Periscope sighted! 2000m!

[UnderseaLcpl]

Ok this is getting really annoying. In addition to having my periscope sighted almost constantly the accuracy of destroyers in targetting is becoming unnerving.

Recently I was attacking convoy on a very dark night (new moon or close to it) in fairly calm seas. After making my moderately succesful attack run one of the escorts (Flower -class) closed on me and I decided to sink the nosy little ^#&)%.

I kept my scope very low while I set up my attack run at "slow ahead". Suddenly at almost 2000m, his searchlights came on and locked right on my scope. As I was lowering it even further he hit my conning tower and destroyed my observation scope with a 3 or 5 inch gun. I would accept the plausible explanation of an extremely astute lookout with great night vision being very lucky had this been the only occurance but it has happened repeatedly. In my last career I suffered no less than 11 patrols where one or both of my scopes were destroyed, forcing me to go deep, evade and return to base. Some of these may have been due to radar sighting my periscope but the current career is in Feb. 41.

Okay, seriously, how the hell are you going to see, let alone hit, with a naval gun, an object that protrudes less than a meter above the surface of the ocean on a dark night? Especially when you are on a light, unstable ship like a destroyer or something even smaller?

I am currently using GWX 2.1. Is there some value I can change in one of the files that will make it more difficult to spot my scope? Are there any "No impossible gunnery" mods?

Furthermore, and I assume this is a stock Sh3 issue, I find being severely damaged or sunk because my conning tower protruded above the trough of a wave in rough seas for 1.7 seconds a ridiculous state of affairs. I even get hit by armed mechantmen sometimes. It really ruins the immersion factor.

Did any of you ever play "U-boat" (that old black and white subsim that came out in like 1989) or "Wolfpack" (which I also believe was by Ubi)? Both of those games featured the ability of warships to hit you square in the periscope. "Wolfpack" was especially bad about that. You could even see the remarkably cannonball-like projectile hit you straight in the periscope lens and it would not even damage any other part of the boat.

I have ranted off-topic now but my main question is whether or not there is an easy fix to the periscope's observability in GWX 2.1 or a mod that fixes this.

Please note that I consider the GWX team's work on SH3 nothing short of remarkable. This one issue is just a pet peeve for me and I doubt it has anything to do with the mod.

[zombiewolf]

Drives me nuts also i get spotted some 5000 km out,I can barely see them yet they see me well enough to engage me.about ready to go back to rub1.45.At the moment i use NYGM 3.0 and GW 2.1

[UnderseaLcpl]

Drives me nuts also i get spotted some 5000 km out

They spot you from the American coast as you are leaving port?

I'm sorry I couldn't resist. I feel like an A-hole.

[HW3]

You might look into OLC Ubermod v 2.4.2 for GWX 2.1. I understand he did alot of work with the sensors of the escorts and merchants. It is a sticky in the mods forum.

[Platapus]

Make sure that Bernard was not using the periscope to dry his skivvies and forgot to take then down. Bernard's big butt boxers hanging from your periscope is hard for a Destroyer to miss. :yep:

What you describe does seem a bit unrealistic though. Nighttime, slow speed, low scope should not be seen that easily. :nope:

[Frank0001]

Bernards skivvies on the periscope... :rotfl:

Well, the destroyer could have 'incidentally' picked you up on its hydrophone, and started searchlighting the area the noise was coming from.
This is strange though, since they usually won't pick you up on the hydrophone at 2000 meters, and a hit from that distance, on a target that small, is considered very lucky!

[Letum]

What year of the war is it?
Late war radar has no problem spotting scopes at 3000m in calm waters.

[nirwana]

im in a middle of a huge convoy downed 2 freighters a black swan looking for me at about 1700m. im submerged at 50m running low speed (2). as soon as i switched 2 half speed the sob turned its surchlight right in my direction and changed course nerving me with wabos in 1939!. im on nygm atm and cant say if its same in gwx but i guess its similiar that asap it gets a fix on us and use any appropriate weapon with high accuracy and unbelievable reaction time.

[Penelope_Grey]

Hi there,

when it comes to the periscope if you stick it up all the way full extension it will stick out of the water quite significantly.

Recently I was attacking convoy on a very dark night (new moon or close to it) in fairly calm seas. After making my moderately succesful attack run one of the escorts (Flower -class) closed on me and I decided to sink the nosy little ^#&)%.

This is probably the most important part of your post. Having just attacked the convoy shifts into Alert status. While in alert status they will be actively searching for you. While in standard alert yes they are watching but, they are not searching. that is the difference.

Also, for GWX there was a major overhaul of the enemy AI because the team felt stock AI was just too easy compared to historical levels.

You sinking that flower class would have provided the AI with a major clue as to your general location so would know where to throw their searchlights.

I kept my scope very low while I set up my attack run at "slow ahead". Suddenly at almost 2000m, his searchlights came on and locked right on my scope.

2000m is not a great deal of distance. Also remember you have attacked and destroyed stuff the AI knows you are there and are actively searching for you.


Okay, seriously, how the hell are you going to see, let alone hit, with a naval gun, an object that protrudes less than a meter above the surface of the ocean on a dark night? Especially when you are on a light, unstable ship like a destroyer or something even smaller?

"Stranger things have happened at sea" springs to mind.. :rotfl:

Seriously it sounds like you were very unlucky. Also you state the sea is reasonably calm, a destroyer is still a much more stable platform for shooting than your U-Boat is. So comparing their ability to gun to your own is not fair.

I am currently using GWX 2.1. Is there some value I can change in one of the files that will make it more difficult to spot my scope? Are there any "No impossible gunnery" mods?

LOL

actually... point of fact, if you look in the GWX 2 manual... somewhere near the start, can't give you the exact page number... it actually says one of the things that Grey Wolves did was to make the shooting of the enemy less accurate.

However I have to say, from the sounds of things, given that you effectively revealed your position by sinking that flower class... spotting your scope was not that spectacular a feat. Also 1941 is where the enemy gets better.


Furthermore, and I assume this is a stock Sh3 issue, I find being severely damaged or sunk because my conning tower protruded above the trough of a wave in rough seas for 1.7 seconds a ridiculous state of affairs. I even get hit by armed mechantmen sometimes. It really ruins the immersion factor.

again it depends if the ship saw you coming and knows you are there and sees your conning tower it will attack you. Its the nature of the beast, and the game simulates it well IMO. Kill or be killed.

If the ship got sight of you coming it would be looking hard to see where you are and if it got sight of you it would shoot.

Please note that I consider the GWX team's work on SH3 nothing short of remarkable.

:up:

Thankyou! Always nice to get a pat on the back! :)

I'm sorry you feel frustrated... believe me, we've all been there! All I can say is stick with it... GWX can be a biatch! But... if you pretend you are actually there and not just playing a game, wow! Awesome.

Alternatively give the mods forum a good browse and see what you come up with. But hand on heart, one thing GWX did was make the shooting of all craft less accurate.

[Sailor Steve]

I feel like an A-hole.
And well you should!

Sorry, I couldn't resist.:rotfl: Actually, when someone makes a typo like that somebody almost always makes a wisecrack about it, and I'm like as not be the one (as if you hadn't already figured that out). It's all but required, just to keep us laughing and sane.

[UnderseaLcpl]

Thanks for the perspectives everybody, especially Penelope's detailed response.
I will also look into the OLC Ubermod as HW3 suggested.

Nonetheless I would love to take a game designer out into the middle of the Atlantic and challenge him to spot and then hit a periscope on a dark night with a 3-inch gun. I would even illuminate it with the searchlight for him.

[zombiewolf]

jeeze i ment 5000m oops.

but it seems they see me from as far away as new york,and fire at me yet.

Dog gone Marines :up:

[Sailor Steve]

I've had escorts spot me in daylight at 7000 meters or more, and I get into trouble because I'm still used to closing and diving at about 5000 from my AOTD days. The longer range spotting in the daytime is realistic, but having your scope spotted at 2000 meters on a dark night is a tough call, simply because the scopes themselves were all-but-useless in those conditions. All of the writings indicate that the night surfaced attack was the only way to go, and they could get quite close without ever being seen.

I'm not blaming GWX or NYGM for problems like these, because I've read enough about the basic AI setup to believe them when they say how hard it is to get it right with the game set up the way it is. It's just something we have to learn to treat as if it's real life, that is accept it and live with it.

As for hitting the periscope, I agree with Penny that it must have been bad luck. I've had my scopes shot at many times in test scenarios, and only had the conning tower hit once - and this was all in broad daylight.

[UnderseaLcpl]

I've had escorts spot me in daylight at 7000 meters or more, and I get into trouble because I'm still used to closing and diving at about 5000 from my AOTD days. The longer range spotting in the daytime is realistic, but having your scope spotted at 2000 meters on a dark night is a tough call, simply because the scopes themselves were all-but-useless in those conditions. All of the writings indicate that the night surfaced attack was the only way to go, and they could get quite close without ever being seen.

I'm not blaming GWX or NYGM for problems like these, because I've read enough about the basic AI setup to believe them when they say how hard it is to get it right with the game set up the way it is. It's just something we have to learn to treat as if it's real life, that is accept it and live with it.

As for hitting the periscope, I agree with Penny that it must have been bad luck. I've had my scopes shot at many times in test scenarios, and only had the conning tower hit once - and this was all in broad daylight.

Based on your experience my luck is worse than bad. I am cursed by the powers that be. I can almost guarantee that my periscope will be shot at and hit(or the conning tower below it) in roughly a fifth of convoy attacks during the course of the war.

I dont think the convoy would be too hard to see at night due to the perilously close ranges at which I attack and the preponderance of starshells fired after the first torpedo impact. At least, in this game.

Still, my main concern is the ease with which they hit my periscope or conning tower. Especially at ranges of 2000m. That is well over a mile, as I am sure you are all aware.

Try shooting a rifle, with a scope, on stable land, at a target more than a mile away. I can guarantee that it is exceedingly difficult. Furthermore, when I tried it, using a "b" target that is like 2 feet wide and four feet tall, I only hit 2 out of ten times, in broad daylight, against a stationary target clearly sillohueted against a white background. Consider that I am an "expert" (per USMC standards) rifleman capable of hitting the same target at 500m 10/10 times. I have also failed to find any evidence of a U-boat shot in the periscope. This is rather incredible as there is a story of a Sherman tank, armed with a 76mm gun, being shot in the muzzle by a German Panther tank with a 75mm gun as the Sherman loader was opening the breech. This was deduced from salvage efforts conducted on the wreck and is chronicled in the book "Death Traps" though I cannot recall the author's name.

Really, this is mostly a complaint against programming and whatever Ai absurdities allow such an object to be hit with more frequency than people winning the lottery.

I realize that in Sh3 this may be impossible to rectify but it is nice to know that there is a reason besides my own actions that cause me to be forced to abandon a patrol because both periscopes were destroyed by ship-borne artillery.
Even with centimetric radar that would be a tough shot.

My main strategy against escorts, especially early in the war is "So they know where we are. Big deal, what are they gonna do when they get here? Make a poorly aimed DC attack and get sunk in turn as they circle around?
Of course this stratagem bears its own unrealistic stigma in the form of 1m torpedoes not porpoising in rough seas and going off-target. This is further countered by destroyers being able to accelerate to 27 kts in 2 or 3 seconds after spotting a G7a torpedo at night fired at less than 500m.

Overall, my main problem is that I am mastering a game with all its' game-like quirks rather than believably commanding a German U-boat in some sense or the other.


Then again, perhaps that is the task of technology which has not yet come. I had the same thoughts about subsims I played in the 90's. The extent of my programming knowledge is creating a Q-basic program that calculated exchange rates based on values supplies by the user and rendered in a crude numerical and graphical representation.

With a few minutes of consideration I have realized that ultimately, I am just B#*%!ing. Please do not fault me, as that as that is the primary Occupational Specialty of any servicemember.

Kudos to Ubisoft for making SH series and in particular, SH3. Further accolades to the GWX team for making it so good that I had to patrol for 7 and 1/2 years to find a real comlaint.

Here's hoping that the next Ubi title will take advantage of the next generation of computational technology to provide an even more impressive subsim and that people will step forward in the spirit of mod-dom to make it ridiculously better!

[d@rk51d3]

What year of the war is it?
Late war radar has no problem spotting scopes at 3000m in calm waters.


Diving to PD might help a bit too.:lol:

[Schwuppes]

As already mentioned you should really try the OLC Ubermod.... I have heard reports regarding this mod that, in 1939 - 1940 during night time surface attacks, it is possible to run circles around escorts at a range of 500 meters (!!) without being spotted.

Also decks awash helps alot too.

[Letum]

What year of the war is it?
Late war radar has no problem spotting scopes at 3000m in calm waters.

Diving to PD might help a bit too.:lol:

To be honest, you won't even need radar to spot it is the scope is raised to 3000m.

[barkhorn45]

this is not entirely related but iwas attacking a escorted convoy when i was spotted so i dove and while i was trying to evade i heard the report"he's pinging us"it was oct'39 a bit early for asdic i believe.i'm running gwx 2.1

[d@rk51d3]

this is not entirely related but iwas attacking a escorted convoy when i was spotted so i dove and while i was trying to evade i heard the report"he's pinging us"it was oct'39 a bit early for asdic i believe.i'm running gwx 2.1

You're correct.

I raised this issue a while back, and it seems however that things were set this way in GWX to help balance things out.

So while most ASW / Destroyers did not get ASDIC for quite a while in real life, they left it in the game to make up for other in game discrepancies that swung things in favor of the U-boats too much...... if that makes sense.

[rob89]

Out of interest. How does one run with "decks awash"?
I've never been able to figure it out.

[d@rk51d3]

Click on the depth gauge between 7 and 8 metres. :up:

The slower you go, the more "invisible" you are.

[Letum]

Out of interest. How does one run with "decks awash"?
I've never been able to figure it out.

Set depth to 7.5m in GWX2.1

[Captain Nemo]

this is not entirely related but iwas attacking a escorted convoy when i was spotted so i dove and while i was trying to evade i heard the report"he's pinging us"it was oct'39 a bit early for asdic i believe.i'm running gwx 2.1

You're correct.

I raised this issue a while back, and it seems however that things were set this way in GWX to help balance things out.

So while most ASW / Destroyers did not get ASDIC for quite a while in real life, they left it in the game to make up for other in game discrepancies that swung things in favor of the U-boats too much...... if that makes sense.

I cannot be sure of the availability of ASDIC to the various units of the Royal Navy at the outbreak of WWII, but this article seems to imply that it had been in development since WWI and was widely available at the beginning of WWII:

"ASDIC

In 1916, under the British Board of Invention and Research, Canadian physicist Robert William Boyle took on the active sound detection project with A B Wood, producing a prototype for testing in mid-1917. This work, for the Anti-Submarine Division, was undertaken in utmost secrecy, and used quartz piezoelectric crystals to produce the world's first practical underwater active sound detection apparatus. To maintain secrecy no mention of sound experimentation or quartz was made - the word used to describe the early work ('supersonics') was changed to 'ASD'ics, and the quartz material 'ASD'ivite. From this came the British acronym ASDIC. In 1939, in response to a question from the Oxford English Dictionary, the Admiralty made up the story that the letters stood for 'Allied Submarine Detection Investigation Committee', and this is still widely believed, though no committee bearing this name has ever been found in the Admiralty archives.

By 1918, both the U.S. and Britain had built active systems, though the British were well in advance of the US. They tested their ASDIC on HMS Antrim in 1920, and started production in 1922. The 6th Destroyer Flotilla had ASDIC-equipped vessels in 1923. An anti-submarine school, HMS Osprey, and a training flotilla of four vessels were established on Portland in 1924. The U.S. Sonar QB set arrived in 1931.

By the outbreak of World War II, the Royal Navy had five sets for different surface ship classes, and others for submarines, incorporated into a complete anti-submarine attack system. The effectiveness of early ASDIC was limited by the use of the depth charge as an anti-submarine weapon. This required an attacking vessel to pass over a submerged contact before dropping charges over the stern, resulting in a loss of ASDIC contact in the moments prior to attack. The hunter was effectively firing blind, during which time a submarine commander was able to take evasive action. This situation was remedied by using several ships cooperating and by the adoption of "ahead throwing weapons", such as Hedgehog and later Squid, which projected warheads at a target ahead of the attacker and thus still in ASDIC contact. Developments during the war resulted in British ASDIC sets which used several different shapes of beam, continuously covering blind spots. Later, acoustic torpedoes were used.

At the start of World War II, British ASDIC technology was transferred for free to the United States. Research on ASDIC and underwater sound was expanded in the UK and in the US. Many new types of military sound detection were developed. These included sonobuoys, first developed by the British in 1944, dipping/dunking sonar and mine detection sonar. This work formed the basis for post war developments related to countering the nuclear submarine. Work on sonar had also been carried out in the Axis countries, notably in Germany, which included countermeasures. At the end of WWII this German work was assimilated by Britain and the US. Sonars have continued to be developed by many countries, including Russia, for both military and civil uses. In recent years the major military development has been the increasing interest in low frequency active systems."

Nemo

[Schwuppes]

This was also my impression... that ASDIC was being developed in WW1 but was too late to have an impact in that war.
But in WW2 almost all destroyers had the device right from the beginning.

[d@rk51d3]

Reading "U-Boat Killer", it was stated that very few boats were actually fitted with ASDIC, and of those that were, some were experimental, and not many knew how to use it.

[Captain Nemo]

Reading "U-Boat Killer", it was stated that very few boats were actually fitted with ASDIC, and of those that were, some were experimental, and not many knew how to use it.

Here is an interesting article by someone who served on HMS Antelope which describes the use of ASDIC at the very beginning of the war http://www.bbc.co.uk/ww2peopleswar/stories/64/a1117964.shtml

I would hazard a guess that it was lack of training of the ASDIC operators rather than the lack of ASDIC sets that was the major drawback early in the war. The book you refer to was published in 1956, perhaps there were certain classified elements around the use of ASDIC during the war at this time, but again I am just guessing here.

Nemo

[d@rk51d3]

The book you refer to was published in 1956, perhaps there were certain classified elements around the use of ASDIC during the war at this time, but again I am just guessing here.

Nemo

Could very well be the case, I hadn't thought of that.:up:

[Stealth Hunter]

What you describe does seem a bit unrealistic though. Nighttime, slow speed, low scope should not be seen that easily. :nope:

If at all...:hmm:

[Letum]

What you describe does seem a bit unrealistic though. Nighttime, slow speed, low scope should not be seen that easily. :nope:
If at all...:hmm:


Raaaaaaaaaaadaaaaaaaar

Radar, Radar, Radar!

mid/late war allied Radar should have no problem picking up scopes in flat
waters. Even the first airborne radar tests picked up scopes.

[UnderseaLcpl]

What you describe does seem a bit unrealistic though. Nighttime, slow speed, low scope should not be seen that easily. :nope:
If at all...:hmm:


Raaaaaaaaaaadaaaaaaaar

Radar, Radar, Radar!

mid/late war allied Radar should have no problem picking up scopes in flat
waters. Even the first airborne radar tests picked up scopes.

Feb 41111111111111111

Feb 41, Feb 41 Feb, 41!

This was in the OP. Also it's not being detected that is my main peeve it is being shot square in the scope to the effect of "Observation Periscope Destroyed"

Try shooting a periscope with any direct-fire weapon from a relatively unstable naval firing platform, at night. Multiply that difficulty by 100 to achieve the impossibility of using ww2 radar to successfully attack and destroy a periscope that is extended only enough to breach the surface.

I could go on with examples of short-range blindspots and lack of crew experience and lack of radar equipment stories but I already feel bad for mocking your post.

It just seemed like a good reply. I appreciate the effort to help, however.

[Zakalwe]

Don`t know, I just finished one attack on a large convoy with 4 escorts in early `40.

It was in dusk twi-light (shortly before getting really dark), wind at ar 3 m/sec.

I dove to PD when the nearest escort was 3,500 m away. She didn`t see or hear me when the nearest range was 1,500 m. Came into firing position on a whaling-factory from 1,200 m, fired two eals and dove to 140 m. They never found me.

As for the hit to the scope, my best guess is the escorts are firing HE shells and it should be enough when small shell splinters put some holes into the scope-tube, with water pouring in, the optics should be useless. It mustn`t have be a direct hit.

Just a wild guess though

Greets

Z.

[Puster Bill]

[quote=zombiewolf]I feel like an A-hole.

Hairy and moist?

[UnderseaLcpl]

ewww...........

Still, remarkably accurate.