RSRD Comments

[ColonelSandersLite]

I've been playing TMO + rsrd

Started with an S-boat out of the Philippines at the start of the war and now have a Balao class in September of 43.

So far 643,971 tons in 13 patrols. Two of those where me raiding Truk harbor netting over 100,000 tons each.

Discounting those two harbor raids, that averages to around 38,500 tons per patrol. The 5 s-boat patrols would have been much lower just due to the comparatively weak armament, which means the other 6 should be somewhat higher than the average.



The good:
Variety of stuff seems to be increased.

At the start of the war, I was heading home to pick up more gas and encountered 2 massive invasion fleets of around 50 ships one after another heading towards Lingayen gulf. I was, of course, duly impressed and this is probably the reason I've stuck with rsrd so long.

I like the concept that the convoys are generated from historical record and will be where they really where at any given time.



The bad:
I've encountered exactly 3 convoys during the whole war. The previously mentioned 2 at the start and a small one heading towards one of the Soloman islands.

I'm not saying the convoys aren't there to be found where they're supposed to be, however, this campaign generates so many single ships just zipping around that I always run out of torpedoes *and* deck gun ammo before I can even get to the areas the convoys are at.

Because of this, I can honestly say that I've only been attacked by ASW forces a whole 1 time, and that was during a harbor raid. The only damage I've taken was when I seriously screwed the pooch in a surface engagement against, I think, a large modern composite.

Call me crazy, but I get the feeling that something is fundamentally wrong with this picture. It's not my shooting, I rarely miss so I'm not using an excessive number of torpedoes/shells on each target. Just guessing here, but the single slow merchants running around probably need to be reduced by around 90%.

In addition, perhaps I'm alone in this, but I feel very strongly that the special operations add some much needed variety in game play.


Anyways, that's my 2c just for anyone that's interested.

Edit:
Come to think of it I've also encountered 2 "convoys" of around a half dozen sampans, but I don't really count those. Still took the renown bonus for radioing them in though...

[SteamWake]

Yea hate patrols like that.

Well you wanted 'realisim' hence the mods.

You got it :03:

[ColonelSandersLite]

Well you wanted 'realisim' hence the mods.

You got it :03:

So you're saying that the Japanese generally didn't convoy and that there where so many single ship targets afloat it's easy to score 40,000 tons of merchants every time you go out with absolutely 0 risk? Doesn't sound right to me.

Where in the world would the 20% casualty rate amongst submariners come from then I wonder?

[Zero Niner]

Can't really compare real life records with the tonnage one can get in the game. In the game on ealways gets the credit for a sinking, down to the correct class of ship whereas IRL it was a much more difficult process to claim credit. Combat flight simulations exhibit a similar characteristic.

About Japanese merchant convoys - afaik the Japs never realy favoured convoys until merchant sipping losses forced them to do so late in the war. Convoy duty & ASW duty I think was looked upon as an inferior assignment.

I suppose th eIJN perhaps had different concepts on how to prosecute ASW. Certainly they did not really adopt the tactics the Allies used such as hunter killer groups and to a certain extent escorted convoys.

From what I've read it's historically accurate to encounter lone ships in the early to mid-war years and merchant convoys, lightly escorted by Allied standards, later in the war.

[Torplexed]

Where in the world would the 20% casualty rate amongst submariners come from then I wonder?

Sadly, a lot of it was self-inflicted. 11 of the 52 US subs lost weren't due to the enemy. Three older US submarines sank in accidents in US controlled waters. USS Dorado and Sea Wolf were sunk by friendly forces. USS Tang and Tullibee by circular runs of their own torpedoes. Four (S-27, S-36, S-39, and Darter ended up stranded on reefs.

Plus, the Japanese observed how poorly US torpedoes performed early in the war and were lulled by it into a false sense of security. By the time the tide turned they were way behind the ball in the convoying and escort game although they tried desperately to catch up.

[MK2]

Sadly, a lot of it was self-inflicted. 11 of the 52 US subs lost weren't due to the enemy. Three older US submarines sank in accidents in US controlled waters. USS Dorado and Sea Wolf were sunk by friendly forces. USS Tang and Tullibee by circular runs of their own torpedoes. Four (S-27, S-36, S-39, and Darter ended up stranded on reefs.

Plus, the Japanese observed how poorly US torpedoes performed early in the war and were lulled by it into a false sense of security. By the time the tide turned they were way behind the ball in the convoying and escort game although they tried desperately to catch up.


Let's not forget the ones that were lost to probable enemy mines. Mines accounted for subs as well.

[Torplexed]

Let's not forget the ones that were lost to probable enemy mines. Mines accounted for subs as well.

Very true. Those probably accounted for many US subs that were never heard from again that aren't mentioned in Japanese records. Regrettably, the stock game makes penetrating Japanese harbours and ports (especially the Home Islands ones) too easy, with no net defences or mines in place. US subs didn't really start penetrating the Inland Sea until 1945 with FM gear for mine detection.

[ColonelSandersLite]

Can't really compare real life records with the tonnage one can get in the game. In the game on ealways gets the credit for a sinking, down to the correct class of ship whereas IRL it was a much more difficult process to claim credit. Combat flight simulations exhibit a similar characteristic.

The problem with that logic is that it's *exactly* backwards. In games you get credit for exactly what you sink/shoot down (unless if fails to credit you, which happens on occasion), as you stated. However, in real life under claiming is not an issue, over claiming is. Check out this link: http://www.valoratsea.com/skippers.htm . Note that to a man, every person on that list over claimed. There where some notable patrols that where exceptions, but not careers to my knowledge. Same story in aviation as well. I don't know of any air force that has ever under claimed ever. I do know that in some air forces in certain conflicts over claiming was way out of proportion to reality though (especially over enemy lines). Understand that I'm not blaming any of these men, as there's just no blame to place really. The fog of war makes getting good battlefield intelligence difficult and "I'm positive I nailed him" or "no way he could survive that" is much more prevalent than "nah, I didn't hit ****" or "wow that's one tough SOB" is all I'm saying.

The thought that in the earlier part of the war, the Japanese did not favor convoy tactics is potentially a good point which I should probably do some research into. However, my assertion that there's too many single ships still stands on some rather simple logic. That logic being that it wasn't such an easy matter to score 40,000 tons per trip out (I play full switch in TMO BTW, so that includes a roughly 60% torpedo malfunction rate). If it had been like that your average sub commanders score would be something like 150,000 tons. Of course JANAC doesn't credit *anyone* with a score like that. In fact, if I'm not mistaken, submarines would sometimes return to base without even sighting a single enemy ship. This is something I just can't imagine when playing RSRD as the ocean is crawling with individual ships clipping around at 8-12 knots.


You guys just sent me on a pretty good research binge with some of your comments on losses though.


11 of the 52 US subs lost weren't due to the enemy.
That still leaves 41 that where, which is quite a few men kia. Here's what I came up with, notes after.

Total listed 41

Lost to enemy aircraft 6 (15%)
Sealion 12/10/41
Grenadier 4/22/43
Wahoo 10/11/43
Barbel 2/4/45
Lagarto 5/3/45
Bullhead 8/6/45

Lost to enemy surface vessels 18 (44%)
Shark 2/11/42
Perch 3/3/42
Argonaut 1/10/43
Amberjack 2/16/43
Grampus 3/5/43
Triton 3/15/43
Pickerel 4/3/43
S-44 10/7/43
Sculpin 11/19/43
Capelin 12/9/43
Trout 2/29/44
Herring 6/1/44
Golet 6/14/44
Harder 8/24/44
Shark II 10/24/44
Scamp 11/11/44
Bonefish 1/18/45
Trigger 3/28/45

Lost to enemy surface vessels or aircraft 3
Cisco 9/28/43 (combined air and surface vessel attack)
Grayback 2/26/44 (combined air and surface vessel attack)
Gudgeon 5/11/44 (controversial)

Submarines Lost to mines 7 (17%)
Runner 5/43
Pompano 9/27/43
Scorpion 2/24/44
Robalo 7/26/44
Flier 8/13/44
Escolar 10/17/44
Albacore 11/7/44

Lost to mines or surface vessel
Swordfish 1/12/45

Lost to an enemy submarine
Corvina 11/16/43

Unknown causes 5
Grunion 7/8/42
Grayling 9/12/43
Growler 11/8/44 (probable enemy destroyer)
Kete 3/20/45
Snook 4/8/45 (probable enemy destroyer, possible enemy submarine)


These numbers came from a post war report, I think from 49. The ones that where split into a couple of categories (debated at the time of the report) and the unknowns I ended up looking into to see if more recent information could place their causes more definitively.

Ok, admittedly, there where only 2 losses to enemy surface vessels in 42. I'm guessing that this is because of the early war tendency of the Japanese ASW to set their depth charges way too shallow. The two subs they got, without looking into it further where probably in shallower water. Notice that this does not mean the Japanese didn't *try* anyways. In 43 the picture changes quite dramatically and notice that I did give RSRD a solid enough chance that I was into late 43 without having even seen an escort, much less getting depth charged by one.


Let's not forget the ones that were lost to probable enemy mines. Mines accounted for subs as well.
Personally, I count mines as enemy action. Sure, it's not as if someone fired a projectile at a target, but the enemy did put that mine there.

Those probably accounted for many US subs that were never heard from again that aren't mentioned in Japanese records.
Which is 3 submarines. If you notice the pattern in those dates, it's probable that maybe one was lost to mines, the others are unlikely. I'd be more willing to be that they where lost to attacks with no record, the records where lost/destroyed, or where operational losses.

Dorado is debatable as a friendly fire incident though. More modern stuff seems to place it as an operational loss. Hard to say though, wasn't ever found.

One final thought though. I noticed doing this research that 3 of the 4 submarines which ran aground where s-boats in 42. That's either one hell of a coincidence or there's some kind of reason for that. Anyone know?

[Torplexed]

One final thought though. I noticed doing this research that 3 of the 4 submarines which ran aground where s-boats in 42. That's either one hell of a coincidence or there's some kind of reason for that. Anyone know?

These strandings were mostly due to the nature of the hopelessly outdated charts US submarines started the war with. Not a few where labeled in the corner "from a survey by Capt. James Cook." (Cook did most of his surveys in the 1770s) The ancient S-Boats in question also didn't have decent fathometers and weren't equipped with radar yet. Of course, in the game our map and position are always GPS perfect and the only time we strand is when we are not paying attention to the little dots that mean islands.;)

Even when the Japanese fully instituted convoys in November 1943 they suffered from some woeful problems. Escort numbers were insufficient, radar radio and weaponry were all inadequate for the escorts available--not enough DC throwers, smaller payload depth charges. Coordination between escorts and the few land-based ASW aircraft was also extremely lacking.

One shocking aspect of the Japanese shipping system was the division among the Navy, Army and civilian services with the result that it was not unknown for civil merchantmen and service ships to sail outward together, the former empty and the latter full, and return with roles reversed. A fatal policy for a nation already short of merchant hulls.

[AVGWarhawk]

So you're saying that the Japanese generally didn't convoy and that there where so many single ship targets afloat it's easy to score 40,000 tons of merchants every time you go out with absolutely 0 risk? Doesn't sound right to me.

Where in the world would the 20% casualty rate amongst submariners come from then I wonder?


In short, yes, convoys were not the same type seen in the ATO. 2-5 ships. Some escorted. Some not. Later in the war the ships would hug the coast hoping the shallows would protect them. In some cases it did. Others not. The very large convoys did happen but certainly not like the ATO convoys. As for what Niki stated above. Bum torpedos, Japanese DC that went off to shallow as our submarines were much deeper until someone blabbed about it. As our torpedoes got better the sub dominated the Pacific. I thing RSRD is close as we will get to the real deal.

[Sevrin]

/agree with most of what's been said. After recently reading 'clear the bridge' it's apparent that life in the Pacific for the Americans was quite a different ballgame than what the U-boats experienced all around.

Early on O'kane even mentions something reflecting the 'inevitable conclusion of the war'.

That said, I do sympathize about the easy pickings, despite running these mods. There are several places one can go and sit...and just wait for the ships to roll into the choke points almost 'assembly line' syle. There have been times I simply passed up ships or saved and exited because it was 'tedious' having to get in position and start the tracking over again immediately after sinking several others...

It's that 'grass is greener' thing though, if the modders were to reduce the traffic to virtually nothing, folks would complain bitterly about 'nothing to shoot at' and 'not being realistic'... dunno what the answer is...

:-?

[AVGWarhawk]

The only answer is creating something with balance. I think RSRD does that. I have had days of patrolling and finding nothing. Then other patrols were all hell breaks loose. RSRD is certainly better than stock.

[Sevrin]

RSRD is certainly better than stock.


/agree 100% with that. I would not be playing this game without rsrd and tmo or rfb. It's no stretch to say that mods MAKE this game.

I was extremely disappointed at the released version, I guess that's why I'm not so charged up about SHV.









<------ btw I hate this current avatar... :O:

[ETR3(SS)]

Whats wrong with Popeye?:O:

[Sevrin]

Whats wrong with Popeye?:O:

"Robin Williams" :haha:

[AVGWarhawk]

http://oldschoolreviews.com/images/movies/popeye.jpg

Popeye the Sailor was a great cartoon. I grew up watching Popeye. :03:

[Sevrin]

I knew I'd catch hell for that, I just wasn't a fan... :)

[ColonelSandersLite]

In short, yes, convoys were not the same type seen in the ATO. 2-5 ships. Some escorted. Some not. Later in the war the ships would hug the coast hoping the shallows would protect them.

You know, that's exactly what I'd like to see then. If your average patrol had few contacts, well that's perfectly fine by me. I want a sim, not continual target practice.

That said, I do sympathize about the easy pickings, despite running these mods. There are several places one can go and sit...and just wait for the ships to roll into the choke points almost 'assembly line' syle. There have been times I simply passed up ships or saved and exited because it was 'tedious' having to get in position and start the tracking over again immediately after sinking several others...

That's exactly my feeling, except I don't find I even need to go sit somewhere. Perhaps people tend to play sailing out of pearl, and I have to admit that I haven't tried that, but just trying to get to your patrol zone in the Asiatic fleet is a little ridiculous as there's always crap moving around between the islands. Half the time I run out of torpedoes before I even get to my assigned patrol area...

The merchant just keep rolling into your sights individually without so so much as an auxillery sub chaser in a 100 mile radius. With no risk, it's seriously just target practice.



Somone mentioned balance, I quite frankly have to say that RSRD's balance is horrible compared to the stock campaign. I'm a big proponent of the mods in general, but you know what? In the stock campaign I do encounter individual ships, but it's not 99% of the time like in RSRD. In stock, I've encountered *many* small convoys with just a few ships, the occaisional rare large convoy, and hunter killer groups. While the stock campaign throws way too many contacts at you, they are at least a better mix, and if you ask me, probably more in line with what a commander could encounter during a career percentage wise. Just guessing, but the game spams the contacts mainly to keep the action going, as yes, a lot of players would complain if there where no contacts. RSRD seems to reduce the frequency of the major convoys to historical levels which in my book is great. The trouble is that small 2 or 3 ship merchant groups where cut completely, the hunter-killer are gone as well, and the individual ship contacts where not reduced in proportion.

Anyways, what I'm getting at with all of this:

In 2 years of war, I have exceeded by a factor of 6.75 Fluckey's JANAC score of 95,360 without getting attacked by an enemy escort even once. In fact, aside from that invasion force and 2 harbor raids, I have not even seen a single enemy warship. Something is very fundamentally wrong with that picture. Since I wrote the above, I've uninstalled RSRD and started my first patrol with TMO's base campaign (slightly modified stock I believe). I've already been attacked by an enemy hunter killer group just days out of port (the Philippines). It was ineffective, but at least the enemy tried, adding that element of risk, and that was certainly more *interesting* than just shooting merchants "assembly line style" as Sevrin puts it.

[Radio]

The very first mod I installed was RSRD, simply because my very first warship contact ever in the game was a Japanese task force of 7 (!!!) BB, 6 DD and ~5 CA accompanied by 2 or 3 merchants which managed to cruise around at 6 knots only, driving in wild circles like being drunk, without the slightest coordination and accidentally ramming one of their DD and sinking it.

That's when I thought: "Ugh, this is so pathetically wrong, this needs a mod to improve it."

Installed RSRD and was happy :salute:

But yes, convoys should be more frequent, it's late '42 in my game and I haven't seen a single one.

[ColonelSandersLite]

Collisions between enemy vessels are fairly rare, and rsrd has nothing to do with that, it's just the AI.

Those circles where almost surely evasive action because you got spotted. If you ever manage to find a convoy in rsrd, I can guarantee that they will do the same thing, as it's just the way the AI works.

The convoy composition, while slightly odd, isn't impossible. Suppose that they where going to bombard the hell out of something and those merchants where hauling extra fuel and ammo. I can really think of maybe a dozen reasons why a few merchant ships might tag along with a task force.

[Ducimus]

Since this is relatively off topic, All i can say is,

- Jap interrogation reports ive read online indicate japan ran convoys as large as 11 to 25 ships. How often these occured is debatable without detailed movement records. I prefer to generalize and say it did happen, but wasn't as common as 2 to 6 ship convoys.

- TMO has entirely too many convoys running late war. (this is being fixed)

- JANAC sucks. Between the "United States Strategic Bombing Survey" and Joint Army Navy Assessment Committee, I get the impression there was some serious inter-service rivalry as to who has the bigger peen. If you read the bombing survey, you swear the interrogation officers were flyboys looking to puff out their chests, and any answer with "submarine" wasn't the answer they were looking for.

[Sevrin]

In O'kane's 'Clear the Bridge' he describes instances of 2-3 ship convoys, search planes and at least some escorts. And although they did encounter the odd single ship, it was usually hugging the coast, zig-zagging, etc...

I agree the easy lone merchants need to be cut down, and more asw units added, even if relatively ineffective (as in reality). :ping:



After I had learned manual targeting, imposed restrictions upon myself (not using the noob cannon, shooting planes, etc.) I figured the ridiculous amounts of tonnage would go down, and it did, but NOT by a substantial amount. Under any circumstances, it is STILL too easy to take home the goods after each patrol if you are the least bit cautious.

As it is, just lay off a bit N of Cam Ranh bay and/or the Celebes choke point and watch the traffic roll in, blast with impunity and repeat... Maybe the solution is mods that further reduce any and all traffic, or as RR puts it, 'put the paper bag over our heads'... :hmmm:

If it was me, I would seriously up the patrol craft and DE's :rock:

[ColonelSandersLite]

I prefer to generalize and say it did happen, but wasn't as common as 2 to 6 ship convoys.

Which is entirely the problem. I don't want more big convoys than is realistic, but I've not seen any 2-6 ship convoys at all. RSRD just spams single ships clipping along at 10 knots, not even bothering to hug the coastlines or zigzag. I would personally *love* to have a large portion of my engagements be something like 2-8 merchants escorted by 0-4 escorts. That would be enough to make a certain amount of variety in your engagements.


JANAC sucks. Between the "United States Strategic Bombing Survey" and Joint Army Navy Assessment Committee, I get the impression there was some serious inter-service rivalry as to who has the bigger peen. If you read the bombing survey, you swear the interrogation officers were flyboys looking to puff out their chests, and any answer with "submarine" wasn't the answer they were looking for.

Not really interested in debating the merits of that specific report, but every post war report I have ever seen, which should be taken seriously, regardless of the unit type over claimed their effectiveness and misidentified enemy units. I don't care if it's tanks, bomber gunners, submarines, fighter pilots, or grunts. The story is the same across the board regardless of branch of service or country. Granted some armed forces where worse than others, but still.

Again, I don't blame the people who made the claims, but rather that's just the nature of war. As an individual your situational awareness only extends so far, and is further hindered by the chaos of battle, and people are more inclined to believe that they had good effect on their desired target than not.

[Sevrin]

Whether mowing down lone merchants in the pacific was correct or not, it certainly does not make compelling gameplay...

[Ducimus]

Well, i feel i am a bit out of place making any commentary on RSRD since i haven't looked at it at all, I'm too busy with my own work, and don't really have time to see what others are up to, and im certainly not going to comment on my own work in a thread that is supposed to be about RSRD.

That said, my understanding of RSRD, is the convoys are based on the Tabular Record of Movements. (TROM for short). Last i heard, every convoy in RSRD is unique. They don't respawn. Your either at the right place at the right time, or your not. How RSRD handles single merchant's i don't know. My guess is there might be a low respawn rate on those since your cheif complaint is too many single merchants. At any rate, if my understanding of the mod is correct, then RSRD's approach to traffic is unique, both literally and figuratively. It's sort of a sim within a sim.

[Torplexed]

The convoy composition, while slightly odd, isn't impossible. Suppose that they where going to bombard the hell out of something and those merchants where hauling extra fuel and ammo. I can really think of maybe a dozen reasons why a few merchant ships might tag along with a task force.

Replenishment at sea during World War II was limited, for the most part, to refueling operations and whatever small amounts of cargo could be transferred by high line. Loading high caliber shells was a delicate operation usually done in the placid waters of a port. Plus, no commander wanted his high speed bombardment or carrier force forced to run at 12 knots so a few merchants or tankers could tag along. That's why replenishment oiler TFs usually operated at a distance in the backfield of an operation with their own dedicated escort. (The oiler Neosho and destroyer Sims at the Battle of the Coral Sea being one small example.)

As the war progressed the high expenditure of aircraft ordnance by fast US carrier tasks forces became a problem during the last year of the war when air groups aboard the fast carriers began to expend more bombs than could be carried aboard ship for the sustained ground attacks now being conducted. By 1945 methods of transferring cargo between AEs (cargo ships converted to carry ammunition) and the flattops under way, which made use of the standard winches, booms, and cargo nets normally carried by the AEs were developed. The devastated Japanese navy never progressed to this point though.

[Bubblehead1980]

I like RSRD but agree, way too many lone merchants.In the begin of the war before US subs were seen as a real threat, lone merchants or unescorted pairs were common.As war went on this became less and less common, esp if a mid or large sized ship.

My solution to this in TMO was to open up the merchant layers with the mission editor and add escorts to some, esp the tankers.So got no more 10,000 ton tankers traveling from Java to Tokyo alone.Left some single but added escort to others, that way, less chance of running into singles.Fun to encounter small convoys of 1 merchant and 1 escort, this was pretty common.Sometimes if its abig important ship, 1 ship to escorts.Or two merchants one escort plus a plane assigned to the group.Really adds to the game.

In RSRD I tried this but turns out you can't change anything because it upsets everything else for some reason.I made some changes, it reset the convoys respawn from 0 to 24, never could get it back to 0.Not sure why but can't modify it, i was :damn: about this to say the least.

[Ducimus]

In RSRD I tried this but turns out you can't change anything because it upsets everything else for some reason.I made some changes, it reset the convoys respawn from 0 to 24, never could get it back to 0.Not sure why but can't modify it, i was :damn: about this to say the least.

I'm guessing that Lurker doesn't always use the mission editor. Some changes you have to do by hand or via an automated script OUTSIDE the mission editor. The Mission editor enforces a ruleset, which isn't always desireable. Believe it or not, Wordpad is a real handy tool in the campaign scripters toolbox. I've acutaly set my windows file association so that MIS files are associated with wordpad. Just be careful to save the file in the same format as when you opened it. (ASCII text as i recall) I'd use notepad but it won't load large ascii text files. So wordpad works nicely. Great for global changes rather then having to edit every single random group in the editor. (be careful when doing this as well). As an aside, DO NOT use Word.

[ColonelSandersLite]

Replenishment at sea during World War II was limited, for the most part, to refueling operations and whatever small amounts of cargo could be transferred by high line. Loading high caliber shells was a delicate operation usually done in the placid waters of a port. Plus, no commander wanted his high speed bombardment or carrier force forced to run at 12 knots so a few merchants or tankers could tag along.


Good points. Something to think about on the speed issue though is that it depends on the merchant as well. I think the large modern tanker has a speed of 22 knots for example. Still, well done all around.

That said, my understanding of RSRD, is the convoys are based on the Tabular Record of Movements. (TROM for short). Last i heard, every convoy in RSRD is unique. They don't respawn. Your either at the right place at the right time, or your not.

Which is cool. Any rational person who's more interested in a sim than an arcade game should be able to appreciate that.

How RSRD handles single merchant's i don't know. My guess is there might be a low respawn rate on those since your cheif complaint is too many single merchants. At any rate, if my understanding of the mod is correct, then RSRD's approach to traffic is unique, both literally and figuratively. It's sort of a sim within a sim.

The respawn rate certainly isn't low. One mission I got had me off the coast of japan for a week. Several Large modern composites and Large modern tankers just went right past me heading SW one after another.

I'm guessing that Lurker doesn't always use the mission editor.

Yeah, in the readme he mentions something about that.

OT:
BTW, your evil escorts nailed me just a few minutes ago. Heading to base (java) in my S-boat after my first patrol, some destroyers caught me at close range at night in the java sea. Got as close to the bottom as I dared and tried to get away. After evading them for around 15 mins or so, I screwed up and turned the wrong way, which resulted in destroyed stern batteries and a flooded engine compartment. I was sinking so I had to choose between either bottoming to make repairs or trying a surface withdrawal. I figured bottoming gave me the better chance of survival as the visibility topside was as good as it gets at night, but they got me after around 15 minutes or so. Pretty intense. Believe it or not, that's the first time I've been KIA by depth charging. Most likely would have outlasted them if it wasn't for that long stint in RSRD where there just where no escorts to avoid. Ah well, time to start a new career again...

[Radio]

Collisions between enemy vessels are fairly rare, and rsrd has nothing to do with that, it's just the AI.

Those circles where almost surely evasive action because you got spotted. If you ever manage to find a convoy in rsrd, I can guarantee that they will do the same thing, as it's just the way the AI works.

The convoy composition, while slightly odd, isn't impossible. Suppose that they where going to bombard the hell out of something and those merchants where hauling extra fuel and ammo. I can really think of maybe a dozen reasons why a few merchant ships might tag along with a task force.

I agree, the merchants make complete sense, especially if those were tankers.

However I hadn't been spotted, but used the Free Camera for looking around. The composition of the fleet was rather unrealistic imho, simply too many BB units on one spot, it felt as if the whole japanese fleet was there.

The distances between the ships were much too narrow, too. But the main thing that troubled me was the fact that it looked like some programmer tried to show off all his fancy units in one big parade :rotfl2:

FWIW: The second mod I installed was the realistic maneuvering ships mod, because I torpedoed a stationary CA in a harbor and saw how it jumpstarted to 30knots right after been hit by the first torpedo, which meant that the other torpedoes all missed...

[ETR3(SS)]

I'm playing RFB+RSRD at 83% and have received the MoH 3 times. I attribute this to 60 years of historical information laid at our feet. If we knew only what the CO knew and operated with historical procedures in mind, I'd be lucky to come home to get a COM (Commendation Medal)!

Case in point. Knowing that the Mk 14 magnetic detonator was useless, I set all my shots up to be contact only, closed to within 1000 yds, and used slow speed. After a patrol or two I decided to have a go at the way they did it by the book back then. The immediate result, a substantial drop in tonnage sunk. And when I came home from that patrol I received no medals.

So if you can operate like they did, you wouldn't have over 600k tons to your name and would probably end up as a nobody in "history."

[Rockin Robbins]

Because of this, I can honestly say that I've only been attacked by ASW forces a whole 1 time, and that was during a harbor raid. The only damage I've taken was when I seriously screwed the pooch in a surface engagement against, I think, a large modern composite.

Don't worry. Later in the war the increased convoys (HEAVILY guarded convoys) will have you eating your words and remembering this "defect" fondly!:haha:

Have patience grasshopper, a large habenero pepper :oops: is best eaten in small portions at several separate meals!:up:

[ColonelSandersLite]

So if you can operate like they did, you wouldn't have over 600k tons to your name and would probably end up as a nobody in "history."


Ooh, hotshot plays at 83%...

I play *full switch* man. I weathered the mk 14 nightmare fully, and yes, I have 600k tons with a mark 14 malfunction rate of somewhere between 60 and 80 percent. Still can't make it to the designated patrol zone 90% of the time now that they torpedoes have matured and actually work most of the time.

BTW, slow speed doesn't effect torpedo duds in tmo (it may or may not in FRB dunno), I did cheat a little and look at the file. TBH, I wasn't using slow settings anyways.

a large habenero pepper :oops: is best eaten in small portions at several separate meals!:up:

Personally, I like turning those into a salsa. Grind them up, add onion, and a very tiny amount of tomato for color and flavor, and whatever else you want and it's delicious. Texans tend to not skimp on their peppers though ;).

Anyways, I'm done with RSRD. I gave it till late 43 to make it interesting for me, but it didn't deliver.

[AVGWarhawk]

Ooh, hotshot plays at 83%...

I play *full switch* man. I weathered the mk 14 nightmare fully, and yes, I have 600k tons with a mark 14 malfunction rate of somewhere between 60 and 80 percent. Still can't make it to the designated patrol zone 90% of the time now that they torpedoes have matured and actually work most of the time.

BTW, slow speed doesn't effect torpedo duds in tmo (it may or may not in FRB dunno), I did cheat a little and look at the file. TBH, I wasn't using slow settings anyways.

What the water is doing affect duds rate in TMO. I play 100% and do not bag that much. Maybe 3-4 ships per patrol. Sometimes none at all. I go for days without seeing ships specifically when using RSRD. I think RSRD is very good. Do you use the deck gun a lot? I never use it or use it very little. The reason is the deck gun was not the primary weapon and the subs did not bob around acting like battleships. But as ETR says, I play magnetic only until I hit the date it was offically switched to contact. That plays a part as well.

[ColonelSandersLite]

Yeah, waveheight effects premature chance. Calm sea is 40% and rough sea is 75% IIRC.

RE the lack of contacts, you out of pear or the asiatic fleet? I find that just sailing up the java see is good for at least 4 single merchants.

Sure I use the deck gun. I do use it intelligently though. If I see that a ship is a threat to me on the surface, well then, I don't surface. I *don't* put my boat at an unnecessary level of risk ever. I think it's the large modern composite that has 2 large caliber deck guns and several 20-30mm cannons, so I don't go near those. However, I do not hesitate to attack a ship with light armament with my deck gun. I just stay out of the range of their 20/30mm cannons and machine guns (which is a rather optimistic 3,000 yards or so) and rip them up.

In other words I almost never take fire from a surface engagement. The one time I got chewed up in that career was a bad surface engagement though. I kinda zoned and forgot that he had deck guns when I made that decision...

[Sevrin]

I don't know whether it makes a difference, but I never play out of Pearl, I don't like that extended slog into the patrol area. So, Asiatic fleet for me...

It does seem that after the second or third patrol, when you get up past Darwin and into the enemy waters, there are an over-abundance of targets running about. That choke point at the top of Celebs is like a revolving door for Jap merchants, as is the area around Cam Ranh Bay and Saigon.

http://i740.photobucket.com/albums/xx43/sevrin2009/area.jpg?t=1257544603

So, maybe it's those starting closer to enemy held areas that are experiencing such a target-rich environment.

I don't use the noob cannons either and still manage to rack up a lot of tonnage... :arrgh!:

[ColonelSandersLite]

That choke point at the top of Celebs is like a revolving door for Jap merchants, as is the area around Cam Ranh Bay and Saigon.

God yes. There's more choke points around that are the same too. Just because of the way the terrain is down in that area, you're going to have to pass through at least one of them to get to the patrol zone. Good luck with still having ammo by the time you're through there...

The terrain is actually what I like about playing the asiatic fleet tbh. It's much more varied than just the big open ocean you deal with coming out of pearl. There's islands all over the place you have to worry about, shallow areas (the java sea for example), lots of enemy airbases, and choke points you have to clear to go anywhere. Depending on where you are, there can be some pretty significant tactical ramifications of the terrain. Something I would really like to see is a couple of destroyers stationed at some of those narrow passages to attempt to stop me from getting through. Would be great fun.

[Sevrin]

God yes. There's more choke points around that are the same too. Just because of the way the terrain is down in that area, you're going to have to pass through at least one of them to get to the patrol zone. Good luck with still having ammo by the time you're through there...

The terrain is actually what I like about playing the asiatic fleet tbh. It's much more varied than just the big open ocean you deal with coming out of pearl. There's islands all over the place you have to worry about, shallow areas (the java sea for example), lots of enemy airbases, and choke points you have to clear to go anywhere. Depending on where you are, there can be some pretty significant tactical ramifications of the terrain. Something I would really like to see is a couple of destroyers stationed at some of those narrow passages to attempt to stop me from getting through. Would be great fun.


Same here, I don't like that vast expanse from Pearl to Luzon, there's just too much goodness around Java and Celebs, you're right. I seem to catch minelayers and assorted cruisers lurking around southern Celebs area sometimes too...

That one choke point is crazy though, that's my 'go to' area if I'm having a slow patrol. I was watching a merchant through the scope once, when WAY off on the horizon I saw another one taking the same track...

I think six is the most I've got in that area in a short amount of time... :doh:

And yea, it's not uncommon to be almost or half out out of torpedoes before even reaching the patrol area.

[AVGWarhawk]

Yeah, waveheight effects premature chance. Calm sea is 40% and rough sea is 75% IIRC.

RE the lack of contacts, you out of pear or the asiatic fleet? I find that just sailing up the java see is good for at least 4 single merchants.

Sure I use the deck gun. I do use it intelligently though. If I see that a ship is a threat to me on the surface, well then, I don't surface. I *don't* put my boat at an unnecessary level of risk ever. I think it's the large modern composite that has 2 large caliber deck guns and several 20-30mm cannons, so I don't go near those. However, I do not hesitate to attack a ship with light armament with my deck gun. I just stay out of the range of their 20/30mm cannons and machine guns (which is a rather optimistic 3,000 yards or so) and rip them up.

In other words I almost never take fire from a surface engagement. The one time I got chewed up in that career was a bad surface engagement though. I kinda zoned and forgot that he had deck guns when I made that decision...


Find how many vessels were sunk by deck gun by these submarines. Remove Sampans from that list or other small fishing boats. Over all, the cannon was a defense weapon and not an offensive weapon. Later on it became offensive. I think this were you are getting tonnage were tonnage is not due. :03: In my pixel world opinion. :D

[AVGWarhawk]

Same here, I don't like that vast expanse from Pearl to Luzon, there's just too much goodness around Java and Celebs, you're right. I seem to catch minelayers and assorted cruisers lurking around southern Celebs area...

That one choke point is crazy though, that's my 'go to' area if I'm having a slow patrol. I was looking at a merchant crossing the scope about to shoot once, when WAY off on the horizon I saw another one taking the same track...

I think six is the most I've got in that area in a short amount of time... :doh:

Problem is...if there were traffic very close to the real thing you would tire of it quickly. There is an attempt to make the traffic realistic but also to a point were you do not spend weeks seeing nothing. You would have to agree that would really suck after a while. Just for craps and giggles...remember the traffic jam in stock. Compare it to what you have now? Less traffic but enough to keep it fun.

[Sevrin]

Problem is...if there were traffic very close to the real thing you would tire of it quickly. There is an attempt to make the traffic realistic but also to a point were you do not spend weeks seeing nothing. You would have to agree that would really suck after a while. Just for craps and giggles...remember the traffic jam in stock. Compare it to what you have now? Less traffic but enough to keep it fun.

Exactly, it's a tough act to balance. Not enough traffic and folks say 'nothing to shoot', too much and it's 'too easy'. :yep:

[AVGWarhawk]

To be honest Sevrin, I did use RSRD and did not find traffic. I then just used TMO that had some reworked traffic. I find more ships. Being my time is limited and I do get to sit and play, finding a vessel to sink in that short hour is at a premium. If I had a lot of time to play I would use RSRD all the time. RSRD is a top mod in my book and I enjoyed watching Lurker build it and I enjoyed using it more. :yeah:

[Sevrin]

Looks like in the newest version of the TMO beta he's done some re-working with the traffic layer, think I'll give that a shot and see what's up. :up:

[ColonelSandersLite]

I think this were you are getting tonnage were tonnage is not due. :03: In my pixel world opinion. :D

Since I'm only engaging lightly armed (ie small) ships with the deck gun, or using it to finish crippled ships off (which is correct), take say 20% of my tonnage off the top if you feel badly about it. I personally don't. Most of my kills are with the torpedoes anyways. Still leaves my score far higher than was ever possible, again, without ever seeing an enemy warship outside of a harbor.

Anyways, the deckgun was always meant to be an offensive weapon, even clear back to WWI. True, it fell out of favor with the US fleet for a time, but that does not mean it's there as an ornament. Submarines where just too damn small for that, not to mention the drag penalty underwater.

Problem is...if there were traffic very close to the real thing you would tire of it quickly. There is an attempt to make the traffic realistic but also to a point were you do not spend weeks seeing nothing. You would have to agree that would really suck after a while.

I don't agree at all. To me, this is a sim and I would rather have realistic traffic. Time compression takes care of not having very many contacts anyways. The trouble with what you're saying is that it basically amounts to this:

The historically accurate large convoys in rsrd are great, but I want something to shoot at. This results in having the convoys where and when they're supposed to be but sea is swarming with solo ships. In other words, the ratio of contact types is totally screwed. Sorry, but the individual merchant spam is not fun, it's tedious target practice.

Just for craps and giggles...remember the traffic jam in stock. Compare it to what you have now? Less traffic but enough to keep it fun.

I don't think there's really less traffic at all. Just less multiship contacts.

I find more ships. Being my time is limited and I do get to sit and play, finding a vessel to sink in that short hour is at a premium.

And I'm sure that's *exactly* why the stock campaign throws so many contacts down your throat. I'm willing to bet that *proportionally* the stock contacts are just simply more realistic. What I mean by that is in stock you might encounter something like this (these numbers are just rough estimates based solely on my experiences):

5% Task force
20% Larger convoy
40% small convoy
10% hunter killer
25% single ship

(not counting sampans and aircraft and such)

In rsrd, the proportions ballance out to something like this:
1% Task forces
1% Larger convoy
1% small convoy
97% single ship

Those RSRD numbers might come out different if I could even make it to the patrol zone with ammo left consistantly, but not happening in the asiatic fleet anways.

[ETR3(SS)]

Ooh, hotshot plays at 83%...

I play *full switch* man. I weathered the mk 14 nightmare fully, and yes, I have 600k tons with a mark 14 malfunction rate of somewhere between 60 and 80 percent. Still can't make it to the designated patrol zone 90% of the time now that they torpedoes have matured and actually work most of the time.I play SH4 at 83%, I played real life at 100%.:lurk:

I'd say try a patrol out of PH and don't attack anything until you get to your patrol zone. That's the way I play it. I won't attack any ships I see on the way to my patrol zone unless it's a huge value target, like a CV Task Force. Keeps them guessing as to the whereabouts of my boat.:up:

[AVGWarhawk]

Since I'm only engaging lightly armed (ie small) ships with the deck gun, or using it to finish crippled ships off (which is correct), take say 20% of my tonnage off the top if you feel badly about it. I personally don't. Most of my kills are with the torpedoes anyways. Still leaves my score far higher than was ever possible, again, without ever seeing an enemy warship outside of a harbor.

Anyways, the deckgun was always meant to be an offensive weapon, even clear back to WWI. True, it fell out of favor with the US fleet for a time, but that does not mean it's there as an ornament. Submarines where just too damn small for that, not to mention the drag penalty underwater.



I don't agree at all. To me, this is a sim and I would rather have realistic traffic. Time compression takes care of not having very many contacts anyways. The trouble with what you're saying is that it basically amounts to this:

The historically accurate large convoys in rsrd are great, but I want something to shoot at. This results in having the convoys where and when they're supposed to be but sea is swarming with solo ships. In other words, the ratio of contact types is totally screwed. Sorry, but the individual merchant spam is not fun, it's tedious target practice.



I don't think there's really less traffic at all. Just less multiship contacts.



And I'm sure that's *exactly* why the stock campaign throws so many contacts down your throat. I'm willing to bet that *proportionally* the stock contacts are just simply more realistic. What I mean by that is in stock you might encounter something like this (these numbers are just rough estimates based solely on my experiences):

5% Task force
20% Larger convoy
40% small convoy
10% hunter killer
25% single ship

(not counting sampans and aircraft and such)

In rsrd, the proportions ballance out to something like this:
1% Task forces
1% Larger convoy
1% small convoy
97% single ship

Those RSRD numbers might come out different if I could even make it to the patrol zone with ammo left consistantly, but not happening in the asiatic fleet anways.


Well you answered your own question. RSRD reduces traffic over stock but perhaps increased singletons by up to 97%. Not sure how you arrived at that figure but at any rate, it keeps the game interesting but not overly crazy with traffic. As far as the cannon, sinking ships after hitting it with one torpedo is not how it was done in RL and I hope you are not playing it that way. Doctrine stated sending out 3 torpedoes to assure a hit and hopeful sinking. Use magnetic only until instructed to switch to impact. Your cannon is for defense only. Again, find a list of ships sunk by cannon fire concerning US subs. Let me know when you find it. :03:

Now, you do have the ability to change the traffic to your liking. RSRD is work done by Lurker who painstaking added all major engagements for you to witness and perhaps take part in. Until then you spend you time sinking singletons so you do not get bored to tears. Not a bad formula IMO.:yeah: Also, if you do not reach your patrol zone the game considers your command a failure. So blowing through your torps on the way to your patrol zone is a bad idea.

[ColonelSandersLite]

As far as the cannon, sinking ships after hitting it with one torpedo is not how it was done in RL and I hope you are not playing it that way.

You sure make a lot of assumptions about how I play without having ever seen me actually do so. I just hope that it's simply a matter of my score seems impossibly higher than yours and you're trying to figure out how, and not the other more obvious reason. Get my drift?

To respond to that; no, I fire spreads of 2, 3 or 4 depending on:
Submarine type (number of tubes)
Torpedo Type
Year
Target Type

In the eary war years, it's almost always 3 or 4 torpedoes unless firing stern tubes on a boat that only has 2. Once the torpedoes get reliable, I tend to fire 2 at a smaller target. Any more is just a waste if you know how to shoot straight. Also, you may be interested to note that all those S-boat kills where done without using the tdc, because it shouldn't have one.

And no, the deck gun was not there for ornamentation. Like all weaponry, (even the .30 cal machine guns stowed in the conning tower that can't actually be used in game) it's used when the tactical situation says that it's the best course of action. No more, no less. You go ahead and do whatever research you feel you must. I've already done a lot of that for this thread and I'm busy.


Well you answered your own question. RSRD reduces traffic over stock but perhaps increased singletons by up to 97%. Not sure how you arrived at that figure but at any rate, it keeps the game interesting but not overly crazy with traffic.

No, it doesn't reduce traffic at all. Just removes the convoys puts new ones in and leaves the singles alone. At least that's how it looks from where I'm sitting. Does not keep the game interesting at all, it's just target practice. You may as well just load and play this day in and day out (click me). (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/downloads.php?do=file&id=668) If you ask me, once you know how to shoot straight, that's just dull. I don't understand what you don't get about this? BTW, wasn't really a question in that.

Also, if you do not reach your patrol zone the game considers your command a failure. So blowing through your torps on the way to your patrol zone is a bad idea.

That's a gamey justification if I ever heard one. Unless command had a special reason for sticking you there (like a suspected invasion fleet moving through the area which you would be briefed on), I would think command would be overjoyed that you sank enough ships to make the trip worthwhile regardless of whether you reached the designated patrol zone or not. You do not win a war by avoiding any and all targets of opportunity. In fact, if you did that, I think you just might be looking at a mutiny or at least a severely damaged reputation. Anyways, what I do to make the game happy is go to the patrol zone and wait the required time to complete the objective, even if I have no ammo.

[ColonelSandersLite]

Since AVGWarhawk is so skeptical of my score, here's some simple math:

Note I said this earlier:
Discounting those two harbor raids, that averages to around 38,500 tons per patrol.


Most fleet boats have carry 24 torpedoes.

Fired in volleys of 4 torpedoes is 6 salvos. Some volleys would be smaller, but this is basically a worst case.

The average merchant is in the neighborhood of 5,000 tons. Some heavier some lighter, but that's a decent average.

6 salvos * 5,000 tons = 30,000 tons.

If you can shoot straight, that's a reasonably easy score to get. Notice that this number isn't much lower than the 38,500 ton average I had been getting? Hmmmmm....

If you consider that I tend to sink the small ships (in the 2-3k tons range) with the deck gun, that skews the average tonnage per merchant torpedoed upwards. If you're so all fired against using the deck gun for more than personal defence and finishing off cripples, just let the smaller ones go and I would be supprised if you couldn't achieve 35k+ per patrol without too much difficulty. Simple as that.

[AVGWarhawk]

You sure make a lot of assumptions about how I play without having ever seen me actually do so. I just hope that it's simply a matter of my score seems impossibly higher than yours and you're trying to figure out how, and not the other more obvious reason. Get my drift?



You are a hoot bud. :har: Gosh how does he do it? BTW, point out were I have assumed anything...


And no, the deck gun was not there for ornamentation. Like all weaponry, (even the .30 cal machine guns stowed in the conning tower that can't actually be used in game) it's used when the tactical situation says that it's the best course of action. No more, no less. You go ahead and do whatever research you feel you must. I've already done a lot of that for this thread and I'm busy.



No sir, I asked you to do the research. You will find none on ships sunk by cannon fire. But hey what do I know? Blasting vessels with the cannon other than a sanpan or two was not the order of the day.

No, it doesn't reduce traffic at all. Just removes the convoys puts new ones in and leaves the singles alone. At least that's how it looks from where I'm sitting. Does not keep the game interesting at all, it's just target practice. You may as well just load and play this day in and day out (click me). (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/downloads.php?do=file&id=668) If you ask me, once you know how to shoot straight, that's just dull. I don't understand what you don't get about this? BTW, wasn't really a question in that.


Well good for you for figuring it out. And you will fix this issue and have it ready when? If not, how about attempting to enjoy the work and stop brow beating a free mod? Just a nice courtesy for a person who took over a year to create it for you...for free:03:


That's a gamey justification if I ever heard one. Unless command had a special reason for sticking you there (like a suspected invasion fleet moving through the area which you would be briefed on), I would think command would be overjoyed that you sank enough ships to make the trip worthwhile regardless of whether you reached the designated patrol zone or not. You do not win a war by avoiding any and all targets of opportunity. In fact, if you did that, I think you just might be looking at a mutiny or at least a severely damaged reputation. Anyways, what I do to make the game happy is go to the patrol zone and wait the required time to complete the objective, even if I have no ammo.

Wrong again, the game does not care how many ships you sink. It cares only for completing the mission. When you get a chance, ask the developers. They visit here daily. But you knew this already correct? What you think and what is reality in the game are two different things. In fact, start searching the forums for getting retired after sinking billions of tons. The commonality was not completing the ordered patrols. Let me guess, you have no time to do that as you are attending this thread. This was know over two years ago.

[AVGWarhawk]

Since AVGWarhawk is so skeptical of my score, here's some simple math:

Note I said this earlier:



Most fleet boats have carry 24 torpedoes.

Fired in volleys of 4 torpedoes is 6 salvos. Some volleys would be smaller, but this is basically a worst case.

The average merchant is in the neighborhood of 5,000 tons. Some heavier some lighter, but that's a decent average.

6 salvos * 5,000 tons = 30,000 tons.

If you can shoot straight, that's a reasonably easy score to get. Notice that this number isn't much lower than the 38,500 ton average I had been getting? Hmmmmm....

If you consider that I tend to sink the small ships (in the 2-3k tons range) with the deck gun, that skews the average tonnage per merchant torpedoed upwards. If you're so all fired against using the deck gun for more than personal defence and finishing off cripples, just let the smaller ones go and I would be supprised if you couldn't achieve 35k+ per patrol without too much difficulty. Simple as that.

I never said I was skeptical of your score. You said that. Please, do not put words on others mouths. I do not care about your score. I was offering up suggestions to why your score is large. You are the one complaining about traffic. There is an old saying, "The first to complain about today's meal is tomorrows cook." So, your new traffic mod will be ready when? :hmmm:

[AVGWarhawk]

Tell you what guy, click the link to the development forum for these free wonderful mods at your finger tips. Find RSRD and read the two years of working on this mod.

http://forum.kickinbak.com/index.php?sid=7a82042423185c20ab647a9120c08614

Lurker would love to hear what you have to say. :yeah: All are open for suggestions and help.

[AVGWarhawk]

Here is the first inkling of what the game sees and determins if you continue:

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=486488&postcount=48

Beery, one hell of a modder and started what is now known today as RFB. Take it for what it is worth. Blasting billions of tons means nothing. So blowing by targets of opportunity is ok in the games book. The game just wants your butt in the patrol area. :03: BTW, if you ever make it to Baltimore, come visit me on the Torsk, we can talk with guys who were there. My guess is they know more than you and I could ever know. :up:

[Ducimus]

Well, im kinda sorry this thread started and went the way it did, and i kinda wish i never posted in it. I have a ton of respect for Lurker. His campaigns are like supermods unto themselves, and he maintains THREE of them, and then he keeps compatible versions for RFB , TMO, and stock on top of that. That is an enormous amount of time and work. I can tell you that if he's read this thread, he's probably biting his lip, if not chomping at the bit.

Constructive critcism is helpful and is alot easier to accept as compared to anything that resembles brow beating or "being yelled at". Just sayin'.

[magic452]

I had much the same situation with RSRD as others in this thread, couldn't find convoys in 12 or 13 patrols. Nothing but singles. I didn't blame RSRD for this but rather my lack of skill in finding convoys. I would complete 3 or 4 missions each patrol and would sink anything I came across, had a very good average in tons sunk. I got very good at shooting singles and perfected my vector analysis method as well as PK shots. But what I didn't perfect was my patrol methodology.

I have nothing but respect and appreciation for Lurkers work and for sure will use RSRD in my next campaign. I know more now than I did then.

If I was to make a constructive criticism, it would be that maybe a few more smaller convoys in place of some of the singles. If Lurker is still actively working on the RSRD that might be a place he could look at, but if he didn't want to do so I can't say I'd blame him. One thing I have learned about modding is nothing is a simple as it seems, and I don't even mod.

Magic

[ColonelSandersLite]

Ooh, hotshot plays at 83%...I play SH4 at 83%, I played real life at 100%.

I have to say that comment was assholish of me. Besides which, that kind of attitude about difficulty settings is something I tend to detest in other people. I dunno why I said it like that but I did, and I apologize.



You sure make a lot of assumptions about how I play without having ever seen me actually do so. I just hope that it's simply a matter of my score seems impossibly higher than yours and you're trying to figure out how, and not the other more obvious reason. Get my drift?You are a hoot bud. Gosh how does he do it? BTW, point out were I have assumed anything...

Do you use the deck gun a lot? I never use it or use it very little.

I play magnetic only until I hit the date it was offically switched to contact. That plays a part as well.

As far as the cannon, sinking ships after hitting it with one torpedo is not how it was done in RL and I hope you are not playing it that way.

Your lectures on how it should be played are a pretty clear indicator that you think it's being played in some other fashion or that I'm being dishonest.

You even came pretty close to outright saying it:
I was offering up suggestions to why your score is large.

I guess it was the more obvious reason then.




You go ahead and do whatever research you feel you must. I've already done a lot of that for this thread and I'm busy.No sir, I asked you to do the research.

I somehow missed it when you where coronated "King of the world". Besides, it's the way of the internet to make an assertion and demand that the other party do the legwork on it, so what was I thinking?

Wrong again, the game does not care how many ships you sink. It cares only for completing the mission.

That's a gamey justification if I ever heard one.

Anyways, what I do to make the game happy is go to the patrol zone and wait the required time to complete the objective, even if I have no ammo.



Here is the first inkling of what the game sees and determins if you continue:

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=486488&postcount=48

Beery, one hell of a modder and started what is now known today as RFB. Take it for what it is worth

Beery said:

So you're saying that the game will force retirement on you after two patrols? Okay, then that is definitely a bug. Actually, you shouldn't get the choice of a Gato until about April 10th 1942, which is when the first Gato to go on a war patrol (Drum) left its base.

Which has nothing to do with what you're saying.



What you think and what is reality in the game are two different things.

If you don't think that reality and the game are two different things, please for your sake, see a shrink.

Edit: Oh, I just reread this and think that part of this is a simple misunderstanding... You think I care about the game's definition of good? Wrong. I'm more interested in recreating history than the game's definition of my "score".

So, your new traffic mod will be ready when?

TBH, I'm an experienced modder (and a software engineer to boot) and would *love* to take a crack at it. I just don't have the time ATM. In some ways, I really wish I did though.

The thing about game modding, from my experience, is that it's kinda like crack. You get into it, it gets into your skin, and next thing you know, you just have no life. I left that scene behind about a year ago now. Took a girl to snap me out of it (thank god for her). While part of me wishes that I could, there's another part of me that's like this great big neon flashing danger sign. Who knows what the future will bring though. Since it took 11 years for the series to revisit fleetboats, it looks like I have time for that sign's lightbulb to burn out.

Anyways, I'm done going around in circles with you warhawk. I know your type and it's simply not worth my time to argue with you, over a game of all things. Meh...



Just for anyone that's curious to see any of the mod worrk I've done (since it was brought up), see:
http://colonelsanderslite.armaholic.eu/

[ColonelSandersLite]

I have nothing but respect and appreciation for Lurkers work

Yeah, clearly he put a lot of effort into it, which certainly deserves credit and praise. If anything I've said intones otherwise, I've misrepresented my opinion on that subject. I just think that it needs more love to be all the way "there" if you get my meaning.

[AVGWarhawk]

Anyways, I'm done going around in circles with you warhawk. I know your type and it's simply not worth my time to argue with you, over a game of all things. Meh...



Excellent!

TBH, I'm an experienced modder (and a software engineer to boot) and would *love* to take a crack at it. I just don't have the time ATM. In some ways, I really wish I did though.


Sure thing! But we have time to post most of the day and throw a crack or two at mod :shifty:

[Rockin Robbins]

ColSanders: You're bordering on insolence. Please tone things down a notch and refrain from personally insulting long-standing Subsim members (including a former moderator) who are respected in the community and are only trying to help you. I understand you probably mean no harm, but I assure you that some either are or will be concluding that you do.

Setting yourself up into an adversarial relationship with top modders and members isn't what you really want to do, is it?

Look, if SH4, young as it is, was nearing perfection, it would be near its death. The journey toward a perfection that can never be reached is far more important than actually reaching it. So SH4 sucks! Until you compare it with anything else out there in the sub sim field... Then it's mostly brilliant.