Stupid STUPID game

[ddiplock]

I have just spent the last 40 minutes playing dodge with a destroyer before giving up. Its march 1943 and i'm down near Freetown.

Main problem: getting away from the destroyer wouldn't be seen as the problem.......its keeping my boat level at the effing depth ordered. The boat is in tip top shape, and i'm not modelling malfucntions and sabotage via SH3 Cmdr so there is no reason why the boat shouldn't keep its depth when i order it to.

In short, i coudn't escape from the bastard because i had to keep increasing my engins speed to rise the boat or to maintain depth, thus giving away my position. the boat ended up sinking to 272mtrs before the hull collapsed and the boat was crushed. Also....the destroyer wasn't even pinging for me....he just seemed to KNOW where i was. yeah...without using asdic and if i'm making along at 1 or 2 knots.....thats realistic.....NOT :@

I'm not accepting that however. i'm reloading the game to before i encountered the destroyer, and i'm going to get my boat home. This is not the first time this has happend during a game. Seems odd that the boat stays level when there are NO enemy ships around, and yet when you have destroyerts buzzing around, it suddenly can't hold its depth?? WTF is up with that??

sorry for the rant, but has anyone else encountered this? It HAS to be a bug surely?

[irish1958]

No bug; that is what happened. It is difficult to survive past 1943.

[ddiplock]

No bug; that is what happened. It is difficult to survive past 1943.


I'm not complaining about the destroyer's effectivness as such, I understand it gets harder.

Its my boat suddenly not maintaining its depth. I loaded the game just now, ran into another destroyer, and it HELD its depth this time. It didn't sink out of control like before.

If the boat is in tip top shape as mine is, there is no reason why the boat shouldn't hold the depth you tell it to go to.

I enjoy the game of cat and mouse with the destroyers, I really do. But when the boat doesn't even hold its depth, it sucks the enjoyment out of the game really quickly, and just annoys the absolute s%it out of me!!. I had a look at the external cam during the whole problem, and the boat would level off, then the ass would begin to fall backwards, and pull the rest of the boat down with it!!!!

Now, if the boat was damaged in some way, diving planes, or ballast tanks, or out of compressed air or something, that might be cause for it and I could accept that....but in this case, there's just no reason for it, and it only serves to really annoy me as i say, and a sinking boat that shouldn't be sinking without reason i will not accept :) lol

[Letum]

This could be two things:

1) You need to keep moving to maintain depth. However good your crew is, they can't balance out the boat just with the ballast tanks. You need water passing the dive planes.
Just 1 knot is enough to keep your boat somewhat stable.

2) There is a bug in GWX (and stock(?)) which means that if you order a crash dive and
then order a different depth before the boat gets down to the 75m(?) that the crash
dive ends at your boat will become less stable at low speeds.

Wait until the boat leavels off after a crash dive before ordering a new depth.

[Phaedrus]

Aha!

So thats what it is!


I too have had this same problem before, and it can be very frustrating.

I have survived by heading in the directly away from the convoy 180 degrees from it's heading, until the destroyer finally decides to go back to his sheep.

Now that I think of it, it must be when I order crash dives and change depth.

I frequently crash dive and then set the new depth to 220.

Thanks for this tip, I'll let it hit 70 at least before I make my next order

[Flamingboat]

2) There is a bug in GWX (and stock(?)) which means that if you order a crash dive and
then order a different depth before the boat gets down to the 75m(?) that the crash
dive ends at your boat will become less stable at low speeds.

Wait until the boat leavels off after a crash dive before ordering a new depth.

This is good to know. I crashdive a lot and then level off at 30 meters or something. I crash first when planes come around because I would rather smack the bottom then get smacked by a plane.

[ddiplock]

This could be two things:

1) You need to keep moving to maintain depth. However good your crew is, they can't balance out the boat just with the ballast tanks. You need water passing the dive planes.
Just 1 knot is enough to keep your boat somewhat stable.

2) There is a bug in GWX (and stock(?)) which means that if you order a crash dive and
then order a different depth before the boat gets down to the 75m(?) that the crash
dive ends at your boat will become less stable at low speeds.

Wait until the boat leavels off after a crash dive before ordering a new depth.

I would say that its number 2 point you raised. Quite often after a crash dive, once the boat is under, I order the planes into Dive mode to keep the boat going down.

[Venatore]

I have just spent the last 40 minutes playing dodge with a destroyer before giving up

http://i137.photobucket.com/albums/q237/Venatore/Alternate/Yoda.jpg

[Madox58]

[quote=Letum]
2) There is a bug in GWX (and stock(?))[ /quote]

Which means it's a problem with stock maybe?
Can you be a bit more difinitive?
Quite blameing GWX for every standard problem out there!!

[ddiplock]

Come on fellow Kaleun, there is hardly any point continuing if the boat wasnt holding its depth now is there??

Each time I increased speed to rise the boat, he located me. Believe me, there were plently of times he lost my scent. but each time, because I had to increase speed to maintain depth control, I kept giving my position away :(

[Reece]

there is hardly any point continuing if the boat wasnt holding its depth now is there??
Just as Venatore said, the force wasn't with you!:lol:

[Kpt. Lehmann]

Come on fellow Kaleun, there is hardly any point continuing if the boat wasnt holding its depth now is there??

Each time I increased speed to rise the boat, he located me. Believe me, there were plently of times he lost my scent. but each time, because I had to increase speed to maintain depth control, I kept giving my position away :(

For that to occur you would first have to take depth charge damage.

It must have really sucked to be a real life U-boat commander... being depth charged for HOURS, with compressed air slowly bleeding away to maintain trim to fight negative bouyancy as the bilges get heavier bit by bit... drifting deeper and deeper... slowly... hull groaning louder and louder... and having to decide to run the electrics at a higher RPM to maintain depth.... knowing that the enemy above will likely hear him...

40 minutes you say? The other night it took me several hours real time to sneak away from an escort in very similar circumstances to yours during my third patrol in my current career.

Even if this is viewed as a bug... I don't see any motivation to 'fix' it.

If you can't get away from an escort in GWX... it is ultimately because you put yourself into an inescapable situation.

[difool2]

Now that's a bit unfair. Didn't sound like an "inescapable" situation to me (just one escort). When I've been bit by this bug (before I was enlightened about it), it would typically take 6+ knots to get her to rise again. Now the modeling (or lack thereof) of the things you mention is a different issue, and I wouldn't mind it if such (via the mythical SDK) was ever implemented, but having to go 6 knots just to save her from a horrible fate seems a bit much.

[gord96]

if a game frustrates you that much to have a rant like that you should perhaps take a break. :roll:

[Kpt. Lehmann]

if a game frustrates you that much to have a rant like that you should perhaps take a break. :roll:

Rants have a way of omitting important details and exagerating the facts too.

Frustration has a semi-natural way of making small things seem huge.

[Schöneboom]

Here's a trick of the trade: When the wabos explode, you have a brief window of opportunity to run your engines at full speed without the DDs hearing you. You can use that burst of speed to change depth & course to your advantage. The window closes about 30 sec. after the last explosion. Then you want to drop back to 1 knot (not just "ahead slow"; 1 knot = 50 rpm), selected on the alternate speed dial. Hope that helps!

Ciao,
Wayne

[ddiplock]

My rant was well justified. Now I know its a bug from altering depth straight after a crash dive order, it shouldn't happen again now i know how to avoid it. :)

On a much brighter note, I ran into a convoy in thick fog outside Gibralter on my way back to La Rochelle. Took a shot in the dark and fired at a 14000 ton Ceramic Ocean Liner from 2700 mtrs, with a 4 torpedo salvo. 3 out of 4 torpedos struck home sending it straight down.

Before I knew it I had THREE destroyers bearing down on me. I had to dive right down to 250mtrs, but even then they were still able to find me on their ASDIC. With the boat actually holding depth now, I was able to command the boat properly. I played cat and mouse for a while before I finally managed to give them the slip and they started to lose sight of me. Decoy's didn't seem to help much though unfortunatley when I used them. But that's what I'm talking about. Despite sustaining some minor damage to the flak guns from a few close cans, I loved every minute of that depth charge attack. :rock:

But it does make you wonder what the real guys went through. It must have been a terrifying ordeal. :shifty:

But, after leaving La Rochelle November 1942, U128 successfully made it back and docked back at base on April 9th 1943. Some 5 months at sea, what a cracking time it was. :)

[msalama]

Not sure about the VIIs (though I didn't have any great problems with them during my last Atlantic career either IIRC), but at least the series II in general seems to behave pretty well in this regard.

In a duck you can order 0 knots forward by putting the needle somewhere between the 0 and 1 marks and get some 50rpm off the electrics, which works fine in both being quiet _and_ maintaining depth - but ONLY IF you're not damaged! Have a leak or two and it all goes haywire, because then you'll need at least 2 knots if not more... plus the repair team binging and banging your boat back to shape, too :damn:

[msalama]

Yah, and thanks from me too for enlightening us about this particular bug :up: Haven't had this happen to me so far - far as I can remember at least - but still, one can't avoid what one doesn't know about, no?

S!

[Yorktown_Class]

This could be two things:

1) You need to keep moving to maintain depth. However good your crew is, they can't balance out the boat just with the ballast tanks. You need water passing the dive planes.
Just 1 knot is enough to keep your boat somewhat stable.

2) There is a bug in GWX (and stock(?)) which means that if you order a crash dive and
then order a different depth before the boat gets down to the 75m(?) that the crash
dive ends at your boat will become less stable at low speeds.

Wait until the boat leavels off after a crash dive before ordering a new depth.

WOW good to know,I always thought it had something to do with going silent,it would sink while being hunted,not all the time tho:up:

[rifleman13]

This could be two things:

1) You need to keep moving to maintain depth. However good your crew is, they can't balance out the boat just with the ballast tanks. You need water passing the dive planes.
Just 1 knot is enough to keep your boat somewhat stable.

2) There is a bug in GWX (and stock(?)) which means that if you order a crash dive and
then order a different depth before the boat gets down to the 75m(?) that the crash
dive ends at your boat will become less stable at low speeds.

Wait until the boat leavels off after a crash dive before ordering a new depth.
WOW good to know,I always thought it had something to do with going silent,it would sink while being hunted,not all the time tho:up:

Good to know that.
I was just been DC'ed by three ASW trawlers and it was crazy and nervous. I went to periscope depth and saw them leaving the scene.:-?

Then placed an eel to two of them!:arrgh!:

[Captain Nemo]

I'm in a similar situation off the North Western Approaches just after sinking an Ore Carrier in convoy. Just cannot hold depth at silent speed, the boat just slips down slowly by the stern until you increase speed to get to a shallower depth. Of course, the escorts are then on to you and give you another bashing with their depth charges. Currently heading away from the convoy at 180 degrees in an effort to give the escorts the slip. To a degree this is a frustrating situation, but I agree with Kpt Lehmann in that I look on it as a bit of added realism rather than a bug and a challenge that the Kaleun must rise to if he is to succeed in being a successful commander.

Nemo

[U56]

I have just spent the last 40 minutes playing dodge with a destroyer before giving up

http://i137.photobucket.com/albums/q237/Venatore/Alternate/Yoda.jpg






LOL:D


Agree with Venatore........Patience he has not. Find another way must he.

[msalama]

Yeah, but if the boat is sinking unless you go 3kts forward, and the repair team is banging away, then what the h*ll is there to do but surrender in the long run, because the buggers will still hear you no matter what? The weather, granted, may come to your rescue (as may decoys, etc. too if used wisely), but other than that... :doh:

This isn't a whine, so please don't misunderstand me now. From what I've read they did hear you pretty easily if the conditions were good, and you were noisy. But if those are the circumstances then how exactly _can_ you slip away - or can you just not?

:
:
:

Or, in other words: tips please, ladies and gents, and I'll buy you a drink if we ever meet :ping: :lol:

[Cohaagen]

Here's a trick of the trade: When the wabos explode, you have a brief window of opportunity to run your engines at full speed without the DDs hearing you. You can use that burst of speed to change depth & course to your advantage. The window closes about 30 sec. after the last explosion. Then you want to drop back to 1 knot (not just "ahead slow"; 1 knot = 50 rpm), selected on the alternate speed dial. Hope that helps!

Unfortunately, SH3/GWX doesn't model this behavior. A shame, since it would make a big difference to in-game tactics.

HOWEVER...if the sea is rough, and you stay at periscope depth, and you've only got one escort to deal with, you can stick your 'scope up to check when you're in his baffles and order flank speed at that point. By zooming away in bursts it's almost easy to evade them this way before they heel round and start bashing away with ASDIC at your last known position.

[msalama]

Unfortunately, SH3/GWX doesn't model this behavior.

There's this however:

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=134264&highlight=depth+charge+noise

[Schwuppes]

I have had this problem too... what worked for me is to manually adjust the RPM (right click on the engineer) on the dial so the boat makes barely 2 knots, mostly it is just enough to keep the boat stable and still quiet enough so the destroyers cant here you.

However I will also try the "not ordering a new depth before the default crashdive depth is reached" tip. ;)


Little question on my part:

IRL rough seas made it harder for escorts to detect a U-Boat... SH3/GWX models this right?

[Cohaagen]

IRL rough seas made it harder for escorts to detect a U-Boat... SH3/GWX models this right?

If you are at periscope depth, yes. The waves will help mask you. It definitely works - I have used this tactic many times.

[danurve]

IRL rough seas made it harder for escorts to detect a U-Boat... SH3/GWX models this right?

If you are at periscope depth, yes. The waves will help mask you. It definitely works - I have used this tactic many times.

Indeed without the rougher seas I have passed on a few later war attacks.
I'm not sure if it is the waves, the extra noise of the ocean, or the escorts being tossed about. Perhaps a little of all that jazz.
I've also set 1m below periscope depth and just raised the scope a bit more to keep the top of the conning tower lower. Rarely, if ever do I extend the scope all the way. That is like a signal flare.

I would also like to add; CrashDive is overrated. I think we just like the sound affects at times. Tip? Develop escape tactics without it.

edited to add; I bet the guys tooling about in those IX sonar magnets have a tougher time :cool:

[KeptinCranky]

heh, didn't know about this bug...does explain some things though:hmm:

Now, I never use crash dive in a surface contact situation, except possibly for flavor, because I generally just proceed slowly into the deeps (if the hunter is far away enough) and I also like to use the rough weather (which seems to stalk me) to evade at shallow depth. This is required by the fact that I tend to hunt in shallow waters like AM36 and the Irish sea... :D

As to not being able to maintain depth, I'm sure this happened to real life captains often enough, with all the possibly fatal consequences involved. I do agree that it could be game-breaking, but sometimes you just have to play the hand fate deals you....

[Catfish]

Hi,
just my two cents. A real boat could keep its depth without moving, at least as there was some energy left in the batteries to actuate the bilge pump, and the electric compressors to recharge pressure tanks for re-blowing the dive and control cells from time to time (they sometimes leaked a bit). This was not possible for a longer time during silent "running" at full stop.

When the boat had a good 1st LI there would be no need to have more than a knot of speed to keep the boat level, at any depth, without pumping for an hour or more.
In 1945 there was even a hovering device that would keep the boat at a given depth automatically (also during a full stop), but it was only built into a few old boats, and certainly into all of the new XXI and XXIII types.

So imagine you are in 1943, in a VIIc boat which is hunted by some escort: you would run silent at not more than 2 knots, all pumps and compressors off. When the escort would start to throw depth charges (heard by the hydrophones) the speed would be set to full, course and/or depth changed, and the pumps would be used as well as the compressors to fill up the pressure tanks, but only for the time until the charges exploded, after which the boat would return to silent running again.

I do not know whether the light leaking of the boat during silent running is realized in SH3 or GWX (caused by stopped bilge pumps and not-watertight seals). Anyway you can run silent until you hear your hydrophone watch tell "depth charges", and switch off silent running as well as change course and raise speed, if only for a short time. Be sure to switch to silent running as soon as four or so charges have exploded. Watch your depth and reset it from time to time. That way you can even survive in the late war.

Greetings,
Catfish

[Red Heat]

"Stop complaining and get to patrolling!" :lol: :lol: :lol:

[Letum]

2) There is a bug in GWX (and stock(?))

Which means it's a problem with stock maybe?
Can you be a bit more difinitive?

Nah, sorry, I can't be any more definative. I know it is in GWX, but I don't know if it
is in stock. It has been many, many moons since I played stock.
It could be a result of changes to the boat's bauancy(?)

Quite blameing GWX for every standard problem out there!!
What's your problem?
I'm not blameing GWX for this and I haven't blames GWX for any other bugs!

I don't blame the devs either. Bugs are not the fault of developers. It's just a fact of
complex code that these things happen.

[Penelope_Grey]

Its not even a GWX bug though or even a SH3 bug IMO so for what its worth you can accept or reject what I have to say to your own content... Its simple physics guys... in a crash dive what do you do? Open your tanks as wide as you can to flood them as quick as you can, to make the boat as heavy as possible so it dives as fast as possible.

So if it doesn't trim at your exact ordered depth straight away... surely that is more realistic rather than a "bug"?

These were ancient machines, they didn't have computers to work out the ballast tank trim down to the last litre, they relied on twisting wheels and pulling levers to make it balance out. In a crash dive, I imagine doing that was exceedingly difficult. There is no fault here. Since it doesn't do that in a normal dive....

I rest my case.

[Myxale]

Bah!:stare:

You poor sods!

I spent once 5 realtime hours with my good ol IXB in W@W I north of Britania!

Having been caught by surprise (ramming with some Ash-Cans to boot) by one of the DD's; my boot banged up was not leveled the whole time! Stern-heavy.
Flooding and damage and way back with the first REL of LRT. Hah! I made it!:arrgh!:

40 min....don't make me:rotfl:


;)

[Letum]

Its not even a GWX bug though or even a SH3 bug IMO so for what its worth you can accept or reject what I have to say to your own content... Its simple physics guys... in a crash dive [...]
I think it is a little too erratic to be design.
But that's just irrelevant technical stuff. Design or bug, it does add to the realism as you pointed out. :up:
I'm all for embracing it!

The subs in SH3 seam to me to be very stable. IRL it was totally impossible to keep the
boat level for long without around 2 knots of water passing the planes.

Does SH3 Commander cause depth keeping problems in the malfunctions/sabotage?


my boot banged up was not leveled the whole time! Stern-heavy.
Flooding and damage and way back with the first REL of LRT. Hah! I made it!
I secretly want this to happen. Since installing the correct interior angles it's gotta look great.
Don't tell my crew I said that.

[Schwuppes]

IRL rough seas made it harder for escorts to detect a U-Boat... SH3/GWX models this right?
If you are at periscope depth, yes. The waves will help mask you. It definitely works - I have used this tactic many times.

I was thinking more in terms of ASDIC and sonar... will the rough weather render those devices less effective for escorts in GWX?

[Letum]

[...]ASDIC and sonar... will the rough weather render those devices less effective for escorts in GWX?

It certinaly effects passive sonar a lot in all versions of the game.
I can't say 100%, but I think it effects ASDIC to the same extent. I'm sure someone
can confirm/deny this...

It also effects radar and visual spotting a lot.

I only ever make surface attacks if the weather if at least windspeed 5 at night.
You can shadow convoys much closer in rough weather when their radar doesn't
work so well.

Big waves, but high visability on a moonless night is perfect u-boat weather.

[Penelope_Grey]

IRL rough seas made it harder for escorts to detect a U-Boat... SH3/GWX models this right?
If you are at periscope depth, yes. The waves will help mask you. It definitely works - I have used this tactic many times.
I was thinking more in terms of ASDIC and sonar... will the rough weather render those devices less effective for escorts in GWX?

Short answer: Yes.

[Madox58]

2) There is a bug in GWX (and stock(?)) which means that if you order a crash dive and
then order a different depth before the boat gets down to the 75m(?) that the crash
dive ends at your boat will become less stable at low speeds.



I qoute your post Sir!!

Would you care to explain that?
Without asking what my problem is.
Why do you point at GWX without backup data?
(and stock(?))
Try playing SH3 as it came out of the box before makeing obtuse statements.
You did not say
Is there a bug in GWX
You said
There is a bug in GWX

[Letum]

2) There is a bug in GWX (and stock(?)) which means that if you order a crash dive and
then order a different depth before the boat gets down to the 75m(?) that the crash
dive ends at your boat will become less stable at low speeds.


I qoute your post Sir!!

Would you care to explain that?
Without asking what my problem is.
Why do you point at GWX without backup data?
(and stock(?))
Try playing SH3 as it came out of the box before makeing obtuse statements.
You did not say
Is there a bug in GWX
You said
There is a bug in GWX
Well...there is a bug in GWX!
I have no idea if it is a bug inherited from stock or not, hence the question mark.

I'm not saying it is caused by GWX or that it is somehow GWX's fault.
It's just there!

You seam to think I am trying to attack GWX. I am not, I am just trying to explain that
there is a bug, it is in GWX and it may be in stock, but I am unsure if it is in stock.

There are lots of bugs in GWX that are inherited from stock and can not be fixed to
to things like hard-code. That's not anyones fault and I'm sure it does not reflect
badly upon anyone.

It's in GWX and I dunno if it is in stock as well. If it is in stock I assume it it in all mods
that derive from stock, but I don't know!

I don't understand what I have said wrong! :(
I was only trying to help the first poster understand what was happening. I wasn't trying
to blame anyone for bugs or atatck anyone. I just gave all the details about it that I had.

*edit*
How else could I have put it to explain it?

Really!
I saw the bug in GWX, but I don't know if it's a stock bug.
How else can I explain it?

[johan_d]

It makes life easier just to blame it on one thing..
My bread-roaster or whatever you call it stopped working, and being a good Kaleun, I immetiatly blamed it on GWX.. they must have put some British thing in it.. you see it helps!

Anyhow, stock is bad, GWX is more bad.. just those damn planes!! grrr.. Sometimes I wonder just by myself, when nobody is around, that we are on a losing war!

[Letum]

It makes life easier just to blame it on one thing..
My bread-roaster or whatever you call it stopped working, and being a good Kaleun, I immetiatly blamed it on GWX.. they must have put some British thing in it.. you see it helps!

:(

Seriously guys. I wasn't trying to blame anything on anyone.

I just don't know how else I can put it.

I haven't said it is the fault of any mod.
I don't know if it's in stock or not.

I'm very upset that I have been misunderstood like this.

I don't know how else I could explain that it is definitely in GWX, but I don't know if it
is in stock or else where.

I don't understand why everyone is so angry. Honestly, I don't.

It's not even a bad bug.

:( :(

Please, I appeal to you to go back and read my words more trustingly. I wrote them
entirely innocently of any offense they might have caused an I am at a loss to explain
why they have caused so much offense.

*edit*
Someone please tell me that they understand what I meant. :(

[Madox58]

Calm down.

I understand now what you ment.
It's hard with just reading a statement how it's intended.

One thing I take offence with is GWX and the word BUG!!

I can not even count the hours spent by all the Team members
to resolve issues that most have never seen.

The Team fixed things no one has yet to notice.

So when you say GWX Bug?
I'm all down your throat!!!

If I'm wrong?
No problem.
I'll apologize where needed.

Let's all carry on then.
Sorry to jump on you over a mis-statement.

[Letum]

Please accept my own humble appologies for any misunderstnding I may have
inadvertantly caused and allow me to ensure you that, whilst I still do not fully
understand the confusion, I do not hold you responsable at all and there is really no
need to apologise to me. I am sure it was just a misunderstanding that occured with
out anyone at fault as they sometimes do.

Going off topic: Can you tell me what the GWX font is please?

And returning firmly back on topic:
Have there ever been posotive and negative bauancy mods for GWX?
I think NYGM had the bauancy set up so you constantly went up if you where not
moveing and some other mod had it so you constantly sank.

I think you sink in GWX...right? but not so much at periscope depth.

[Madox58]

The font is Deutsch Gothic.

[Bosje]

I encounted this...thing... twice: On my VIIC career in 1943 (freiherr beckman's U-735) its an interesting event so i'll save those details for the journal :) .

I run a new career in the background while writing Beckman's journal, to check the map and other ingame stuff, and had an interesting experience in a VIIB in 1939. Here it goes:

with inexperienced officers/crew and a watch officer at the helm, she keeps depth less well than with my LI (helm and repair qualification, any medal and promotions i get go to him, first)
The LI was on damage control duty and the 1.WO was at the helm. control room bar was still a full green but she didnt quite do what i told her to do. ordered a crash dive while at periscope depth, to get deep quick without having to press 'D' and '5' manually (and because i had the hope that it might make her drop down as fast as possibly possible :doh: )

didn't allow her to level off, got planes on full dive from 30 meters or so, some rudder movement etc, either way i treated the boat quite badly and settled down at 160 meters. depthcharges coming in, full speed, down to 180 meters, silent running.

from there she started slipping away, as she should from reading all these posts. in the control room I could see the bubble showing a very slight nose-down angle. Planes on full rise (ordered the boat to surface) and 1 knot. still dropping. 2 knots. still dropping. Its only 1939 so the escorts arent really all that dangerous, got her going at 200 rpm and she went back up to 160 meters. from there, 50 rpm and she dropped back down again.

At 230 meters I started to worry about the hull and thats where it gets interesting:
I put my designated LI back at the helm (most qualified officer for the job) and i put all spare hands in the AFT torpedo room. Unless I am much mistaken, this helped: she still slipped down but less rapidly. But presumably the boat is still suffering the effects of the crash dive order bug/glitch/realistic coding event/thingy. Either way, it took 3 knots or more to get her back up. Got up to 120 meters, let her sit there for a while, cruise around for a bit, get the boat to properly trim etc etc. After a couple of minutes cruising at 1/3 at 120 meters i got the rpm down to 50 and she was still stable. down to 160 meters, still stable. down to 180 meters, still stable.

So, if you are all still following me, here is my conclusion: A competent helm crew is able to hold depth quite well but the boat has to be decently balanced. After some harsh manouvering and hurried manipulations, she is not holding depth (especially when you get below operational depth) but a good crew will get her steady after you let the boat trim properly at a bit of speed at operational depth. Having all crew in the forward compartments or aft compartments seems to make a difference too. I can't help but think that the water pressure simply forces the boat down and you need a good team to keep her stable.

is this conclusion way off and simply the result of a crap interpretation of random events? or is the game / GWX actually this cool?

I'll get into my VIIB again and do some more runs to check all of this. I'm also curious whether or not going backwards will help (since the nose is slightly pointing down, even with planes on surface). Keep an eye on the bubble in the control room, you'll see a clue: she points down at 1 knot, thus explaining the slow descent. At 3 knots you'll see her pointing up.

So much for my two cents

[Letum]

I can't help but think that the water pressure simply forces the boat down and you need a good team to keep her stable.

Water pressure does not work like that because there is equal pressure pushing up on
the boat as there is pushing down.

[Cheapskate]

Water pressure does not work like that because there is equal pressure pushing up on the boat as there is pushing down.

which is why I find find the NYGM approach to depth-keeping, where the boat tends to sink, and that of GWX, where it rises, equally off-putting.

In stock 1.4b, (assuming no damage) the boat hovers quite happily with no forward or backward motion, and generally responds accurately to depth changes.

In RL, things were very different. I can imagine there were dozens of things that would influence depth keeping and I seem to remember reading (in these forums) of one LI who was replaced because he could not do that satisfactorily.

However, it always struck me as a smidgeon unfair to model the effects of poor depth keeping without having the means ( see Catfish's post earlier in this thread) to make it better.

Still with SH3's inability to model such complexities, I suppose that the NYGM/GWX both thought that their approach was a reasonable attempt to simulate this form of instability. Not least to help us avoid getting bored and sitting around listening to the gramophone all the time.

Were they successful? Suppose that's for all of us to judge individually. Me?.... I'll settle for the gramophone any day!:D - particularly if it's playing one of Evelyn Kuenneke's songs

PS There was a reduced positive buoyancy option in GWX 1.03. Dunno if that works with 2.1 though - not running that version yet.

[Letum]

Well, the NYGM/GWX way doesn't so much simulate buoyancy problems with stationary
u-boats as it simulates the gameplay implications. i.e. you have to keep a minimum
speed to keep a constant depth.

[Bosje]

so what's pushing the nose down at 1 knot with planes on full rise?

[seafarer]

Hi,
just my two cents. A real boat could keep its depth without moving, at least as there was some energy left in the batteries to actuate the bilge pump, and the electric compressors to recharge pressure tanks for re-blowing the dive and control cells from time to time (they sometimes leaked a bit). This was not possible for a longer time during silent "running" at full stop.

Greetings,
Catfish

Just a technical aside, you could not recharge compressed air while submerged. Simple, since where would the air come from? If you compress the air in the boat, the crew suffocates. Even a nuclear boat must either surface or use a snorkel to replenish compressed air, as the seawater atmosphere plants cannot possibly produce internal air fast enough to allow for compressed air recharge from the boat's interior air.

The only other point I'd make is that pumping water out at depth consumes a lot of battery power, as you have to pump against the outside pressure gradient. To some degree, maintaining forward momentum of a knot or two may have been energetically favorable over frequently moving ballast water in, and then back out.

[FIREWALL]

if a game frustrates you that much to have a rant like that you should perhaps take a break. :roll:

Rants have a way of omitting important details and exagerating the facts too.

Frustration has a semi-natural way of making small things seem huge.

I think ddiplock's use of the term rant was a poor choice.

Frustrated is the better one. And good it is.

I could give a damn if you sink, surface or get totally away.

All the emotions you expressed tell me you were totally Immersed.

TOTAL IMMERSION. Thats the whole reason for GWX.

AND THEY DID THEIR JOB TO THE MAX. imho :yep: :up:

[Cheapskate]

you have to keep a minimum speed to keep a constant depth.

Do you? Really? Would have thought that if there were no changes in your boat's displacement , then you would be able maintain depth without momentum coming into the equation to any marked degree.

However, I'm no expert in these matters and open to correction.

Where's 1480 - he's good at all this scientific stuff :yep:

edit: Just seen Seafarer's post. Seems I am being corrected. Thanks :up:

I'll still settle for the gramophone though!

[seafarer]

you have to keep a minimum speed to keep a constant depth.

Do you? Really? Would have thought that if there were no changes in your boat's displacement , then you would be able maintain depth without momentum coming into the equation to any marked degree.

However, I'm no expert in these matters and open to correction.

Where's 1480 - he's good at all this scientific stuff :yep:

edit: Just seen Seafarer's post. Seems I am being corrected. Thanks :up:

I'll still settle for the gramophone though!

In theory, sure neutrally bouyant and your set. In practice though, it proves extremely difficult to achieve. Pumps and controls have lag in them, so it's difficult to achieve the sheer precision that true neutral bouyancy would require.

But mainly, the ocean ain't static. There are currents that move you, and the environment around your boat is in constant flux. Subtle little changes in salinity, temperature and such mean that the goal of true neutral bouyancy is a contantly moving target.

I did several dives in my grad school days in DSV Alvin (to over 3000m depth in a couple of dives). Here you have a little 36ton (DoH - meant 18ton, ie 36,000lbs), 3-man submersible, with mercury trim tanks and pumps capable of moving fairly minute amounts of trim and ballast water around, and even then it was near impossible to achieve truly neutral bouyancy, and at best we could get it really close for a few moments, but that was it.

If the environment was static, it would be easy, but the environment is very far from static, and hence it is not an easy nor simple thing to try to achieve. Even just trying to do it in a WWII era sub would, I expect, prove mentally exhausting for the crew. They would need to constantly fiddle and fuss with ballast controls - it would be a futile attempt. So, far better to keep some way on, and use the control planes for exactly what they were intended for - depth control.

[FIREWALL]

This whole discussion reminds me of a funny story.

My younger brother (50yo) being the prefectionist he is spent 1/2 hour adjusting his baseball cap on his head to my impatience. I wanted to get to the local bar before HAPPY HOUR was over.

As we were walking down the street a big gust of wind blew his hat off and down the street it flew.

He looked over at me and I smiled and said.

YOU DIDN'T ALLOW FOR THE RANDOM EVENT DID YOU.:p

[Letum]

you have to keep a minimum speed to keep a constant depth.
Do you? Really? Would have thought that if there were no changes in your boat's displacement , then you would be able maintain depth without momentum coming into the equation to any marked degree.
Nah, depth keeping with out speed was impossible unless the boat was sitting on the
bottom and around 2knts was the minimum to maintain accurate depth.

It was impossible to perfectly trim a u-boat's basalt tanks. Even if you did, just one
crew member walking along the boat would be enough to unbalance it. It was
impossible to constantly adjust the basalt tanks accurately enough all the time.

Depth and an even keel where kept by the dive planes, which could be adjusted
easier and reacted much faster than the trim tanks. They needed water passing over
them to work.
Balancing a u-boat with just basalt is like trying to balance a pencil on
the edge of a knife with thick gloves on and tiny people moving around
the pencil.

Generally speaking, a u-boat would dive 1-4 times a day for a trim dive and
hydrophone check. The basalt tanks where trimmed to keep the boat as stable as
possible with slightly positive buoyancy in case of emergency.

[FIREWALL]

This whole discussion reminds me of a funny story.

My younger brother (50yo) being the prefectionist he is spent 1/2 hour adjusting his baseball cap on his head to my impatience. I wanted to get to the local bar before HAPPY HOUR was over.

As we were walking down the street a big gust of wind blew his hat off and down the street it flew.

He looked over at me and I smiled and said.

YOU DIDN'T ALLOW FOR THE RANDOM EVENT DID YOU.:p :arrgh!:

[Cheapskate]

Thanks for that info, Seafarer (and Letum BTW). Interesting stuff indeed. 3000m Eh! The mind boggles - at least mine does.

Might have known that salinity and temperature would rear their ugly heads! Have just participated in another thread concerning Thermoclines, their causes, and effects on Sonar detection. I had some misconceptions about them too, which 1480 sorted me out on!

Seriously, I do appreciate all this scientific education, having learned absolutely nothing about this subject at school. Mainly due, BTW, to our Science teacher being a Welshman, who had no teeth. As a cover up he spoke with his mouth half shut and had grown a bushy moustache to further disguise his shortcomings in the dental department. No wonder I didn't develop any scientific inclinations!

That's my excuse anyway.

Again thanks many thanks for your input - maybe I'll even give GWX a try. Specially as it appears they seem to have got things about right!!

[Letum]

Personally I don't like GWX's buoyancy all that much.

In reality the boats where trimmed so they had a slight amount of positive buoyancy.
This meant that if the E-motors stopped for any reason the boat would slowly surface,
rather than sink. In GWX you sink.
I am sure there was a reson for doing it this way. It's better than stock anyhow.

There was a mod that had positive buoyancy...can't remember which.

*edit* you haven't tried GWX?! Your, Sir, are mad! :D

[Madox58]

3000m DOWN?
:o
That's around 9850 feet!!
I've jumped from
15,000 feet (4572m)

But I've only been 75 feet (23m) down.

I salute you Sir!!!
:up:

[seafarer]

:D Yup, diving on hydrothermal vents on the Juan de Fuca Ridge, East Pacific Rise and Mid Atlantic Ridge. DSV Alvin is cert'd to 4000m depth.

I have a couple of friends who have been to near 6000m in the Russian MIR DSVs. That would be fun :p

[Sailor Steve]

Personally I don't like GWX's buoyancy all that much.

In reality the boats where trimmed so they had a slight amount of positive buoyancy.
This meant that if the E-motors stopped for any reason the boat would slowly surface,
rather than sink.
Where does that come from? I've heard people say that, but I have yet to see it anywhere but being repeated by other posters. Official US doctrine, at least, was for neutral bouyancy:
When a submarine is on the surface, or when it reaches a desired depth, the first objective is to attain perfect, or nearly perfect, trim, that is, a balancing of the forces.
http://www.maritime.org/fleetsub/trim/chap1.htm


In GWX you sink.
Not so. NYGM was made so you sink. GW was made so you'd rise, which is probably where you got that info. GWX, I think, is changed back to neutral, unless you take a slight bit of damage, then down you go.

I was fond of AOD's system. At very slow speeds you would start to sink, but you'd get a message from the Chief: "Cannot maintain depth unless we run the pumps!"

I also think sinking is more common than rising, simply because there is no such thing as a ship that doesn't leak; and taking on water means taking on weight.

[Cheapskate]

*edit* you haven't tried GWX?! Your, Sir, are mad! :D

Oi, Oi, Letum,matey. I'm not completely round the twist...yet! :lol:
I do use GWX 1.03 a fair bit. Increasingly now, because many modders have stopped making Stock1.4b versions of their stuff.

Graphically it's superb, aurally too ( for the most part), and the damage model seems, to my limited knowledge, the most realistic on offer. Only problem is, I don't feel comfortable messing about with it. Knew fairly well where I was with 1.4b. Not so with GWX.

Did a quick search on the Net for trim tanks etc. Came up with the following:-
http://www.uboat.net/forums/read.php?20,73790,73849#msg-73849

Unsurprisingly,it seems depth keeping wasn't purely down to the ballast tanks. There were many different trim tanks including torpedo firing compensation.

Also of interest were the devs comments before SH3 was released:-
http://silenthunteriii.com/de/community_chat2.php
You'll note that they say realistic AI control had been fully implemented! :hmm:

Like the sound of the pumps operation in AOTD, Steve. Never played that game much. Didn't really start playing sub sims until the original Silent Hunter. Still have the Commander edition of AOTD somewhere. Maybe time to dig it out. Might appreciate it a bit more now.

[Sailor Steve]

You really should move up to 2.1. They have a whole lot of new and interesting things, including floating drydocks in harbors and some convoys escorted by blimps. Not the most important things, I know, but still quite immersive and cool.

Also of interest were the devs comments before SH3 was released:-
http://silenthunteriii.com/de/community_chat2.php
You'll note that they say realistic AI control had been fully implemented! :hmm:
Not to mention trying for manual planes control (with the risk of losing it all) and looking toward a Destroyer Command 2. My, how things change.

Like the sound of the pumps operation in AOTD, Steve. Never played that game much. Didn't really start playing sub sims until the original Silent Hunter. Still have the Commander edition of AOTD somewhere. Maybe time to dig it out. Might appreciate it a bit more now.
Another cool thing about AOTD was that sitting on the bottom actually worked. Depth charges were less effective and their sonar got all messed up. Of course I did lose one crew to getting stuck in the mud and not being able to break loose...:dead:

[Cheapskate]

I'm sure your right about 2.1 Haven't really got much of an excuse for not trying it...have had it hanging about since December.
Was only waiting for the update to make the open hatch mod and Serg's Camera mod compatible.

But then it came out that enemy AI had gone all hardline. Sounded more NYGM than NYGM. Sort of dampened my enthusiam somewhat.:cry:

My realism preferences are for the "being there" side of things. Accuracy in sights and sounds are fine with me, Having roughly the same chance of surviving as a UBoat crewman, comes way further down my desirability list. In fact it ain't even on it at all!!

Having said all that, I've got an idea of how much effort the GWX guys (& gal) put into it and I'm certain it is the usual polished, professional product that they always come up with. No doubt I'll succumb and install it some day not too far off. Bet the team are really relieved to hear that!! :rotfl: :rotfl:

BTW There are a couple of things you might be able to give some advice on. One is Serg's camera. Seem to remember you said " it wasn't a game breaker" in 2.1. Have you noticed any bad side effects at all?. Was a bit concerned about the WO not responding thing. What was that about?

Secondly,I think you've got SHIV? Was wondering what (if anything) the Devs had put in, that they had promised (and didn't get implemented) for SH3. I know there's a Thermocline and the crew compartments look much more realistic. But have they put in the plane control? or any other radical improvements?

The uselessness of the 'bottom resting' evasion technique in SH3 is a real bummer. Remember that saved my bacon in Silent Hunter 1 more than a few times. So did the Thermoclines. Also got stuck in the mud. Just the once though. Up planes and full speed astern got me out as I remember.

[Sailor Steve]

I'm sure your right about 2.1 Haven't really got much of an excuse for not trying it...have had it hanging about since December.
Was only waiting for the update to make the open hatch mod and Serg's Camera mod compatible.
Open hatch is cool. Some folks have complained because 2.0 (and 2.1) uses the fixed observation scope. It is now in the correct position near the front of the control room and partially blocks the view of the open hatch!:rotfl: I love it myself - it makes the place look appropriately crowded. Also helping is the big attack scope housing behind the ladder.

But then it came out that enemy AI had gone all hardline. Sounded more NYGM than NYGM. Sort of dampened my enthusiam somewhat.:cry:

My realism preferences are for the "being there" side of things. Accuracy in sights and sounds are fine with me, Having roughly the same chance of surviving as a UBoat crewman, comes way further down my desirability list. In fact it ain't even on it at all!!
I haven't found it to be that much harder. If you stick to historic tactics and don't push your luck, you have a fair chance of surviving...at least until 1943.

Having said all that, I've got an idea of how much effort the GWX guys (& gal) put into it and I'm certain it is the usual polished, professional product that they always come up with. No doubt I'll succumb and install it some day not too far off. Bet the team are really relieved to hear that!! :rotfl: :rotfl:
They're all good folks. They like being appreciated.

BTW There are a couple of things you might be able to give some advice on. One is Serg's camera. Seem to remember you said " it wasn't a game breaker" in 2.1. Have you noticed any bad side effects at all?.
I have no problems, unless you count everybody's head being in the way. I call that realism. The 'compass' in the binocular view doesn't work in the mod, but that's more realistic, and GWX 2.1 removes the compass altogether. I like the mod a lot.

Was a bit concerned about the WO not responding thing. What was that about?
I'm not sure what you mean. Watch Officer? Weapons? Who doesn't respond?

Secondly,I think you've got SHIV? Was wondering what (if anything) the Devs had put in, that they had promised (and didn't get implemented) for SH3. I know there's a Thermocline and the crew compartments look much more realistic. But have they put in the plane control? or any other radical improvements?
No dive planes control that I know of, but I'm still learning SH4. I don't find direct control to be realistic anyway; but then I never shoot the guns myself either. I don't have the U-boat add-on yet, but from pictures I've seen it adds an extra guy or two in u-boat control rooms. The basic US game is awesome from what I've seen so far. Interiors are crisper and more realistic; crew members look more like real people; the conning tower is populated and the bridge views are spectacular. SH4 comes with free movement around the boat, and the 'lock-on' views allow you to walk around other ships as well, and they have animated crew members moving around on deck. The crew management is far better as well. They change watches by themselves and all come when you call them to General Quarters. All-in-all it's a big improvement. I can't wait until it gets the full U-boat treatment.

The uselessness of the 'bottom resting' evasion technique in SH3 is a real bummer. Remember that saved my bacon in Silent Hunter 1 more than a few times. So did the Thermoclines. Also got stuck in the mud. Just the once though. Up planes and full speed astern got me out as I remember.
I don't remember using it in SH1. But then it's been awhile.

[Cheapskate]

Many thanks for your reassuring comments, Steve:up:

Certainly seems that 'anticipation being worse than the actual event', applies here and that many of my doubts are unfounded.

Re: the Camera Mod: The WO not responding thing came from a report that he would sometimes stop carrying out his scanning duties and would then fail to report sightings. There were few further details given, other than Ref had not found a way to fix the problem. This was given as the major reason that the camera mod was not included in the final 2.1. release.

Just wondered if you had noticed anything like that?

Echo your comments re the open hatch mod. Had to laugh when the "please put the peri back in the wrong place - so I can see the hatch better" requests started coming in. Particularly when one of the guys' sigs said he favoured 100% reality! It really is simple to use Shift+f2 to give you an alternative 'hatch gazing' position- although I suspect there are probably plenty of folks who still don't know about this feature.

SHIV looks really good in many respects - good job really since that's the way the U-Boat campaign seems destined to go. The crew management feature sounds fine. In SH3 I've been forced to run with no fatigue. Tiredness resulting in lower compartment efficiency is just about acceptable, but complete compartment breakdown?.... No way!! :nope:

From what I've seen, conversions like Mikhayl's TypeII seems gone pretty well. Don't think I'd have my crew wandering about in their vests though. Does SHIV give you any better control over what the crew wears??. One of my few remaining visual irritations with SH3 is seeing the bridge crew just clad in their shirt sleeves. In the Atlantic?, in winter?? Don't think so! and, judging from my previous cross channel trips, not even in Summer - or what passes for Summer in these parts.

[Frame57]

Cannot maintain Depth? Since when? had to run this one by my Uncle who rode diesel boats in the late 40's and 50's. His rememberance is that even the German boats had compressors and air tanks to adjust depth with out speed. It is called acheiving neutral bouyancy. So long as you have sufficient compressed air and can bring water into your trim tanks then you can do this. When I was on Nuke boats we had a fancy system called "HOV" short for hovering. I have not had this problem with SH3 or 4 unless I had flooding which would produce negative bouyancy and then you must use speed to maintain depth hopefully!

[Nyarlathotep]

As far as realism goes in regards to all this; try turning on "Random Crush Depth". It's a whole different experience when you can't just crash dive down to 200+ meters, knowing that your hull is good down to almost twice the rated depth.

Maybe you're ok at 200m. And maybe you're not. :o

[Bosje]

For those who read both this thread and my 'war journal' stories:

the latest events described are pretty much exactly as they happened in gwx2.1 with sh3commander

is that story realistic or would a real life kaleun never ever experience stuff like that?

all i know for sure is that it was the best damn gaming experience i ever had
hats off to the gwx team! :arrgh!:

[Schwuppes]

*edit* you haven't tried GWX?! Your, Sir, are mad! :D
Oi, Oi, Letum,matey. I'm not completely round the twist...yet! :lol:
I do use GWX 1.03 a fair bit. Increasingly now, because many modders have stopped making Stock1.4b versions of their stuff.

Graphically it's superb, aurally too ( for the most part), and the damage model seems, to my limited knowledge, the most realistic on offer. Only problem is, I don't feel comfortable messing about with it. Knew fairly well where I was with 1.4b. Not so with GWX.

Did a quick search on the Net for trim tanks etc. Came up with the following:-
http://www.uboat.net/forums/read.php?20,73790,73849#msg-73849

Unsurprisingly,it seems depth keeping wasn't purely down to the ballast tanks. There were many different trim tanks including torpedo firing compensation.

Also of interest were the devs comments before SH3 was released:-
http://silenthunteriii.com/de/community_chat2.php
You'll note that they say realistic AI control had been fully implemented! :hmm:

Like the sound of the pumps operation in AOTD, Steve. Never played that game much. Didn't really start playing sub sims until the original Silent Hunter. Still have the Commander edition of AOTD somewhere. Maybe time to dig it out. Might appreciate it a bit more now.

I read in that chatlog that the Depth charge lethal range is not affected by the depth and pressure.... but they were thinking of implementing this feature "time permitting" and depending on research data.
So was this feature ever implemented in SH3 or GWX for that matter?