeing anything in the mission, normal? the sound problem? mod conflect?

i'm going to remove all mods tonight and re-install the rfb's, including the new one, and just try regular campaign.

oh, there are the other two mods in the rfb group, i forget the name now, gramaphone(?), something else. could these have a conflict with rsrd?
thanks

[kwbgjh2]

Hey guys,

We've isolated and fixed a problem where the Porpoise's surface radar would not work correctly. Download this hotfix below and enable it after the 18Jan09 patch and before any other mods:

http://postdownload.filefront.com/13127017//efb6ca54fca4a1048c17129966afd97576e07217a11394a77f a138b294c29503b9db2f88ebb96f32


Got the same Problem with Balao.

Clean Installation.

RFB 1.52
RFB 1.52 Patch_18Jan09
RSRDC_RFBv15V420
NoIntro

(NoIntro is a selfmade mod which only removes the start film sequence).


I started carreer after July43 in Midway.
In Midway i have visual contact reports by the crew and the radar screen is full of spots.

Going out for a mission, there is nothing to see on the radar. Even when i get visual contact reports by the crew for merchants or warships there is nothing to see on the radar.

:huh::huh:

[AVGWarhawk]

sigh:cry:

installed RSRDC_RFBv15_v420 (wanted to replace some files, noticed some were .wav). on first mission, going to and on station, ran into absoultly nothing, not even an aircraft. even sailed down the coast of okinawa on the surface in broad day light.

on the way back, was passing iwo jima, noticed light house flashing, decide to go look and see if anything there. saved with replay at this point (intent was to review up to this point to see if any targets were ever close). the neat part; it was patchy fog and i was trying to see anything in the port. look outs shotted out contact, swung around to see big ugly destroyer coming out of the fog. crashed dived. as sub dived, took a quick look at the ship, swear it speeded up and turned directly at the sub. as soon as the sub was under, i had sonar track it, after a few minutes it went from medium speed to slow screws. so went back and id the 'destoryer' as a corvet, but it still had more and bigger guns then i had. i decided that this was better than nothing and started to setup a shot.

during this tracking and shot setup, an (what appeared to be) alarm went off. however, it was rather raspy and sounded every 3 seconds. i looked through every menu and couldn't find anything. after about 5 minutes i gave up and reloaded the saved game.

so i'm heading in to start tracking the corvett when i notice that there is a big fire in the port! watching this fire, i noticed that the graphics fps was taking a big hit. so i toned down the graphics settings (they were all at about max). and the fps improved.

i had just made sonar contact (rather, unkown contact at long range), when the sound went crazy. snap, crackle and pops. it seem to happen everytime the crew was about to say something. first came the loud scp's and then the crew's voice would make the statement. i have the volume on crew voice down and their anouncement would still come in soft and clear, but was always preceeded with the scps'. i gave up.

loaded the replay. want to see what the fire was. in port there was another smaller corvett in dock. there was another ship, wasn't sure what, because it was 'in the dock', literally. :rotfl: there was a sound going on, like a ship that was grounding. i'm 'assuming' the game finally decide it was grounded and became wreckage and that was the fire.

not seeing anything in the mission, normal? the sound problem? mod conflect?

i'm going to remove all mods tonight and re-install the rfb's, including the new one, and just try regular campaign.

oh, there are the other two mods in the rfb group, i forget the name now, gramaphone(?), something else. could these have a conflict with rsrd?
thanks

Sometimes if you save near a port, when you start the save again, the ships will spawn in strange places. I'm sure that is what happened with the ships inside docks and buildings. RSRD makes vessels routes historic. You will not find a target rich environment like the stock game offers. But, if you like vessels all over the place and does make for useful torpedo practice, just run RFB and the RFB patch like you suggested. Nothing should conflict with RSRD or RFB if the mods are loaded correctly. As far as your sound, go into sound options and reduce the 3D effects for sound. Anyway, what other mods do you have loaded and what order?

[difool2]

I've done two (successful-83k tons total) patrols late 43-early 44, and not a single crewmember has been offered a promotion, and not only that, some are STILL stuck on 0 experience! This is with the latest version of RFB (+ patch) and the corresponding version of RSRDC. I understand that promotions may have been scaled back to cut down on all the arcadey special abilities, but if I have guys who aren't gaining any experience at all, something's not right. I'd appreciate it if someone could clarify what's going on.

[Nephandus]

I've done two (successful-83k tons total) patrols late 43-early 44, and not a single crewmember has been offered a promotion, and not only that, some are STILL stuck on 0 experience! This is with the latest version of RFB (+ patch) and the corresponding version of RSRDC. I understand that promotions may have been scaled back to cut down on all the arcadey special abilities, but if I have guys who aren't gaining any experience at all, something's not right. I'd appreciate it if someone could clarify what's going on.

The promotions dished out during port stays affect only the steps seaman grades to petty officer and petty officer to chief petty officer.

The promotions from class 4 to 3 and so on are done automatically even while at sea.

The Chief Petty Officers do not receive experience (if you look, they do have a 0/0 experience stat) as they are not eligible to promotion to officer rank (apperently no more NCO to CO promotions anymore).

Also there is a limit of Petty Officers and Officers you can have. Upon reaching that, no more promotions are available even if a crewmember exceeds the experience level by far.

BTW... I run the same mod setup as you are

[LukeFF]

I've done two (successful-83k tons total) patrols late 43-early 44, and not a single crewmember has been offered a promotion, and not only that, some are STILL stuck on 0 experience! This is with the latest version of RFB (+ patch) and the corresponding version of RSRDC. I understand that promotions may have been scaled back to cut down on all the arcadey special abilities, but if I have guys who aren't gaining any experience at all, something's not right. I'd appreciate it if someone could clarify what's going on.

Read the manual.

[difool2]

I've done two (successful-83k tons total) patrols late 43-early 44, and not a single crewmember has been offered a promotion, and not only that, some are STILL stuck on 0 experience! This is with the latest version of RFB (+ patch) and the corresponding version of RSRDC. I understand that promotions may have been scaled back to cut down on all the arcadey special abilities, but if I have guys who aren't gaining any experience at all, something's not right. I'd appreciate it if someone could clarify what's going on.
Read the manual.

Thank you for your support, and yes that is the first thing I did before playing the mod. :damn: Nothing in the RFB manual about experience caps, promotions, or the like-all I see is something about enlisted crew skills increasing in value until level 6, at which point leadership skills take precedence.

[cgjimeneza]

Indy676 has reported on the OpMonsun thread that he´s getting ships of up to 8000 tons to sink with one hit at least 50% of the time and tankers of 12,000 with to

he´s reporting he´s got a "system"... any of you guys have such good shootign? this info should be collated (IMHO)

and come feb 1st, it will be Captain Jimenez, yeah

[LukeFF]

Thank you for your support, and yes that is the first thing I did before playing the mod. :damn: Nothing in the RFB manual about experience caps, promotions, or the like-all I see is something about enlisted crew skills increasing in value until level 6, at which point leadership skills take precedence.
Alright, I'll give you partial credit for this one, since the manual indeed doesn't mention anything about experience caps: ;)

Page 9-10:

Do note that while Chief Petty Officers and Officers are lumped together into the same category, it is not possible to promote CPOs to the officer ranks with RFB. While it was true that CPOs could become officers, the time needed to do so took far longer than the "instantaneous" promotions Silent Hunter 4 allows.
Basically, experience points is what determines when a sailor can be promoted to the next rank, if possible. Since CPOs can't be promoted any higher they thus have "0" experience points.

[Nephandus]

A quick question... are there any plans on correcting the propeller spinning direction issue and three bladed propellors on the Gato and Balao for the future?

[Rockin Robbins]

Real Fleet Boat isn't much of an eyecandy mod. If it doesn't contribute to gameplay it is definitely a lower priority. Right now the surface ship physics model, the target damage model and some other projects are taking up all the front burners. We have the solution to the propellers ready if and when we get around to it. Skwasjr handed us that one on a silver platter awhile ago. It's one of the hazards of team modding. You always have too many ideas to implement them all!

Interestingly, one of the eyecandy things that DID make it is rotating fans in the control room and conning tower. There might be others but I haven't noticed. And the HUD gauges are magnificent! I imagine there will always be something to do and the mod will never be "finished."

The problem comes in when the mod gets so large and unwieldy that game loading time and performance takes an unacceptable hit. What is that point? We don't know but we'll know it when we see it.

[OlegM]

OK I am back to SH4 after a hiatus, and of course I installed latest versions of RFB and RSRDC, my favorite mods.

My question is simple, how do I get some of my framerate back?

As I understand RFB now incorporates some environment mods, which is nice generally speaking, but I am not too crazy about enviro mods because they kill the framerate. I would be grateful if you could throw in some suggestions as to how to disable some of the less needed enviro eye candy thingies to get back at least some of the framerate, thanks.

[Nephandus]

Real Fleet Boat isn't much of an eyecandy mod. If it doesn't contribute to gameplay it is definitely a lower priority. Right now the surface ship physics model, the target damage model and some other projects are taking up all the front burners. We have the solution to the propellers ready if and when we get around to it. Skwasjr handed us that one on a silver platter awhile ago. It's one of the hazards of team modding. You always have too many ideas to implement them all!

Interestingly, one of the eyecandy things that DID make it is rotating fans in the control room and conning tower. There might be others but I haven't noticed. And the HUD gauges are magnificent! I imagine there will always be something to do and the mod will never be "finished."

The problem comes in when the mod gets so large and unwieldy that game loading time and performance takes an unacceptable hit. What is that point? We don't know but we'll know it when we see it.

True.... though I think that adjusting the propeller pitch in order not to have it spinning for backward propulsion when you are going forward and adding a new historically accurate propeller shouldn't have that big of an impact on performance.

I guess the foremost important thing for the modding team currently is adjusting those ships to the new damage and sinking model that haven't been adjusted yet (like the warships). That must definitely be a hard thing.... but the results are really rewarding (I love what they have done in that respect to the merchant vessels)

I think there is no "a mod is complete".... there is only "not complete" or "overdone" (like when the mod is bigger in size than the actual game).

[Indy676]

There were no changes for weeks on end on my last patrol of the east coast of the United States in OM 600.
Is it not unrealistic to have the same weather for a full two weeks in January 1942? No wind at all, for more than two weeks with no changes in direktion, visibility or with the sky.
Before the installing of the last patche the weather was changing every two to three days. That was fine for me.
Greets Indy

[Nephandus]

There were no changes for weeks on end on my last patrol of the east coast of the United States in OM 600.
Is it not unrealistic to have the same weather for a full two weeks in January 1942? No wind at all, for more than two weeks with no changes in direktion, visibility or with the sky.
Before the installing of the last patche the weather was changing every two to three days. That was fine for me.
Greets Indy

Lucky you.... my wether is usually like s***.... winds above 12 knots coupled with sometime heavy rain and fog... quite funny to see two merchants passing at 600 yards and the only thing possible is to get a radar lock on them

[mikeydredd]

I have just downloaded this brilliant mod compilation and installed it last night. It kept me up until 4.30!

Started work at 8!

It's been a long day today. :dead: :zzz:

Thanks to all your team for this superb culmination of your hard work and dedication. Fantastic stuff and to think it costs nothing but a download. A salutary lesson to all those money hogging b***ards out there who are STILL doing their best to ruin our lives.

Keep up the brilliant work.

Many many many thanks.

Dredd:) :) :)

[TopcatWA]

Bravo Zulu to the RFB team for a great effort on the update. Now to get back out thgere & do some hunting!!!!!!:yeah: :up:

[LukeFF]

Glad you guys like it! We have more good things in store for you all, for sure.

[Flanker15]

Was wondering:
Is the way ships sink (straight down with minimal list or tilt) a side effect of it being WIP or acutally how torpedoed ships sunk?
I can no longer blow bits off ships (masts, little guns etc...) is this intentional or WIP stuff?
Can the burn time for fires be increased, they go out pretty quickly but you still hear the fire noise comming from them (this is important for night time hunting)?

Also does anyone else see oil/fuel floating up into the air when you have a leak while surfaced?

[jazzabilly]

Any idea when the next version will be ready?

~respectful anticipation.

[LukeFF]

Any idea when the next version will be ready?

Not for a while. This next version will require a lot of work.

[ancient46]

For some reason I don't encounter many capital ships on patrol. Last night on my second career patrol I encountered a lone Kuma cruiser near Manila. One torpedo hit under the middle funnel and boom up pops the ship sunk message. I was shocked. My first thought was what was wrong with my game. Then I realized the warships have not been modeled yet. I am so used to the new RFB sinking model I was really disappointed sinking the cruiser. It wasn't as much fun knowing I sank the ship immediatly after hitting it with one torpedo. I am afraid RFB has ruined the stock game for me it is definately not as much fun.

[tater]

Some of the stock warship outcomes are not unrealistic. CLs sinking with 1 fish was not at all uncommon, though it's a virtual certainty in stock.

50% of the CLs hit with 1 fish (4 in RL) in RL sank. 60% of those hit with 2 (7 attacks) sank, and 100% of those hit with 3+ (3 attacks) sank.

[Fish40]

Just started a new patrol! Love the new skins, and the included EE by W.Clear! I love that all the mods I had to enable seperately, are now being incorporated. It unclutters my JSGME. Can't wait for the next release, hopefully with the Clear/Kriller environment combo. It'll be awesome! Thanks RFB Team!:up:

[OlegM]

Latest RFB sucks, plain and simple.

I don't know what you did to my favorite mod in the last couple months but it's complete BS now. When Beery was the boss it was the best mod evah, being limited to tweaking realism, and leaving environment stuff alone (as it should be). Now, after a hiatus, I am again back to SH4 with RTF and it sucks.

- Framerate is utterly *murdered* - I assume by environment mods which should have nothing to do with RFB and should be made optional. Enviro mods suck IMO anyway and for the most part don't look very realistic at all (but that's another story - they should never have been integrated into RFB at the first place). Now I can't avoid them because they are integral part of RFB. Nice work guys, good bye to good frame rate (oh and I even upgraded my PC in the meantime). I asked if there's any way of restoring my framerate, got no answer, I assume it's just not possible.

- Damage model is a joke, I assume this NSM sub-mod is responsible for that? Again, whose idea was to take some ridicolous mod and integrate it into RFB with obviously no testing at all? I've had medium sized merchants taking 4 torps and happily chugging along at 10 knots, engines working, guns being manned, ship even taking some evasive manouvers. After 4 torps? This is not "natural" sinking mechanics this is ridicolous.

- Ships almost never stop, until they sink. I don't know what would it take to destroy the ship'e engine in RFB 1.52? In reality, engine was among the first things to go dead after a critical torpedo hit, with ships going DIW (dead in water).

- All ships sink like bathtubs slowly filled with water. Gone are the spectacular sinkings of the stock SH4. OK, the stock SH4 went a bit too far with Hollywood effects, but what we have now is even more ridicolous and not realistic at all.

It's back to stock SH4 with RSRD campaign for me. Please, reconsider what you've done since Beery left and do some changes (leaving stuff out or making it optional) for the next version, thanks.

What I would like RFB to do is basically just tweak some parameters in the text files, with some very very basic graphical options (like new, realistic scopes).

Please, please check and recheck every third party mod that claims to be realistic but is actually a joke (Natural sinking mech?) and leave the enviro BS out altogether. Just a suggestion.

[Lt commander lare]

hi when i installed real fleet boat the aa gun in front of the bridge keeps turning around on its own and the deck gun does not work and is pointing down towards the deck am i doing something wrong with the install

lt commander lare

[LukeFF]

Latest RFB sucks, plain and simple.
Thanks for the compliment. :roll:

- Framerate is utterly *murdered* - I assume by environment mods which should have nothing to do with RFB and should be made optional. Enviro mods suck IMO anyway and for the most part don't look very realistic at all (but that's another story - they should never have been integrated into RFB at the first place). Now I can't avoid them because they are integral part of RFB. Nice work guys, good bye to good frame rate (oh and I even upgraded my PC in the meantime). I asked if there's any way of restoring my framerate, got no answer, I assume it's just not possible.
Everything in RFB is tested and vetted by me and those who choose to test the mod. As such, EE5 got the green light. Is it perfect? No. More environmental work is in store for RFB 2.0.

What type of hardware are you running?

- Damage model is a joke, I assume this NSM sub-mod is responsible for that? Again, whose idea was to take some ridicolous mod and integrate it into RFB with obviously no testing at all? I've had medium sized merchants taking 4 torps and happily chugging along at 10 knots, engines working, guns being manned, ship even taking some evasive manouvers. After 4 torps? This is not "natural" sinking mechanics this is ridicolous.

- Ships almost never stop, until they sink. I don't know what would it take to destroy the ship'e engine in RFB 1.52? In reality, engine was among the first things to go dead after a critical torpedo hit, with ships going DIW (dead in water).

- All ships sink like bathtubs slowly filled with water. Gone are the spectacular sinkings of the stock SH4. OK, the stock SH4 went a bit too far with Hollywood effects, but what we have now is even more ridicolous and not realistic at all.
ROFL. NSM never was/is a part of RFB. We (mainly Observer and Der Teddy Bär) have created our own damage model from scratch, and it has absolutely nothing to do with NSM. It's all explained in the manual. That, and the current patch modified the damage mod, so you shouldn't be seeing the behaviors above that you so eloquently pointed out. ;)

It's back to stock SH4 with RSRD campaign for me. Please, reconsider what you've done since Beery left and do some changes (leaving stuff out or making it optional) for the next version, thanks.
RFB is not "mod soup." The manual explains to the player what the mod does. Either you (a) accept the mod "as is" or (b) tweak the mod, at your own risk.

What I would like RFB to do is basically just tweak some parameters in the text files, with some very very basic graphical options (like new, realistic scopes).
RFB has moved far beyond that, thanks largely to skwasjer and his excellent S3D editing program. Sorry, no turning back now. ;)

[OlegM]

OK so I apologize to the author of NSM, which I *assumed* was responsible for this joke of a damage model currently in RFB.

Everything else I said stands, don't know what would I add to that..... I did use the latest patch, and still saw the "behaviors I so eloquently" described, ie medium sized merchies surviving 3-4 torp hits - not merely surviving, but happily chugging along with guns manned and taking evasive manouvers at 8-12 knots with elephant-sized holes in their hulls which is just utterly ridicolous.

As I understand this latest version is couple months old, and the latest patch is at least couple weeks old. Did no one complain about this in that time?

My PC hardware is a moot point. It's new, good, powerful and plays games nicely :cool: I don't want to go into "put new drivers" or "nVidia sucks" kind of BS. Stock SH4 runs VERY fine on my new PC as it actually did on the old one as well. It's the enviro crap that kills my framerate and it really should not have been present in a mod like this AT ALL.

Well, obviously it's just my opinion. The new RFB management decided to put all this mumbo jumbo into mod, which is a decision I acknowledge and guys sharing my opinon may only go look elsewhere.

Too bad Beery retired, though. This game needs a relatively simple, enviro-BS-free mod like old RFB.... That, and the damage model should have been made optional. Too late for that it seems.

[Wilcke]

hi when i installed real fleet boat the aa gun in front of the bridge keeps turning around on its own and the deck gun does not work and is pointing down towards the deck am i doing something wrong with the install

lt commander lare

Hey lare,

How ya been man? Hey listen post up your JSGME activated mod list for a quick peek. Then post your:

Start date:
Sub:
Port:
etc.

Its all good! Take care!

Happy Hunting!

[Lt commander lare]

hey wilkie im doing fine thanks for asking all the mods i had installed were real fleet boat and my start date was july12 1943 and i had a gato class boat uss trigger and i was at pearl harbor hope this helps take care

lt commander lare

[Indy676]

Hello Captains

Some time ago I was not satisfied with the sinkability of the ships in OM with RFB and wrote so in the OM threat.
Now I know it’s only a matter of hitting the right spot of the ship. Ships of up to 8.000 BRT will sink after only one hit, in maybe a little under 50% of the attacks, if hit in the right spot. The big large oiler, of 12.000 BRT will sink after two torpedoes, if hit in the right spot, but you need time and you need to be patient, so I think it’s relatively realistic.
Greets Indy

[Fish40]

@ Oleg: Dude, believe me when I say, my machine is far from bleeding edge. As a matter of fact, I only have 1gig of memory, and still manage the game with RFB, with graphic options turned fairly high, and manage decent FRs. What I do though, is make sure what I have is in tip top shape. That means defragging befor I play, run Ccleaner, and use FSautostart, a utility to shut down all background applications. Also, be sure ALL drivers are up to date (that means Chipset too)

I'm sorry you feel the way you do about RFB. I'm sure you could do some tweaking useing some of the suggestions I cited to help you out. Quite frankly IMHO the RFB team has done an excellent job takeing over for Beery, and I simply wouldn't play the game without it. Bottom line. Good luck, and hope you sort things out.

[AVGWarhawk]

Latest RFB sucks, plain and simple.

I don't know what you did to my favorite mod in the last couple months but it's complete BS now. When Beery was the boss it was the best mod evah, being limited to tweaking realism, and leaving environment stuff alone (as it should be). Now, after a hiatus, I am again back to SH4 with RTF and it sucks.

- Framerate is utterly *murdered* - I assume by environment mods which should have nothing to do with RFB and should be made optional. Enviro mods suck IMO anyway and for the most part don't look very realistic at all (but that's another story - they should never have been integrated into RFB at the first place). Now I can't avoid them because they are integral part of RFB. Nice work guys, good bye to good frame rate (oh and I even upgraded my PC in the meantime). I asked if there's any way of restoring my framerate, got no answer, I assume it's just not possible.

- Damage model is a joke, I assume this NSM sub-mod is responsible for that? Again, whose idea was to take some ridicolous mod and integrate it into RFB with obviously no testing at all? I've had medium sized merchants taking 4 torps and happily chugging along at 10 knots, engines working, guns being manned, ship even taking some evasive manouvers. After 4 torps? This is not "natural" sinking mechanics this is ridicolous.

- Ships almost never stop, until they sink. I don't know what would it take to destroy the ship'e engine in RFB 1.52? In reality, engine was among the first things to go dead after a critical torpedo hit, with ships going DIW (dead in water).

- All ships sink like bathtubs slowly filled with water. Gone are the spectacular sinkings of the stock SH4. OK, the stock SH4 went a bit too far with Hollywood effects, but what we have now is even more ridicolous and not realistic at all.

It's back to stock SH4 with RSRD campaign for me. Please, reconsider what you've done since Beery left and do some changes (leaving stuff out or making it optional) for the next version, thanks.

What I would like RFB to do is basically just tweak some parameters in the text files, with some very very basic graphical options (like new, realistic scopes).

Please, please check and recheck every third party mod that claims to be realistic but is actually a joke (Natural sinking mech?) and leave the enviro BS out altogether. Just a suggestion.

You have options, TMO or RFB. That is just about it. RFB can not satisfy all systems the mod is played on nor satisfy every user. Try TMO. TMO sounds like your type of mod. Just a suggestion.

[Rockin Robbins]

Latest RFB sucks, plain and simple.

I don't know what you did to my favorite mod in the last couple months but it's complete BS now. When Beery was the boss it was the best mod evah, being limited to tweaking realism, and leaving environment stuff alone (as it should be). Now, after a hiatus, I am again back to SH4 with RTF and it sucks.

- Framerate is utterly *murdered* - I assume by environment mods which should have nothing to do with RFB and should be made optional. Enviro mods suck IMO anyway and for the most part don't look very realistic at all (but that's another story - they should never have been integrated into RFB at the first place). Now I can't avoid them because they are integral part of RFB. Nice work guys, good bye to good frame rate (oh and I even upgraded my PC in the meantime). I asked if there's any way of restoring my framerate, got no answer, I assume it's just not possible.

- Damage model is a joke, I assume this NSM sub-mod is responsible for that? Again, whose idea was to take some ridicolous mod and integrate it into RFB with obviously no testing at all? I've had medium sized merchants taking 4 torps and happily chugging along at 10 knots, engines working, guns being manned, ship even taking some evasive manouvers. After 4 torps? This is not "natural" sinking mechanics this is ridicolous.

- Ships almost never stop, until they sink. I don't know what would it take to destroy the ship'e engine in RFB 1.52? In reality, engine was among the first things to go dead after a critical torpedo hit, with ships going DIW (dead in water).

- All ships sink like bathtubs slowly filled with water. Gone are the spectacular sinkings of the stock SH4. OK, the stock SH4 went a bit too far with Hollywood effects, but what we have now is even more ridicolous and not realistic at all.

It's back to stock SH4 with RSRD campaign for me. Please, reconsider what you've done since Beery left and do some changes (leaving stuff out or making it optional) for the next version, thanks.

What I would like RFB to do is basically just tweak some parameters in the text files, with some very very basic graphical options (like new, realistic scopes).

Please, please check and recheck every third party mod that claims to be realistic but is actually a joke (Natural sinking mech?) and leave the enviro BS out altogether. Just a suggestion.
Oleg: you really don't expect positive response from an insulting post do you? That's just plain silly. So would answering your points be silly.

Those who want to improve a mod work constructively, from the inside to build something better. Those who don't snipe from outside to tear it down.

[Dieselglock]

I guess everyone has there own opinion. I have tested and played every version of RFB since 1.5.

The latest version of RFB I believe is the best so far. I have no problem what so ever with the sinking mechanics. ( Most of the time 2 hits, 3 on larger ships) every ship I hit stops and is usually dead in the water in what would seem to be realistic time. I think Luke and the boys have done a fantastic job in achieving there goal for the mod. Good work!:yeah:

By the way I play this mod and have been playing SH4 for the last year on a Macintosh laptop. I have no problem at all with the environmental mod included in RFB and enjoy it a lot. My frame rates rarely fall into the 30's.

Len

[AVGWarhawk]

OK so I apologize to the author of NSM, which I *assumed* was responsible for this joke of a damage model currently in RFB.

Everything else I said stands, don't know what would I add to that..... I did use the latest patch, and still saw the "behaviors I so eloquently" described, ie medium sized merchies surviving 3-4 torp hits - not merely surviving, but happily chugging along with guns manned and taking evasive manouvers at 8-12 knots with elephant-sized holes in their hulls which is just utterly ridicolous.

As I understand this latest version is couple months old, and the latest patch is at least couple weeks old. Did no one complain about this in that time?

My PC hardware is a moot point. It's new, good, powerful and plays games nicely :cool: I don't want to go into "put new drivers" or "nVidia sucks" kind of BS. Stock SH4 runs VERY fine on my new PC as it actually did on the old one as well. It's the enviro crap that kills my framerate and it really should not have been present in a mod like this AT ALL.

Well, obviously it's just my opinion. The new RFB management decided to put all this mumbo jumbo into mod, which is a decision I acknowledge and guys sharing my opinon may only go look elsewhere.

Too bad Beery retired, though. This game needs a relatively simple, enviro-BS-free mod like old RFB.... That, and the damage model should have been made optional. Too late for that it seems.
So judging by this response, the enviro mod is causing you problems. Therefore, your PC hardware is not a moot point. I could not run RFB very well on my old system using the 5.0 enviro mod. I simply install an older version of PE4 right after RFB. No issues at all. Sometimes modders can look after the need of the one but in this instance with the enviro mod, looking after that need of the one affects the many. But, there are ways around this and that is activating an older version of PE4 right behind RFB as stated. JSGME and keeping older mod versions in a folder is very helpful in making 'mod soup' as you put it. I keep several of mods from PE to use if the current or future mod for the environment look to be over the top for my PC. However, my new PC built for games makes this a thing of the past. So, PC power does make a difference in performance concerning some mods.

Sadly, Beery probably retired because of posts like this.

[Wilcke]

hey wilkie im doing fine thanks for asking all the mods i had installed were real fleet boat and my start date was july12 1943 and i had a gato class boat uss trigger and i was at pearl harbor hope this helps take care

lt commander lare
hey lare,

sure not a problem at work now but tonight when i get home i will give this a shot and see where it lands gonna start a career on those dates and see what gives if you get a chance during the day go to your jsgme proggy and use the utility to generate a text doc of you active mods then just cut and paste into this post so i can have a looksie take care man posts later tonight laters take care

[ancient46]

Well RFB clearly states its goals and direction in the manual, It is not really constructive to criticize people who are only trying to perfect what they set out to do. Probably starting off with "RFB sucks" invites adversarial responses instead of addressing your concerns. Anyone who does not like anything about RFB is free to change it for their own personal enjoyment. It may take some time to learn what to do but it is not realy that hard to remove or modify parts that you really don't like. I would caution you to be patient though. Many of the new features in 1.52 were fustrating at first but once the learning curve hit the top I wouldn't go back to stock ever again.

I do not have a powerful system, a nForce 4 motherboard with an Athlon x2 4200, 1 GB ram, a 8800 GT video card and a stripped down version of XP. However it does run RFB at high graphics settings from 45 to 120 framerates. I do not consider it a frame rate killer on my low end system. I would venture a guess from all the questions asked about the proper way to install the environmental mods, that most people already were running one and the inclusion of one into RFB was a proper decision.

When I hit the mechanical rooms of a merchant and rip open two holds with another torp I usually get a sinking in about 15 minutes. Less accurate shots take longer. I see a ship that is hit in the engine room slow to a stop as the steam pressure is lost and the drives momentum is lost. Loss of engines does not equal loss of momentum. Did you really cause a critical hit on the actual engines or boilers or did you just put a hole in the side without taking out major equipment? I like the design that makes where you hit a major factor in how the ship sinks. Frankly shooting at ships that haven't been modded by RFB is showy but boring in my opinion. Knowing a cruiser is sunk at the moment a torp hits, before it even has a chance to start sinking is not for me anymore. I eagerly await the capital ships being re-worked.

I sucked at shooting and the new sinking model was frustrating at first. However the RFB team in general and LukeFF in particular patiently helped all of us learn to shoot and quickly sink our targets. However I do think that they responded better to pleas for help rather than "RFB sucks because ships don't sink like I am used to" posts.

[Nisgeis]

OK so I apologize to the author of NSM, which I *assumed* was responsible for this joke of a damage model currently in RFB.
You know what's really not funny? That red Triangle thread. I mean, OK, it might have been hilarious back when it was topical, when SH3 was being developed, but to ressurect it now is like... Bam! To the moon Alice! Some things should stay buried in nostalgia, as those that 'weren't there' will never understand (find it hilarious).


Everything else I said stands, don't know what would I add to that..... I did use the latest patch, and still saw the "behaviors I so eloquently" described, ie medium sized merchies surviving 3-4 torp hits - not merely surviving, but happily chugging along with guns manned and taking evasive manouvers at 8-12 knots with elephant-sized holes in their hulls which is just utterly ridicolous.

I agree.


As I understand this latest version is couple months old, and the latest patch is at least couple weeks old. Did no one complain about this in that time?

If only there were like, this system, where you know, you can post stuff and it gets recorded, you know like, some sort of bulletin board thing. If there were such a thing, you could look back and see if anyone did complain about it in that time. I'm not going to look back through this thread for you. If you want to know if anyone complained, look for yourself, unless your eyes don't work.


My PC hardware is a moot point. It's new, good, powerful and plays games nicely :cool: I don't want to go into "put new drivers" or "nVidia sucks" kind of BS. Stock SH4 runs VERY fine on my new PC as it actually did on the old one as well. It's the enviro crap that kills my framerate and it really should not have been present in a mod like this AT ALL.

I'm sorry to say that if your new hardware will not run a game that is well over a year old with a few tweaks, then your hardware is not, as you claim, 'good'. If your gfx card does not have sufficient power, then you can't blame a mod. Did you perhaps upgrade to a Commodore 64?


Well, obviously it's just my opinion. The new RFB management decided to put all this mumbo jumbo into mod, which is a decision I acknowledge and guys sharing my opinon may only go look elsewhere.

Yes it is your opinion. I have to say I've not heard of you recently in this forum. Perhaps it's your new found fame as the 'Not really very funny red triangle guy' that makes you think that your opinion counts for something? No really, do go on. I'm trying to understand your message, but, those pesky rules of English get in the way.

"The new RFB management decided to put all this mumbo jumbo into mod"

Into mod? What? Into a mod perhaps? Am I being presumtuous? Ok, so let's say that the new RFB management decided to put all this mumbo jumbo into 'a' mod... right, with you so far. Do go on...

"which is a decision I acknowledge and guys sharing my opinon may only go look elsewhere."

Right, so you acknowledge that a decision was made to put some mumbo jumbo into a mod... with you there.

"and guys sharing my opinon may only go look elsewhere."

No, sorry... if you are going to revert to Japanese manga style quotes then you have to give some warning. I mean, that makes no sense at all. All our base are belong to us! Guys sharing my opinion may only go look elsewhere! Someone set us up the bomb! Good evening cats!

Too bad Beery retired, though. This game needs a relatively simple, enviro-BS-free mod like old RFB.... That, and the damage model should have been made optional. Too late for that it seems.
Yes, too bad Beery got tired of your whining and had nothing more to do with the modding scene that you and your very unfunny red triangle killed off.

Why did you kill Beery? Did he not laugh at the red triangle either?

OlegM... hmmm... shouldn't you be developing IL3, not hanging around here? Unless you aren't really the real Oleg. In which case, you may only go look elsewhere.

[OlegM]

Sadly, Beery probably retired because of posts like this.

Beery as I remember him, was pretty thick skinned dude.... what with all the flak he received for deck gun rate of fire.... I doubt he retired because of "posts like this". He simply lost interest in modding the game and moved on to other things in life - at least that's what I remember him saying in his last posts.

Anyway it would be interesting to see his opinion on the current state of RFB although that, too, is a moot point I guess...

Damage model can be tweaked I guess, it will probably get better - although I remain utterly shocked by the lack of protests about it, already, in this thread.

Enviro crap is entirely different problem, and some guys, me included, are simply not ready to sacrifice 10, or 20, or 40% of performance for some superficial and not even very realistic eye candy, done by complete game development amateurs. Bottom line - SH4 3D designers had good reasons why they did things the way they did. Enviro BS, hi res skins and whatnot should be left out of the mod like this, and made optional, period. Nothing will change my opinion on this, no matter how rude or polite anyone's posts might be (including mine).

[AVGWarhawk]

Beery as I remember him, was pretty thick skinned dude

How does someone get a thick skin? From the beatings. :03:

[tater]

I've done several patrols with the current incarnation of the ship damage model, and sunk many ships (59k one RSRD patrol alone (had to refuel/rearm on that patrol 'cause I let myself get well under 50% on the wrong side of the pacific)), almost all of which were merchants. I've yet to sink any with more than 3 fish, and that includes large tankers.

I'm a decent enough shot, and while I aim spreads at fore mast, MOT, aft mast, I rarely hit where I aim, and more times than not I get 1-2 of a 3 fish spread to hit. As a result, my hits are more or less randomly spread around the targets, I'm not gaming the "1 hit kill" spots.

I'm just not seeing the problem with it taking so many fish to get a sinking. That said, it might take a while for some of them to sink, OTOH, in response to some of the comments I've read here (there were a lot, if you bothered to read the thread, even a little) I started timing sinkings. 5k+ ships hit with 2 fish almost always sink for me in under 30 minutes. About half the ships I attack sink in under 5-6 minutes.

As a reality check, some 7k japanese ships survived 3 torpedo hits, though the majority sank with 2 fish (~80% of attacks with 2 hits resulted in a sinking in RL (I made a spreadsheet of every single confirmed attack on ~7k ton jap merchants).

[OlegM]

As a reality check, some 7k japanese ships survived 3 torpedo hits, though the majority sank with 2 fish (~80% of attacks with 2 hits resulted in a sinking in RL (I made a spreadsheet of every single confirmed attack on ~7k ton jap merchants).

How many sank after just one hit? I guess many did. And how many sank in less than 10 minutes?

I am not trying to be confrontational, I am just asking...

Because, in RFB 1.52 I am yet to see that happen. Even the smallest merchies survive one torp hit with apparent ease, and there seems to be no way to make ship sink in 10-15 minutes not even if you hit it with 6 torps.

[AVGWarhawk]

As a reality check, some 7k japanese ships survived 3 torpedo hits, though the majority sank with 2 fish (~80% of attacks with 2 hits resulted in a sinking in RL (I made a spreadsheet of every single confirmed attack on ~7k ton jap merchants).

How many sank after just one hit? I guess many did. And how many sank in less than 10 minutes?

I am not trying to be confrontational, I am just asking...

Because, in RFB 1.52 I am yet to see that happen. Even the smallest merchies survive one torp hit with apparent ease, and there seems to be no way to make ship sink in 10-15 minutes not even if you hit it with 6 torps.

Just a question Oleg, your sinking issue. Some have found, including my self, that a clean install of SH4 and RFB with patch clears up this problem. I know this thread is long but I know of three, including me, that did the complete reinstall for the sinking mod to work. Also, it fixed a camera problem that was solved months ago. After I did that, all worked as designed. Would you consider a fresh install and give it a second try? Just a thought. :DL

[tater]

Small splits and small composite, and the refer (shown as a small tanker, though she was not in RL) have all sunk for me in one hit, some of them very fast. I had 1 medium sized AK take 2 and not sink all the way, but after a couple hours (I was busy avoiding ashcans) I surfaced and threw a few DG rounds in her and down she went. She might well have sunk on her own.

The only thing I'd like to see a little more of in the SDM is listing. I've seen very little profound listing. This might be an unrealistic expectation though, I have no idea how many merchants were compartmentalized port/stbd.

[OlegM]

Small splits and small composite, and the refer (shown as a small tanker, though she was not in RL) have all sunk for me in one hit.

I didn't ask you about the game I asked about real life stats, as you say you have extensive real life stats. The Japanese being notorious for their bad damage control I would assume many many even bigger ships went down after a single torpedo hit.

Lusitania, a big liner of 30.000+ tons went down after a ONE torpedo. And it went down, listing, in 18 minutes!

That could never happen in RFB 1.52. It would require 8 torps to sink a ship that big, she would not list she would simply go down like a bathtub, and it would take half a day for her to sink (probably firing guns till the last minute, if it were an armed ship).

[theluckyone17]

Gorram people.

You don't like a mod? Don't use it.
You like an older version of a mod, instead? Use that.
Think something's not historical? Start a thread and argue over it with the rest of the historians. Better provide proof.
Like a mod, but wish something was different? Change it.
Really like a mod? Thank the folks who made it.Really, it's that simple. End of the conversation. Next topic, please.

[OlegM]

Gorram people.

You don't like a mod? Don't use it.
You like an older version of a mod, instead? Use that.
Think something's not historical? Start a thread and argue over it with the rest of the historians. Better provide proof.
Like a mod, but wish something was different? Change it.
Really like a mod? Thank the folks who made it.Really, it's that simple. End of the conversation. Next topic, please.

Thanks for your marvellous insight.

I don't use the mod anymore for my "serious gaming", it's a non issue, I just happen to like to argue on web forums anyway, OK?

Older version of the mod is a) not available (link?) b) not compatible with patch 1.5 which I happen to like.

Historical or not? - I wouldn't even use the word "historical" here. The damage model as such is not even close to "historical" it's just ridicolous. I did provide some proof (the Lusitania example) but really think the model is so obviously bad we are a long way from any sensible discussion.

The other issue that bothers me - enviro mods and their influence on the framerate - has nothing to do with history per se. I simply argue enviro mods should be left out, that's all.

[tater]

Well, Almost all small ships sinking with 1 hit is pretty good.

That said, I counted 57 attacks on ships from ~4800-5500 tons which were hit with 1 fish (rough scan), and 50 sank, 7 damaged.

88% sank with 1 torpedo.

For 10k AOs, only 30% sank with 1 hit. 40% sank with 2 hits, and 30% sank with 3 hits. 100% sank with 4+ hits. Plenty of 10-20k AOs steamed haway from 2-3 hits, however, looking at the damaged data (not sunk). One 14k AO was hit with 6, and got away, though claimed sunk.

[tater]

You are claiming it is absurd, but I've been watching my attacks now for maybe 4 patrols (I don't have time the last couple weeks), and my results are hugely different than yours. I have not seen any ships steaming away from even 3 hits. So far for me, 3 hits has been a certain sinking for me in RFB. For small ships (heck, medium, too), 2 has been certain, and more often than not 1 does the trick (I always fire spreads, so 2 hits is probably my most common result, so many of those likely would have gone down with one, IMO).

Perhaps something is corrupted in your install.

Lusitania is a poor example since she was transporting ammo, right? Also, 1 example would make a piss-poor basis for a DM. 30k tons sinks with 1 fish, every time. That pretty much means 1-hit kills on, well, everything except large warships, which is entirely counter to reality.

[OlegM]

Well, Almost all small ships sinking with 1 hit is pretty good.

That said, I counted 57 attacks on ships from ~4800-5500 tons which were hit with 1 fish (rough scan), and 50 sank, 7 damaged.

88% sank with 1 torpedo.

For 10k AOs, only 30% sank with 1 hit. 40% sank with 2 hits, and 30% sank with 3 hits. 100% sank with 4+ hits. Plenty of 10-20k AOs steamed haway from 2-3 hits, however, looking at the damaged data (not sunk). One 14k AO was hit with 6, and got away, though claimed sunk.

Well I should say "I rest my case". You basically confirmed what I said in my "rude manner".

I dare you, or anyone, to replicate the above results in RFB 1.52. I will quote them again for clarity:

"I counted 57 attacks on ships from ~4800-5500 tons which were hit with 1 fish (rough scan), and 50 sank, 7 damaged. 88% sank with 1 torpedo" Replicate this in RFB if you can! :haha:

For 10k AOs, only 30% sank with 1 hit. <= "only"? I would not say that 30% is "only" but anyway please replicate this in RFB.

I don't understand that you are bothered by my "rude" manner, and not being bothered by the fact that RFB does not come *even close* to the numerical data YOU provide? And it's NOT just about number of torpedos, it's also about the way ships sink (never capsize), the way they keep going even heavily damaged, and crew manning the guns instead of abandoning ship.

Rude manner? I would call the results of this mod rudely disappointing, so if that means I am being rude so be it.... :arrgh!:

[OlegM]

Lusitania is a poor example since she was transporting ammo, right?

So the Germans say but it's not widely accepted. :nope:

Also, 1 example would make a piss-poor basis for a DM. 30k tons sinks with 1 fish, every time. That pretty much means 1-hit kills on, well, everything except large warships, which is entirely counter to reality.

Well Lusitania is a pretty famous example.

And lets not make amateruish logic mistakes - of course I am not saying a ship that big should sink from 1 torp EVERY time, but in RFB 1.52 it will not sink in any way resebling the history even in 100 trial runs. Also, she sunk in 18 minutes! It should happen, not every time, but at least OCCASIONALLY in RFB as well.

[tater]

I've sunk several Nippon Maru (10k AO) in testing with 1 torp using RFB. Gotta be close to 30% (wasn't counting).

Almost all ships up to medium (5k tons) I attack sink with 1, and virtually all do with 2, but since I fire spreads, many of the 2-hit sinkings would sink with one, I imagine. The shortest sinking I recorded was around 4 minutes I think (might have been 3-something).

What % of RL sinkings capsized in the PTO?

[tater]

BTW, being rude requires another post to itself.

RFB is a MOD. It's made by people, using tools available to anyone reading this thread. Acting like an ass accomplishes exactly nothing. I am not mad, even if I thought the DM still needed tweaking, I'd not whine like a 13 YO girl for daddy to fix the mod for me. I'd set up test missions, and do the stats. If the results greatly varied from reality, I'd post those results in a way that was useful to the modders, and make suggestions.

Given how easy S3D is to use (some DM stuff is also text stuff in Zones.cfg), I'd then experiment with fixing it myself. I'd "join the team" and do something. Testing a few simple mod variations might help the team narrow down a solution to the problem that I demonstrated with data.

Expert that you are in the sinking mechanics of the Japanese Merchant Marine, perhaps you can rezone everything in the game for us, and we can marvel at the perfection of your DM.

The RFB guys (or anyone else here) are not devs. They are not a secret society that doesn't talk about what they do, and you take it or leave it—it's all public, anyone can participate, anyone can fix/alter things.

So if your sole "contribution" is to be talk, at least be civil.

[AVGWarhawk]

OlegM,

Let this thread be the RFB mod thread. If you want to discuss statistic, etc. Please feel free to start your own thread in the Regular SH4.

[Der Teddy Bar]

OlegM,
Mate, your crude statements based upon your experiences sinking, or not sinking ships in RFB are in conflict with 99% other post on this subject.

So, that would on the surface suggest that you are the exception i.e. special.

I can only presume that your intentions are to spam the RFB thread because you are bored as you have supplied no evidence to support your viral tirade about the excellent ship NYGM Ship Damage mod done by Observer and Luke.

Lets assume that you are the only one who has the 'balls' to speak out and tell it how it is, that there are serious failings on the ship damage mod, maybe you thought that your street cred is enough to have everyone jump into action to correct what must, on your say so, be serious failings on the ship damage mod....

Or you are shy of posting screens shots with detailed information because you are a terrible shot...

Or by posting screen shots with detailed information all would see that you do not have substantial facts to which you have based your, uhm, criticisms on.

Prove us wrong i.e. you can do more than p1ss on someone elses hard work with no evidence to support your claim and for the benefit of the whole community contribute to the open source modding happening at the Silent Hunter modding forums.

[Nephandus]

Well.... that type of criticism is a bit over the top IMO as it is not really constructive.

Ok... the ocean might be a bit too blue depending on lighting- and weatherconditions but I think, the modders are working on that... at least I can say it looks really better than the stock environment.

Regarding the framerate.... it might be a wise idea to cut down a bit on anti-aliasing. Usually, 2x is enough as more will blur the picture more than acceptable. My system is now over a year old but is able to run the game in 1280x1024 at 70Hz.

I didn't like the mods to the deck-guns as well... but tell you what... I did mod them myself for personal use taking the historical figures and making them a bit worse than that. And they work really nice (though it is suicide to use them later in the war as most merchants are armed).

Personally I must say, I like the new damage model although it is not yet complete and has some glitches. Before this, all small merchants required 1 torp, all medium took 2 and all large 3... hitting the merchant in the right spot always caused him to explode and break in two halves. Now careful aiming is required. By the way.... an aimed torpedo right under the funnel stops the ship in 90% of all cases. On the last patrol I came across a large tanker who had severe explosions after the second hit causing it to sink in like 5 minutes. That was spectacular.

Actually, small ships now still take one good hit. Mediums 1-2, Large usually 2-4. Since I am playing with duds, I seldom shoot less than 2 Torps on a larger than small target (that message "Torpedo is a dud, sir" usually comes at the most inopportune moments)

The glitch I came across was a medium merchant that I sunk with a deck gun. I started hitting it at 4000 and sunk it at app. 2000. Unfortunately that think broke in two halves causing the "going down" message but the two halves didn't sink (although I modded the guns the mod is strictly swivel- and reload speed. The damage and the loadout is still the same).

I find the comparison with the Lusitania somewhat lacking. It is hardly practical to compare freighters built in the 20's and 30's to an all riveted liner built before 1914 (even earlier than the Titanic)... especially since the metallurgy of that time was only able to produce steel that contained a high percentage of carbon making it extremely brittle under colder climates (guess, what the Atlantic usually has).

[jazzabilly]

I will preface this reply with two statements.

I love both RFB & TMO, each for different reasons. Thank you, modders. You fellows are definitely BRAVO ZULU.

Just some feedback. I am still having some problems w/ lookouts not seeing clearly visible targets w/ the latest patch. Lockons still unstable.

New damage model is pretty realistic, from what I can see thus far. Torpedoes are damned frustrating (early '42), but that is expected.:stare:

Just input. Not a complaint.

Have a sweet day.:salute:

[tater]

BTW, while I frequently thorw ideas out there, and do some testing, I'm not a RFB team member. That said, if anyone sees a pattern of difficulty sinking stuff, post the info. Fish type used, number and location of hits, and the specifric target. That can help Observer, and I'd certainly pore through Alden (and/or TROMs) to see how that pattern looks compared to statistical reality for similar targets.

I might keep a log with target, hits, result, and time to sink on a scratch pad for my next patrols.

[jazzabilly]

BTW, while I frequently thorw ideas out there, and do some testing, I'm not a RFB team member. That said, if anyone sees a pattern of difficulty sinking stuff, post the info. Fish type used, number and location of hits, and the specifric target. That can help Observer, and I'd certainly pore through Alden (and/or TROMs) to see how that pattern looks compared to statistical reality for similar targets.
Yeah, I'll do that.

What I can say for sure~ 1st patrol (Dec.'41) , 9/10 of my magnetic fuses worked. Which is not consistent w/ RL. (RFB/RSDC). Will start keeping hard data for the mod teams.

[LukeFF]

What I can say for sure~ 1st patrol (Dec.'41) , 9/10 of my magnetic fuses worked. Which is not consistent w/ RL. (RFB/RSDC). Will start keeping hard data for the mod teams.

Sadly, failure rates for magnetic fuses cannot be modeled. The best I could do to simulate magnetic detonator failures is to set the detonation range to a very small value. Hopefully SH5 will have a "magnetic failures" parameter included with all the other (well-modeled) torpedo failures.

[tater]

I remember a LONG time ago, when the first realistic torpedo mod came out. There were always wierd findings where on patrol it would seem like none worked, and another they'd work fine.

That said, with a historical failure rate of maybe 70% or more, getting 9/10 bad is not particularly odd. It would be over multiple patrols, obviously.

[Binary101]

can some one help me, Im not sure which mod i should download i want to save some internet usage, so im not sure which is better in Trigger Maru or This one? like which fixes the bathtub issue and which 1 in your opnion have better water effects?

[Dogzero1]

[quote=tater]

Rude manner? I would call the results of this mod rudely disappointing, so if that means I am being rude so be it.... :arrgh!:

Well you wasted your money on the RFB mod then? What a shame. Remind me old rude one, how much did it cost you again?:down: :down:

ps, lets see your supermod available.;)

[OlegM]

Well you wasted your money on the RFB mod then? What a shame. Remind me old rude one, how much did it cost you again?:down:

Oh you gotta love the "zero cost" argument.

Are we discussing quality or the price here? Because if it's about the price I agree it's unbeatable. However, apparently in some areas of the mod you do get what you pay for... EVEN if you'd prefer getting nothing at all (as is the case with enviro submods which I would actually pay to get RID of)

[tater]

Dogzero, that's NOT my quote, that's oleg's.

[tater]

Well you wasted your money on the RFB mod then? What a shame. Remind me old rude one, how much did it cost you again?:down:

Oh you gotta love the "zero cost" argument.

Are we discussing quality or the price here? Because if it's about the price I agree it's unbeatable. However, apparently in some areas of the mod you do get what you pay for... EVEN if you'd prefer getting nothing at all (as is the case with enviro submods which I would actually pay to get RID of)

So get rid of them. Stop whining and just do it.

The trouble with the environment mods (I also suffer from awful FR problems them with my machine which I think should run the game fine) is that they do not just change eyecandy stuff. They mess with sensors to the extent sensors are affected by weather/waves/etc. As a result, when eye-candy obsessed players install them (which they WILL do), they'll break gameplay. Since they are so popular, the choice is to disallow the majority of players who use them, or include one.

BTW, others running systems the same as mine do not have the FR issues I have with PE/EE. I can only assume it's a problem with my machine in that case (or settings, or drivers).

[RFB Team]

Are we discussing quality or the price here? Because if it's about the price I agree it's unbeatable. However, apparently in some areas of the mod you do get what you pay for... EVEN if you'd prefer getting nothing at all (as is the case with enviro submods which I would actually pay to get RID of)

...and yet you continue to refuse to tell us what your hardware configuration is, despite LukeFF asking what it was, in case there truly is a problem with the way the environment mod is configured. :roll:

[Lt commander lare]

why when i install real fleet boat is my forward aa gun turning arounds constantly all by itself and the deck gun points down towards the deck and will not turn fire do anything, and this mod is all i have installed nothing else


lt commander lare

[Nephandus]

I have the impression our friend Oleg here just indulges a bit in venting of steam and getting a bit frustrated with noone sharing his grievances.

I find his destructive way of criticism very disrespectful though. He bought a game for money that was actually too arcadish and several graphic glitches.

The Mod Teams have taken it onto themselves improving the gameplay and at some points integrating graphic improvements as well.

As a matter of fact it is always a fact that you get what is being offered. If it is completely to your liking is secondary. If you don't like it, do it yourself to improve things to your liking.

I don't think anyone is eligible to that kind of criticism as long as one hasn't tried to mod himself (it took myself some time to sort out how to modify the things in the mod I didn't like to my liking and yet I still don't see myself writing in public that I find the mod crap because it did not meet my taste 100%... because I noticed that it takes time and effort to mod even the little things).

[OlegM]

I have the impression our friend Oleg here just indulges a bit in venting of steam.

Yes that is essentially correct.

I wasn't playing SH for couple months and I find out that in the meantime someone took Beery's perfectly usable medium sized realism mod and turned it into something.... well, into something else. Into a framerate-murdering monster mish-mash chaos, to put it shortly.

Honestly, if I'd only find a way to get rid of the enviro crap, I'd shut up and live with the quirky damage model for a while at least knowing it's been worked on, and trying to get wider statistical base for my damage/sinking analysis.

BTW I find tater's posts particuraly funny. Tater, mate, you essentially agree with pretty much everything I say, yet you choose to be on the other side, because my "manners are rude", or what?

Your real world data in my opinion confirmed that the damage/sinking model is NOT working nearly as it should. Also, your latest post confirmed YOU TOO have huge problems with the framerate. So, we agree on most important points! :88) Why didn't you tell all that to the modding team before, instead of waiting for the "rude guy"?

[tater]

Yes, I find rude posts to be, well, rude. Guys have spent hundreds and hundreds of hours of their free time working, and you act like an ass in their thread, with no data.

I do not agree with you, because as I said, I have not seen the results you are seeing WRT the damage model—not in the current version. In fact, WRT to the older DM, I did the spreadsheets, and presented it to Observer, who was happy for any data that would improve the mod. I need to really keep track, but off-hand, after looking at hundreds of RL sinkings (by reading and retyping them into a spreadsheet) it doesn't feel grossly off to me in the current version.

To compare a decent sample we'd need to have a bunch of well-documented patrol reports from players. Even if you don;t want to work on doing the actual modding, it's not terribly hard to alt-tab out and write down: target, hits (with fish type, and ideally location), result (with a sinking time, even notes) for each attack.

I think that "real" patrols are better than line 'em up and shoot single missions, because variable sea states, ship speeds, etc, matter.

Others have had problems with mods acting grossly odd from everyone else's experience, and there is usually some corruption happening somewhere.

Al;so, regarding environmental mods, if everyone isn't complaining about a FR of 2 (which I was seeing sometimes) with the same decent system, then it's probably your (or my, in this case) machine, NOT the mod. I have reported horrible RFB FRs with the PE mod in there before on my E6600/8800GTS system, and others with virtually identical systems have had a FR of 60+ in the same situations. Gotta be me.

You were asked for your system specs... crickets.

[jazzabilly]

Getting CTD's +++.

Generally, it happens when I run into a small convoy with a troopship. Running RFB 1.63 & RSRDC. I notice that the game gets confused over day/night with daylight at 04:30 in the a.m, then it's CTD, all saves corrupted and when I try to reload I get a CTD.

Don't know if RSRDC is the problem or not. All saves in that patrol cause CTD, regardless of where they were saved.

Waste of hours....about 3, of real time in that patrol

VERY FRUSTRATING.

[Nisgeis]

Oh my God! I just looked at the 'Red Triangle' thread again. How wrong could I have been?! NOW I get it! That stuff is hilarious! My God, it's like 24 carrot gold. For anyone that hasn't seen it, it's a post dredged up from the past, where the whole premise is that the Germans have this super secret, cutting edge technology device that can place a red triangle on enemy shipping. How hilarious is that! An actual red triangle on real shipping!

There's a whole series of modified grabs from Das Boot that are absolutely hilarious! They show the red triangle and the crew commenting on the red triangle.


And lets not make amateruish logic mistakes
Actually, now that you mention logic... Can you explain why the Germans didn't like the red triangle? Surely if it was a new weapon that showed targets, they'd have loved it. It would have helped them sink ships, no? Now you force me to hold the candle of realism up to someone's (your own) work, I find it sadly lacking. Why would the Germans despise the red triangle, that was an excellent advantage for them? Boy, analysing something with logic sure does ruin things. That red triangle thread sucks, it says that the Germas were stupid and despised war winning devices. The Germans weren't stuipid. Why did you say they were OlegM?


I just happen to like to argue on web forums anyway, OK?

You know, people shouldn't argue on the web, it's pointless. As the French say 'C'est La Vie' (That's life) and as the Japanese say 'guys sharing my opinon may only go look elsewhere' (No idea how to translate that).

[lurker_hlb3]

Getting CTD's +++.

Generally, it happens when I run into a small convoy with a troopship. Running RFB 1.63 & RSRDC. I notice that the game gets confused over day/night with daylight at 04:30 in the a.m, then it's CTD, all saves corrupted and when I try to reload I get a CTD.

Don't know if RSRDC is the problem or not. All saves in that patrol cause CTD, regardless of where they were saved.

Waste of hours....about 3, of real time in that patrol

VERY FRUSTRATING.

Request the following info

1. What date ?
2. What location ?
3. What sub type ?
3. What task group / home base ?

[theluckyone17]

Thanks for your marvellous insight.I just call it as I see it.

I don't use the mod anymore for my "serious gaming", it's a non issueWell, I do use the mod for my "serious gaming." Oddly enough, when I've spent hours of effort working on a program, I don't get as rude as you. I post asking for help, not trash talking someone's mod. I'll use Oblivion as a reference here... I've spent hours, if not days, getting FCOM (http://devnull.devakm.googlepages.com/convergence) installed and working. When I ran into performance issues, I research it, post about it. I do not fly off the handle and start bad mouthing the mod, claiming it's trash. Quite frankly, if you're not "serious gaming", then you're spending a lot more time arguing on this thread than you should, by my opinion. If it's a non-issue, move on.

I just happen to like to argue on web forums anyway, OK?That much is obvious. Myself, I'd rather debate. Collect your data, and post it. Give the RFB modders details. Arguing for the sake of arguing doesn't get anybody anywhere. Posting your feelings, impressions, rather than hard data, doesn't get anybody anywhere.

Older version of the mod is a) not available (link?) b) not compatible with patch 1.5 which I happen to like.a) Keeping a copy of older versions around is a good idea... just like backing up your data. Might want to consider it, even if you're not using it for your "serious gaming". b) If it's not compatible with 1.5, then you have a choice to make. Either go with 1.5 & RFB in its current state, go with 1.4 and an older version of RFB, or go with 1.5 and change RFB so it meets your expectations.

Historical or not? - I wouldn't even use the word "historical" here. The damage model as such is not even close to "historical" it's just ridicolous. I did provide some proof (the Lusitania example) but really think the model is so obviously bad we are a long way from any sensible discussion.See the posts above. The Lusitania's a single, special case. Give more data, so we can establish a pattern. It's not "obviously bad", since I haven't got any outright complaints. I'm with Tater... I'd like to see more ships capsizing, but from what I've read, most merchants didn't capsize... they just simply sunk. Warships were more likely to capsize, due to extent of their compartmentalization. Seeing as the RFB team haven't gotten to the warship DMs yet...

The other issue that bothers me - enviro mods and their influence on the framerate - has nothing to do with history per se. I simply argue enviro mods should be left out, that's all.I'd much rather have the enviro mods built in... that way, I don't have to be worried whether the latest & greatest enviro mod is compatible or not. I've just enough modding experience to realize that mods can (and will) introduce unintended changes to the rest of the game/simulation. Having the mod integrated gives me a greater degree of confidence that it doesn't introduce unintended problems.

Oddly enough, you skipped over the one bullet point I feel most strong about. If you've got something complain about on the mod, change it yourself. It's not like the SH4 modders have taken the tools and hidden them away. They're available to you. If you want something changed, and nobody wants to do it for you, put your energy into changing it yourself.

I do realize that it takes a (large) investment of time & effort into learning the tools, and learning how to mod. In my opinion, quite frankly, if you don't want to exert that effort and give your time, then you have no right to complain. Put your money/time/effort where your mouth is.

[jazzabilly]

Request the following info

1. What date ?
2. What location ?
3. What sub type ?
3. What task group / home base ?
Many thanks for the reply, Lurker.

February '41 (homeward leg of a patrol beginning Dec 8/41)
Pearl Harbor homebase: subpac.
TAMBOR class.

I always encounter the small (2 shiip) convoy N or NNW of the Marianas, Iwo Jima or in Japanese home waters. It always contains a troopship or large old liner, with the other ship being a random type.

As I mentioned- the day/time cycle of daylight is completely out of sync. I commonly go to 4000+ TC when on the homeward leg.

[Fincuan]

A bit OT here, but Oleg's statments on the Lusitania case caught my eye.

I find it unbeliavable that some people still believe it wasn't carrying ammunition. The ammunition is not solely a part of conspiracy theories anymore, it's fact. Apparantely it's still not thought as being the most probable cause for the famous second explosion, but it was definitely there.

Check for yourself:
Lusitania cargo manifest
http://www.lusitania.net/deadlycargo.html

"Ordnance found aboard Lusitania"
http://www.divernet.com/cgi-bin/articles.pl?id=7703&sc=1&ac=d

[theluckyone17]

As I mentioned- the day/time cycle of daylight is completely out of sync. I commonly go to 4000+ TC when on the homeward leg.Seems to me, "things" go out of sync period at high TC. It really stress my system (E6300 processor, with 3 GB of memory). I try to avoid going over x2048.

[OlegM]

A bit OT here, but Oleg's statments on the Lusitania case caught my eye.

I find it unbeliavable that some people still believe it wasn't carrying ammunition.

That's beside the point here really. I never said she DIDN'T carry the ammo, as there's no way for me to know, I merely noted that the "ammo theory" comes from Germans.

However, if Lusitania carried ammo, wouldn't it be logical for Japanese ships, especially troop carriers, to carry ammo as well?

My point is - I dare anyone to replicate Lusitania under latest version of RFB, ammo or no ammo.

[Rockin Robbins]

Damn, Oleg, you are a cantankerous cat in a room full of rocking chairs. You are just about as foul and ornery as TDB, Ducimus, Luke and Observer. As a matter of fact, why don't you come on over to Submarine Sim Central (http://forum.kickinbak.com)and lend a hand. Sounds like along with a healthy dose of attitude you have an equally healthy dose of ability. So quitcherbichin and come on over to lend a hand! Then you have a right to be cantakerous.:D

[tater]

There are chances for critical hits on all the ships. What % of randomly assigned (to different parts of the hull) hits should have blown up Lusitania? Or would ANY hit to her have sunk her? A single bizarre sinking is a poor thing to judge a game damage model on.

[OlegM]

There are chances for critical hits on all the ships. What % of randomly assigned (to different parts of the hull) hits should have blown up Lusitania? Or would ANY hit to her have sunk her? A single bizarre sinking is a poor thing to judge a game damage model on.

I really can't believe you don't see a glaring logical fallacy here. It seems as if you think real life should immitate RFB damage model, not the other way round? :|\\ Well real life apparently refuses to cooperate :haha:

If something DID happen in real life, I argue than it should certainly happen, occasionally (not every time, but occasionally) in the realism mod as well. So, "Lusitanias" in the game should occasionally sink after one torpedo, and 18 minutes (listing to one side, probably capsizing from time to time).

Tater, you accused me of being "rude" ie overly emotional about all this, but I would say you're the one being too emotional with this mod, to the point of being blind to your own arguments. You didn't prove to me that mod follows your OWN real life data, you have the SAME framerate issues as I do, and finally, you never proved Lusitania is doable in RFB, apparently you think the real life cheated, by not playing according to RFB damage model?

Seems to me you like the idea of this mod, more than the mod itself.

[tater]

Not at all. We don't HAVE a Lusitania model in game. I could easily make a clone of Conte Verde (18k tons), and make a critical hit area where Lusitania was hit and she'll go down there to 1 fish every time. You are arguing for a comparison that doesn't exist. I'm just arguing facts. RL vs what I see.

I asked what % chance you think any random hit on the real Lusitania would have, because unless we know this, how would we set up such a DM for our new ship with a critical hit area?

As I said, all zones have criticals, so you could indeed sink a large liner with 1 in RFB, theoretically. How rare that is, I have no idea, I haven't tested. Your argumewnt seems to be that you should be able to sink a ship in SH4 that is not an analog to the Lusitania with 1 hit, some indeterminate % of the time. Have you at least executed a decent number of attacks on a large liner with the latest version? How many attacks, share the stats and contrubute something useful. I uderstand wanting variability, and that is in fact a goal of Observer's mod (if you read the readme). If 1-hit sinkings should happen some arbitrary % of the time, that has to be balanced with the fact that such a DM can easily become deterministic. Meaning you quicklly learn (since unlike RL there is ONE large liner in game, every one you see is exactly the same) that if you hit a hair behind the 2d funnel, the ship instantly sinks. Yawn---so much for variability.

Quick scan of Alden looking for attacks on decent sized APs. All sunk unless noted:

XAP 12,752t. Brazil M. 2 hits claimed.

APK 10,935t. Fushimi M. 3 hits claimed

XAP 16,975 Tatsuta M. 4 hits claimed

APH 17,526 Kamakura M. 3 hits

AP 15,105t. Teiko M. 4 hits

XAP 11,738t. Miike M. 1 hit (there ya go, though rather smaller than our target size)

XAP 10,380t. Hakusan M. 2 hits

XAH 11,249t. Awa M. 3 hits LIGHT DAMAGE

APK 10,509t. Kachidoki M. 3 hits

XAP 16,975t. Asama M. 2 hits

XAP 10,438t. Gokoku M. 3 hits

XAP 10,413t. Hakozaki M. 3 hits

XAH 11,249 Awa M. 4 hits

That's it. All the "big" liners sunk in the PTO. 8% sank with 1 hit for sure. Most are more comparable to Horai M. in game (9k tons). I know I've sunk a few of those with 2 hits, don't remember any with just one hit since I shoot at least 3 at any large troopship I see.

For DM purposes, we'd expect Horai to sometimes sink with 1 ideally, and sometime survive at least 2, maybe 3. At some point you need to get it close enough. 1 took 3 hits for light damage, another took 1 hit and sank. Average was 2.8 hits. Include the damaged on, and you're over 3 fish average (37 hits, 12 sinkings).

[lurker_hlb3]

Request the following info

1. What date ?
2. What location ?
3. What sub type ?
3. What task group / home base ?
Many thanks for the reply, Lurker.

February '41 (homeward leg of a patrol beginning Dec 8/41)
Pearl Harbor homebase: subpac.
TAMBOR class.

I always encounter the small (2 shiip) convoy N or NNW of the Marianas, Iwo Jima or in Japanese home waters. It always contains a troopship or large old liner, with the other ship being a random type.

As I mentioned- the day/time cycle of daylight is completely out of sync. I commonly go to 4000+ TC when on the homeward leg.


I have done some testing and have not recreated your problem, please note that I have come across the two ship convoy ( there are two different ones in the general area ). I have one additional question, which direction was this convoy heading, North, South, East or West.

[lurker_hlb3]

Latest RFB sucks, plain and simple.



One of the many things I like about this forum is the "Ignore List" option.


http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/profile.php?do=addlist&userlist=ignore&u=210226

[tater]

Quick reality check. Of the 3 RL ships close in size to Conte Verde, the number of hits were 2, 3, and 4.

I just sank 3 (moving at 15 knots) in calm seas. I got 1 hit at a time (unintentional, damn buord). 2 had 1st hits near the bow, and kept steaming. Bother were down at the bow, one quite a bit. One was hit MOT, and stopped, burning, and took a slight list.

2d hit and the 2 moving ones stopped/slowed. One near MOT stopped, one at stern lost a prop, and slowed to a fraction of a knot. 2d hit on the one that was already stopped put her down after a while awash.

All sank very fast with the 3d hit. The one with awash decks stayed that way for 24 hours, so I finished her.

So 3, and all sank with 3 hits, and the RL average for slightly smaller ships was, well, 3. I think that the one that was hit MOT first would have sunk on the 2d hit for sure with any wave action at all. The one that was heavily down by the bow after the first hit could easily have sunk with moderate seas with just the 1 fish. I was also sort of lazy and didn't wait long enough for that one before putting a 2d fish in her, and cause she was running (and had AA guns), the shot I got was at her stern on the other side, so I corrected her list for her. Another forward and she'd have gone down with 2 as well.

Not a statistical sample, but not at all goofy, IMO.

[jazzabilly]

Request the following info

1. What date ?
2. What location ?
3. What sub type ?
3. What task group / home base ?
Many thanks for the reply, Lurker.

February '41 (homeward leg of a patrol beginning Dec 8/41)
Pearl Harbor homebase: subpac.
TAMBOR class.

I always encounter the small (2 shiip) convoy N or NNW of the Marianas, Iwo Jima or in Japanese home waters. It always contains a troopship or large old liner, with the other ship being a random type.

As I mentioned- the day/time cycle of daylight is completely out of sync. I commonly go to 4000+ TC when on the homeward leg.

I have done some testing and have not recreated your problem, please note that I have come across the two ship convoy ( there are two different ones in the general area ). I have one additional question, which direction was this convoy heading, North, South, East or West.

Thanks for your attention to this, Tater, very much appreciated.

the convoy has been heading between 160 deg. and about 135 deg. (SSW). On each 'incident'.

[OlegM]

Have you at least executed a decent number of attacks on a large liner with the latest version?

I haven't, and that's because enviro mods ruin my performance and make playing and testing under RFB pointless.

Otherwise, I'd be glad to try more patrols, perhaps I'd meet some of your proclaimed "variability" and "realism". I haven't so far.

Anyhow, I am not good at data mining, apperently you are. I don't have huge database of data for real world sinkings, and have no wish to do hundereds of trial runs to test whether the model in the game provides similar results (seems to me, it doesn't, based on your observations but never mind).

What I DO KNOW is that in dozens of books on naval warfare I don't ever remember reading about transports that kept chugging along after three hits, with guns manned, zig zagging. I remember reading about one hit sinkings fairly often, about ships going down like stones etc - that IME does not happen often enough in RFB (it didn't happen at all in my few RFB patrols).

[tater]

Jazzabilly, that was lurker answering your question, not me.

Oleg, As I said, I've seen a ton of 1-hit sinkings, and only rare, large critters have taken 3 for me. Perhaps there is a corruption issue someplace. There is another effect I think I read Observer talking about, and the prop-wake on ships (maybe rotation, too?) happens as long as the ship is moving, even if the ship is no longer powered. For some ships it takes a while for them to drift to 0 speed (during which time the AI still constant helms). Observer, et al, have very happily received real data on sinkings, and used it. That's all they've ever asked for, data. We've all read PRs, but there are hundreds of sinkings. I'd love to have all the PR stuff in an easy format with how fast they went down, I'd add that into the mix. Course Observer would also need to know how fast they sink in game.

BTW, you were asked for the system specs to try and address the FR issue, but no response. Knowing that might help. I had had HUGE FR problems in RFB (posted a few times here and in a PE thread). I did something last week to a driver setting, and it's much better now, though not where I think it should be. Don't recall what it was, I fiddled with stuff. 8800 GTS vid card. Wait, in nhancer (3d party control panel for nvidea) I set it one notch below highest quality on a general performance setting, maybe texture related. Still high quality, cannot tell visually. Helped a lot.

[Munchausen]

I post asking for help, not trash talking someone's mod. I'll use Oblivion as a reference here... I've spent hours, if not days, getting FCOM (http://devnull.devakm.googlepages.com/convergence) installed and working. When I ran into performance issues, I research it, post about it.

:06: What's FCOM?

[Indy676]

What I DO KNOW is that in dozens of books on naval warfare I don't ever remember reading about transports that kept chugging along after three hits, with guns manned, zig zagging. I remember reading about one hit sinkings fairly often, about ships going down like stones etc - that IME does not happen often enough in RFB (it didn't happen at all in my few RFB patrols).

Then just look at the patrol of Otto Kretschmers U99, as he sank the two "helpcruisers", passanger cargoes equiped with guns, The Laurentic with 18K tons took 4 torps, the Patroclus with 12K tons took 6 torps to sink and they where shooting back furiously.
Its only one example, but it shows, it could happen.
Greets Indy

[OlegM]

[quote=OlegM]
The Laurentic with 18K tons took 4 torps, the Patroclus with 12K tons took 6 torps to sink. Its only one example, but it shows, it could happen.

I know that story. Wasn't one of them famous for being filled with empty cannisters or something that made it virtually unsinkable? :haha:

If that's the case it's no more of a "quirky incident" than Lusitania. However I agree there should be great variability in both resillience, AND the way ships sink. Honestly in my (albeit limited) RFB experience I saw none of that variability. Plus ships seem altogether "too alive" when heavily damaged (guns manned, ships zigzaging...).

[Indy676]

If that's the case it's no more of a "quirky incident" than Lusitania. However I agree there should be great variability in both resillience, AND the way ships sink. Honestly in my (albeit limited) RFB experience I saw none of that variability. Plus ships seem altogether "too alive" when heavily damaged (guns manned, ships zigzaging...).

OK, this, I believe, is a shortcoming of SHIV. If a ship is equipped with guns, it will use them, till the sinking message appears.
On my last patrol, I sunk 18 ships, 15 cargos and 3 tankers, with 26 torpedoes, and 5 or 6 duds. None of them took more than 2 torpedoes and 10 to 20 rounds of the deck gun. One thing that should be tweaked as soon as possible, is, that the guns of the merchants should be destroyable. If I can shut down the guns of a merchant, it would be easier to sink it with the gun.
Greets Indy

[tater]

If the ship can still make way, and there is a submarine around, they would run, and evade. If the ship was armed, they'd shoot, too—their lives literally depend on it.

They do not zig-zag, BTW, they "constant helm." I wish we had real zig-zags in SH.

Had you read the SDM readme (within the large RFB readme) you would understand that the ships defending themselves to the last minute is a trade-off.

The way SH works, is that when a ship reaches a certain level of flooding, it will certainly sink. At that point, the game marks it as sunk, the crew abandons ship, and you get the "she's going down!' message. This is true in stock, even if the ship would not actually sink for hours, days, whatever. In RL, you didn't know a ship was sunk until, duh, it sank. As a result, in RL you might finish off a ship that would certainly have sunk on her own, but how could you know? The only way to delay this "instant success" message means that the crew of the ship (guns in this case) continue to function. It's a trade off. It also results in people thinking that they did not get a 1 hit sinking, or a 2 hit sinking, etc, when in fact they did, they just didn't wait long enough before finishing the target off (which would have sunk anyway).

Note that this is indeed "instant." In stock, if the 1 fish is enough, the second the damage is applied, the game tells you she's finished, even with other fish on the way, and the target showing no sings of sinking yet (the splash has not fallen back into the sea).

Before the latest version, many people had ships take 4 hits and steam away, this simply does not happen to me in the current version. At this point, if I did see that, it would be a welcome variation since I've not had any merchant survive even 3 hits.

tater

PS-regarding the very low FR issue. I had FRs that were literally pulsing between 70-80, and TWO with the PE in RFB. I wonder if profoundly low FR can cause the game to skip over some damage? Meaning the game is busy with drawing a frame and the damage doesn't get applied... I have no idea, just throwing that out there. Work on your vid card settings, I really did improve my RFB FR a lot with nhancer (sticky thread top of the general SH4 forum).

[lurker_hlb3]

Request the following info

1. What date ?
2. What location ?
3. What sub type ?
3. What task group / home base ?
Many thanks for the reply, Lurker.

February '41 (homeward leg of a patrol beginning Dec 8/41)
Pearl Harbor homebase: subpac.
TAMBOR class.

I always encounter the small (2 shiip) convoy N or NNW of the Marianas, Iwo Jima or in Japanese home waters. It always contains a troopship or large old liner, with the other ship being a random type.

As I mentioned- the day/time cycle of daylight is completely out of sync. I commonly go to 4000+ TC when on the homeward leg.

I have done some testing and have not recreated your problem, please note that I have come across the two ship convoy ( there are two different ones in the general area ). I have one additional question, which direction was this convoy heading, North, South, East or West.
Thanks for your attention to this, Tater, very much appreciated.

the convoy has been heading between 160 deg. and about 135 deg. (SSW). On each 'incident'.

Well I have found two more 2 ship convoys that fit the information you provided, and still not having any problems. Is there any other info that can narrow done your problem

[tater]

For 10k AOs, only 30% sank with 1 hit. 40% sank with 2 hits, and 30% sank with 3 hits. 100% sank with 4+ hits. Plenty of 10-20k AOs steamed haway from 2-3 hits, however, looking at the damaged data (not sunk). One 14k AO was hit with 6, and got away, though claimed sunk.

I wrote this a couple pages up, and I just came across some new data. In addition, I read the wrong row on my spreadsheet, and overreported sinkings.

The one ship that took the most to sink, Kyuei Maru, a 10k AO, was listed in Alden as 6 hits for a sinking. There is no way to know the way they were fired. The Japanese Wartime Convoy History, OTOH, breaks this attack to 3 separate attacks of 2 hits each, spread out over the day. 2 hits for damage. 2 more hits for damage. A 5th hit for damage, then a 6th to sink her. That adds some "hit with X fish but survived" numbers to the spreadsheet (damage results are more useful than sinkings, really, since it allows us to look at the % hit with X fish that lived). The revised results are:

The numbers are the % of ships hit with X torps that actually sank:
1 hit: 00% sank
2 hits: 53.9% sank
3 hits: 66.67% sank
4 hits: 60% sank
5 hits: 85.7% sank
6+ hits: 100% sank

No 10k AO in the war sank with one fish.

[OlegM]

No 10k AO in the war sank with one fish.

Were they all empty? Because I would expect an oiler full of oil to go down when hit with even one torpedo (probably in flames).

[tater]

Bunker oil need to be injected as a vapor to burn effectively. It is even heavier than diesel, if you are familiar with how they work. It also floats. Once water floods a hold, the oil floats on TOP, and actually helps keep the ship afloat. Progressive fires can of course happen, but SH4 doesn't have progressive fire, and in any event, tankers were generally quite tough to take down in RL.

Some that blew apart more easily might have been holding refined products (avgas, diesel, etc)

I read a japanese report of a ship hit in a hold full of avgas. Fires started in the next hold (#2), which was full of shells, and depth charges. The avgas then caught fire. She was afloat for many hours, burning. You never know, sinking is... variable. A 5k tonner I saw in that doc was hit with 2 and took almost 40 hours to sink.

[LukeFF]

I remember a LONG time ago, when the first realistic torpedo mod came out. There were always wierd findings where on patrol it would seem like none worked, and another they'd work fine.

All of the failure rates are based on chance, i.e., a roll of dice, so to say. So, I guess one could get really lucky and not have a single dud at all at certain angles of impact. However, defects like deep runners are modeled to occur 100% of the time, so no favorable chances there. :o

[jazzabilly]

A question for the RFB team - re: aircraft

It would seem to me that in RL one would encounter many more a/c than you presently do in RFB. Particularly in active theatres of the war (Formosa during the invasion of the Phillipines, Guadalcanal, etc.)

Now, granted that most would not be dedicated ASW patrols.

Would it not make sense to add more a/c that would sim. CAP's or other enemy a/c that might attack your sub as a target of oppurtunity? I assume that my idea might be complicated from a simulation point of view.

Or is this a question better directed to Lurker/RSDC?

[lurker_hlb3]

A question for the RFB team - re: aircraft

It would seem to me that in RL one would encounter many more a/c than you presently do in RFB. Particularly in active theatres of the war (Formosa during the invasion of the Phillipines, Guadalcanal, etc.)

Now, granted that most would not be dedicated ASW patrols.

Would it not make sense to add more a/c that would sim. CAP's or other enemy a/c that might attack your sub as a target of oppurtunity? I assume that my idea might be complicated from a simulation point of view.

Or is this a question better directed to Lurker/RSDC?

The current aircraft set up is "as designed" (i.e ASW related only)

[Te Kaha]

In RFB 1.5, I was playing an American career and encountered a japanese convoy (3 DD's, 6 tankers) west of the Marianas. I hit the 1st tanker with 1 fish, huge explosion, she's going down, and away she was. I hit the 2nd tanker with 1 fish, huge explosion, she's going down, and away she was. I hit the 3rd tanker with 1 fish, huge explosion, she's going down, and away she was. The whole convoy action was a matter of maybe 5 minutes, 1 hit sinks a ship, as sure as if you're hitting a tree with your car - bang you're dead.

Playing the sim remembered me of RN Capt. Walkers famous SSSS radio message (Saw sub, sank same)

Now, take RFB 1.52, with all current patches applied;

German campaign, Ops Monsun, hit 2 tankers, 1 fish each. One sank after appr. 6 hours, the other survived.

Next patrol, encountered a huge convoy north of Ireland. Hit one large tanker with 2 torpedoes, and she survived. Hit 2 freighters with 1 fish each, and they survived.

3rd convoy, hit a large oiler with 2 fish, she sank. Hit a large modern tanker with 3 fish, and she sank appr. 1 hour later as the large oiler, even though 2 hits happened before I hit the large oiler. Hit another tanker with 2 fish, and she sank. Hit 2 freighters (small composites) with 1 fish each, 1 sank, 1 survived.


Comparing these 2 examples (RFB 1.5 and RFB 1.52), the second wins hands down for me. Ships don't explode instantly when hit by 1 torpedo filled with a couple hundred kilos of explosives. Ships are NOT stuffed with explosives or flammable stuff in any spot one can possibly hit (ammunition carriers exempted in RL maybe - but they don't explode either when hit in the bow while the ammunition is carried in the aft compartment).

[IronPerch]

Hi,

i've been lately more in cockpit than in conning tower and somehow during that time my crew has developed a telepatic way to spot the ships (= applied 1.52 patch + hotfix). I get visual reports a way before anything can bee seen (even when the weather is calm and clear or before the radar does the job). The contact are real, but a crew with superman's eyes is a bit realism killer.

I remember reading that W_Clear's Environmental mod had this kind of issues in a past? Or is my installation corrupted or something like that?

I also see the bearing markers with my binoculars... Did they come along with the latest patch?

Otherwise the mod is getting better all the time!

[jazzabilly]

Surface search Radar not functioning! I have the 'hotfix' applied, but it doesn't work @ all. In fact, as I recall it worked a lot better before the latest patch. It consistently fails to pick up contacts that are clearly visible, and despite having greater range than hydrophones, I have yet to find a ship w/ radar.

Nov '42, Gato Class boat.

currently installed mods: (in order)
RFB v 1.52_102408
RFB v 1.52 patch_18_Jan_09
RFB v.1.52_RadarHotfix
RSRDC_RFBv1.5_V420
RSRDC_V4XX_patch1

[Rockin Robbins]

Finally taking a December 1941 cruise with the new RFB January patch, no radar hotfix (no radar!), RSRD and a partridge in a pear tree. Found two targets so far, lone merchies off Camranh Bay. Results of torpedoes, set at 5' or under. Five passed under target :rock:, no duds, three hits, two on one and one on the other, both together 5791 tons. Both sank in a short time. Both had engines shut down after hit. They sank within 20 minutes of being plugged.

Lock on the surface was good and solid, even at 5 miles. Through the periscope can still come unlocked it isn't any worse than the stock game and encourages you to be careful during the setup. I didn't have any trouble setting up either a Dick O'Kane or a conventional check bearing attack. I am using TMOplot and TMOkeys with map updates on, manual targeting.

Looks like a slam dunk success to me! Night operations are a challenge, just like they should be! I was galavanting with decks awash within 2000 yards of the enemy. What a blast! RFB 1.52 is a winner.:yeah:

[theluckyone17]

Heh. I'll toss in a patrol report, too.

I peeked back in a few days ago, saw that RFB and RSRD had been patched, and the bug bit me again. A quick download, and I started another earlier war career. Like RR said, no radar (determining a target's speed is not fun). I play without the external camera, since it makes me lazy, even though I like the eye candy. Mainly, that means I can't follow my fish to see why I missed.

Got sent around the coast of Luzon. Ran into an invasion force. All the merchies were stretched out in a straight line, with one escort close in at its nose... the others, branched off at its sides. Just three in the front half of the convoy. I sat in front of the convoy 'til nightfall, then moved in. Guessing the nature of the convoy, I skipped over the first merchie, a large freighter. Fired four forward fish off at a large old passenger ship. Three hit, one dud. A quick 'scope peek showed it burning. I turned 180, and fired four aft fish at the second liner, right behind the first. One hit, three duds.

Unfortunately, I got lazy... and got a kick in the rear from the real world. I was listening on my headphones (wife got tired of hearing explosions), plugged into my 5.1 surround sound speakers. When I do this, it cuts channels. Most notably, the center channel, where all the pings get played. Doh. :damn:

I got nervous watching the hydrophone screen, realized what happened, and pulled the headphones out & off. Pings. Go figure. Lots 'n' lots of pings.

16 DC's later, I manage to slink off, pride hurt. But for a 9k liner, I'm not going to complain.

After I completed my last objective, I was turned loose. Headed up to the west coast of Formosa, finding nothing. Started patrolling the east coast, along that line of islands towards Japan. Found a large composite freighter, in rough weather. I can use that as an excuse, since I fired off all four forward fish at it. Each missed. In a fit of frustration, I fired off all four aft fish, too. Missed with those, too. Maybe the weather threw off my measurements, my tower broached in the rough waves, maybe the target saw 'em coming and dodged. Whatever... final result, they all missed.

While my crew reloaded all eight tubes, I ran around the target again. This gave me time to breathe and relax. Patience, young grasshopper, and all that :shifty:. The target quit constant helming, and settled on a specific course & speed. I manuever into position, doublecheck the firing solution, and let all four forward tubes go. Breathe. Wait for it. Relax. Visualize the torpedoes flowing to the target, and providing a beautiful display of pyrotechnics.

Dud.:yeah:

Dud.:D

Dud.:shifty:

Dud.:stare:

:nope:

At that point, I figured that somebody bigger than me has decided that this freighter will live to deliver its load. I gave up, and agreed. With only four torp's left (the external aft stores), I headed back to Manilla to end the patrol.

13 miles from port, I get the radio message to switch my base of operations to Java. :rotfl::har::har::damn:

[ancient46]

You didn't name your captain Dan Daspit did you? You have just had an experience akin to his one in WW2 on the Tinosa. He fired all of his torpedoes at the largest tanker Japan had at the time and had all but two duds. Then he had to go deep to avoid the DD that came out of the harbor to tow it to safety and later watch it slip away. His incident started Lockwood on the road to fixing the dud problem.

[LukeFF]

While my crew reloaded all eight tubes, I ran around the target again. This gave me time to breathe and relax. Patience, young grasshopper, and all that :shifty:. The target quit constant helming, and settled on a specific course & speed. I manuever into position, doublecheck the firing solution, and let all four forward tubes go. Breathe. Wait for it. Relax. Visualize the torpedoes flowing to the target, and providing a beautiful display of pyrotechnics.

Dud.:yeah:

Dud.:D

Dud.:shifty:

Dud.:stare:

:nope:

[Bureau of Ordnance]

This was obviously your fault, because if you set up your attack properly, the torpedoes would have hit the target.

[/Bureau of Ordnance]

:smug:

[Coolhand01]

BuOrd. Acronym for Big Ugly Overweight Raunchy Dipsh*ts....CH

[theluckyone17]

[Bureau of Ordnance]

This was obviously your fault, because if you set up your attack properly, the torpedoes would have hit the target.

[/Bureau of Ordnance]

:smug:

Oooohhhhh.... dem's fightin' words. :yep:

Actually, I've got to look the bright side. My hydrophone operator has good ears, as he apparently can hear the dull thud as the torpedo hits the side of the target. If not for that, I'd have said I had missed the shot.

At that point, the TDC would've been the next thing to be fired out the tubes...

[theluckyone17]

Anybody else notice an issue with the medium tanker?
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_4ApKZeYcXxQ/SZZFA94v0eI/AAAAAAAAAAM/wLn27WfHvEQ/s1600/MediumTankerProblem.jpg

The port hull appears to be missing (darn Jap's working on transparent aluminum? :D).

Yeah, I missed him. Got some out of the large convoy that followed him, though. And, for the record, one of 'em was a Large Modern Composite Freighter, with one torp in the bow. I was surrounded by about 40 ships (including an escort) around March of '42, just north of Java. About the same time Java should've been being overrun. I just popped up in the middle of the convoy, which had been alerted to my presence by one of the escorts. They were constant helming, so I just took pot shots off, figuring that if I missed my target, I'd have a good shot at hitting something else. I did manage to miss another LMCF entirely, and had a dud on the one I sank. I definitely hit a small passenger which did not sink, and I got another hit on what may have been a medium modern composite freighter. If I had missed it, the hit would've been on another small passenger behind it. In either case, neither sank with the one single hit *shrug*. I won't complain.

Edit: Erg. The image shows up, but only if you've got my blog open in another window ('Cause it's hosted off my blog). I'll figure out how to fix it later... for now, look at http://theluckyone17.blogspot.com (http://theluckyone17.blogspot.com/). The pic is the only posting so far... kinda hard to miss. Hosting the pic was the major reason for getting the blog:damn:.

[Arclight]

Just got my hands on the latest patch (been gone for a while), and it's simply fantastic. Stunning graphics, improved FPS (for me in Pearl, anyway) and all kinds of little miracles. Sank 2 ships so far, both came to a dead stop after being struck, first sank less then 30 minutes after impact and the other 15 min after.

Seriously, you guys don't just take steps forward, you make leaps. :yeah:

No complaints here, keep up the good work! I'm of to play some more. :salute:

[Platapus]

BuOrd. Acronym for Big Ugly Overweight Raunchy Dipsh*ts....CH


Oh I am sure the Submarine force came up with some good ones during the war for the BuOrd. :yeah:

[Deep Six]

Anybody else notice an issue with the medium tanker?
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_4ApKZeYcXxQ/SZZFA94v0eI/AAAAAAAAAAM/wLn27WfHvEQ/s1600/MediumTankerProblem.jpg

The port hull appears to be missing (darn Jap's working on transparent aluminum? :D).

Yeah, I missed him. Got some out of the large convoy that followed him, though. And, for the record, one of 'em was a Large Modern Composite Freighter, with one torp in the bow. I was surrounded by about 40 ships (including an escort) around March of '42, just north of Java. About the same time Java should've been being overrun. I just popped up in the middle of the convoy, which had been alerted to my presence by one of the escorts. They were constant helming, so I just took pot shots off, figuring that if I missed my target, I'd have a good shot at hitting something else. I did manage to miss another LMCF entirely, and had a dud on the one I sank. I definitely hit a small passenger which did not sink, and I got another hit on what may have been a medium modern composite freighter. If I had missed it, the hit would've been on another small passenger behind it. In either case, neither sank with the one single hit *shrug*. I won't complain.

Edit: Erg. The image shows up, but only if you've got my blog open in another window ('Cause it's hosted off my blog). I'll figure out how to fix it later... for now, look at http://theluckyone17.blogspot.com (http://theluckyone17.blogspot.com/). The pic is the only posting so far... kinda hard to miss. Hosting the pic was the major reason for getting the blog:damn:.

Strange I have the same (Maybe) missing graphics, this is also apparent in the museum as well, I just thought it was a low draft type tanker seeing that the decks might obviously in a storm be awash, but then the main part of the deck is appreciably higher, so i thought it was just designed that way.

A quirky boat design?...For shallow inland seas and lakes?

Deep Six

[tater]

Not seeing this, can you post a screenshot?

[theluckyone17]

I've got the full size shot of it saved... I'll see if I can't clip it and keep the original resolution. Gimme a few.

Update: Alrighty. Assuming I got imageshack right...

http://img4.imageshack.us/img4/756/mediumtankerproblemdv4.jpg

And for the close up, detailing the problem:
http://img4.imageshack.us/img4/5310/closeuprz0.jpg

See the missing textures towards the bow, left side of the pic? It's been a while since I played with any sort of modelling, but if my memory serves me correctly, it's like the normal of some of the polygons building up the hull are reversed, causing the texture to be displayed on the wrong side of the polygon.

[tater]

That's a Paula. I'll have a look at the model.

[tater]

That is just the way the Paula's Foc'sle looks:

http://i121.photobucket.com/albums/o222/tatersw/SH4/paula.jpg

http://i121.photobucket.com/albums/o222/tatersw/SH4/paula2.jpg

[theluckyone17]

Heh. It looks funky.... 'cause it is funky :D

[Deep Six]

Heh. It looks funky.... 'cause it is funky :D

Yeah that's one funky LOW DRAFT design, what was it used for......Sailing up canals!!!:har::har:

Man any sort of wind/wave over 5 m/sec is gonna wash this boat for sure.....
Nice to know though that It's actually not a graphic/mesh error...

Deep Six

[tater]

Looks like a bad place for those crates...

[LukeFF]

Man any sort of wind/wave over 5 m/sec is gonna wash this boat for sure.....
Nice to know though that It's actually not a graphic/mesh error...
If I recall correctly, the boats of this class that the Dutch purchased were used in the Caribbean and in the seas around the Java coast, i.e., not on long-distance, inter-continental voyages.

BTW, here's a pic of the real thing, from one of the ONI manuals on Japanese shipping:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v258/LukeFF/Paula.jpg

[AVGWarhawk]

Looks like a bad place for those crates...

Not if there is someone in there you do not like:har:

[I'm goin' down]

WHY CAN'T YOU BRILLIANT MODDERS MAKE A RFB WITH A BUILT IN SMALLER HAMILTION STOP WATCH AND SMALLER TOOLS? For these excellent programs to have a GIAGANTIC TOOL SET AND STOP WATCH on the MAP SCREEN reflect, in my opinion, and inability of some of the programs' decision makers to see the forest for the trees, as the GIAGANTIC TOOL SET AND STOP WATCH ARE EVER PRESNT ON THE MAP SCREEN. I know the someone of you probably likes the GIGANTIC TOOL SET AND STOP WATCH, but I DO NOT. I humbly remind you of the words from the enlightened philosper Groucho Marx, who said, after a man told him he was happily married and that his wife had bourne him eight children, "I like my wife, too, but I take my cigar out of my mouth once in awhile."

(Whew, I feel better now.)

Let's take care of business.

Supplemental note: Please refer to the threat I started re this matter, and particularly the responses to my similar post, located in the SH4 forum. The post is dated 02-16-2009 at 05:06 P.M. by I'm goin' down (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/member.php?find=lastposter&t=148262) http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/smartdark/lastpost.gif (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?goto=lastpost&t=148262)

[I'm goin' down]

I play SH4 1.5, with current RFB, current patch and hotfix, and current RSRDC. My mods are Hitmans in Game TSAC v. 2.1, and Gar combo fooskin fleet boat mod from Digital Trucker. I do not have a slide rule on the Map Screen. I used to have one. Has RFB dropped it from the program? I am reluctant to use mods with RFB because I do not want to screw up the game, but if a slide rule mod is avaialble and does not conflict I will activate it, unless it should appear in the mod I downloaded re RFB.

[AGOSTINO]

This order of installation is corrected?? :shifty:

http://img25.imageshack.us/img25/8470/abilitazionerealfleetbovk4.jpg

Thanks in advance!! :salute:

[Indy676]

Yes, I would say it is correct, because it is the same as my. If you dont go to the Indian Ocean you dont need RSRDC because RSRDC covers only the Pacific Theater.
Greets Indy

[kriller2]

Hi LukeFF, you might want to read your RFB mail, there is something that might be of interest :salute:

[swdw]

I have the impression our friend Oleg here just indulges a bit in venting of steam.
Yes that is essentially correct.

I wasn't playing SH for couple months and I find out that in the meantime someone took Beery's perfectly usable medium sized realism mod and turned it into something.... well, into something else. Into a framerate-murdering monster mish-mash chaos, to put it shortly.

Blame me, I started the newer version but had to hand it off to LukeFF to run.

If you like Beery's version so much better, keep a 1.2 install on your machine and play it. You can use the 1.5 install with other mods and not have to worry about the new version of RFB slowing your machine down.

[I'm goin' down]

I cannot get to the patch from this link.
RFB 1.52 Patch (18 January 2009):
http://postdownload.filefront.com/13020034//bd3e93ab4b73bca7572d033dbe5ffba1c62f9fbad6d0adde8a 16286842abf172a4bded4a189937e2 (http://postdownload.filefront.com/13020034//bd3e93ab4b73bca7572d033dbe5ffba1c62f9fbad6d0adde8a 16286842abf172a4bded4a189937e2)

I get to filefront, but it is not there. Help please.:hmmm:

[Rockin Robbins]

It's our late great fearless leader, back from the dead! Or karate... whichever. Hey, this Oleg bully has been picking on us, can you beat him up?:O: I remember Beery's perfect version well. I would park under a DD, let him rain depth charges all over me and not get hurt. It was perfect! Let's not go back, OK?

Well, I have a two generation old Asus A8N32-SLI Deluxe slot 939 motherboard, a so-so Opteron 175 processor, an ancient EVGA 7600GT graphics card, 2 megabytes of memory and a moldy partridge in a pear tree. My frame rate is no different in RFB, TMO and a couple of fps better in stock. All my movies are made in RFB. Judge for yourself if RFB kills frame rates. I'll bet Oleg's computer is no worse than mine. I'm very happy with my performance. DDs flip out (http://files.filefront.com/Closeup+Asashio+goes+for+9wmv/;13327297;/fileinfo.html) over me.

I played TMO in desparation because Beery lost the vision and killed his mod. That's why I kicked Ducimus in the kiester so much when he started to do the same thing. When modders listen to crybabies, their mod jumps the shark. It's gotta be your mod your way. There really is no alternative. Nothing wrong with evaluating advice. But you make the decisions and don't make apologies.

The alternative is you get sand kicked in your eyes as you're groveling around trying to make everybody happy, nobody ends up happy, especially you and you quit the game, modding, life and everything and end up working the graveyard shift at a convenience store in Amarillo, Texas. You never do get the sand out of your eyes. :zzz: OK you can wake up now.

Moral of the story: it's your way or the Handy Way. Budda Boomp.

[OlegM]

It's our late great fearless leader, back from the dead! Or karate... whichever. Hey, this Oleg bully has been picking on us, can you beat him up? I remember Beery's perfect version well. I would park under a DD, let him rain depth charges all over me and not get hurt. It was perfect! Let's not go back, OK?.

Ah here we go again....

Raining depth charges? Beery's RFB was about realism, and honestly Japanese ASW was pretty bad throughout the war, so from what I read on Pacific war I would say Japanese raining DCs blindly (most of their escorts didn't even have ASDIC), and US subs usually not getting hurt seems pretty realistic to me overall. If you wanted Japanese on steroids, ie making them much better than they were historically, for added challenge - you had (or have) TMO.

Back in the "good old days" Beery and Ducimus had pretty consistent visions of their mods. Beery = realism. Ducimus = added chalenge. Plus they both KNEW what to leave out of their mods, enviro crap, hi res skins etc (kudos to them).

Now, after their mods have changed hands several times it's just chaos, all sorts of cr4p shoe-horned into mods and, well, I don't like it at all.

It's gotta be your mod your way. There really is no alternative. Nothing wrong with evaluating advice. But you make the decisions and don't make apologies.

I agree. That's why the BEST mods are almost always work of just one man. After the mod changes hands several times, and becomes a mess, too many thngs to too many people, it usually goes downhill. Sadly, RFB is just one of the mods with the described fate however the one I care about the most.

[AVGWarhawk]

OlegM:
I agree. That's why the BEST mods are almost always work of just one man. After the mod changes hands several times, and becomes a mess, too many thngs to too many people, it usually goes downhill. Sadly, RFB is just one of the mods with the described fate however the one I care about the most.

:timeout:

Seems to me RFB challenges your computer more than anything. Is this your discontent with RFB? If so, should others with faster machines not have available the most graphic intensive game they can get their hands on? How does so may people ruin it? Currently RFB is led by one person, LukeFF. The final decision to add or subtract is his only. It is his vision of how it should go in the final posting of the updates or patches. Trust that the fate of RFB is in good hands. :yep:

[OlegM]

Seems to me RFB challenges your computer more than anything. Is this your discontent with RFB? If so, should others with faster machines not have available the most graphic intensive game they can get their hands on? How does so may people ruin it? Currently RFB is led by one person, LukeFF. The final decision to add or subtract is his only. It is his vision of how it should go in the final posting of the updates or patches. Trust that the fate of RFB is in good hands.

My computer is similar to swdw's above, but that's really a moot point as I said so many times before. I am computer freak, and I know how to optimize my machine for games. I run newer and more demanding games just fine. So when I say I am not pleased by the RFB performance due to enviro stuff, and it does slow my machine to levels **I** am not ready to accept, you can only take my word for that, as it's only my opinion.

And it is my opinion that enviro mods should be made optional.

"The finaly decision to add or subtract is his" - yeah and I would say he usually decides to add, never to subtract. I think Beery would have trouble recognizing his original mod after layers and layers of stuff (I almost said s..t :woot: ) others added to it, and swdw or LukeFF or god knows who "approved".

Perhaps he (Beery) would like what RFB is today, perhaps not.... I know I don't.

[Rockin Robbins]

RFB OWNS SH4 on the fleet boat side. It is better in a hundred ways than Beery left it and I wouldn't play it if it hadn't changed. There is no way putting the sub into God mode where depth charges can explode against my hull without hurting me is "realistic." You are dealing with the expert on US sub experiences vs Japanese ASW in WWII. I am hooked back up to my archives, so watch it with the absolutely baseless claims of Japanese impotence. They're a crock of lies and can be proved so several dozens of times. Now that the boat cruise reports are out, verifying these first-hand stories will be child's play and rewriting history need no longer be tolerated.

Since you chose not to answer my computer allegation I'll take it that your computer is considerably better than mine. In that case your frame rates are fine and you're just wearing out your keyboard for no gain. Did you watch the flip out video on my computer worse than yours? That's decent performance--with RFB. Case closed on that end.

Let's just take a minor example of Jap incompetence: the death of Sam Dealey, where the flacid ASW technique of the Japanese is described in some detail:

REMEMBER THIS USS HARDER?

The Harder's (Dealey) last patrol was conducted in July-August 1944 with Haddo and Ray in a wolfpack. After decimating a convoy on August 19th on the west coast of Mindoro and sustaining one of the worst depth charge attacks thus far in the war, they moved to the entrance of Manila Bay. On the night of Aug. 21 they picked up three targets on radar. Nimitz, in Haddo, suggested that the targets were too small to bother with, but Dealy insisted on attacking. The targets were ASW "Kaibokans" - the Harder sinking the Hiburi and Matsumwa, while the Haddo sank the Sado. Moving along the west coast of Luzon, on Aug. 22, Harder found a tanker, escorted by the destroyer Asakaze. Firing 4 fish, Dealey hit Asakaze, blowing her bow off. Two trawlers and another destroyer came out to tow the Asakaze to safety but she sank on the way in. Two days later another contact was made with another Kaibokan and the former 4-stack destroyer USS Stewart that was captured by the Japanese when abandoned in a marine railway in Surabaya in February 1942. The patrol boat 102 (Stewart) located Harder and commenced dropping a staggered pattern of depth charges, 6 charges in each run, the first at 150 feet, the second 180 feet, then 270, 360, and finally 450 feet. After the 5th run, oil and other debris began to surface. The water in this area was 900 feet deep.

Note the staggered depth charge pattern, the persistent runs, the accurate aim, all characteristics of lousy technique. I guess you are right. The Japanese couldn't sink a rock. Did anyone know that Dealey was sunk by a WWI American four-stacker DD?

[OlegM]

Note the staggered depth charge pattern, the persistent runs, the accurate aim, all characteristics of lousy technique. I guess you are right. The Japanese couldn't sink a rock.

Why the smartass attitude?

Until you write the NEW book on Japanese ASW - and I will gladly buy it the first day it's out - it is generally accepted fact their ASW wasn't worth sh1t. Most of their escorts (except DDs) didn't even have ASDIC and dropped their charges blindly.

We could probably get the correct ratio by doing some maths, but I think it's safe to say being a USN submariner was *an order of magnitude* or couple orders of magnitude safer than being a German or Japanese submariner.

If you want to change this belief, and have tons of facts to support it, I will gladly read it (preferably in the form of book) but tit-for-tat on the Internet forum, with isolated cases of occassionally successful or expertly led Japanese ASW attack (one in a million) won't matter much.

[Rockin Robbins]

One more then (I have dozens). I figure Tambor deserves a shout out. This is from the Polaris, official publication of the US Sub Veterans of WWII. Damn the post-war bean counters. They rewrote history and demeaned the sacrifice of our submariners.

We Remember The Tambor
By: The Crew
and
Presented by: Ray Werbrich

It is truly said "War experiences are never forgotten." We may try, and try, but we can't forget. And even when we succumb to gentle urgings of friends to describe incidents that hold special meanings in memory, we tend to minimize the actual happenings -- often narrating things in a light vein lest we appear boastful...

Attesting to these exploits, as we all remember, TAMBOR's part in the Midway Battle was featured in Life magazine. Landing the guerillas at Pagodian Bay in Mindanao became a motion picture with John Wayne in the leading role. In another action, when the TAMBOR sank a Japanese gunboat; we made the front page of New York's Daily News and were written up and pictured in newspapers across the entire United States. The depiction of these actions can be read quickly and effortlessly, but the reading and visualizing can in no way be a substitute for the physical and emotional stresses endured by the Captain and the crew. Not to mention feeling the inherent quality and character of a submarine like the TAMBOR. We remember the TAMBOR for what she was. She survived more than seventy depth charges in just one attack in the China Sea! She could almost be heard to console us -- "Don't worry -- I'II bring you home."

With Lt. Cdr. R. Kefauver in command, we were making an end-around run to get ahead of a small Japanese convoy of one freighter, a tanker, and one brand new destroyer. The calculation was that the convoy would reach its destination the following day, and therefore, we had to close in, in a hurry for our attack. With the sky brightening in the east, we knew we had a now-or-never situation.

The tracking group began its work. Bill Shoop was on the radar in the conning tower calling out readings to William Wood and Elmer Atchison. Plotting officers, Vito Vitucci, radar officer, and Walter Post, T.D.C. operator. Battle stations were sounded at 0400.

In a flooded-down approach, we closed for the attack. Captain Kefauver, with the Executive Officer, Ed Spruance as Assistant Approach Officer, were on the bridge. Bill Reynolds was on the port side of the periscope shears, Tom Lampley on the starboard, and Clarence Erich to the stern.

Bill Reynolds was facing directly at the convoy. Later he said he got a queasy feeling in his stomach and a trembling in his hands and legs as he heard the target ranges shorten and the targets became discernable. The freighter and the tanker loomed into view, but the escorting destroyer was hidden by the haze.

The order to fire was given, and there was the usual gentle tug on the boat as the high-pressure air expelled the torpedo from the tube. Bill Reynolds' glasses were on the freighter. Ariake Maru. He saw the first hit ... a plume of sea water spewing upwards and a split second later ... the loud explosion! One Japanese freighter consigned to the deep.

Bill Reynolds shifted his glasses to the tanker, Goyo Maru. The methodical calculations, the torpedo on its way. Then the geyser and the explosion. Bill said he saw a flicker of flame appear from the stack, and then it died down completely but in the next instant there was a sight never to be forgotten. The whole horizon turned into day as the tanker exploded, lighting up the whole China Sea.

While our radar had picked up the relative position of the escort destroyer, we at last saw her in the brightness of the exploding tanker.

Radarman Bill Shoop's voice rose to high pitch. The angle on the bow was 90 degrees starboard. Within seconds it was 0 degrees. The range was closing fast.

The claxon sounded, Dive! Dive! All hands below! The bridge was cleared, the last man closing the hatch. Vents were opened and all eyes were on the depth gauge: The needle seemed to just hang there ... an eternity before the bow got on the down angle and we headed below.

But that Japanese destroyer had no intention of losing us. Even as we were diving, he was right on us. On his first run, he dropped about a dozen depth charges. We were thus forced to take evasive measures and race for deeper water.

Gordon "Red," Mayo was on the sound gear and he heard the destroyer change to short scale pinging, and increasedher speed. It meant that we could expect another run.

Captain Kefauver decided to head for the sea floor. Down...down...and we finally settle on sand at 268 feet. We were now a completely silent submarine just sitting and waiting.

The next string of charges were too close, far too close. Something was betraying our position to the destroyer up there. And that destroyer was stubborn -- for the next fifteen hours the TAMBOR was taking depth charge after depth charge. Every man was wondering how much pounding the TAMBOR could take without splitting her hull.

The depth charges came, one on top of another, and with the most uncanny accuracy! It was Bob Freedman who asked "Was that one closer than before?" Sitting next to him, Claude Brown just shrugged and didn't bother to define close or closer.

We were in shallow enough water to hear the destroyer's screws above us: the sound was like a train crossing a railroad trestle. First a distinct sound, like a hum, then increasing rapidly in volume to a roar as he approached, and then the sound decreasing quite rapidly. And on each run we had to take two depth charges. We could hear them hit the water, then, came the click of the firing pin, the snap of a detonator, and then the loud rumble of the depth charge. The sound and implication of a depth charge landing on the deck, rolling slowly, thump, thump, thump, across the deck, bouncing on the outer hull and then sloping in the sand can only be understood from experience. Just thinking of it... Pause, and then the renewed attack. We can think of it now, forty-five years later, and it still produces chills up and down your spine. Any one of those depth charges could have been the last one we would ever hear ...

The movie depictions of a depth charge attack, with the violent rocking of the boat (in the studio setup) and the crew being tossed around, is ludicrous. In reality, it just doesn't happen that way, as anyone in the crew can tell you. What really happens is something like an instant concussion! A shock! It can cause a lightbulb, hanging from a six inch cord, to burst. The shock of the concussion will cause pipe connections, gauge glasses, and mirrors to break.

Enginemen Ray Bouffard and Warren Link were standing at the throttle area of the engine room when one of the blasts went off and in that instant they found themselves staring at a wall of water.

"This is it!" they thought. Jack Semmelrath and John Scaduto, standing alongside Ray and Warren, thought the same thing. "Trapped ! No Escape! "

But the strange thing was that the wall of water didn't move. Reacting automatically, the men put their hands out to stem the flow, but their hands went right through the water! Then they realized that what had happened was the cooling water gasket flange on number two main engine had been forced loose and water was shooting across the entire area of the engine room.

Ray resolved the problem almost as quickly as it had happened. We waited, and we listened. The sound of air escaping under pressure was definite and unmistakable. We agreed that we had ruptured a line to our air bottles in the fuel ballast tank located just off of the battery compartment bulkhead. The situation was serious, because escaping air would indicate our position to the enemy. Knowing the depth, and the run of the current, that destroyer could figure out our exact location.

Captain Kefauver came through later for a personal assessment of our problems and the boat's condition. We had done the best we could under the circumstances, and the Captain knew it. He took the time to speak to each man individually. When living in close confinement for a long period of time you get to know unique characteristics that lock a man in memory, and Captain Kefauver added to that moment a remark that fitted the occasion and made the incident very special for us. As the Captain was turning to leave, he gave us a long look, then said. "Good luck. I'm proud to be your shipmate.

Yes, sir. We were proud to be in the TAMBOR, with him!

Topside, that destroyer was making perfect runs, dumping depth charges all the time. He just wasn't going to stop until he was sure he'd done a complete job.

In the TAMBOR everything was a mess. The conning tower and pump room bilges were full of water. With the air conditioning out, we were breathing humid air. Cork was everywhere. No need to say the situation was wearing us down. The crew members, in sleeping areas not assigned to specific duties tried to get what sleep they could.

But rest was impossible. Two depth charges were laid right on top of us! The destroyer turned and put two more so close that our ears rang. This was a contest -- who would stand the hammering best, the crew or the TAMBOR. It was definitely not the time for humor, but there's always one in every crowd. Fred Richardson said, "When you hear the rumble of the depth charges you know the TAMBOR has made another attack." He was right -- we never sank an enemy ship without getting depth charged.

Carlos "Nip" Howard, a very popular and valued shipmate, just five days earlier had saved us from being rammed. During a lull, after Fred's wry humor, we had time to reflect how Nip had fired his 20mm gun at nearly point-blank range at the bridge of the Shunai Maru, with the startling result that the enemy lost control and gave us the momentary advantage and time in which to sink him. Now Nip was sitting on the floor of the control room, staring into space. "Hey. Bill." Nip called out. "Are you scared?"

"Bill Reynolds said "no" in a flat voice. "l'm not either." Nip retorted dryly. Everyone laughed. At this point the only thing we had was a kind of suppressed bravado.

We went back to sweeping cork, paint chips, and glass on the control room deck. It was better to keep busy than to wonder how many more depth charges would be dropped on us, and how we would react to them. As two more depth charges went off, one of the men shook his head in wonderment, said, "Some boat -- she sure can take it." Now, thinking back, the remark certainly did justice to the glory of the TAMBOR.

The maneuvering room was having its troubles. The packing glands on both screw shafts were leaking. Long ago we had conceded that Roy "Foo" Rausher was the strongest man on the boat -- when Foo tightened something, it always took two men and a boy to loosen it. Yet even his strength was of no avail as he struggled to crank tight the nuts in an effort to stop the shaft leaks. When the water reached the motor room deck plates, we had to form a bucket brigade to the after torpedo room with Charles. "Chesty" De Bay, Rex Harvey. Robert Galloway, Robert Koostra, and Foo. They worked feverishly, bailing and passing buckets as fast as they could after every depth charge attack. Anticipating the next depth charges, they would shut the water tight door and wait out the attack.

The after torpedo room was having water problems. They had to chain-fall the escape hatch as well as the torpedo loading hatch because the latch dogs wouldn't hold tight after a close depth charge. The torpedo room bilges could accept more water than the maneuvering room, and the above procedure was necessary to protect the main motors from getting wet.

By now it was getting late in the day and we were counting on the telltale escaping bubbles to be difficult to spot by the enemy. Also, we felt our silence on the sea floor should make him believe he had destroyed us. After all, what boat could withstand seventy depth charges, placed quite accurately, and survive?

The hours passed. The TAMBOR lay silent on the ocean floor. All we could do was remain silent, and wait...

No sound was reaching us from above for quite some time, and Captain Kefauver decided to risk surfacing. Was the enemy cunning enough to be waiting for us? There was no way to tell. We went into action. But deciding to surface, and really surfacing were two different things. The TAMBOR had been sitting on the bottom for over fifteen hours, and the sand had locked her in solidly. Instead of being at 268 feet, we had settled to 280 feet! Even with all the tanks blown, she couldn't be budged. Power to the screws had to be used cautiously. The screws couldn't turn. We were stuck!

All stations had to be manned to react to surfacing and other necessary underway operations. We moved water. We pumped bilges. We even blew the heads. Inch by inch, and with thanks to William Blankenbaker, Chief of the boat, and his skill as a diving officer, he resorted to using air bubbles in the tanks for added buoyancy, and at last we broke loose. It was then a tense few minutes to the surface, all the while maintaining control of the boat. Blankenbaker had two compartments still partially flooded, so that keeping the TAMBOR level was far from an ordinary job.

With most of the gauges inoperative, we did not know how much pressure we had in the boat. The gauges were either not reading correctly because of the shocks from the depth charges, or broken glass had shifted the original setting.

When the Conning Tower hatch was finally opened, the pressure almost carried the man up the ladder. The sudden change in air pressure was far more than we had ever before experienced. In an instant the conning tower air turned to a smokey blue vapor, and topside the odor of diesel fuel was heavy. As we scanned an empty horizon, we breathed a sigh of relief.

When the engines were called on the line we found the governor base on Number 2 engine cracked. With some extra coaxing, the other engines responded. The seven hundred KW. auxiliary engine was put on battery charge, and, with some jury rigging, we finally got the governor to perform and eventually had all four engines putting distance between us and that unlucky location.

The time had arrived to assess our damage in detail, and then attempt to restore the TAMBOR to fighting trim. Even a casual glance told us that nothing had escaped serious damage, so we set to work.

It took many hours of concentrated work, with Bob Hunt directing the forward torpedo room repairs to restore the most crucial part to use and reload the torpedoes into the tubes. The turbo blower had been ripped off its base, the bolts totally gone. Gus Builder, Auxiliaryman, worked with Warren Link to fashion bolts on the boat's lathe from raw stock. Gus hand-filled the hex-heads on these bolts and retapped the old holes, making it possible to refasten the blower to its base.

Both our compressors were destroyed, almost beyond use, which meant we could not jam air. We would be restricted to the use of whatever air remained in the stored bottles for dives and torpedo shots. Not a good prospect. In the end. Gus and Art Stickle cannibalized two compressors into one good one. It goes without saying that the motor on the turbo blower needed repair. This was efficiently handled by "Chesty" De Bay.

There were two serious leaks in the high pressure line in the battery well, threatening a dangerous rise in pressure in the boat. William Wood and Gus Builder, with no concern for their own safety, stretched themselves flat on a rubber sheet placed over the battery cell tops. They repaired the leaks all right, but they also received several severe shocks before completing the job. Our air conditioning system was so full of line leaks that it could not be repaired. The refrigeration for our food freezer was also finished -- the food had already started to defrost. Number one periscope was flooded, as was the S.D. radar mast. The radio antenna was gone.

The radio compartment itself was not in bad shape, except for the damaged antenna allowing water to leak onto the transmitter. Bill Shoop. Harvey Rebensterf, and "Red" Maya divided the work into areas of expertise, and went to it. They somehow succeeded in getting a weak signal by running a lead from the transmitter through the control room and out the conning tower hatch. We stationed a man there with an axe -- just in case we had to dive in a hurry. Another antenna was rigged in make-shift style across the deck as far as its length allowed. Incidentally during this work "Red" Mayo discovered he was deaf in one ear from listening to depth charges on the sound gear. His condition lasted exactly ten days.

Robert Dye sat on the control room deck, struggling to fix the S.D. radar. The filament leads of the tube that drives the spark coil were shorted. Our cipher keys were outdated, and we had no reception from Pearl Harbor. Since our messages were not being received by our operational commanders, the TAMBOR, ten days overdue, was presumed lost. "Tokyo Rose," reported us as being sunk! This presumption was brought to the attention of Vito Vitucci's wife while she was on duty at the Naval Communications Station in Washington, D.C. But soon, as our weak radio transmissions were picked up, our real fate was known.

The conning tower, to keep the record straight. was a near total wreck. Glass. cork, charts, and anything else that could be torn loose was on the deck. The Torpedo Data Computer was hanging from its fastenings: two dials were missing, but we located them in the periscope well ! How to fish them out? Walter Post and Elmer Atchison made a yoke out of a pillow and two heaving lines and lowered Warren Link with a flashlight hanging from his neck to the bottom to pick up the much needed dials. Then, working continuously for fourteen hours. Post got the computer into operation and "Atch" managed to get the navigational and plotting gear in order.

The five inch fifty-one gun on the after deck was off its trunnions. Imagine the power of the depth charge that lifted such a weight! And with the muzzle bracketed in place.

The depth charges that went off real close to the TAMBOR left several large grey-white blotches on the superstructure. Subsequent examination revealed a twenty-one inch split in the port side of the fuel ballast tank. We had thus lost a few thousand gallons of fuel oil, along with the air we heard escaping from the air bottles. At the time the destroyer kept hammering us, that vast amount of fuel oil must have convinced the enemy that he had done us in completely. The TAMBOR, we felt, seemed to have her own way of fooling the enemy -- to protect us.

Now we shifted fuel, but soon realized that the only way to rid ourselves of the oil leak was to flush the tank, and this could be accomplished only by reconverting the valves in the superstructure. John Scaduto, our "Oil King." and Warren Link volunteered to make the conversion, which meant crawling among a jumble of lines and removing the blanking plates so the tanks could be blown and then be operated as a regular ballast tank. Captain Kefauver warned the men that he could not jeopardize the boat in the event of being spotted, and that he would dive if it become absolutely necessary.

"Yes, sir." And you can be sure a record was set for that type of conversion. The bolts had to be removed and kept in shirt pockets, and then reinstalled and tightened sufficiently to hold the pressure of the entire tank. All this was done by the light of a battle lantern which a man handled from the deck. When the job was completed, the valves were quickly tested -- when the high pressure air hit those valves there was a roar like the sound of a boat diving. As our "Oil King" ran past the men on deck on his way to the conning tower, he yelled. "Don't get in my way." So, with the fuel ballast tanks converted and flushed, the oil hazard was presumably, overcome.

The maneuvering room was under "Chesty" De Bay's care, and he had serious problems there. When we started the battery charge, it was with a full voltage ground. We had survived seventy depth charges, and now we faced a possible battery explosion that could wipe us out. "Chesty's" men scurried through the boat trying to resolve all kinds of electrical problems, and many days later, when we reached Midway, they were still chasing problems and fixing them !

In spite of our continuous efforts to pull the after torpedo room hatches tight, they were still leaking. A spirits tank had ruptured from the bulkhead where it had been secured with 3/4 inch bolts. The torpedo tube spindles were bent by the concussion and there was no way we could make them operational. The after tubes were useless. Ole Claussen George Venditelli, and Carl Johnson worked tirelessly to regain use of even one tube so we would have stern protection, but all their efforts were unsuccessful. To think that seventy depth charges could do this to the TAMBOR.

Nine days later the Captain's voice came over the P.A. system. "Boys. I've just completed a thorough inspection of our boat -- as you well know we're in one helluva shape. But I think she's good enough for another shot at "OL Tojo." so if you'll back me up I'd like to see what we can do to another convoy out there. I promise -- one more try and then we'll head for the barn." Objections? You kidding?

We sank another ship, the Ronsau Maru, with one good hit out of the torpedoes spread -- and we received the usual reply of depth charges for our audacity. But this time we were in deep water and our evasive action put us well in the clear. There was not even a close one. At last, we were heading for Midway.

The "Three Musketeers" from Philadelphia, Bill Raymond. Jack O'Brien, and Bill Shoop, finally got a chance to get together. They said they felt as if they were each returning from another world. Their experience had transformed them into true believers. There was only one thing they could say, the one thing all of us could say.

"Thank God -- and the TAMBOR.

I apologize for the long quote. Several facts emerge from this account, the persistence and accuracy of the Japanese escort, the power and effectiveness of the depth charges (much more dangerous than Beery's), and the fact that the crew was convinced they were dead. You see they had never read the lies that were told after the war. All they knew was the truth, and that is all they had to tell. For all they knew this story was only going to be read by fellow submariners. They felt isolated and abandoned, thanks to the after the war bean counters, who from behind mahogany desks, consulted their tables compiled from war records and intoned, "The Japanese did a cursory job at best of anti-submarine warfare. They were generally unskilled, perfunctory and harmless." Read the above account again. Check out the Tambor's cruise report to verify (I have not). Who do you believe, the snooty scholar with the degree or the sailor who put his life on the line for lousy pay, who had nothing to lose in telling the truth as he saw it? My money is on the sailor. I've met enough weasels to know how they operate.

[AVGWarhawk]

Seems to me RFB challenges your computer more than anything. Is this your discontent with RFB? If so, should others with faster machines not have available the most graphic intensive game they can get their hands on? How does so may people ruin it? Currently RFB is led by one person, LukeFF. The final decision to add or subtract is his only. It is his vision of how it should go in the final posting of the updates or patches. Trust that the fate of RFB is in good hands.

My computer is similar to swdw's above, but that's really a moot point as I said so many times before. I am computer freak, and I know how to optimize my machine for games. I run newer and more demanding games just fine. So when I say I am not pleased by the RFB performance due to enviro stuff, and it does slow my machine to levels **I** am not ready to accept, you can only take my word for that, as it's only my opinion.

And it is my opinion that enviro mods should be made optional.

"The finaly decision to add or subtract is his" - yeah and I would say he usually decides to add, never to subtract. I think Beery would have trouble recognizing his original mod after layers and layers of stuff (I almost said s..t :woot: ) others added to it, and swdw or LukeFF or god knows who "approved".

Perhaps he (Beery) would like what RFB is today, perhaps not.... I know I don't.

Well sir. Beery said to have at it. No problems. The keys are yours. Paint it any color you want. Nowere in the contract did it state the mod must remain in Beerys vision or how Beery would handle this or that. Beery turned it all over to do as Swdw wished. That is all there is. So you do not like the enviro mod. Got it. Sorry mate, the mod was handed to Swdw and taken over by LukeFF. It is their show. What else is there to say? Try out TMO:03:

[vanjast]

A good inidcator of Japanese ASW would be...

How many allied subs went on patrol.
How many patrols they did.
How many didn't return, and when/where were thay lost.
(54 I think it is - This is a relatively high number considering the expanse of the Pacific)
:)

[I'm goin' down]

I was having so much fun reading the war stories, I almost forget about the fact that I the link to filefront to download the RFB 1.52 patch is not working.

I cannot get to the patch from this link.
RFB 1.52 Patch (18 January 2009):
http://postdownload.filefront.com/13020034//bd3e93ab4b73bca7572d033dbe5ffba1c62f9fbad6d0adde8a 16286842abf172a4bded4a189937e2 (http://postdownload.filefront.com/13020034//bd3e93ab4b73bca7572d033dbe5ffba1c62f9fbad6d0adde8a 16286842abf172a4bded4a189937e2)

I get to filefront, but it is not there. Help please.:hmmm:

[Arclight]

I've put it up on my FF page;

http://files.filefront.com/RFB+v152+Patch+18Jan097z/;13336231;/fileinfo.html

I hope noone objects, if so let me know and it will be removed immediatly.

[I'm goin' down]

Arclight, i just began downloading it. RFB should fix the link shortly, I suspect. I should complete the download in about 10-15 minutes. Thank you!!

[Rockin Robbins]

I've used up all my budgeted space in this thread and am not allowed to post for several weeks. http://i196.photobucket.com/albums/aa293/RockinRobbins13/smileys/lol-045.gif

[tater]

Note the staggered depth charge pattern, the persistent runs, the accurate aim, all characteristics of lousy technique. I guess you are right. The Japanese couldn't sink a rock.

Why the smartass attitude?

Until you write the NEW book on Japanese ASW - and I will gladly buy it the first day it's out - it is generally accepted fact their ASW wasn't worth sh1t. Most of their escorts (except DDs) didn't even have ASDIC and dropped their charges blindly.

We could probably get the correct ratio by doing some maths, but I think it's safe to say being a USN submariner was *an order of magnitude* or couple orders of magnitude safer than being a German or Japanese submariner.

If you want to change this belief, and have tons of facts to support it, I will gladly read it (preferably in the form of book) but tit-for-tat on the Internet forum, with isolated cases of occassionally successful or expertly led Japanese ASW attack (one in a million) won't matter much.

Come again?

Most escorts over the size of a CHa-1 (130t) had sonar, and not just a hydrophone. In fact, the japanese were known for overusing their active sonar.

The IJN doctrine was not to drop blind charges, though many ersatz ASW platforms did (merchant ships with a few releases on the taffrail). They dropped patterns, usually. They did drop blind on depth, however. A pattern had some at 30m, some 60m, some 90m, etc. Virtually all jap escorts had Y throwers, unlike the stock game. Purpose built ASW craft (the kaibokan "coast defense ships") had quite a few throwers (6 per side, and a roll rack).

Overall IJN ASW was indeed ineffective (in terms of sinkings and protecting merchants), but the reasons are more complex than "they sucked."

1. They did not concentrate ASW assets and merchants into convoys til late in the war. The Allied merchant success was hugely do to convoy doctrine. ~1% of convoyed ships were lost, and a large % of those were stragglers. Individual Allied ASW platforms were not nearly as effective as numbers of them together (number determined by the Casablanca formula). A lone USN ASW platform was certainly more dangerous than a lone IJN one—particularly with forward throwers. That said, lone platforms were so grossly inferior to groups—even if the lone platform was a capable ASW unit.

2. Code breaking and sigint. Cannot be stressed how important this was. Look at the subs we sank specifically by placing another sub or asset right on top of them in the middle of no place.

3. Excellent USN submarine doctrine. The way the US skippers worked absolutely mattered. They understood their own ASW doctrine, and fought as if the enemy had the same capability. They thought about their radius from an attack, for example. You see this in PRs. Attack, then leave the area so any followup ASW will be in a radius around the sinking, and you'll be outside of that.

The reality was that while not terribly effective at SINKING subs, they certainly managed to keep our subs down once they prosecuted attacks. Early on, their attacks were heavily compromised by shallow depth DCs. I've read a lot of PRs, and many involve serious DC attacks holding them down.

I made similar arguments back in the beery days. I found RFB then to be artificially easy in the name of "realism" WRT jap ASW. In old RFB, there was no reason to even bother being worried about ASW, they might as well have been disarmed, frankly. Which is sort of funny since they had grossly too many DCs (40 per DC launcher (80 for a Y))

Currently, I think the IJN ASW is pretty reasonable in RFB. I don't get set upon like I would in TMO (I use a mod that adds some TMO sensor abilities to RFB for DC testing (cause I want to get hammered in that case)). I rarely get sunk, and it's virtually always my fault for being an idiot (attacking in shallow water, getting greedy, etc). If I plan attacks, and play in a conservative (and realistic) way, I have little chance of being sunk in RFB.

The last time I was sunk in RFB was mid 1944, I was West of Formosa, there was like 50 feet under my periscope depth keel, and I was attacking a convoy with air cover. In daylight, and glassy seas. Pretty stupid of me, they were not so fast that I could not have end-arounded them for a night attack in deeper water.

Oh, and they had kaibokan escorts.

[RFB Team]

I cannot get to the patch from this link.
RFB 1.52 Patch (18 January 2009):
http://postdownload.filefront.com/13020034//bd3e93ab4b73bca7572d033dbe5ffba1c62f9fbad6d0adde8a 16286842abf172a4bded4a189937e2 (http://postdownload.filefront.com/13020034//bd3e93ab4b73bca7572d033dbe5ffba1c62f9fbad6d0adde8a 16286842abf172a4bded4a189937e2)

I get to filefront, but it is not there. Help please.:hmmm:

Looks like it was somehow deleted from FileFront. We'll get it re-uploaded.

[I'm goin' down]

This is a present for you. Send me a private message with your next post, and I will post it under my name, attributing it to you. Your posts are interesting, informative, and humorous (at times). It is the informative part that I do not want to miss, even for a day, yet alone for a couple of weeks.:D

[Munchausen]

RR, I enjoyed your post on the Tambor's escape from 15 hours of depth charging. But, to me, it seems the post argues against what you then said:

...the power and effectiveness of the depth charges (much more dangerous than Beery's)....

Fifteen hours sitting on the bottom, in less than 300 feet of water. Yet they survived. Granted, the Japanese destroyer was dogged ... but have you tried a similar tactic (sitting silently on the bottom while under attack) in RFB ... and survived?

:hmmm: If so, I suspect the RFB team (of one?) must've modified something to make it happen. Either effectiveness of depth charges or something else ... maybe strength of the sub or the AI of the Japanese destroyer? Bottom line being: can a sub in SH4 do, in RFB, what the Tambor did as a real fleet boat?

[tater]

There is a factor that is often overlooked that I have brought up WRT TMO.

The player.

"Realism" requires a number of things. One, some realistic "rules" for the game itself (in this case the base code, plus mods). Two, a realistic campaign. Three, the willing participation of the player. Four, which is sort of related to one, the UNwilling participation of the player.

1 and 2 are the easy parts. Hard to actually build, but the rules are then set, and you're off. 3, player participation would be willing stuff, like telling the player in the README that real subs didn't drive to Kure, so don't do that if you want realism. It might go so far as to tell the player that for his first couple patrols to ID each target, and set the fish 10 feet under the keel, with the influence pistol set.

The 4th, the unwilling player participation is an acknowledgment that the player will learn what behavior the game allows, and what behavior it encourages implicitly, and will unknowingly or knowingly alter his behavior to that new standard.

Take DCs, for example. In the interest of realism, I'd dearly love to be able to set the detonation depths for IJN DCs at 30, 60, 90, and later 120m for Type 95 DCs. That and alternate them in the racks. That would be realistic... sort of. Why "sort of?" Because the players would be CERTAIN that they were safe. After a while ONI and the skippers believed this to be true, but for a few months at least, the certainly did NOT know this. Players would go to ~300ft and know they were invulnerable. Bad gameplay, and unrealistic, real skippers went deep, but didn't assume that they were 100% safe, then go to sleep down there.

I think because of the nature of the game, ASW capability should always err on the side of being MORE rather than less lethal. To do the latter teaches players to be complacent, when in reality they would have made an attack, pulled the plug, and end-arounded perhaps for another go rather than just heading straight into the middle of the enemy.

[OlegM]

Well, seems like everyone has his own agenda to paint the Japanese ASW as either phenomenally dangerous, atrociously bad or just plain stupid.

For me the lethality and survivability all come down to this.

According to what I've read, 288 USN subs were operational in WW2 and did more than 1600 war patrols. (Some of them were in the Atlantic but it does not really matter for this "rule of thumb" analysis.) 52 of those patrols ended up with sub being lost (including operational losses and subs being stranded on shoals etc).

So, roughly less than 3,25% of US sub war patrols ended with the death of the sub, correct?

I have *never*, even in the most "benign" version of RFB have managed to be that successful (ie, I rarely survived 6-10 patrols in a row, thus having an "in game lethality" at least FOUR TIMES HIGHER than in reality).

And, yes, I always play VERY safe, trying to get to the end of the war alive, I never hunt the tonnage records, and try to bring my guys back home to their virtual digital mothers and girlfriends :DL

To me, the "old benign Beery RFB" was better when it comes to historic and in-game lethality.

Now if you wanted more of a challenge - there was always TMO...

[tater]

I tend to run them out of DCs, at least early in the war, since they don't have all that many.

One way to scale things a little closer to reality might be to not look at the number of patrols, but the tonnage sunk. Even with RSRDC on top of RFB I can sink more in a couple of patrols than most boats sank period. Clearly, I'm putting myself in more dangerous situations.

Actually, the very argument you just made was made by either beery, or someone else in an early RFB conversation I participated in here. I just remembered my take on it.

I think that you'd either need to eliminate all the patrols that did not meet ASW assets in battle (meaning the sub was prosecuted at all), or at the very least make sure you only compare the same % of such patrols that YOU had vs similar RL numbers.

I probably find myself on the receiving end of at least one DC attack on at least 50% of my patrols, for example. Of those 1600 patrols, how many never saw a japanese warship capable of attacking them underwater?

<EDIT> one other thing, you read a lot about subs being held down by serious DC attacks. This is tricky in SH4 since the IJN DCs are always set for the depth the AI thinks you are at. In RL, they'd be dropping a pattern on you, and only maybe 1/4-1/3 would be anywhere near your depth. They could be shacking you but shallow, or the one at the right depth was in the wrong place in the pattern. Impossible in SH4 right now. The only way to make the DC attacks less deadly is to make them less deadly. The down side of that is it might become impossible to sink you without a few hitting you right against the hull.

It's non-trivial.

Small changes in DC damage values can likely tweak this to whatever end you want, though I think that the prosecutions themselves are decent within the limits of SH4. AI any less capable and they'd never hit you at all.

[OlegM]

I think that you'd either need to eliminate all the patrols that did not meet ASW assets in battle (meaning the sub was prosecuted at all)

Why would we eliminate them, when we have patrols that do not meet ASW assets in the game too?

In fact I prefer exactly those patrols. I try to avoid ASW altogether, not take any risks, playing as close to real life as possible, safety-wise.

Still I died at least four times more often than reality, and that was in the old Beery RFB that many of you think was too easy on the player.

[tater]

Compare similar patrols is what I meant. If 50% of your patrols meet ASW, and in RL it was lower, then you need to filter out some of the RL ones to normalize your danger level.

Not sure what beery did with the number of DCs carried. I think nothing. In that case, the typical ASW asset you encountered in the old days would have been equal to multiple RL escorts.

Also, what campaign did you use witht hat old RFB? Stock? Mine?

No play with the stock campaign can be compared to RL stats at all IMO, the stock campaign is absurd. The convoys there have universally lame esocrts, and the TFs, in order to make up for other failings perhpas, were all escorted by "Elite" DDs, with a massive overrepresentation of the Akizuki type. In the stock game (and early RFB I think) she carried 240 DCs. She actually carried 72. Even if he toned down just the skill levels of the AI, the DC counts alone are a massive multiplier making comparison to RL ssort of useless, IMO.

RSRDC is really the benchmark for those sorts of comparisons, IMO.

[OlegM]

Also, what campaign did you use witht hat old RFB? Stock? Mine?


I always use RSRD since it's first release. For some time before that I might have used your campaign mod.

Modding the campaign is actually more important than anything else, that's why I am happy that at least RSRD dude didn't feel the need to include enviroment, 3D, candy bars, harbor harlots and refrigerators in his mod, nor did he let everyone and his dog to add stuff to his work.

[tater]

The trouble is, like everything else in SH4, that stuff starts to overlap.

Escorts.

The campaign decides what AI skill levels to set them to.

ASW capability is a complex interaction of sensors (actually reduced in capability vs stock for the most part in RFB I believe), the sensor rules (breaking contact time, weather effects, etc), AI ship skill level, DC lethality, etc.

Within the above, the sensor stuff is impacted by some of the environmental stuff. DC lethality requires changing sub DM (which was awful before, anyway, as anyone duking it out on the surface knew since their crew was invulnerable). DCs need to be tweaked so ships don't blow their sterns off, so ship DMs might come into play as well. The campaign of course is an issue because how the AI skill level changes things is hard-coded.

I'm certainly interested in having things be "about right," that said, there is usually a down side. In this case, it's really hard as I said above, because the DCs do not act as they should, and even if some ideas I have work, it will create other issues.

Since DCs blow at set-depth, plus an error factor, you can NEVER go under DCs in SH4. US subs frequently survived by being below the DC depth setting.

How do you address this? You want a 3.X% rate of death per patrol. The trouble is that in order to do this, you might well have to dumb down the DCs such that it would require numerous direct-hits to sink you, and anythign short of that might do nothing at all.

This is really the crux of IJN ASW lethality in SH4 vs RL. Really.

The only way to "get under" them is to have them break contact, which is not the same thing. It can help mitigate the problem a little, though.

[Rockin Robbins]

I used to just sit at all stop at periscope depth in Beery's RFB. The escorts couldn't sink me. I really didn't know how to die and never did. I suppose you could have dove below crush depth or maybe collided at full speed with a DD. Their guns were undoubtedly nasty, but I never stuck around on the surface to find out. After all, under water I was invulnerable. Supersub! That chased me directly to Trigger Maru, which I was fully prepared to hate but loved and love to this day.

I captured the entire Ussubvetsofworldwarii.org site to my hard drive. It's vanished twice, and somebody has to preserve all those first-hand accounts from the Polaris and other sources. Losing the stories and the men is infinitely more tragic than losing the boats. Statistics lie. At best they can illuminate the truth, but they will never find the truth.

[lurker_hlb3]

Also, what campaign did you use witht hat old RFB? Stock? Mine?

I always use RSRD since it's first release. For some time before that I might have used your campaign mod.

Modding the campaign is actually more important than anything else, that's why I am happy that at least RSRD dude didn't feel the need to include enviroment, 3D, candy bars, harbor harlots and refrigerators in his mod, nor did he let everyone and his dog to add stuff to his work.

Just a little FYI for you, as the "RSRDC dude" I work "hand in glove" with RFB, and personally dislike your bent "s***can" attitude

[I'm goin' down]

Here is a short version. The above link is to a PDF that is a table of ship lengths of IJN vessells. However, when I started looking at the Submarine Sighting Guide in RFB, I discovered there were over 40 additional boats in RFB compared to the stock game. Thus the tables I made, which cover boats in the stock game, are basically useless. Where can I find easy access to the lengths of all the ships in RFB, so I can make a table that I can use in the game? Someone must have had the information when they programmed the ships into the game.

Hitman's TSAC v2.1 mod requires a ship's length to enter the proper spread angle for torpedoes, and you also need it to calculate the aspect ratio if you choose to use that method to calculate the AoB and range for manual targeting. Hitman's TSAC v2.1 is incompatible with RFB as it overrides the nomograph, and may kill the deck gun as well. Even if you are planning to update the Submarine Sighting Guide, the table would be useful and even necessary until the update is ready for installation.

http://files.filefront.com/13342455 (http://files.filefront.com/13342455)</B>

[tater]

Assuming you mean to make a perfectly accurate measure of the in-game ships, here is the easy way: open them in S3D, and look at the 3d models. One "unit" in SH4 (hence S3D) is 10m. If there are no nodes at the bow and stern, move some aroiund til they are there, and simply read 'em off. If the bow is at 2.3, and the stern is at 2.2, the ship is 75m long.

tater

[sperril]

Hey folks. Just started playing RFB with RSRDC.

First off, excellent work by all involved!

I have a question though. I have successfully completed 6 war patrols, each lasting about 1 month, and I have yet to see a single aircraft of any type. Is this normal?

[I'm goin' down]

I am not planning on make a life's work of this project. There is no way I am going to fiddle with the editor as I have never used it, and do not plan to do so. Someone else can find the lengths and I will put them in Table form. That is as much as I will do. But thanks for the tip. If I totally lose my mind, perhaps one day I would try your suggestion, but don't count on it.

[Rockin Robbins]

I am not planning on make a life's work of this project. There is no way I am going to fiddle with the editor as I have never used it, and do not plan to do so. Someone else can find the lengths and I will put them in Table form. That is as much as I will do. But thanks for the tip. If I totally lose my mind, perhaps one day I would try your suggestion, but don't count on it. I'm goin' down, part of the intent of the RFB scheme is to introduce doubt and uncertainty into the targeting process. During World War II, the captain of the sub didn't know the height of the mast or the length of the boat, because his ONI manual didn't allow him to identify it properly! If he could, the Japanese had altered the profile of the ship with altered mast heights or a cut down funnel to make his range measurements wrong.

One of the problems with simulations is that there is too much certainty. And like normal people, when we see certainty mixed with uncertainty like wrong masthead heights in the game, we players demand MORE of what the problem is. One of my mottos as a manager is "if you treat the customer bad enough long enough, they will demand it!" I use it to make fun of somebody not getting the job done, but the nasty secret is that it is absolutely true.

In the real war, hundreds of ships were misidentified. A target identified as 1,000 tons might have turned out to be half that or less! Tater is the expert here, not me, but I think it's safe to say that correctly identifying targets, having the correct information on that target to find the range and sinking it using stadimeter information only was the exception, not the rule. The aspect ratio of measuring AoB? A complete fiction, and something not possible in World War II. (yes I know the Germans tried it on us. When you are fighting an open society information is easy to come by) They visually estimated AoB, almost exclusively. I have not found a single instance of the aspect ratio method. They knew their info wasn't good enough and the Mark I eyeball was a superior instrument.

I was reading one cruise report where the radar went out (was it Archerfish?) and the captain (Enright, I think) wrote in the report that he assumed that would mean half of his torpedoes from then on would be wasted! These guys took it for granted that their information was crap, so they were shooting 150% or 200% spreads, automatically wasting a third to half of their torpedoes just to get a hit.

We don't do that because we automatically adjust to the capabilities of the game. I find myself shooting 75% spreads, because I know I can hit 1/4 of the way back of the bow and 1/4 of the way forward from the stern. I have all the correct information, and that's wrong, if we want to call this game a simulation without busting out laughing while we do so.

Read the account of Batfish's hat trick, where they sank three Japanese submarines in a day. They didn't have any idea whether they were shooting at an I-Boat or one of the other varieties. They were dealing with a 100% uncertainty about what their target length was! What was the saying? "SNAFU, proceed as routine." They didn't expect perfect or even good information. They were going to sink the enemy anyway. They weren't going to waste time complaining about it.

It wasn't as if the USN could rent the Japanese merchant fleet, boat by boat and take measurements in Pearl Harbor for shooting purposes and then return them to the enemy so we could prosecute the war with perfect information, such as we have in Silent Hunter 4!:har:

[AVGWarhawk]

Hey folks. Just started playing RFB with RSRDC.

First off, excellent work by all involved!

I have a question though. I have successfully completed 6 war patrols, each lasting about 1 month, and I have yet to see a single aircraft of any type. Is this normal?

RSRD handles the aircraft. Yes, I see very little of them. Then again, depends on where you are and what month/year. Just getting into my 4 patrol and spotted 2 aircraft. I did shoot down one. They are out there. When you get your aircraft detecting gear, you will detect more aircraft.

[AVGWarhawk]

Also, what campaign did you use witht hat old RFB? Stock? Mine?


I always use RSRD since it's first release. For some time before that I might have used your campaign mod.

Modding the campaign is actually more important than anything else, that's why I am happy that at least RSRD dude didn't feel the need to include enviroment, 3D, candy bars, harbor harlots and refrigerators in his mod, nor did he let everyone and his dog to add stuff to his work.

There is no candy bars but RFB added an ice cream machine:har: I see most of your posts really concern the enviro mod which would indicate to me your machine can not run the game well with it. But you blew this off a few posts back. I also see were you posted most mods offer an enviro mod as an option to use or not. I do not recall any major mod in it final stages offering this option. Furthermore, RSRD does and will continue to work closely with RFB to assure all can enjoy both mods without conflict. So, RSRD did not need to address enviro mods. It was already handled. So, really, what is the deal?

[ancient46]

Excuse me Mr. AVGWarhawk sir, but this MOD does not do exactly what I want, therefore it is incumbent upon you and the RFB team to make it work that way for me.

Sorry scratch that, I went and did it myself, you don't need to bother.

[I'm goin' down]

I wonder if ancient46 doesn't have a bit of saracasm running through his vein, coupled with a severe case of "dry sense of humor?":rotfl:

[LukeFF]

This one's for our dear friend OlegM: :yeah:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v258/LukeFF/SH4/SH4Img2009-02-22_215545_531.jpg

Kriller and W_Clear's Real Environment mod in action, integrated into RFB.

Also, as this is a Porpoise class boat, can someone else spot something new in this pic?

[Deep Six]

Searchlight??

[Fincuan]

The (aerial?) wire doesn't go up to the bow anymore.

[ancient46]

I can't see the stern too well but somebody definitely stole the ugly bow mast, bracing and cables. I guess you don't need a bow running light in wartime.

[Anvart]

...
So when I say I am not pleased by the RFB performance due to enviro stuff, and it does slow my machine to levels **I** am not ready to accept, you can only take my word for that, as it's only my opinion.

And it is my opinion that enviro mods should be made optional.
...

I vote two hands FOR !
...
In game we have crappy braking engine and in additives ... environment mods contradicting common sense ...

[Rockin Robbins]

Reality contradicts common sense, so where's the problem?:O:

[Fish40]

This one's for our dear friend OlegM: :yeah:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v258/LukeFF/SH4/SH4Img2009-02-22_215545_531.jpg

Kriller and W_Clear's Real Environment mod in action, integrated into RFB.

Also, as this is a Porpoise class boat, can someone else spot something new in this pic?





Luke you're a first class Ballbreaker! I love it:rotfl: Seriously though, the new environment work looks stunning! Is this available now, or still in testing? Also, how much of a framerate hit if any, compared to RFB with just EE?

[AVGWarhawk]

...
So when I say I am not pleased by the RFB performance due to enviro stuff, and it does slow my machine to levels **I** am not ready to accept, you can only take my word for that, as it's only my opinion.

And it is my opinion that enviro mods should be made optional.
...
I vote two hands FOR !
...
In game we have crappy braking engine and in additives ... environment mods contradicting common sense ...


This is not being packages like a car at the dealer were one can ask for aluminum wheels and pin stripes. LukeFF makes it an entire package and RSRD can run right along with it as Lurker keeps all compatible. I do not know about you but I would not stop driving a Rolls Royce because there is a dent in fender. :D

[xvii-munger]

as some know the FOTRS mod has added the german battle ships to there game play. was woundering if you all in the R.F.B are too shortly .Ii like this mod do somtimes get a iwxe fail or somthing like that . in online games but over all great mod thx for your hard work.:rock:

[tater]

RFB doesn't touch the campaign.

[Fer32]

I just installed RFB and RSRDC and I really like this combo but I have some questions, I used TMO before and if I use a high time compression my saves always become corrupted, can I use high time compression now? (over 7000).
Am I doing something wrog or my crew cant managed the deck gun and flak. Is this realistic? I dont think that I, as a commander has to do it. :hmmm:

[I'm goin' down]

As you know, I installed the mods recommended by RFB, and ended up with my handle and boat not being recognized at the beginning of a mission, although the emblem and boat number appeared on the sub. Also, I could not load sailors to man the guns, and my boat had no deck guns.

I found the solution to the deck guns' problem (i.e. no deck guns) and the failure of RFB to recognize and my boat at the outset of new missions in SH4 1.5.

The RFB Team recommends the following mods be activated in SH4 1.5:

1. RFB_V1.52_102408;
2. RFB_V1.52_Patch_18Jan09;
3. RSRDC_SH15_V400; and
4. RSRDC_V400_Patch 2

I also activated the following mods:

5. SS205 USS Gar_ComboFooskin_I'm Goin' Down; and
6. Mini_ChronoTools (activated by JTex).

As a result of the foregoing, which followed the RFB sticky thread's instruction, I ended up with the unacceptable results described above.

I filed a complaint in the RFB thread. I was about the do the same in the RSRDC thread when I noticed that RFB does not mention activating mods RSRDC_SH15_V400 and RSRDC_V400_Patch2. Instead, it recommends activating the RSRDC_RFB1.5_V420 and RSRC_V420_Patch_18Jan09 mods with RFB v1.52 mods. I deactivated mods nos. 3 and 4 above and replaced them with the two mods recommended by RSRDC. Guess what? I NOW HAVE TWO DECK GUNS!!!

However, the SH4 1.5 did not recognize my handle and boat at the beginning of a mission, so I deactivated mod 5. SS205 USS Gar_ComboFooskin_I'm Goin' Down and reactivated it. Now RFB recognizes me as captain at the outset.

Problems fixed after four days! I plan to post this in both the RFB and RSRDC mod threads to alert them to the issue.

[Fer32]

As you know, I installed the mods recommended by RFB, and ended up with my handle and boat not being recognized at the beginning of a mission, although the emblem and boat number appeared on the sub. Also, I could not load sailors to man the guns, and my boat had no deck guns.

I found the solution to the deck guns' problem (i.e. no deck guns) and the failure of RFB to recognize and my boat at the outset of new missions in SH4 1.5.

The RFB Team recommends the following mods be activated in SH4 1.5:

1. RFB_V1.52_102408;
2. RFB_V1.52_Patch_18Jan09;
3. RSRDC_SH15_V400; and
4. RSRDC_V400_Patch 2

I also activated the following mods:

5. SS205 USS Gar_ComboFooskin_I'm Goin' Down; and
6. Mini_ChronoTools (activated by JTex).

As a result of the foregoing, which followed the RFB sticky thread's instruction, I ended up with the unacceptable results described above.

I filed a complaint in the RFB thread. I was about the do the same in the RSRDC thread when I noticed that RFB does not mention activating mods RSRDC_SH15_V400 and RSRDC_V400_Patch2. Instead, it recommends activating the RSRDC_RFB1.5_V420 and RSRC_V420_Patch_18Jan09 mods with RFB v1.52 mods. I deactivated mods nos. 3 and 4 above and replaced them with the two mods recommended by RSRDC. Guess what? I NOW HAVE TWO DECK GUNS!!!

However, the SH4 1.5 did not recognize my handle and boat at the beginning of a mission, so I deactivated mod 5. SS205 USS Gar_ComboFooskin_I'm Goin' Down and reactivated it. Now RFB recognizes me as captain at the outset.

Problems fixed after four days! I plan to post this in both the RFB and RSRDC mod threads to alert them to the issue.

I have the mods installed exactly as you said but my crew cant managed the flak and deck gun, I can do it by myself but it is not my work as a commander!:salute:

[AVGWarhawk]

I just installed RFB and RSRDC and I really like this combo but I have some questions, I used TMO before and if I use a high time compression my saves always become corrupted, can I use high time compression now? (over 7000).
Am I doing something wrog or my crew cant managed the deck gun and flak. Is this realistic? I dont think that I, as a commander has to do it. :hmmm:
I use high TC and have not experienced corrupted game saves. As far as I know, if there is no men in the slots for the cannon, you need to put them there to have them work the gun. I leave it open because there are two gunners in the forward torp room. I move these to gunners there and grab some guys from my damage control team. They make up a pretty good team on the cannon. Remember, you got sailors that are new and do not know how to use these yet efficiently. As you patrol more they get better and you will not have to do it yourself. About your third patrol it gets much better with your cannon crew. It is all about crew development! Also, sea state affects how accurate they are.

[vanjast]

WOW!! what a great pic :yeah: - Straight onto my desktop...

[Fer32]

I just installed RFB and RSRDC and I really like this combo but I have some questions, I used TMO before and if I use a high time compression my saves always become corrupted, can I use high time compression now? (over 7000).
Am I doing something wrog or my crew cant managed the deck gun and flak. Is this realistic? I dont think that I, as a commander has to do it. :hmmm:
I use high TC and have not experienced corrupted game saves. As far as I know, if there is no men in the slots for the cannon, you need to put them there to have them work the gun. I leave it open because there are two gunners in the forward torp room. I move these to gunners there and grab some guys from my damage control team. They make up a pretty good team on the cannon. Remember, you got sailors that are new and do not know how to use these yet efficiently. As you patrol more they get better and you will not have to do it yourself. About your third patrol it gets much better with your cannon crew. It is all about crew development! Also, sea state affects how accurate they are.

Thank you sir, exactly what I needed to know :up:

[Soundman]

The 152 patch link appears to be broken. It is taking me to the Filefront home page.

[LukeFF]

Luke you're a first class Ballbreaker! I love it:rotfl: Seriously though, the new environment work looks stunning! Is this available now, or still in testing? Also, how much of a framerate hit if any, compared to RFB with just EE?
What can I say? I aim to please. :D

We just barely started testing Real Environment a couple of days ago. It will take some work and adjustment to the sensors to make the mod fully function how it's supposed to. Frame rate hit so far seems to be negligible, at least for myself (running an ATI 4870, 4 GB RAM, Core I7 940).

Oh yeah, and to answer my trivia question above: yes, we hacked off the jackstaff and the cable that was running to it. You'll see some similar modifications to the Salmon, Sargo, and S Class boats as well.

[LukeFF]

The 152 patch link appears to be broken. It is taking me to the Filefront home page.

We're still working on it.

[Stealhead]

LukeFF I love your RFB man nice job and it looks really great with W_Clears enviromental mod gald to see that you are considering adding it next time around. I really love the ship damage system to me that makes your supermod stand out and shine. I noticed that there is an ice cream machine it the damage control list does it effect morale if it gets destroyed?:har: Awsome work.
P.S. mot sure why some say that RFB is a hit on frame rate not an issue for and I dont have a top of the line machine.(though I do have a quad core cpu)

[Soundman]

WOW!... I was just reading a few threads back on this debate between RR and Oleg, sometimes AVG.. You know, everyone makes good points IMO. Of course we must respect all of our beloved modders time and effort, but in a perfect world I can see where Oleg is coming from. From the perspective that gameplay and eyecandy are two different animals, why not offer a "gameplay only" RFB (or TMO) and another version with both gameplay and the visual mods included. The problem seems to lie in the time and effort a modder has available and avoiding the confusion we all have, figuring out what mod is compatible with one another.

However... I can see an even more perfect world...and the person who could pull this off would be a (pardon my expression) a "Mod God" so to speak, in this community.

Let me expound... I'm sure many of us "Sim Fanatics" here have also dabbled a bit with flightsims and played Falcon 4.0, a true, great simulation. Well, how many can remember when "Superpack 3" came about and then we had the "BMS F4 Configuration Editor". This was a fantastic addition allowing the flexibility to open this utility up and there you could see all of the different mods available. All you needed to do was put a check mark next to the modification of your choice and start the game and BAM ... you played it the way you wanted.

Now I realize this is not Falcon 4.0 and things may be a bit more complicated with this simulation, but with the talent I have witnessed inside this forum, I find it hard to believe something along these lines can't be accomplished and think this could be the answer to all our SH4 prayers. Yes, it would be a major undertaking, but if this could be done it would allieviate the problems of what mod works with what mod, how much eye candy do you want, and in general, how do YOU wish to play the game AND allow you to do it. Yes, maybe I'm dreaming, but it's a nice one ! :DL

I honestly believe something along these lines desperately needs to happen. We have some really great mods out there and even the best of them get critisism for some small detail. It would seem obvious that what the subsim community really desires, is the flexibility to mold the game into each individuals own vision of reality, not neccessarily what the modders may invision in their world.

[tater]

Soundman, the problem is that this stuff all interacts. The environment mods change the way the sensors work. That changes, well, everything. Given that the AI changes based on AI skill level are hard-coded, such a change could possibly (not likely, but just for the sake of argument) require all the skill levels in the campaign to be tweaked.

The ONLY way to test this... is playing it.

Every single enviro patch... fubars everything else.

The only way for the enviro-guys to be compatible is to make their mod strictly RFB compatible... it's a can of worms, sadly.

[I'm goin' down]

I have the current RFB mod and patch and the current, correct RSRDC mod and patch. I now have DECK guns...finally. I have a Digital_Trucker custom boat -- a Gar. At sea the boat's emblem, boat's number and kills are pasted on the boat. However, in port at the beginning of a mission my boat's (USS GAR) name and number is not recognized, nor is my handle. What is up with this? Can it be an RFB mod problem?

I have wasted several days figuring out I had no deck guns because the links in RFB to RSRDC were to out of date RSRDC files. Apparently, RFB has eliminated those links. In any event, I would like to know if there is any way to fix the problems I am experiencing in port at commencement of a mission?

[I'm goin' down]

I have a deck gun and an anti aircraft gun. The anti aircraft gun is manned by a couple of men. However, the slots for the men to fill are behind the ship's dials. It is hard/impossible to fill the slots and I have one gunner who I can extract to his original positon inside the boat. What is the story/remedy? My screen, which is 14 - 15 inches is set to 1280 x 920 resolution?

[pythos]

I have decided to leave TMO and try RFB+RSDC, but this plan was stopped by the inability to acquire the patch. Filefront just directs me to their main page.

Thought you should know.

[Fincuan]

I have wasted several days figuring out I had no deck guns because the links in RFB to RSRDC were to out of date RSRDC files. Apparently, RFB has eliminated those links.

There hasn't been such links. Look at the "last edited" date of the first post:


Last edited by RFB Team : 01-29-2009 at 04:19 AM. Reason: New file uploaded

[I'm goin' down]

I have wasted several days figuring out I had no deck guns because the links in RFB to RSRDC were to out of date RSRDC files. Apparently, RFB has eliminated those links.

There hasn't been such links. Look at the "last edited" date of the first post:


Last edited by RFB Team : 01-29-2009 at 04:19 AM. Reason: New file uploaded


Well, I got the downloads from a link at RSRDC or RFB. Your post merely indicates that they have not edited the first post since the end of Janaury. It does not address what links were contained therein prior to the date of its last edit. I never downloaded from RSRDC until Sunday. It is not really important though. The point is that one of these main threads was providing obsolete information re RSRDC and it caused me to lose my deck guns. Now, I have them, but my boat dials block the anti-aircraft gun personnel slots, and I cannot garb the one sailor I somehow managed to squeeze into the gun slot and drag him back to his crewman slot. I have been unable to drag another crewman to the second slot on the anti-aircraft gun. Every time I try, I end up triggering the back 1/3 speed dial arrow.

[I'm goin' down]

I have wasted several days figuring out I had no deck guns because the links in RFB to RSRDC were to out of date RSRDC files. Apparently, RFB has eliminated those links.

There hasn't been such links. Look at the "last edited" date of the first post:


Last edited by RFB Team : 01-29-2009 at 04:19 AM. Reason: New file uploaded


Well, I got the downloads from a link at RSRDC or RFB. Your post merely indicates that they have not edited the first post since the end of Janaury. It does not address what links were contained therein prior to the date of its last edit. I never downloaded from RSRDC until Sunday. It is not really important though. The point is that one of these main threads was providing obsolete information re RSRDC and it caused me to lose my deck guns. Now, I have them, but my boat dials block the anti-aircraft gun personnel slots, and I cannot garb the one sailor I somehow managed to squeeze into the gun slot and drag him back to his crewman slot. I have been unable to drag another crewman to the second slot on the anti-aircraft gun. Every time I try, I end up triggering the back 1/3 speed dial arrow.

[Fincuan]

It's kind of impossible that someone removed the links a few days ago if the post has been edited in January, that's what I was trying to say.

[Coolhand01]

As for filling the AA slots, just hit the numpad delete key and it will hide the menu bar for easier access....CH

[Anvart]

I have forgotten already ... ST radar it's NSS_radar_periscope?
If it so ...
In stock, radar_periscope has no SensorData controller for SensorType Radar (it has it only for SensorType Visual) ... may be it's reason ...?
...Necessary to try ...



Today i look radar_periscope in Sensors_sub_US.dat and Sensors_sub_US.sim (now i have reinstalled game without changes ...)
...
And i was not right ... SensorType Radar and SensorType Visual are in stock game ...
And radar_periscope works as well as should ...
...
ANd my old reply: #4
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=126779
:rotfl:
sclerosis ...
...
After periscope raising (ObsPeriscope) you will see messages "Radar contact, sir. Bearing ..." ...
For the best work it is necessary to change controller (SensorData in Sensors_sub_US.sim ) parametres:
SweepPeriod = 1 (or less = 0.7);
Revolving = False;
and it's optional (may be not RL) ...
to increase vertical angle of view:
ElevationMax = 30 ---> 60° ... 90° ...

http://img520.imageshack.us/img520/3091/radarperi.jpg


http://img520.imageshack.us/img520/5268/radarperienv.jpg

[Arclight]

For anyone who can't download the patch;

Here's an alternative link:

RFB 1.52 Patch (18 January 2009) (http://files.filefront.com/RFB+v152+Patch+18Jan097z/;13336231;/fileinfo.html)

[pythos]

Nope, that one fails too. Doesn't even load up.

[Arclight]

Works fine for me, and considering it has been downloaded several times I'm pretty sure it works for others as well. Maybe you should clear your cookies or something?