Realism- and gameplay-related hardcode fixes for SH3.EXE [Archive] - Page 9

Stiebler

08-29-11, 04:10 AM

@LGN1, @SSB:

I was very interested to discover that you have prevented CTDs from Sergbuto's AI-boats by cloning them with new IDs.

It would be very helpful indeed if either or both of you could release your cloned variants for public use. I would certainly like to update NYGM with a bullet-proof AI-U-boat, if you kindly give me permission for use.

Since H.sie is planning to use LGN1's version for his wolf-packs mod, perhaps this would be the preferred version to upload for general use, in the interests of economy of mods.

Of course, I could always make my own clones, since I have Sansal's Pack3D, but there is a small chance that my cloned version could also clash with an existing ship/air/land-unit. And again, in the interests of economy of mods, it is better if I use an existing stable clone.

Incidentally, did you both remember to clone the turms of the AI-boats also?

@Robin40:
My patch Stiebler_Surrender_Smoke has now been replaced with Stiebler_Surrender_Smoke_CAM, see here:
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=1736728&postcount=10

Also your statement 'impossible to find the specified file' is very vague. What cannot find which file? Can you give more details, please.

Stiebler.

h.sie

08-29-11, 04:24 AM

@Stiebler: Of course you can have the cloned AI-Subs - if they are finished and final and tested. There is some work to do with them in the future, either by LGN1 or me. LGN1 has the cloned ones, but he isn't here at the moment.

H.Sie

Robin40

08-29-11, 05:25 AM

Stiebler

08-29-11, 06:31 AM

@H.sie,

Many thanks for the reply about the AI-Uboats.

@Robin40:

It seems that you are missing one or more of these files from your patch folder:
1. SH3.exe already patched with H.sie's V15G2.
2. V15_G2_Surrender_Smoke_CAM (a file with no extension).
3. bspatch.exe.

You must have all these files in the same folder in which you run patch_SH3.bat.

The file SH3.exe is your file which you have patched already with H.sies's patch-kit V15G2. Make sure you create a back-up copy of it somewhere before using my Surrender_Smoke_CAM patch.

Stiebler.

U-Falke

08-29-11, 12:05 PM

Good morning

This mod is briliant, congratulations!
Is it posssible to have a gauge for oxygen
and another for CO2? They could be located
in the control room, so guys what do you think?

h.sie

08-29-11, 02:15 PM

@U-Falke: Thanks. No, it is not possible to have both gauges, one for O2 and one for CO2. One can only have O2 or CO2. It's your choice.

h.sie

08-29-11, 02:29 PM

Some input needed (historical facts preferred):

Let's assume there has been a contact report and BDU really sent a wolfpack to sink the reported convoy.

I work with a certain chance p that the wolfpack will find the convoy (that means: it has not been sunk, no machine damage, no navigation problems and so on).

For calculating this chance, I want also to consider the weather conditions. Now my question: What does affect this chance stronger: storm or visibility or both factors equally??

h.sie

Robin40

08-29-11, 02:32 PM

Stiebler

08-30-11, 02:05 AM

@H.sie (Wolfpacks):

The main factors affecting whether a U-boat pack could find a convoy are these:
1. The U-boat that found the convoy must *continue* to send contact reports. That is the critical factor.
2. No U-boats can find a convoy in fog.
3. Storms affect the speed at which distant U-boats can arrive, and cause much greater fuel consumption. Some U-boats might not have sufficient fuel to arrive in storms.

Remember that the U-boats did not arrive all together as a 'pack'. They arrived individually from their patrol (1941) or pack reconnaissance areas (1942-1944), and had to travel different distances. However, once arrived, they would be coordinated by BdU to attack all on the same night. Thus it is reasonable to have the pack seem to arrive all at once.

The original U-boat must send several contact reports. The more contact reports it sends, the greater the chance of a pack attack. (But allow a space of at least two hours between contact reports - it would be silly if a U-boat could send 10 contact reports in five minutes in order to organise an attack!) This (multiple contact reports) was another feature well modelled in the old Aces of the Deep.

Stiebler.

Stiebler

08-30-11, 02:09 AM

@Robin40:

Quote:
@Robin40:

It seems that you are missing one or more of these files from your patch folder:
1. SH3.exe already patched with H.sie's V15G2.
2. V15_G2_Surrender_Smoke_CAM (a file with no extension).
3. bspatch.exe.

You must have all these files in the same folder in which you run patch_SH3.bat.

The file SH3.exe is your file which you have patched already with H.sies's patch-kit V15G2. Make sure you create a back-up copy of it somewhere before using my Surrender_Smoke_CAM patch.

Stiebler.

no missing file:wah:Sorry, but now I cannot guess what is your problem.

Has anyone else had the same problem? Can anyone else provide a suggestion?

Stiebler.

h.sie

08-30-11, 05:30 AM

@Stiebler: Thank you very much, J., for the information.

I was able to reduce the time between contact messages from 12 hours to 1 hour, that means, it is now possible (and required) to send a contact report on a regulary basis. Otherwise the chance rises that the other Subs won't be able to intercept the convoy. This is already programmed, only the influence of the weather was missing, but this will come in the next days.

Regarding Robin40: I'm also not able to see where his problem is, because his description is not very helpful.

h.sie

SquareSteelBar

08-30-11, 06:02 AM

...Has anyone else had the same problem? Can anyone else provide a suggestion?...Just ckecked your CAM patch once more -> works like a charme...

Don't know what's Robin's prob.

Stiebler

08-30-11, 06:35 AM

Many thanks for the confirmation that the Surrender-Smoke-CAM patch works properly, SSB.

Stiebler.

Robin40

08-30-11, 07:50 AM

Many thanks for the confirmation that the Surrender-Smoke-CAM patch works properly, SSB.

Stiebler.

well....don't bother about that

anyway here it is what I have in my window c:\Windows\syste32\cmd.exe when I apply Patch_SH3

SH3 Patcher V1.0 by h.sie

Trying to apply patch V15G2_Stiebler to H.sie' V15G2 sh3.exe

Premere un tasto per continuare (trans. press a key to continue)

Making backup sh3.old

Impossibile trovare il file specificato (trans. Impossible to find the specified file)

Patching.....

Exit

Wreford-Brown

08-30-11, 08:35 AM

anyway here it is what I have in my window c:\Windows\syste32\cmd.exe when I apply Patch_SH3

Are you using a completely new sh3.exe?
If you use one which has been modified in any way (e.g. using a no-CD patch, or even using earlier versions of h.sie's work) then the patch will not work.

Use the 'Patch_SH3' MS DOS file to check you have a compatible version. If you still have problems then PM me.

h.sie

08-30-11, 10:47 AM

@Stiebler: I think about to also model the chance of wolfpack subs being sunk by hunter-killer groups. But I'm not sure whether it makes sense, since, as you told, the UBoats did not travel together as a single group.

I thought about a simple model: The later the war, the higher the chance that a wolfpack is sunk by enemy.

On the other hand: Since radar was available in late 42 (?), life will be hard enough in sh3 to keep visual contact and send contact reports without being detected. Maybe an additional modelling of wolfpack Uboats being sunk by hunter-killer-groups makes life too hard????

urfisch

08-30-11, 01:43 PM

nice to see you are still deep in it h.sie!

:yeah:

08-30-11, 11:09 PM

Is there any patch or fix for SH3/GWX 3 Gold that will stop it from crashing when attempting to open a saved game. It'll let me start a mission then after a day of playing and saving I try reloading a saved segment and get the message that there's a problem which causes the program to close. Out of frustration I started a Career in SH4 Gold and unfortunately three quarters through a mission after saving then trying to reopen I get the same message. Any ideas or suggestions to correct these problems. I did completely uninstall the reinstall both programs and still get the error. I'm on a Windows 7 unit. Thanks

Sailor Steve

08-30-11, 11:54 PM

Hi, JC. You would probably be better off starting a new thread for that question, as this thread is dedicated to a particular program.

[edit] Never mind, I see that you already did.

Stiebler

08-31-11, 02:33 AM

@H.sie:
I think about to also model the chance of wolfpack subs being sunk by hunter-killer groups. But I'm not sure whether it makes sense, since, as you told, the UBoats did not travel together as a single group.

I thought about a simple model: The later the war, the higher the chance that a wolfpack is sunk by enemy.

On the other hand: Since radar was available in late 42 (?), life will be hard enough in sh3 to keep visual contact and send contact reports without being detected. Maybe an additional modelling of wolfpack Uboats being sunk by hunter-killer-groups makes life too hard???? I can think of an even simpler model to adjust for changing fortunes at sea.

In 1941: add a wolf-pack group of randomly up to 2 AI-boats.
In 1942: randomly up to 3 AI-boats.
In 1943 to May: randomly up to 4 U-boats.
From June 1943 to March 1944: randomly up to 2 U-boats.
After March 1944, pack operations were ended by BdU owing to heavy losses.

The above random figures should be reduced for storms (divide the random number above as an integer by 2; use the integer result).

In real-life, some convoys were attacked by up to 20 U-boats. However, it is necessary to consider the effects on game-speed, and the stability of game-saves, so I think 4 AI U-boats must be a realistic maximum for SH3.

As for sinking the wolf-pack boats, this may occur anyway from the convoy defences, which become stronger as the war advances, so that is not a problem.

Radar was widespread on British warships from about mid-1941. First encountered at sea in March 1941. But signalling close to a convoy is not much of a problem in darkness and/or stormy seas. SH3 models this quite well.

I hope that helps.
Stiebler.

h.sie

08-31-11, 04:24 AM

@Stiebler: Thank you. This gives me an impression of the situation at different times during the war. The mod will indeed model fortunes at sea depending on time and region, and the maximum number of AI subs is 4. How did you know? I never told you!

What I really would like to know is: From which year on did hunter-killer-groups affect fortunes at sea significantly?

Stiebler

08-31-11, 05:14 AM

@H.sie:
What I really would like to know is: From which year on did hunter-killer-groups affect fortunes at sea significantly?
Essentially from the beginning of 1943.

There were two types of hunter-killer-groups:
1. From beginning 1943, they were rushed to the assistance of convoys already being attacked, in order to reinforce the original escorts. However, they would rarely arrive before the first attacks.
2. From June 1943, groups attached to aircraft-carriers, intended to sweep ocean areas known to hold many U-boats. These were employed mostly around the Azores +1000 miles radius.

I think it is the reinforcement killer-groups (1) that will most affect your wolf-pack mod. Or maybe you could code that the effect of killer-groups is noticed from January 1943, and becomes worse in June 1943.

Stiebler.

Robin40

08-31-11, 09:36 AM

@Wreford-Brown, Stiebler

well I got it finally:DL

Stiebler's needs to be applied to an already 4Gb patched h.sie's V15G2 file

I enabled the LargeAddressAware flag to h.sie she.exe

So I got my Stiebler patched sh3 exe:yeah:

Unfortunately Stiebler_Surrender_Smoke_CAM mod causes CTD to my SH3GWX

How can I enable this mod only for Surrender and SmokeOnTheHorizon options?

I tried to delete in the Data folder Air, Roster and Sea folders, but no good

SquareSteelBar

08-31-11, 09:57 AM

...Stiebler's needs to be applied to an already 4Gb patched h.sie's V15G2 file...That's not correct. It works with a non-4GB-patched V15G2 exe, too. Tried it yesterday (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=1739376&postcount=2016)

...How can I enable this mod only for Surrender and SmokeOnTheHorizon options?...Use HsieOptionsSelector.exe

Robin40

08-31-11, 10:04 AM

That's not correct. It works with a non-4GB-patched V15G2 exe, too. Tried it yesterday (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=1739376&postcount=2016)

Use HsieOptionsSelector.exe

I mean that h.sie's sh3 must have the LargeAddressAware flag ON...not to apply 4 GB patch via HsieOptionsSelector.exe

Used it...no good

h.sie

08-31-11, 10:21 AM

it's not nice with all these patches. obviously some guys get confused. I also don't like it. but I see no other solution, since it is not allowed to directly share the patched exe. (please, not again a discussion about that).

@Stiebler, SqaureSteelBar and others: Thanks for giving support here.

Stiebler

08-31-11, 11:00 AM

@Robin40:
I enabled the LargeAddressAware flag to h.sie she.exe
What is this flag? It forms no part of the patch-kit that I released, so far as I know. Probably you should turn it off again.

Unfortunately Stiebler_Surrender_Smoke_CAM mod causes CTD to my SH3GWXI would guess that you are using the supplied *example* files en_menu.txt and de_menu.txt, included with the patch for the convenience of NYGM users, and taken from the NYGM super-mod. Instructions for GWX users to modify their own en_menu.txt file are included with the package. The key feature is to cut-and-paste some of the lines from the NYGM versions of these files to your GWX versions, as explained in the instructions (file Stiebler_Surrender_Smoke_CAM_for_V15G2_Sh3.txt).

Change these lines in your GWX copies of en_menu.txt (and de_menu.txt) thus:
566=Scuttling charges set! 10 minutes to abandon boat! Set U-boat to crash-dive!
2905=Abandon U-boat!
4809=Prepare to abandon U-boat!
4810=Prepare to abandon U-boat!

Then REMOVE the supplied en_menu.txt de_menu.txt files from your folder Stieber_Surrender_Smoke_CAM\data\menu, and replace them with the GWX copies which you have just created.

Good luck,
Stiebler.

h.sie

08-31-11, 11:08 AM

VERY IMPORTANT: READ THE MANUALS BEFORE STARTING TO PATCH

Robin40

08-31-11, 11:51 AM

VERY IMPORTANT: READ THE MANUALS BEFORE STARTING TO PATCH

Manuals read

I open Hsie Option Selector

My computer is 32 bit, so I uncheck the 4 Gbyte box (64-bit computers only)

I patch...I run GWX...CTD

So I apply LAA (see http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=1544521&postcount=15) and I see that LargeAddressAware flag is OFF

I turn LAA flag ON in the SH3V15G2

bingo...GWX runs fine and I can apply Stiebler's patch

SquareSteelBar

08-31-11, 12:26 PM

If I got it right LAA is exact the same as the 4GB patch and it's only useful on a 64-bit system.

Read the last sentence:
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=1543583&postcount=5

It doesn't matter if you use HsieOptionsSelector or a different patcher which changes that LAA flag - the result is always the same [checked by MD5].

Robin40

08-31-11, 12:54 PM

SquareSteelBar

09-02-11, 02:45 AM

...So I apply LAA (see http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=1544521&postcount=15) and I see that LargeAddressAware flag is OFF...Where did you get this LAA switcher?
I want to check if there's any difference to HsieOptionsSelector or other 4GB patchers.

Robin40

09-02-11, 05:19 AM

Where did you get this LAA switcher?
I want to check if there's any difference to HsieOptionsSelector or other 4GB patchers.

take a look at #32 of

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=177503

SquareSteelBar

09-02-11, 05:54 AM

Robin40

09-02-11, 07:51 AM

Large Address Aware.exe does exactly the same as HsieOptionsSelector.exe or any other 4GB patcher like this one (http://www.ntcore.com/4gb_patch.php) or privateer's special SH3-4GB-patch. They all set the LAA flag.

Maybe it's a new finding that the 4GB patch has an positive effect on 32-bit systems?
Can somebody confirm that? I'm not very familiar with that issue yet...

take a look at

http://www.lsh3.com/dl/v5/LSH3_V5.1_Installation_EN.pdf

4GB Patch - Installations for all Windows-versions

That's why I said that the box 4 GB Patch (64-bit computers only) in HsieOptionsSelector was misleading

SquareSteelBar

09-02-11, 08:00 AM

So it's no new finding. The 4GB patch [AKA LAA switch] takes effect on 32-bit systems, too.

However, there's no difference between 4GB patch, LAA or h.sieOptionSelector...

...and it's also possible to apply Stiebler's CAM patch to a non-4GB-patched V15G2-sh3.exe

Robin40

09-02-11, 08:02 AM

So it's no new finding. The 4GB patch [AKA LAA switch] takes effect on 32-bit systems, too.

However, there's no difference between 4GB patch, LAA or h.sieOptionSelector...

yep....I advise to clear

64-bit computers only

in h.sieOptionSelector

SquareSteelBar

09-02-11, 08:06 AM

...64-bit computers only

in h.sieOptionSelectorMaybe that's a little misleading...

h.sie

09-04-11, 08:55 AM

Is there any information available how an wolfpack attack has been synchronized?

Did the BDU give the order to start the attack?

Did the wolfpack leader give the order?

Or was is chaotic without any synchronization? (Everyone shoot when he was in good firing position)

Stiebler

09-04-11, 10:07 AM

Is there any information available how an wolfpack attack has been synchronized?BdU released U-boats for attack when there was a sufficient number present for at least one to maintain contact with the convoy.

Sometimes boats would be allowed to attack alone, if no other U-boat was sufficiently close.

There was never any 'wolfpack leader'.

Stiebler.

Jimbuna

09-04-11, 10:10 AM

difool2

09-04-11, 09:59 PM

BdU released U-boats for attack when there was a sufficient number present for at least one to maintain contact with the convoy.

Sometimes boats would be allowed to attack alone, if no other U-boat was sufficiently close.

There was never any 'wolfpack leader'.

Stiebler.

This is contrasted with how the Americans did it-their wolfpacks (usually smaller than the Kriegsmarine's, usually 2-4 subs) were under the control of a local commander (sometimes a commodore).

h.sie

09-05-11, 01:24 AM

@Stiebler, Jim: Thanks. Synchronizing will be the last hard piece of work for me. I already have a solution, but it is inexact (tolerance +/- 30 minutes) because it is based on an estimation how late after spawning the AI-subs begin to attack a convoy moving at 7knots .....

On the other hand: I don't think we need a 100% exact synchronization: "Fire", "Boom".

Yesterday I played a test convoy wolfpack attack. I liked it - especially at night. We won't get 100% realistic battles, since the AI-subs tend to attack/sink the escorts first, because those are the first who come into their visible range. But I think that isn't that worse, because the (deflecting) effect for the player is the same: the escorts leave the convoy and give the player a better chance for his own attack.

Stiebler

09-05-11, 04:08 AM

@H.sie:
I don't think we need a 100% exact synchronization: "Fire", "Boom".

No, definitely no synchronisation needed. U-boats might attack on the same night, but any synchronisation was a complete coincidence.

Stiebler.

h.sie

09-05-11, 04:11 AM

@Stiebler: Nice to know, so my current solution with an accuracy of about +/- 30 (or 60) minutes seems to be sufficient. Saves me a lot of work & time.

Wolfstriked

09-05-11, 10:10 AM

That they attack escorts first seems fine to me.:up:

Stiebler

09-05-11, 02:37 PM

I have updated my Surrender-Smoke-CAMship mod, which overlays H.sie's V15_G2 patch-kit, with a small fix.

The new version is called Stiebler_Surrender_Smoke_CAM_2

See here:
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=1743111&postcount=18

Stiebler.

difool2

09-06-11, 05:47 PM

That they attack escorts first seems fine to me.:up:

Note that this could have been a viable strategy on the part of the Kriegsmarine. For a good while there the British were starved for good escort vessels-so you trade some raw tonnage now so that there are few escorts later, then attack the weakened convoys. Sink enough escorts and the British might be forced to abandon the convoy system.

Hitman

09-07-11, 08:24 AM

Note that this could have been a viable strategy on the part of the Kriegsmarine. For a good while there the British were starved for good escort vessels-so you trade some raw tonnage now so that there are few escorts later, then attack the weakened convoys. Sink enough escorts and the British might be forced to abandon the convoy system.

It is very possible that the KM had considered this, and indeed later in the war escorts became as interesting as target as merchants themselves, because the main purpose was to tie lots of resources to the convoy system and prevent them being employed more directly agains the german land. However, the KM knew as well as the commanders how difficult it was to hit an escort with low draft (Which is mainly what was used as escort in early war: corvettes and sloops) and thin profile from the bow that was zigzagging and changing speed wildly during their search pattern. By the time the escorts became bigger and better equipped (i.e. more interesting targets) they were already being mass-produced like the River frigates, and again there was no point in sinking them and alerting the whole convoy when the same torpedo could hit a merchant.

But yes, it's food for thought and I guess there are no 100% satisfactory explanations for why it wasn't even attempted.:up:

andqui

09-07-11, 09:22 AM

Actually, it was attempted. At a later stage in the war, (aug 1943 if I recall), if a uboat was deteced by convoy escorts, standard operating procedure dictated that it's primary duty switched from sinking some merchants to sinking some escorts. In the words of Doenitz in the operational order, this was meant to a) create an atmosphere of fear on the escort crews, and b) tie up/sink escorts so that other uboats could close in on the convoy unimpeded. The operational order goes on to providing tactical tips such as remaining surfaced for a bit so the escort knows that you're there and heads right for you, supposedly making for an easier shot. I would provide a link but am a bit pressed on time.

h.sie

09-07-11, 09:31 AM

Sorry to say, but I have to damp down the optimism of a quick solution regarding wolfpacks. During my tests I found out that at dark nights (especially in GWX 16km atmosphere) the AI-sensors are totally blind and thus the AI-Subs won't attack - although the watch crew on the players sub has a visible range of some kilometers.

Hope I can fix it somehow.

JohnnyBlaze

09-07-11, 07:39 PM

holy sh## whats going on here?

I've been away from silent hunter for something like 9 months and come back to this? :rock:

You guys never stop amazing me :up:

Too bad my sh3 cd exploded in my dvd drive something like 9 months ago :nope:

I guess the game is quite cheap now tho..

Great job guys, thank you

h.sie

09-08-11, 02:25 AM

In the meantime (and with the kind help of Makman94) I was able to analyse the visibility/blindness problem. The visual sensors of the AI-Subs need a minimal amount of light even at midnight, and also certain sensor settings in Sim.cfg in order to work properly. Otherwise, the AI-Subs are blind and thus won't attack.

In MEP v3 (and I guess also in NYGM and other supermods/environments) all seems to work well, but not in these dark black nights of GWX3/16km - which I like so much.

So I see 2 options/solutions:

1) The better one: Create a special visual sensor for AI-Subs and "hack" it so that it will work even in dark GWX nights. Don't know if it's possible.

2) The unlovely one, if 1) does not work: Giving up the compatibility to all supermods / environments and link the wolfpack mod to a certain environment mod with certain sensor settings.

The future will show.

urfisch

09-08-11, 03:17 AM

interesting, even its annoying. thanks for the update, h.sie!

Hitman

09-08-11, 07:41 AM

You have another easy solution, which is to create a radar sensor for the AI uboats which also identifies friend or foe. That would allow them to shoot in the darkest nights with any mods, and nobody will know it's a radar. Besides, it is realistic that uboats attack at night seeing the enemy before they see them, and when escorts have radar receiver they also have radar so they would detect uboats anyway.

What I see of more interest is that you ensure if possible that the wolfpack is spawned only at night, because otherwise it would generate the ridiculous situation of uboats attacking at plain daylight in pack :-?

h.sie

09-08-11, 08:10 AM

@Hitman: Thanks. I'll try that idea!!! The question is: Do they use the radar sensor for shooting? I doubt.

I already programmed a simple, but "non-goofy" BDU-AI (in co-operation with LGN1). BDU will order to attack (and AI-Subs will be spawned) only during the night and without fog.

h.sie

09-09-11, 02:02 AM

@Hitman: Radar or Hydrophone sensors are not used by the AI for firing. Good idea, but doesn't work.

But: I could locate the code that deals with visual sensors, so I am slightly non-pessimistic that I can program my own AI visual sensor that is required for the AI Subs to start an attack at medium distance even in darkest GWX nights.

We'll see.

Hitman

09-09-11, 02:29 AM

@Hitman: Radar or Hydrophone sensors are not used by the AI for firing. Good idea, but doesn't work.

That's really strange :hmmm: IIRC from discussions long ago, the AI basically becomes aware of what is near it and where via the sensors as a global input, i.e. some sensors tell it some things, others don't (Like distance, identity, height, etc). And whatever sensor has the better range or chance of detection, becomes chief sensor (AI uses only one at a time).

You can add to the radar the property of identifying friend or foe IIRC, -which it of course currently doesn't have- but that requires to do it with Silent 3ditor in the sensors.dat file, which would in turn require adding a new special type of sensor and sadly having to do one for each supermod :-? However, in SH4 you can place a new sensors.dat file with a different name (F.e. AIUBoat_sensors.dat) and point in your unit to look for the sensor there. No idea if you can do that in SH3, however :03:

Hitman

09-09-11, 02:36 AM

Oh, and I forgot ...

Is it possible that you make the wolfpack units spawn only at night as suggested? While sometimes uboats would attack individually submerged at day a convoy, the chief idea of the wolfpack was to use the speed and maneuverability of the surfaced uboat at night, so that in 99% of cases if you are operating on a convoy that is followed by a wolfpack you would only see others attack at night (The day was spent by uboats mainly doing quick speed end arounds to reposition again in fron t of the convoy for the night).

If you can do that, the AI Uboats would not even need to be submerged as they would attack like in real life :up: (And besides, the AI doesn't identify them as submerged, so who cares)

Other interesting option would be that the triggered Uboat dissapears f.e. one hour after being spawned (This allows the unit to shoot at the convoy and maybe get sunk by counterfire or survive by dissapearing before escorts get her - simulates well chances of escaping after an attack)

SquareSteelBar

09-09-11, 02:56 AM

...However, in SH4 you can place a new sensors.dat file with a different name (F.e. AIUBoat_sensors.dat) and point in your unit to look for the sensor there. No idea if you can do that in SH3, however :03:IIRC you can put into Library folder whatever you want; SH3 will look for it at least and if it's useable it will be used.
Otherwise mods like e.g. 'Lifeboats & Debris' etc. were not possible.

AFAIK h.sie is aware of that fact since he did it with Sergbuto's Wolfpack Mod v2.0 Reloaded. He placed new separate Shell2.* files into Library folder.

.

urfisch

09-09-11, 05:41 AM

would love to have the skills to help in this...but i havent.

:-?

h.sie

09-09-11, 05:15 PM

@Hitman: Yes, it is possible to spawn and attack only at night. It's already programmed. Stiebler told me that 99,9% of all wolfpack attacks occured during darkness. And yes, the AI-subs will attack in surfaced state, since their job is only to attack and irritate / deflect the escorts. Maybe I'll add a sound source to them, but only if necessary.

I know how to add new visual sensors, since for my private GWX version I have different visual sensors depending on ship type - as in NYGM. For that I used a different file hsieSensors.dat.

The problem is (no, was!) that none of these (unmodded) AI visual sensors work in GWX black night, they are all blind.

But I already programmed a working sensor hack, so that the AI-subs can see and fire over long distances even in black nights. That's what I need!

SquareSteelBar

09-10-11, 02:15 AM

....That's what I need!...we all need. ;)

:rock:

Hitman

09-10-11, 03:46 AM

Brilliant H.Sie, just what the doctor ordered :yeah:

h.sie

09-10-11, 05:16 AM

...we all need. ;)

WE ALL is a little bit disproportionate....(laugh!)

Following the current discussions about HAHD, I see a tendency to other SH versions like SH4 and SH5, since these seem to have a better engine.

And even in the SH3 community, only a minority of people know and use "my" fixes (about 500 downloads of V15F). But I don't care, since I mainly do it for me (but share with others).

One person asked me to also switch to SH4 (sorry for not having answered yet), but I installed SH4+OPMonsoon three times and tried hard to like it, without success. This game totally lacks the depressing Uboat athmosphere SH3 has. This is an individual question of taste and cannot be discussed (and isn't intended to bash Lurkers hard job, which I respect!!). So I finally sold my SH4 DVD. I also cannot follow the discussion about this transparent SH4 water. On my ferry trip to Helgoland, I couldn't see more than 1 meter deep into the water. Very little transparency.

And because of DRM SH5 also is no option. So I'll stick on SH3 and try to add some nice features which I remember from Aces of the Deep.

Hitman

09-10-11, 05:41 AM

Following the current discussions about HAHD, I see a tendency to other SH versions like SH4 and SH5, since these seem to have a better engine.

And even in the SH3 community, only a minority of people know and use "my" fixes (about 500 downloads of V15F). But I don't care, since I mainly do it for me (but share with others).I think SH3 still has more players and support than SH4, but the discussion about HAHD is related to the better modding platform, with more possibilities, which SH4 probably is.

Regarding downloads and use of your patches, in my opinion there are still many users a bit confused by the different releases of your patch, the options, Stiebler's additional work, etc, who fear they can cause harm to their install and prefer to see a more consolidated "final" version with all the blessings from everyone.

Personally, and despite supporting the idea of SH4 as a better platform due to more advanced features & engine plus solved bugs, the only thing I would like to see really really ironed out in SH3 is the time compression bug, where you will get no aircraft contacts at high time compression. For people like me -with less available time to play-, this is a killer bug, as high TC is a must and we can't use the game well without it being fixed.

But the wolfpacks you are preparing are really, really, luring me back into this game :arrgh!:

Oh and I forgot, any comments about this suggestion I made?:

Other interesting option would be that the triggered Uboat dissapears f.e. one hour after being spawned (This allows the unit to shoot at the convoy and maybe get sunk by counterfire or survive by dissapearing before escorts get her - simulates well chances of escaping after an attack)

SquareSteelBar

09-10-11, 05:56 AM

...I also cannot follow the discussion about this transparent SH4 water. On my ferry trip to Helgoland, I couldn't see more than 1 meter deep into the water. Very little transparency...In this regard the North Sea can't be representative. It is relative shallow and muddy...

However, I can live well without transparency in SH3.

h.sie

09-10-11, 06:02 AM

Hitman: Other interesting option would be that the triggered Uboat dissapears f.e. one hour after being spawned (This allows the unit to shoot at the convoy and maybe get sunk by counterfire or survive by dissapearing before escorts get her - simulates well chances of escaping after an attack)

I don't understand your point here. In my opinion it is not that important for the player perspective whether the AI-Subs survive or not. After they have done their job (defecting, sinking escorts, sinking merchants) they may be sunk, since there can be spawned new ones in case a new convoy is sighted.

Hitman

09-10-11, 06:15 AM

I don't understand your point here. In my opinion it is not that important for the player perspective whether the AI-Subs survive or not. After they have done their job (defecting, sinking escorts, sinking merchants) they may be sunk, since there can be spawned new ones in case a new convoy is sighted. Of course not, but what can be a real inmersion kiler is if the player gets to watch another uboat surfaced, ramming and shooting at close range an escort in a surface battle :-?

What subs basically did surfaced by night was "get in-shoot-get out" so ideally early in the war they would do that and dissapear (Read: submerge or evade) and later on in the war would be detected and intercepted before attacking, probably with escorts catching by surprise and sinking them even when surfaced.

I was just trying to highlight that from my player's point of view, I would rather never see "surface battles" between wolfpacks and escorts; and making the sub dissapear after she had enough time to conduct an attack seems interesting to solve all matters (The destroyer might even stay some time in the last know position circling around).

urfisch

09-10-11, 06:17 AM

i agree to hitman, surface attacks via deckgun or ramming is not the way uboats should engage...

;)

h.sie

09-10-11, 06:55 AM

@Hitman, Urfisch: If I'm informed right, the subs didn't see each other during a convoy battle in 99%. They only saw the RESULTS of what the other subs did (burning ships, deflected escorts). This is what LGN1 and me are focusing on. We also focus on the shadowing and contact-holding after having discovered a convoy and the danger of being detected when sending contact reports every 1-2 hours.

This mod will not be built for people who intend to follow the battle with external cam. They will be dissappointed.

It would be even sufficient to spawn a duck that fires with chocolate tarts at the convoy as long as the player doesn't see it.

But I agree in one point: There is a chance that the player by random sees one of the AI-Subs. This must be avoided, so it's better to have them submerged. It does not matter whether they are on the surface of not. Only important is that they shoot with their virtual torpedoes.

With these dumb AI-Subs, we cannot model a real wolfpack attack in detail, but we try to make an illusion of a wolfpack attack for those who don't use external cam. Real Kaleuns also used their external cam only very rarely.

Only an illusion?? This is disappointing!
Yes! Only an illusion. But Sh3 itself also is only an illusion. Nothing is real.

Hitman

09-10-11, 08:38 AM

But I agree in one point: There is a chance that the player by random sees one of the AI-Subs. This must be avoided, so it's better to have them submerged. It does not matter whether they are on the surface of not. Only important is that they shoot with their virtual torpedoes.

With these dumb AI-Subs, we cannot model a real wolfpack attack in detail, but we try to make an illusion of a wolfpack attack for those who don't use external cam. Real Kaleuns also used their external cam only very rarely.

We are thinking in the same line here, H.Sie, no external cam and my only concern is that the player might randomly stumble upon another uboat which is lurking around the convoy :up:

However I disagree with submerging the uboats; it is more realistic for the player to meet them surfaced at night -and even try to avoid colliding them if necessary- than otherwise. It not just adds atmosphere to the game, but also a difficulty that real Kaleuns had to contend with.

There are at least two instances of uboats colliding with each other on the surface at night close to a convoy, and sightings were by no means rare (See U-521 which almost collided with another while operating on a convoy at night), specially in early war when convoys were smaller and the area around them equally reduced. Also, don't forget that real Kaleuns (And clever escort commanders like Capt. Walker) chose the SAME side of the convoy (Windlee & against the phosphorescent horizon) to attack, thus further reducing the area where uboats operated around a convoy.

In my opinion, surfaced uboats attacking at night and then dissapearing after some time is the most realistic solution for any situation in which the player might find himself in the game :up:

Fish In The Water

09-10-11, 09:18 AM

...I installed SH4+OPMonsoon three times and tried hard to like it, without success. This game totally lacks the depressing Uboat athmosphere SH3 has...

And because of DRM SH5 also is no option. So I'll stick on SH3 and try to add some nice features which I remember from Aces of the Deep.

This is pretty much exactly where I'm at as well...

I'd love to move forward to 'bigger and better' platforms, but great as the graphics may be the gameplay is just too weak. It's kind of like having a sleek looking sports car with a three cylinder engine under the hood. All show and no go.

As for the 500 downloads, I wouldn't fret. The hardcore sim crowd has always been a small group. Better to know you've helped those who truly appreciate the added intricacies and depth. We may be few in number, but you're not alone.

Last but not least, I've found it quite interesting to follow the wolfpack discussion. This strikes me as an important project and I for one am quite pleased that you're investing the time to take it on. :sunny:

ETsd4

09-10-11, 09:25 AM

In my opinion, surfaced uboats attacking at night and then dissapearing after some time is the most realistic solution for any situation in which the player might find himself in the game :up:

The classic Wolf-pack doctrine was this...
(in pictue course of convoy is 180°T)
http://i714.photobucket.com/albums/ww143/snDf1/Rudel.jpg

Step 1: U-boats heading towards convoy until the first convoy-contact happens.
Step 2: U-boats changing course as same as the convoy-course and sailing in front of the convoy until twilight.
Step 3: At twilight u-boats changing course and approach submerged towards convoy. At night the u-boats are admidst convoy and the attack will start.

At the picture you can see the wolf-pack organizes at max visible range to each other. My guess is: this is because the celestial position FIX with sextant in open waters is in most cases not exact to position in a line-formation with other u-boats. (Edit: Position information via celestial fix have errors upto +-20 sm. It depends of the sea-swell and the visibility/clarity of the horizon)

Visibility under water:
The highest level of visibility ever made under water at sea was ca. 100m. And if i know right there are only a small handful of places worldwide that can offer this visibility.

h.sie

09-10-11, 10:10 AM

@Hitman: At the current state we only have Sergs AI-Subs, which are dumb. They don't search for enemy ships nor do they dive or submerge automatically, whatever is better. They only sit there and shoot at all enemy ships that come in visible range. That's all. I cannot remote-control them. I can only spawn some of them in a waiting position where the convoy is expected, according to the contact reports and course estimations of the player. You see: I cannot fulfil those detailed wishes of yours. AI-Subs lurking through a convoy are not possible at the moment. Instead, they will shoot virtual torpedoes from a distant position.

Also, I will model Hunter-Killer-Groups in 1943+, but you won't see battles between them and the Uboats. The AI-Subs simply won't get spawned and the player receives a BDU message "U-456 sunk. Attack alone" or similar.

This is a compromise!

Those who are unsatisfied with that compromise, are invited to enhance the AI of the Subs. I would be thankful to have better ones. I must admit: I am not able to change their AI at the moment. Thus, detailed wolfpack tactics won't help in this point, because I cannot realise them. Thanks anyway, Et4ds

Hitman

09-10-11, 10:18 AM

Ah I see, so the AI Uboats are not like the german AI destroyers, and will not move around and close in to shoot, but instead will remain sitting in a position from which they will shoot at the enemy :hmmm:

Sorry for the misunderstanding, I had though the AI uboats would act as german destroyers, now it's all clear :up:

h.sie

09-10-11, 10:39 AM

@Hitman: Glad the misunderstanding is cleared now.

LGN1 and me tried different approaches, but none was satisfying. We also tried to "beam" an airbase which itself spawns AI-Subs (with aircraft AI). That works in principle, the AI-Subs searched the convoy, but then the AI-Subs were treated as aircraft by the escorts, not as submarine.

So we decided to use the current solution. Some AI-Subs waiting for the convoy on interception position.

Better than nothing.

Hitman

09-10-11, 11:24 AM

Yup, some quick tests run by me reveal that:

1) German DDs attached to the convoy asume its waypoints and speed. They attack if close enough, and simply steer same course and speed if distant enough to exclude mutual detection with convoy (Not a bad principle for a shadowing uboat, though)

2) German DDs forming an own task force but with no waypoints sit like ducks and shoot at the convoy

3) German DDs forming an own task force and with waypoints follow the scripted path and shoot at the convoy

There is hence no dynamic action of the AI when finding a convoy, (Unlike when finding a sub, where they actively prosecute her) and that is more than likely the reason why your AI Uboats sit there like ducks.

Interestingly, I tried sergbutos wolfpack mod and the escorts dropped depth charges at the AI Uboats, which amazed me since they should theoretically consider them surface units :03:

Now the question is wether you can manage to make the AI uboat appear as unit attached to the convoy (so it has waypoints) AND in a random position close to it, so it can at least move and shoot at it and attract the escorts. That would enhance consideraly the behaviour of the AI Uboats :up:

Myxale

09-10-11, 12:25 PM

Just a quick question:

Is it possible to add more Ranks (to expand on them) to the game?

?:hmmm:

LGN1

09-10-11, 05:32 PM

Hi,

as h.sie has written, we tried hard to get a better/more active AI, but did not succeed. Therefore, the AI-subs at the moment are far from perfect. However, they do their job well enough I would say.

The present work is more about simulating the wolfpack action before the attack, i.e., simulating the shadowing, the BDU orders, the probability to have wolfpacks at different times and in different areas,... this aspect in itself is a huge task and h.sie is doing a fantastic job. I dare to promiss that if all problems can be solved this mod will have a huge impact on game-play and immersion in SH3.

Cheers, LGN1

PS: If at some later time a better AI for the subs can be created, it's not a problem to add it to h.sie's current work.

LGN1

09-10-11, 05:40 PM

@Hitman: The AI 'sees' the AI-subs as surface units, but their type is 'submarine'. Therefore they are attacked with depth-charges.

Only 'plane' types actively search targets and attack. However, the atttacked ships then respond as if they are attacked by planes, i.e., no depth-charges, but anti-aircraft fire,...

What I would really like to understand better is the influence of the type setting of a unit. It seems that it determines a lot of things, e.g., how a unit responds to a certain other unit, how it attacks (depending on its own type and the target type), and whether it can spawn aircrafts,...

If I'm not wrong some mods add new types and I wonder what AI these types get attached :06:

Cheers, LGN1

Hitman

09-10-11, 05:43 PM

LGN1

09-10-11, 05:55 PM

Radar was widespread on British warships from about mid-1941. First encountered at sea in March 1941. But signalling close to a convoy is not much of a problem in darkness and/or stormy seas. SH3 models this quite well.

I hope that helps.
Stiebler.

Hi Stiebler,

do you have some more accurate information on radar usage? From what I gathered it seems that the first really useful device against u-boats was the 'Type 271' 10cm radar. It was first installed in March '41 on a ship and the first 'kill' attributed to it was in Nov. '41. I also found that by May '42 236 ships carried it. I'm wondering whether after spring '42 night attacks were still useful/possible? Do you know details about this?

Regards, LGN1

LGN1

09-10-11, 05:59 PM

What about using airplane AI but setting the unit as submarine? :hmmm:

The idea is that the AI is of an airplane, but for the enemy it is a submarine. If right now we have destroyer AI combined with submarine type for the unit, I don't see why we can't set the Ai of the airplane combined with the latter. YOu probably have already tried it, so I guess there must be some problem here or there :88)

I tried this, but it didn't work. However, I'm glad if someone else also wants to try and play with it. Testing these things is not easy and one quickly makes mistakes.

I think the crucial setting is the type setting of the unit and not the AI setting in the unit's *.sim file.

As mentioned earlier, I would really love to know more about the type setting.

Cheers, LGN1

h.sie

09-11-11, 02:35 AM

@LGN1: Even if the AI-Subs are not perfect, the convoy battle looks great. I have a working sensor-hack. It works even in the black GWX nights. A first alpha is on the horizon. Only some parameter adjustment has to be done.

The AI-Subs do their job: Deflecting & sinking escorts, and sinking merchants. In my opinion it does not matter whether a merchant has been sunk by a dumb or intelligent AI, since the player doesn't see what happens, except he uses his external cam and examines all actions in detail.

I think in a real convoy battle the Uboat crew didn't see the other Uboats acting. They only saw the result: Burning and sinking ships, distress flares and so on. And this is possible in the next time.

It's better for a player NOT to think about how we realised that mod. Only play and look through the periscope or binocular.

We invite everyone who isn't satisfied to enhance the AI-Sub.

urfisch

09-11-11, 06:36 AM

enhanced ai subs, who are able to interact and dive away in case of danger...that would be great. indeed. but the people who are able to do this, might not be interested in doing this.

i am just a designer, i cant help with this. sorry!

:-?

Hitman

09-11-11, 10:22 AM

The AI-Subs do their job: Deflecting & sinking escorts, and sinking merchants. In my opinion it does not matter whether a merchant has been sunk by a dumb or intelligent AI, since the player doesn't see what happens, except he uses his external cam and examines all actions in detail.
I'm sure that you guys have implemented the best solution possible with what resources we have :up:

Yes, sitting uboats that shoot at the convoy fake torpedoes from outside the screen and cause:

1) Some hits on merchants
2) Escorts leaving its position and running away at full speed to investigate and eventually engage

Which is exactly what is needed. :yep:

But come to think of it, since what we can do is just that, I would even recommend one further step to ensure the best effect for the player that might casually pass close to an AI-Uboat: Make it submerged and invisible (3d model reduced to the nodes). That way, the player will never see a stopped uboat shooting, and the only thing he might stumble upon is:

1) A hydrophones contact
2) A destroyer circling and dropping DCs in the surface

Both results are entirely realistic, even more than seeing a stopped uboat shooting at a convoy from 3000 metres outside it. Think of it, there are two possibilities of finding uboats around a convoy:

1) Before shooting: The escorts detect it before it can shoot and run there to prevent the shot.
2) After shooting: A normal torpedo would take some minutes to travel to the objective, and in that time the uboat would have gone those 3kms away

In both cases, again, it is realistic to make eventual contact with an uboat a bit far off from the convoy.

One more suggestion:

As I determined before, it is possible to add to an enemy convoy a german unit (A surfaced uboat) that will steer same course and speed. This could work great for representing a "shadowing uboat", i.e. an uboat that is following the convoy on the limit of visibility and making other uboats concentrate on it. An AI Uboat attached to the convoy 16 kms to a side and rear would probably not get detected by the escorts, but will make contact reports (It will appear in the map as a big blue uboat symbol) and will allow you to vector into the convoy and then call more ubots using H.Sie's patch.

Sounds amazing and is right now possible to be done with resources at hand :yeah:

Fubar2Niner

09-11-11, 11:08 AM

Holy moly gentlemen, this whole topic is getting too exciting for words :yeah:

Best regards.

Fubar2Niner

complutum

09-12-11, 06:09 AM

Answering a previous question of h'sie i've found in an spanish book about U boat warfare that the end of wolf pack was on January,1944. The 7 of this month Doenitz order his U boat to operate individually.

Hope this could help.

LGN1

09-12-11, 03:45 PM

h.sie

09-12-11, 05:08 PM

Maybe he removed his posts because noone said "Thank you" to him. So I say

THANK YOU !

to all who helped with suggestions, ideas, knowledge, research - in the past and in the future!

urfisch

09-13-11, 03:17 AM

yes. anvart is very sensitive, regarding "thank yous" for his knowledge.

:yep:

complutum

09-13-11, 06:14 AM

Anvart

09-13-11, 12:08 PM

@Anvart: Did you remove your posts :06:

Anyway, thanks a lot for the information :up: I agree it's the class setting not the type setting. I'm wondering what the AI setting in the *.sim files does and how it interacts with the class setting :hmmm:

Regards, LGN1
:haha:
I do not need thanks.
I'm a pragmatist. If someone asks a question and i had answered it (as i could), I must to have a sign (any reaction), that my reply been readed... and it's all.
If my answer is not on theme (for ex. i did not understand question) my reply must be removed, so as not to clog the thread.

@h.sie,
@urfisch... before doing any conclusions need learn to understand the motivation for actions of people... rather than to open your big mouth. http://img172.imageshack.us/img172/103/blum2xc9.gif

h.sie

09-13-11, 02:05 PM

So I retract my wrong assumption that Anvart waited for a "Thank you".

Hitman

09-14-11, 09:39 AM

Last time my GF guesed the number from 1 to 4172 was 25. So I'm off with U-25 as a type VIIB (I know it's not correct type of u-boat).

Unfortunately, neither H.Sie nor us have a method for fixing bugs and shortcomings on girldfriends. Yet. :D

Fish In The Water

09-14-11, 09:50 AM

Jumped by to tell you my story, not sure wether it is related to GWX or this hardcode fix but here it is..:

Welcome aboard Kentas and thanks for sharing! :sunny:

Stiebler

09-14-11, 11:25 AM

@LGN1:

I have been on holiday, sorry for delay in reply:

Do you have some more accurate information on radar usage? From what I gathered it seems that the first really useful device against u-boats was the 'Type 271' 10cm radar. It was first installed in March '41 on a ship and the first 'kill' attributed to it was in Nov. '41. I also found that by May '42 236 ships carried it. I'm wondering whether after spring '42 night attacks were still useful/possible? Do you know details about this?I can never remember the numbers of types of radar. However, the early successes by warships against U-boats were achieved with 150cm radar. The British had found a way to miniaturise the components, which previously had to be carried on very large warships. Thus, in March 1941, five U-boats were detected and sunk by surprise around just one or two convoys in the Atlantic, by only two radar-fitted destroyers. Three of the U-boats sunk were commanded by aces: Kretschmer, Prien and Schepke.

It was not until mid-1942 that BdU accepted that Allied warships were fitted with radar (still 150 cm), and by August 1942 Allied aircraft were carrying 150 cm radar too. This led to the development of the German radar detector Metox. The Allies introduced 10 cm radar to aircraft and warships starting around September 1942, but this radar only began to make an impact (compared with 150 cm radar) when fitted to aircraft over the Bay of Biscay in 1943. Metox could not detect the lower frequency.

Radar carried by destroyers was less effective at detecting U-boats, because the seas are high and the top of the destroyer is low (compared with an aircraft). Thus U-boat commanders continued to make wolf-pack attacks at night even when they knew that the escorts were fitted with radar. Firstly, the nearest warship might not have detected any U-boat. Secondly, even if it had detected 10 U-boats, it could still attack only one U-boat at a time.

As late as 1944, standard U-boat training emphasised night-surface attacks, and I have seen many accounts of U-boats that surfaced at night in 1944, even in calm waters, in order to attack a convoy or single ships. The U-boats were often detected by radar, but could still complete their attack, then escape detection (from long-range radar) by diving. The U-boats would hope to escape the subsequent asdic search, with its much shorter range.

@Hitman:
Concerning effect of time compression (TC) on aircraft attacks in SH3:
It has always been the case that high TC results in fewer air attacks. The reason is that U-boat and aircraft move in jumps across the sea (in SH3), and the higher the TC, the larger the jumps between each test of detection by the SH3 code. Therefore, the higher the TC, the more likely it is that the aircraft has jumped over the U-boat without either side being detected. (I'm sure you knew all this already. I mention it only for the benefit of newer players of SH3.)

However, I have found a more interesting discovery. With NYGM and SH3, it used to be that aircraft *never* attacked at TC above 1024. From NYGM 3.4, aircraft *do* attack at TC 2048 and 4096, although these attacks are much less common than attacks at TC 1024 and lower, for the reason stated above.

I have no idea why this change has occurred.

Stiebler.

Hitman

09-14-11, 01:25 PM

However, I have found a more interesting discovery. With NYGM and SH3, it used to be that aircraft *never* attacked at TC above 1024. From NYGM 3.4, aircraft *do* attack at TC 2048 and 4096, although these attacks are much less common than attacks at TC 1024 and lower, for the reason stated above.

I have no idea why this change has occurred.

I found similar effects when switching mods and even stock game.

Apparently the key is the detection range, i.e. early in the war units only have the visual sensor so at high TC they quickly jump over the area where they could detect mutually. Later in the war, however, you start receiving many reports of radar detection that drop TC from high figures. The reason is that the detection range of radar detectors is much larger, and the unit's jumps at hight TC do not take it out of detection area before the next "pass" of the sensor's system.

Did you by chance make modifications in the detection ranges or effectiveness of anti-radar?

I made some experiments long ago giving aircraft a super visual sensor of 100 miles or so, to see if they would overcome the jumps and detect the uboat but no joy. However, the radar detector coupled with radar emissions from the airplan did work flawlessly to enlarge the detections range, so I suspect that somehow detection must be given mutual chances by the game engine, i.e. that the enemy unit detects the uboat is not enough to drop TC if it is not within uboat's sensor ranges. Obviously, enlarging them to enable detection of airplanes at greater range will screw the general gameplay, but a solution would be to experiment with a limited sensor, with a minimum heigth that does not allow it to detect ships, but only airplanes, and that can't identify friend or foe and will not trigger reports, but just make TC drop. :hmmm:

andqui

09-14-11, 04:52 PM

With regards to aircraft and TC detection- I thought of something that would be best fixed in a hardcode patch- I'm using GWX3 with MEPv3, and I am never surprised by any aircraft in good weather. Under these circumstances I have not once spotted a plane at a range below 10 km or so, and the only time I've been surprised has been at night when I heard the aircraft engines before my watchcrew spotted the plane. However, this has occurred only once, at night, whereas I think that even in daylight there would be a chance that an aircraft could approach undetected until it was close. Is that assumption valid, and is this just me?

h.sie

09-14-11, 05:27 PM

Could it be possible to have electric propulsion while surfaced?
And could also be possible to manage each engine indIvidually?
I mean you can put starboard engine full ahead and portboard stop or whatever combination you want.
Just only one suggest to study when you have time
Thanks for your great work

That would be possible, but the hardest part would be to add new Dials which are needed for controlling this new bahaviour! And: IIRC, someone in the past mentioned that this would not bring any gameplay benefit, since the detection probability would not be changed (because of poor modelling of engine sound?)

But I put it on my growing ToDo-List. Priority: High!!
----------------------------------------------------
(The priority levels of my ToDo-List are: Extremely High, VeryVery High, Very High and High)

complutum

09-14-11, 06:07 PM

many thanks for your reply, as i posted it was only one suggest.

I'm using your V15G2 version and in my oppinion it gives a lot of inmersion on the role of a real u boat commander. it's just other game, not SH3.

h.sie

09-15-11, 04:58 AM

@complutum: sorry for not being able to fulfil all suggestions/wishes, but I'm glad you like it anyway. Happy hunting!

h.sie

09-15-11, 04:36 PM

I would be very thankful if some native english speaker could help me to make some messages. Sure, I am able to write in english, but I'm not able to make the messages sound military-like.......thus, I need help. Thank you!!

For the forthcoming Wolfpack Mod there will be 6 different categories of BDU responses to the players contact reports. For each category, I need more than only one message, in order to have more variety:

Category 1 (4 messages required):
-------------------------------------------
BDU orders player to attack the convoy alone without mentioning details. Example: "Attack convoy in your sole discretion. Awaiting status report after attack. Good luck."

Category 2 (4 messages required):
-------------------------------------------
The 1st response of the BDU on a new contact report. Some praise for the player. Other Uboats are not far away and are ordered to form a wolfpack and intercept the convoy. Contact reports should be sent hourly. Example: "Good work! Hold contact and sent contact reports every hour."

Category 3 (10 messages required):
-------------------------------------------
The 2nd and further response of the BDU on an report on an established contact. Contact reports should still be sent hourly. Example: "Contact report received. Continue sending hourly. Beware of aircraft."

Category 4 (4 messages required):
-------------------------------------------
The wolfpack Uboats have reached their interception positions. Attack will start in the next time (no exact time known). No further contact reports in order to prevent from detection. Example: "Uboats are in operation area. Will attack soon. Radio silence from now on. Good luck!"

Category 5 (4 messages required):
-------------------------------------------
For certain reasons (bad weather, fuel problems, infrequent contact reports) the wolfpack Uboats are not able to reach the interception point in time, thus, the player is ordered to attack alone. Example: "Wolfpack is unable to find the convoy. Attack alone. Good luck."

Category 6 (4 messages required):
-------------------------------------------
Wolfpack Uboats have been sunk/damaged/chased away by enemy (hunter-killer groups or similar, in 1943 and later). Thus, the player is ordered to attack alone. Example: "Contact to wolfpack Uboats lost. U-145 sunk, U-443 missed. Attack alone in your sole discretion."

Hitman

09-16-11, 04:39 AM

Sounds great :up:

For further reading on standing orders to the UBoats regarding wolfpacks, you can see the UBoat Commander's Handbook here:

http://www.hnsa.org/doc/uboat/index.htm#par340

See paragraphs: 310 onwards, 340 onwards

complutum

09-16-11, 04:50 AM

Robin40

09-16-11, 11:00 AM

I need to know how to change the names of german supply ships to allow them be used as u tankers. this is mentioned in the frist post of this thread, but i'm not sure how to do it. I mean which file i must look for.

thanks in advance.

Go to

Data/Campaigns/Campaign_SCR

Open file

Find with Find option

Python
Belchen Supply Ship (2 items)
Corrientes
Thalia
Bessel
Max Albrecht
Charlotte Schliemann

Make a backup of the file

Change names

Save it

Stiebler

09-16-11, 02:42 PM

@H.sie:
I would be very thankful if some native english speaker could help me to make some messages. Sure, I am able to write in english, but I'm not able to make the messages sound military-like.......thus, I need help. Thank you!!

For the forthcoming Wolfpack Mod there will be 6 different categories of BDU responses to the players contact reports. For each category, I need more than only one message, in order to have more variety:Here are my ideas for signals from BdU for wolfpack attacks.

Please note that there is a slight misunderstanding about contact reports and homing signals. The procedure was this: 1. The U-boat making contact with a convoy would make a sighting report. 2. BdU would then EITHER release the U-boat for individual attack OR order the U-boat to send out homing signals on which other U-boats could converge.

Thus, there is no need for your ‘Category 3’ signals. BdU should remain silent, or the code should say simply ‘Homing signal transmitted’ to confirm that the contact message has been sent.

Also, your categories (5) and (6) can be merged. BdU would never tell a U-boat holding contact that a wolfpack would not arrive because all the boats had been sunk or damaged! Think of the effect on morale! Besides, probably BdU would not know itself the fate of the wolfpack.

Category 1:
a) Full freedom of manoeuvre granted.
b) Individual attack recommended for tonight.
c) No support available - attack at discretion.
d) Looks like you’re on your own - attack at will.

Category 2:
a) Good work! Maintain contact. Homing signals every hour.
b) Well done! Transmit hourly. Other boats on way.
c) Curb your impatience! We’re sending U-Hsie. Hourly transmissions needed.
d) At last a convoy! Stick with it until pack arrives. Request hourly updates.

Category 3:
[Not needed] ‘Homing signal transmitted.’

Category 4:
a) Pack has assembled. Expect joint attack tonight.
b) Pack reports contact. You are released for attack.
c) U 123 to take over as shadower of convoy. Attack at will.
d) Boats in position. Commence operation tonight. Attack! Sink!

Category 5/6:
a) Cannot assemble wolfpack in time. Freedom of manoeuvre granted.
b) U 123 reports mechanical difficulties. Attack alone tonight.
c) Pack is low on fuel. You are on your own - good luck!
d) Pack reports local fog. You are cleared for solo attack.
e) Pack has disbanded. Attack at will.
f) U-123 reports strong aerial activity around convoy. Assume you must attack alone.
g) Enemy reinforcements will join convoy tomorrow. Don’t wait for others, attack tonight.
h) Weather expected to deteriorate. Attack at dusk.

Stiebler.

LGN1

09-16-11, 03:29 PM

Hi Stiebler,

thanks for your reply about the radar questions!

Concerning the messages: The problem is that we cannot have homing signals in SH3 (without much work) and therefore, the contact report feature is used to simulate homing signals. Neglecting the signals/contact report is also not possible because a) it's used to calculate the chance for a wolfpack and b) in areas with aircover sending the message increases the chance for being attacked (or does this only hold for the status report???). This is a very good aspect of using the contact report feature.

Anyway, since anyone can later adapt the messages to his taste, it's not really important what the exact wording is. H.sie's current version allows a lot of flexibility and whether players use this or not is up to them.

Regards, LGN1

PS: I agree that BDU would not send a message that U-xxx has been sunk,..., but I'm sure that sometimes BDU had the knowledge (U-boats sending messages that they scuttle the boat, U-boats not responding for some time,...). Anyway, for immersion reasons some player might like it.

PS 2: I would not include any reference to planes or aerial activity because it might be that the contact is early in the war and in the middle of the Atlantic. In this case it might sound strange (and maybe use different U-xxx numbers so that it will not become repetitive).

Kpt. Lehmann

09-16-11, 03:37 PM

Hello all.

I may be late to the party here, but I don't think I've posted my thoughts on this thread... and I should have.

To H.Sie, Stiebler, and all who have put so much effort into this impressive body of work, thank you for undertaking it. Cheers to all of you.

Sink'em all! :up::up::up:

h.sie

09-16-11, 03:54 PM

@Stiebler: Thanks, J. for the messages!!!!

I know about the difference between contact report and homing signals ("Peilsignale" in german I think).

BUT: We have to live with some compromises:

1) In SH3 we don't have the GUI- and code infrastructure for sending special homing signals, we only have "contact report".

2) There surely was some communication between the wolfpack subs. But since it was very hard / impossible to establish an intelligent communication between the wolfpack subs and the player sub (which fits each possible situation) we decided to use the already available code infrastructure for the communication between the BDU and the player sub (BDU responds to contact reports) instead, with some generic messages for game athmosphere reasons.

3) Since our AI-Subs are dumb, we have programmed a BDU-AI that leads the AI-Subs to the convoy. This BDU-AI (sometimes) needs the players course (and speed) estimations of the convoy in order to lead the AI-Subs into the correct area. This cannot be done with a simple homing signal.

Despite these simplifications I have now almost 1000 lines of assembler code (including comments).

h.sie

09-16-11, 03:58 PM

@Kpt. Lehmann: Thanks very much. Without the huge effort of the Supermod creators (GWX, NYGM, LSH, WAC, CCoM), who made sh3 a great sim, I wouldn't have started to try to polish it a little bit.

Stiebler

09-17-11, 02:00 AM

@LGN1, H.sie,

Yes, I understand that you have to use 'Report Contact' to mimick 'Homing Signals'.

What I intended to say, was that this difference means that the BdU signals must be constructed a little differently (as I have done) in order to maintain the *pretence* that the player is sending homing signals.

As you say, it really doesn't matter much.

[Edit: Good idea, LGN1, that the U-numbers in messages could be randomly changed.
My vague message about 'strong air activity' could mean anything, even imagination from a wolf-pack commander, so it is probably safe to use. Even in 1940, two attacks on a U-boat by one Sunderland might be construed as 'strong aerial activity', to those commanders who usually saw no aircraft at all.]

Stiebler.

Sittingwolf

09-20-11, 08:24 AM

Hi everyone,

I'm wondering if it could be possible to add using of electrical engines by all the u-boats in the game, when surfaced (as one of the options via Stiebler comfortable selector), like it was in the reality so that to be less visible and exposed in some situations to the opponent. I saw that situation in Das Boot film
Best,

Hitman

09-20-11, 08:50 AM

@Sittingwolf: This was already answered some posts ago, look one or two pages back :up:

Sittingwolf

09-20-11, 10:19 AM

@Sittingwolf: This was already answered some posts ago, look one or two pages back :up:

Thanks Hit, I saw that. Maybe in some time and with another generation of V15 issued.
Who knows.

rik007

09-24-11, 01:20 AM

H.Sie,

Thanks for your outstanding achievements! I do not know if it has been asked before but I wonder if there is a way to extend the range at which the game will slow down the the TC to the AirEnemyDetecte value as aircrafts are detected by the game. If extended a solution could be created for the issue that airplanes are not detected at high TC (above 256).

I cannot find it myself. I do not know where to start either.

Rik

h.sie

09-24-11, 04:54 AM

@SittingWOlf, Rik007: Thanks for your suggestions. I keep them in mind for my future work. Maybe I find a way to do that. But at the moment I exclusively focus on my current work.

h.sie

09-24-11, 04:57 AM

It's done! Yesterday I finished programming. I now make an Alpha-Test bundle and then we can start the Alpha-Test period of the Wolfpack Mod.

Hitman

09-24-11, 05:13 AM

:yeah::yeah::yeah:

reaper7

09-24-11, 07:14 AM

It's done! Yesterday I finished programming. I now make an Alpha-Test bundle and then we can start the Alpha-Test period of the Wolfpack Mod.

Well done h.sie another monumental milestone for sh3 :Kaleun_Applaud:

Robin40

09-24-11, 08:39 AM

This is not sh3...it's sh9:yeah:

h.sie

09-24-11, 10:21 AM

The best strategy to be satisfied is to have not too high expectations. It will not be perfect, but a considerable step forward - compared to what we have so far.

Magic1111

09-24-11, 11:24 AM

It's done! Yesterday I finished programming. I now make an Alpha-Test bundle and then we can start the Alpha-Test period of the Wolfpack Mod.

:woot::woot::yeah::yeah::woot::woot:

Hitman

09-24-11, 11:34 AM

Fish In The Water

09-24-11, 02:41 PM

The best strategy to be satisfied is to have not too high expectations. It will not be perfect, but a considerable step forward - compared to what we have so far.

A very judicious point of view, that everyone should embrace :up:

Agreed. Something is a lot better than nothing and no one should expect perfection straight out of the shoot. I've followed the development of this mod with great interest, and news of an impending alpha test is most welcome. :woot:

h.sie

09-24-11, 06:55 PM

Wolfpack Mod Alpha Version 1 is online.

http://www.mediafire.com/?2ex2hsyk1silas6 (http://www.mediafire.com/?raxlajcdz1xsl)

LGN1: Idea, research
h.sie: Programming

Instructions:

1) Patch sh3.exe as usual to V16A0.

2) Put patched sh3.exe into Supplement folder (where the dll's are).

3) Activate Supplement Folder (and overwrite Campaign.scr and xx_menu.txt, that's okay for testing purposes).

4) Load Single Mission "Wolfpack". (Instructions for Career mode will follow soon).

5) In Single Mission "Wolfpack" just set TC to high value and wait.

6) When you see a convoy, estimate it's course and speed and put these values into the two TDC dials (German: Zielrichtung & Gegnerfahrt, English: Bearing & Speed) and then send the contact report. You'll see these two values in the contact report. sh3 no more calculates them for you. It's your job now. From now on you are the contact holder and you have to shadow the convoy and send contact reports every hour. But it's also possible that no Uboats are available to help you. Then, BDU orders to attack alone.

The speed and course values are (sometimes) necessary to lead the wolfpack subs into the operation area. You'll also get some response from BDU. Follow these instructions. But sometimes BDU messages get lost or come too late - chaos, as in real life. If the wolfpack reaches the operation area, BDU will wait for good attack conditions (dark and no fog) and then order to attack (but sometimes this order does not come in time or gets lost). Then, some time later, the convoy battle (hopefully) begins. Use the binocs or the peri, but not the external cam.

The time period influences the behaviour. In early times, no wolfpack subs are available. In 1942 the chance is very high that a wolfpack is available to help you. From 1943 on, the chance strongly rises, that hunter-killer groups sink/damage the wolfpack subs, so that they don't reach their operation area. Then, BDU orders to attack alone.

The area also influences the behaviour. Wolfpacks are available in the north- and south atlantic, but not near land.

It is very important to send contact reports on a regulary basis, every hour. Otherwise the chance strongly rises that the wolfpack isn't able to find the interception point in time. Then, you have to attack alone.

The higher the windspeed, the higher the chance that the wolfpack subs get fuel problems or similar and don't reach the interception point in time.

-----------
Rules for Savegames/Reloads:

Single-Missons:
Don't save/reload Single Missions. Enemy units are dumb after reload.

Career:
1) Game must run 3 minutes after (re)loading before sending a contact report.
2) After sending a contact report, wait 3 minutes and then save the game.

-----------
Credits:

Thanks to LGN1. Without his brilliant idea and findings, this mod would not be possible.
Thanks to Sergbuto for giving permission to use/modify his AI-Subs.
Thanks to Stiebler, SqareSteelBar and Hitman for help, support, knowledge.
Thanks to all testers in the past and future.
Last but not least: Thanks to the sh3 - programmers. For a good sim.

Looking forward for your testing reports.
H.Sie

Victor Schutze

09-24-11, 08:22 PM

Brilliant! h.sie :rock:
we can officially rename sh3 as SH9 as someone suggested ealrlier. :smug:

h.sie

09-25-11, 04:04 AM

Please note: Not every contact leads to a convoy battle. At good conditions (1942, north atlantic, no storm, no fog, hourly contact reports, good course estimation, no hunter-killers) the chance that the wolfpack intercepts the convoy is about 50 and 60% (depending on the initial distance between the wolfpack and the convoy).

So you may need to play the mission more than once to see a convoy battle.

rik007

09-25-11, 04:33 AM

I did recieve the messages from BDU. Unfortunately no other boats were available yet. But I will try again. I'm very curious what will happen when there are boats in the area and the attack command is given! :)

h.sie

09-25-11, 04:37 AM

@Rik: If in the current mission the state is "no boats available", then this state does not change for some days. Thus, I recommend to start the same mission again and try again. New roll-a-dice.

Thanks for testing!

h.sie

09-25-11, 05:00 AM

When wolfpack reached interception position, don't expect BDU order to attack and 1 minute later the battle begins. There was chaos - no good synchronization. Thus, it's possible that one wolfpack boat attacks before you get the order to attack. Or, you never get the order to attack or you get the order to attack but the attack begins 1 hour later or the wolfpack doesn't attack at all......because of "unknown" resons.....

Hitman

09-25-11, 05:13 AM

There are two files in the link, one of them "BDU AI" is password protected. I guess we only really need the other pack, right?

h.sie

09-25-11, 05:14 AM

@Hitman: Yep. I deleted the other file.

h.sie

09-25-11, 06:51 AM

The purpose of this alpha test period is to get some experiences and to fine-adjust some parameters and probabilities.

It must also be tested whether the cause of the chaos in attack synchronisation, the strongly varying BDU response time on contact reports (30 minutes to 3 hours), is okay. I didn't change it so far, but could make it less varying, if necessary, in order to reduce chaos and enhance attack synchronisation.

LGN1

09-25-11, 06:59 AM

A few months ago h.sie wrote something along the line '... in principle everything is possible now. Even wolfpacks some day.' I think the day has come! :yeah: Thank you very much for this great work, h.sie! I know how much work it was for you and I'm extremely glad that you continued the work despite all the setbacks!

I think this is a good opportunity to thank h.sie also once again for all the other great patches he did, e.g., the 'WO automatically moves to the bridge' patch; something players wanted to have from the beginning of SH3. I know that h.sie has worked very hard during the last year to create all the patches and that he worked alone almost all the time. With remarkable persistence he learned the required skills, studied SH3, and made dreams come true. And most important for us, he had the courage to share his work despite all the legal issues surrounding a modified executable.

Thanks again for all of this, h.sie. :salute: :salute: :salute:

LGN1

h.sie

09-25-11, 07:07 AM

Please first test. Only if the mod is good, time has come to say "Thank you"!

LGN1

09-25-11, 07:12 AM

I knew your reply even before you posted :03: :haha::salute:

Wolfstriked

09-25-11, 10:29 AM

Videos folks.:woot:

Hitman

09-25-11, 11:12 AM

Hmmm strange thing, it doesn't allow me to patch my SH3.exe (Cracked version), but previous versions of your patch had no problem with it. :hmmm:

SquareSteelBar

09-25-11, 11:44 AM

Yep - V16A0 patch doesn't work with 'reloaded' sh3.exe

rik007

09-25-11, 01:00 PM

What is the actual signal for the start of the attack I recieved "Individual attack recommended" and "full movement granted"? Two attempts failed due to fog after shadowing the convoy for 1.5 day. Still trying!

h.sie

09-25-11, 03:03 PM

h.sie

09-25-11, 03:21 PM

@rik007: Thanks for your patience. Some details:

If you are shadowing a convoy, the BDU-AI is in HOLD_CONTACT state. Then, you receive orders to continue shadowing.

If you get a message like "Individual attack recommended", then the BDU-AI is in ATTACK_ALONE state.

I programmed the BDU-AI so that it cannot directly go from HOLD_CONTACT into ATTACK_ALONE state.

I'm 100% sure that something important happened between HOLD_CONTACT and ATTACK_ALONE state (maybe wolfpack sunk or out of fuel? or BDU ordered wolfpack attack?) but the corresponding message has been lost.

Messages get lost, if you send a new contact report before you got a reply to a previous contact report.

Contact reports are hourly, but response time of BDU is sometimes longer than 1 hour -> message lost.

I could maybe fix that, but my idea was to firstly leave it as it is, because I hoped this could model reality: Messages got lost and the Kaleun was irritated and helpless. I'm not cynical when I say that your irritation is part of the reality.....

If the problem with lost messages gets too large, I'll try to fix it by reducing the response time to values below 1 hour.

Glad you are still trying. There is a lot of randomness, thus, every mission will be different.

Stiebler

09-25-11, 03:41 PM

@H.sie, LGN1:

Feedback - wolf-packs mod.

Instead of using the single mission file, I added the whole pack to NYGM and played it in late 1942 in campaign mode.

I had no difficulty patching my Starforce-free SH3.exe with the patch-kit. Of course, the use of files derived from GWX caused a certain amount of unfamiliarity with my NYGM set-up, but nothing serious. I needed a short learning curve to understand how to send contact signals, but again that all functioned correctly once I had mastered the system.

I have made a total of four attacks on convoys in two patrols. All have responded correctly - that is, as programmed - but there are a number of minor difficulties with operation.

1. Every time that I signalled 'contact report' in daylight, in a patrol west of Ireland, I was attacked by either land or carrier-based aircraft. I'm not sure what can be done about that - except to attack convoys in the air-gap in mid-Atlantic, as in real life!

2. Contact reports have to be sent every one hour, but it is impossible to send a contact report in less than one hour after the previous. (This should be made clear in notes/instructions).

3. It is very hard to maintain contact on a convoy in perfect visibility, without being detected by the convoy escort. After that it is necessary to dive quickly, and stay dived for several hours, and I believe the delay before re-signalling causes the wolf-pack to lose contact.

4. The 'Contact Convoy' button is rather erratic in use. I noticed exactly the same problem when creating my 'Smoke-on-the-horizon' mod, and it is evident that your Wolfpack mod suffers from the same problems:
a) At least two ships must be in sight for the button to function.
b) In light fog or at night, you may need to see 6-10 ships before the button functions.
The result is that one presses the 'Convoy Contact' button about every hour, and it says 'Message Sent', but frequently the message is not sent. It is necessary to send the messages from the Radio Messages screen (press 'M' to get it), in order to confirm that the message was sent.

However, there is no doubt that the functionality is working correctly, although I have yet to see any sign of an attack by your Type VIIF AI U-boats.

On one occasion, I saw instead an attack by the NYGM/SSB/Sergbuto VIIA AI U-boats. I was interested to see whether this caused any kind of conflict, since the Wolfpacks mod assumes that it is always the player U-boat that calls in the AI U-boats, while the old NYGM system assumes that it is the AI U-boats that attack before the player arrives. However, since the VIIF boats failed to arrive, the answer to this conflict remains unknown to me.

At this time, no difficulty with reloads of saved games, after convoy attacks - but (to say it again) I have seen no VIIF boats present to cause potential problems.

These are very encouraging results, but for *test* purposes perhaps the probability of attack by VIIF boats should be increased.

These preliminary results released in order to encourage others: I see above that some other potential users have had difficulties with the mod.

Stiebler.

Robin40

09-25-11, 03:48 PM

No possibility to apply hsie Options Selector?:hmmm:

h.sie

09-25-11, 03:54 PM

OptionsSelector not necessary for alpha testing

Robin40

09-25-11, 03:58 PM

OptionsSelector not necessary for alpha testing

ah...OK:up:

LGN1

09-25-11, 04:14 PM

Hi Stiebler,

thanks for your reply! Just a few quick comments:

@H.sie, LGN1:

1. Every time that I signalled 'contact report' in daylight, in a patrol west of Ireland, I was attacked by either land or carrier-based aircraft. I'm not sure what can be done about that - except to attack convoys in the air-gap in mid-Atlantic, as in real life!

H.sie and I discussed this problem some time ago. Like what you say, I think it is realistic and not a real problem. Shadowing a convoy with aircover should be very hard. This feature should give the air-gap in SH3 much more importance (as it had in real-life).

3. It is very hard to maintain contact on a convoy in perfect visibility, without being detected by the convoy escort. After that it is necessary to dive quickly, and stay dived for several hours, and I believe the delay before re-signalling causes the wolf-pack to lose contact.

The probability for the wolfpack to assemble quickly drops off with increasing time intervals between the messages. Maybe this requires a small parameter adjustment :hmmm:

4. The 'Contact Convoy' button is rather erratic in use. I noticed exactly the same problem when creating my 'Smoke-on-the-horizon' mod, and it is evident that your Wolfpack mod suffers from the same problems:
a) At least two ships must be in sight for the button to function.
b) In light fog or at night, you may need to see 6-10 ships before the button functions.
The result is that one presses the 'Convoy Contact' button about every hour, and it says 'Message Sent', but frequently the message is not sent. It is necessary to send the messages from the Radio Messages screen (press 'M' to get it), in order to confirm that the message was sent.

I strongly recommend to send the contact report only via the Radio Message Screen ('M'). I think this should be mentioned in the documentation later.

The required visual detection of a few ships is quite problematic. I've discussed that already with h.sie in the context of late-war attacks when many escorts have radar and you hardly get close to the convoy (mostly you shadow via hydrophone and radar warning receivers). Unfortunately, this problem seems to be quite difficult to solve. :-?

Cheers, LGN1

h.sie

09-25-11, 04:36 PM

@Stiebler: Thanks very much for your detailed report.

If BDU ordered you to shadow a convoy, that indicates that you added the whole pack correctly into your .scr campaign file.

Regarding the difficulties you mentioned:

1) If I'm informed correctly, sending contact reports and homing signals was risky near the coast where aircraft density is high. So I think (hope) the behavoiur isn't that unrealistic. I would answer the same: attack convoys in the air-gap in mid-Atlantic, as in real life!

2) For certain reasons I could not reduce the time between contact reports to a value lower than 55 minutes. But you are right: A note about that will go into the documentation.

3) I have no solution for this problem. The environment / sensor combination I used for testing allowed me to shadow a convoy at daylight without being detected (but I had to be very careful). By the way: Shouldn't an Uboat watchcrew see an escort much earlier than the escorts watchcrew sees the Uboat (because the difference in ship volume/surface?)

4) I always used the Press 'M' - method to send contact reports, and for a long time I didn't know about the other alternative. Thus, I didn't mention it. But this point will also go into the documentation.

X) If BDU orders wolfpack attack and you entered the right convoy course (coarse estimation is sufficient) then there should be a convoy battle in the next time. Try to set TC to 16 or 32 and wait ....... or dive and listen, sometimes your sonar man reports the AI-Subs ....

Good idea. I also thought about to enlarge the probability of an convoy attack of the VIIF boats for testing purposes.....

I made save/reload tests with VIIF DURING A CONVOY BATTLE with burning ships. No problems. Never had any problems with CTD and stability. Funny that so many people have problems.

Thanks again, J.
H.Sie

h.sie

09-25-11, 04:55 PM

40 downloads in 1 day. nobody saw a convoy battle?

makman94

09-25-11, 08:06 PM

Today is the 'zero' day for sh3 - sh4 - sh5 !

H.Sie and all your 'company' that involved in this ..... the sh community is just celebrating and starts a new chapter at silent hunter series ...exactly today ...thanks to all of you !

i tested your mission and everything i saw is very promising and convising !! VERY VERY GOOD JOB ! in fact ...i don't know if there are words to congratulate all of you...
you are writting the gold history for sh series ! realy...hacking the executables is making 'miracles' ...eh ?

my set up for the mission :

1) i used the MEP 20km (with my visual sensors) --i don't know if there is anyone that can play seriously at 'smaller' envs . a ship with a small mast=25m can be seen by a u-boat observer at about 26km distance . if we could ...we need a even much 'bigger' than 20km environment . we need one up to about 32 - 33 km (but experts here saying that is impossible to create a bigger than 20km env) ,so my point is that you all have to 'forget' the 16km environments

2) i removed from the mission the destroyers for just shadowing easily the convoy and test the wolfpack mission

everything works very nice and i find very brilliant the idea to 'inform' the bdu for convoy's course and speed through tdc's dials !! very brilliant !!

ps: i ,aslo , didn't like the fact that i can't send contact report any time i want . why not to send report anytime ? more 'updates'-reports to bdu...the better or...no ??

and the pics of proof : Wolfpacks are REAL in sh3 !! (H.Sie: was only one the u-boat that attacked---WITH TORPS !!!! --- the convoy or more than one ? i was very far from the 'action' when took place)

message from bdu ...setting the wolfpack on route :

http://img101.imageshack.us/img101/2677/14088140.png

the time of the attack (i turned the boat to move in but i was very far) :

http://img831.imageshack.us/img831/3576/49028541.png

view of wolfpack attack from my bridge :

http://img600.imageshack.us/img600/6343/18051877.png

the spotted wolfpack u-boat while attacking :

http://img508.imageshack.us/img508/2819/27779127.png

================

rik007

09-25-11, 10:33 PM

Makman, Did the Wolfpack u-boat actually hit something?

PapaKilo

09-26-11, 12:58 AM

Sending contacts hourly seems to be pointless for me. If the Convoy is actually maintaining course and speed unchanged for 24 hours. It should be enough to report every 24 hours of a position of the convoy.

Exclusions to report BDU about changes of convoy course or speed should be done only if that is actually necessary. (otherwise 1 report every 24 hour should be enough) The u-boat commander shouldn't be risking of losing stealth every hour by surfacing, while he shadows a convoy.

About messages getting lost thing ? Ahm.. now how exactly are they getting lost if the message IS actually sent ? If the u-boats would have used post pigeons to carry the messages, this loss would be self explanatory in more ways, rather that radio wave is lost ? :hmmm:

If I was a u-boat commander in RL I wouldn't want to stay in eternal visual contact with the convoy and sending contact every hour, thus increasing the chance that something can go unplanned. It's not always the aircraft that brings great threat to a u-boat, but also destroyers/escorts. I'm not sure wether "Huff Duff antennas" (radio direction finders ) work in GWX but as you know, destroyers also had fair chances to detect a u-boat that is sending reports with info about convoy..
I would be shadowing convoy in periscope view following it by hydrophones, surfacing only to catch up with the convoy to visual range say every 6 hours, to check if the course and speed is the same. I would also do this at night more often than in clear daylight..

h.sie

09-26-11, 01:16 AM

@makman: Glad that we had at least one success!! Great. Please be not that optimistic. There is still some work to do. It is not possible to reduce the time between contact reports to a value below 55minutes because of certain reasons.

@rik: Look at the NavMap makman posted. You see a wreck that has been sunk. Look at the picture through the binocular. There you see the torpedo impact explosion.

@PapaKilo: According to the UboatCommender's Handbook - which we took as reference- the Contact holder had to send contact reports / homing signals every hour (somtimes even every 30 minutes). If there is high density of enemy aircraft, you can decide NOT to send these signals, but then the chance rises that the wolfpack takes a wrong route and cannot be in operation area in time.

Do you have any historical information that the rule of hourly homing signals was not practiced?

Indeed, we have to discuss about that "lost messages" problem. If too many (important) messages get lost, I'll try to fix that.

PapaKilo

09-26-11, 01:22 AM

@PapaKilo: According to the UboatCommender's Handbook - which we took as reference- the Contact holder had to send contact reports / homing signals every hour (somtimes even every 30 minutes). If there is high density of enemy aircraft, you can decide NOT to send these signals, but then the chance rises that the wolfpack takes a wrong route and cannot be in operation area in time.

It must be related due to often convoy zig zag curse that probably happened in RL.

In GWX we have more stable convoy routes I guess :DL

h.sie

09-26-11, 01:24 AM

@PapaKoilo: I have GWX / NYGM hybrid and have a lot of zig Zag because I use LGN1's zigzag mod.

PapaKilo

09-26-11, 01:35 AM

@PapaKoilo: I have GWX / NYGM hybrid and have a lot of zig Zag because I use LGN1's zigzag mod.

So it is self explanatory thing why you have to stay in such frequent radio contact with BDU.

LGN1 zigzag mod will deffinetly cause a PITA to most Captains I already feel that :haha:

On the other hand, zig zag course wasn't very economic regarding fuel wasn't it ? Not to mention FORCED course changes in high seas where ships had to turn their bows to incoming waves, thus deviating from original destination course..

so does that mean if I'm not using LGN's zig zag mod, do I still have to send reports hourly ?

PapaKilo

09-26-11, 02:16 AM

Do you have any historical information that the rule of hourly homing signals was not practiced?

I coudn't find any information on aprooval or deny of hourly homing signals. But It's not that hard to imagine the decisions of captains that were actually shadowing a convoy. What he really wanted was to maintain a contact with the convoy (visual/hydrophone), checking it's course/speed 2-3 times per 24 hours, thus minimizing chances of losing stealth and further consequencies.

I do also believe if the exact course or speed could not be reported due to bad visibility, u-boat radioman could send position of the u-boat istelf with estimated course of a convoy, moreover as we know that experienced sonarguys were able to read estimated speed of a ship by the noise of it's screw (RPM), it gave also some bonus for a u-boat to stay in the contact as long as possible..

h.sie

09-26-11, 02:23 AM

@PapaKilo: Good point. The problem: Currently, one can only use the "Send contact report" button, if one has visible contact to the convoy. Thus, the method of shadowing by hydrophone contact does not work. But LGN1 and me also discussed that point.

Maybe I can remove that restriction, so that shadowing by hydrophone contact is possible?

What do you think about that, LGN1 and Stiebler?

Hitman

09-26-11, 02:43 AM

Despite not being able myself to test this, there are already several things I can comment considering the feedback already posted.

1.- First and foremost, it is obvious that by bringing the game closer to reality in terms of tactics to be employed, we are hitting against the game limitations and there is a need to circumvent this. I'm taking about the visibility, and its hardcoded 20km limit in the game (No units are physically rendered beyond that, but they are detectable).

In real life, the Uboat would be overhauling/following the convoy at the very same visibility limit, constantly going in and out, and keeping contact. This is described by the UBoat Commander's handbooks as one of the most difficult and strenuous manevuers, and is therefore reserved to the captain -the better trained at that.

But as Stiebler has already said, in the game it is quite difficult to keep in touch with the convoy, while at the same time not being detected by the escorts. The main reason for this is that we need to stay too close when compared with real life, as we have a 16km limit (20km in some mods).

In my opinion, only a sensor workaround with the use of a proper 20km environment mod will allow correct results. Alternatively, a 16km mod with additional curve in the horizon and again revised sensors could work, but the first one is the better solution.

This obviously far exceeds H.Sie's scope, so I would recommend it to be developed by either active mod creators for their own mods (NYGM) or someone else to take the task for the finished ones (GWX, WAC)

A separate discussion of this issue in another thread is wellcomed.

2.- There seems to be some confussion between homing signal and radio reports. UBoats had both the ordinary radio we all know well, and a beacon/homing signal that emitted automatically each X minutes/hours. This was used to locate an uboat by another unit, and was used f.e. sometimes by the Milkcows to home the other uboats to them. This was also the method initially used to vector other uboats to the contact holder, but was progressively disregarded due to the risk of being counterdetected.

Then there are the radio reports, which are the method to report to BDU what has been found, and after that, appropiate only when the convoy changes course or speed noticeably -which again is not the same as doing a zig-zag in their leg-.

Hence, we can say that after the initial report of course and speed, the uboat would only do aditional radio reports about course or speed when either big changes are made, or he can confirm the values as correct. In the other ocasions, the contact holder would probably use the homing beacon signal.

In my opinion, the wolfpack should be able to intercept with just one initial report of course and speed, as long as it is accurate and the convoy doesn't change it -even if the player sends no more signals. The reason is that BDU and other uboats would calculate a plot with 1st contact, predict the course and run there. It is not uncommon when reading books to see that one uboat loses the convoy but another one finds it when raciing to intercept. Note that Uboats made a line abreast and when one detected a convoy, the others converged there, so if the convoy changes course it might stumble upon one of the other uboats vectoring in.

EDIT:

Here are the relevant sections from the UKH:

315.) While carrying out its own attack, the submarine must transmit regular and complete contact reports, according to the following headings:
a) The two first boats to make contact, acting as "contact holders," transmit complete hourly reports.
b) As long as the two first boats transmit contact reports, the other boats signal "made contact!" once only, as soon as they have reached the convoy, or, analogously, "lost contact!", using short signals in both cases.
c) If a "contact holder" fails to send reports for longer than 1 hours, another boat must take over. This must be done without waiting for orders.
d) If a "contact holder" loses contact, it must report as soon as possible the last position of the enemy, and his course and speed.
e) All boats which have been in contact with the convoy, and lost ground in consequence of their long stay underwater, or have been driven off, must also report their own position.
316.) The "contact holders" also operate as is best for the purposes of their attack. Do not endanger your own overhauling maneuver, and the success of the attack, by approaching too close, in order to obtain (more) accurate firing data.
317.) The arrangements for guiding further submarines to the spot are greatly facilitated by the emission of D/F signals by the submarine maintaining the contact. At intervals of half an hour, the "contact holder" sends out D/F signals and a wireless signal, on a long wave-length fixed by Headquarters, defining the D/F and the distance from the enemy, according to "Standing War Orders for Submarine Commanders" ("St.Kriegsbor.B.d.U."), either at the request of other submarines, or on orders of the "Home Submarine Command," or, in certain circumstances, on its own initiative, if such orders are not received in time, and there is reason to believe that there are other submarines about. If the commander decides to send out D/F signals on his own initiative, the other submarines should first be notified by means of a wireless message or signal on the submarine's short wave.
318.) The transmission of D/F signals, however, always creates an additional danger that the "contact holder" will be spotted; consequently:,
a) Do not ask for D/F signals if dead reckoning and visibility are good. b) Ask for D/F signals if the dead reckoning is wrong, visibility is very bad, or if nothing is sighted on the computed point of contact ("erkoppelter Treffpunkt").

Stiebler

09-26-11, 03:29 AM

I agree with Hitman, that the easiest solution to the shadowing problem is to require fewer contact reports. Perhaps 2-hourly, or even 3-hourly. However, still permit hourly signals, so that the shadower does not have to wait on the surface until the last moment, in order to send the necessary signal.

As Hitman also points out, what is written in the U-boat Commander's Handbook should be adapted for the limitations of the game. 'Compensatory realism' again!

Stiebler.

h.sie

09-26-11, 03:56 AM

@Hitman: We don't have the code infrastructure for "homing signals" in sh3. Thus, we use "contact report" button instead to mimick homing signals.

The AI-Subs we have so far, don't have an intelligent Kaleun on board who does his own decisions and calculations and communications with the BDU to find the convoy. The AI-Subs don't actively search the enemy, they only sit there and shoot at the enemy that comes in visible and gunnery range. In the current state, they NEED the course information the player provides in order to find the correct interception point.

Hitman

09-26-11, 04:20 AM

We don't have the code infrastructure for "homing signals" in sh3. Thus, we use "contact report" button instead to mimick homing signals.

I know, and it's OK to use the contact report, but then probably not on an hourly basis, since this causes trouble for the player -who isn't always able to do the report hourly due to the constraints in visibility-, and anyway in SH3 convoys do not change course so much as in real life (Even with LGN's excelellent script). That should compensate the lack of intelligent Kaleuns in the AI Uboats a bit better.

Part of the problem in helping is that I also do not know how you coded the Ai-Uboats, i.e. are they moved to a future convoy waypoint, or simply to an area calculated basing on the player's reports of speed and course?

PapaKilo

09-26-11, 04:36 AM

Let's cooperate and buy the bloody SDK and source code from Ubi. That will end up all the troubles we have :haha:

SquareSteelBar

09-26-11, 06:05 AM

@Hitman, SSB: I cannot reproduce your problem. The former patch (V15G2) supported 5 different versions of sh3.exe, and the current Alpha-Test Mod supports the same 5 versions. I tested it with all 5 versions, all could be patched.

Only explaination: Wou have the 4GB patch applied. Try to remove the 4GB patch. If that doesn't work, please send me your sh3.exe and I'll try to locate the problem.No 4GB patch. It's the well known sh3.exe from 'Reloaded' -> b7ad5f9d609fc60bf9410ec5ee7692df

And I've no prob with it since I use the STD version. I tried it yesterday to confirm Hitman's prob and it really didn't work - but I did an old mistake: I forgot to switch off the AntiVir Guard...

Tried it again today [Guard switched off] -> works like a charme...

@Hitman:
deactivate any AntiVirus/AntiMalware apps etc. and try again...

Alternatively I'll send you the patched file [with/without 4GB patch] if you want.

Hitman

09-26-11, 06:34 AM

@Hitman:
deactivate any AntiVirus/AntiMalware apps etc. and try again...

Alternatively I'll send you the patched file [with/without 4GB patch] if you want.

Weird, I have no antivirus or guard or whatever :hmmm:

SquareSteelBar

09-26-11, 07:31 AM

You're sailing without any defense? :o

h.sie

09-26-11, 10:45 AM

@Stiebler: I hope you did not change the settings of the WP_Visual Sensor. The Range 29999,0m is no more the current max. Range as usual, it's only a sign to activate my Sensor Fix for that specific sensor but not for other sensors (AI_Visual). The real range is 6000m. Also, do not change the range value in the .sim file of the VIIF type sub.

The Sensor patch was necessary to let the AI-subs see in dark GWX nights.

Additionally, during a convoy battle, there was a problem that the AI-Subs tended to first attack the escorts and then the merchants, what I didn't like. Since I still cannot change the AI directly, I patched the Sensor of the Subs so that they are completely blind for some escorts, with the result that they now attack more merchants than escorts. But this also varies from mission to mission because of the use of random numbers....

Stiebler

09-26-11, 10:48 AM

I have now completed a further campaign patrol and also the single mission. Both resulted in attacks by VIIF AI-U-boats! Explosions clearly visible on the ships with camera and periscope view!

There were big problems at first with the single-mission attack. Using default wind of 8 m/s, after 6-7 single missions, sooner or later my U-boat was always attacked during daylight while trying to hold contact.

After changing the Tribal destroyers to Flower corvettes, and crew competence of the escorts to 2 (was 3), and also the wind to 12 m/s, finally it was possible to maintain contact at hourly intervals all through the day. The result was a spectacular attack by probably several AI U-boats (impossible to count in the darkness), with seven convoy ships sunk (as well as my feeble one ship sunk).

Therefore I have to point up again the difficulty of sending hourly contacts on a convoy during good visibility and low winds. After checking the supplied mod files, it seems that the original NYGM sensors are being used (ie, not overwritten). The mod was tested by Hsie/LGN1 with GWX, which might explain the difference.

Incidentally, someone had a good idea in placing the AI U-boats 'torpedoes' (actually 21-inch shells) into brand-new files called shells2.dat/.sim/.zon, and the AI U-boats sensors into their own AI_sensors_WP.dat file. This solves all problems of incompatibility between super-mods. Also, use of the torpedo manual bearing and speed controls was an excellent idea too.

So congratulations, H.sie and LGN1.

But permit 2-3 hours between contact reports, please.

Stiebler.

HanSolo78

09-26-11, 11:32 AM

Incidentally, someone had a good idea in placing the AI U-boats 'torpedoes' (actually 21-inch shells) into brand-new files called shells2.dat/.sim/.zon, and the AI U-boats sensors into their own AI_sensors_WP.dat file. This solves all problems of incompatibility between super-mods. Also, use of the torpedo manual bearing and speed controls was an excellent idea too.

So congratulations, H.sie and LGN1.

But permit 2-3 hours between contact reports, please.

Stiebler.

I have to second that.
Would be great to add your mod to other supermods... extra "torpedoe" cannon files and a different interval of 3 hours would be perfect!!

h.sie

09-26-11, 12:00 PM

@Stieber: GREAT!

I could try to tweak all AI_Visual sensors ONLY when they look at the player Uboat so that they cannot look more than , say, 10000 or 12000m, WITHOUT changing their behaviour for smaller distances or other Objects. WHat about that idea? Maybe possible?

Hitman

09-26-11, 12:32 PM

ou're sailing without any defense? :o

I have a backup copy of my C: drive with the original clean install of Windows XP and all utilities/programs that needed activation, and then periodically -each 3 months or so, depending- I simply erase everything from the HDD and copy the whole backup over it. Works wonderfully well and saves me the PITA of running antivirus that slow my machine down horribly.

Stiebler

09-26-11, 12:53 PM

@H.sie:
I could try to tweak all AI_Visual sensors ONLY when they look at the player Uboat so that they cannot look more than , say, 10000 or 12000m, WITHOUT changing their behaviour for smaller distances or other Objects. WHat about that idea? Maybe possible? It looks as though it might be difficult, and really it is better if the escorts can detect the U-boat normally.

I suggest that reducing the number of contact reports needed, ie by sending every 2-3 hours, is technically a lot simpler.

This solution has also another big advantage:
It will be possible for the player U-boat to break away (then return) from the convoy at high TC, in order to accelerate the game. Staying in hourly contact with the convoy forces TC=32 for most of the day, which results in slow play. Slow TC has another side effect: the crew tires quickly, which makes crew management more of a nuisance too.

Stiebler.

Hitman

09-26-11, 01:17 PM

I'm currently playing the single mission in the stock SH3+ MEP3 (20km environment) and shadowing the convoy since several hours, now is daytime So far I would like to make some observations:

- It is simply impossible to shadow correctly with the stock or any supermod's current environment and sensors. I am doing it fantastically simply because I'm using MEP3 without any sensor update, so I have basically the stock SH3 escorts limited to some 8kms vision radius (Though automatically a bit enlarged by the game due to the new environment). I did this intentionally because I knew the already reported problems and wanted to be able to shadow efficiently.

- The mission plays with light or medium fog, so I have ships vanishing at around 8kms. Not good for this type of mission, as it makes shadowings even more difficult!

- Despite entering the data correctly on the TDC, when I check the contact reports the reported course is reversed! :o Convoy is heading on a general west course with a nice zigzag pattern and at 5 knots (All that is easy to determine if you get the hang of steering paralell at visibility limit) but in all the messages I have sent to BDU course appears around 110º to 116º :o

BDU has twice aknowledged my reports, 1st time asking to shadow convoy and 2nd to encourage me to stick to it. Nice :up:

Waiting now for the night to come and see what happens. It will be a long day, though, as I'm limited to 32x Time compression in this situation. Great for normal gaming, but really annoying for testing purposes :stare:

Hitman

09-26-11, 01:35 PM

It's 13:04 nowand I have been chased and forced to submerge twice already. I evaded and resumed pursuit both times. The light fog makes it necessary to get closer to hold contact and it's easy to get detected there by the screen. BDU continues encouraging me, however I have not been able to make a report for several hours.

rik007

09-26-11, 01:36 PM

Hitman, I use the MaGui mod and let the persicope point according to the heading of the convoy that will not reverse the heading in the report.

Generally it takes a long time before the pack is available. Wheather can easily turn into storm. Certainly with the bad wheather fix it becomes almost impossible to avoid losing the convoy. Maybe it is a good idea to create harder and a more easy version of the mod for people who are less patient. For example by giving the other higher speed or something so the attack will take shorter before it unfolds.

I had six attempts from which four failures due to deteriorating wheather. It is a great experience to "be part" of the pack. At one moment during the day one of the boats was discovered and all guns were pointed on the unfortunate ship giving me an excellent opportunity to give them hell. They didnot bother about me and maybe that is a bug. Altogether an outstanding achievement to create this mod!

An extention could be that in the campaign files u-boats become available that match historically time and place of Wolfpacks. Mission objectives could then be that an area is patrolled to join/use a certain Wolfpack to whatever unlucky convoy that will pass. I'm not in the campaign files so I do not know it this is possible.:arrgh!:

Hitman

09-26-11, 01:40 PM

Thxs Rik, good thoughts :up:

I forgot to add that the escorts clearly are D/Fing me when I transmit now (But they didn't before they got alerted to my prescence), as two group and run in zigzag to the bearing I was when I transmitted. Luckily I expect that already and transmit only when running at flank from the edge of visibility. When they get closer I'm already far away and if necessary, submerge for a while and stop engines.

What I want to say is that this chase is incredibly more rewarding that when hunting alone :yeah: In those cases, all you want is to get in front of the convoy and attack, but now you have a responsability to be shadower and stick to the convoy and it's amazing :sunny:

EDIT:

Oh I also forgot to say that my crew is now wearing rain gear all the time even if the sun is shining in the sky!

Hitman

09-26-11, 02:06 PM

Well it's night already after having been again forced down and evaded, I sent a new contact report to BDU and now I have received the reply: Allowed to attack at once :D

I'll overtake the convoy and engage from the surface, let's see if another UBoot attacks too :up:

EDIT:

Well got caught in the surface entering the screen and was blown out of the water LOL

No idea if the wolfpack would have gathered or not. Sorry.

LGN1

09-26-11, 04:25 PM

Hi all,

thanks for the feedback :up: It seems that people have fun with the patch :up:

Interval between messages: Already now you do not need to send a report after exactly one hour. You've got a bit more time... :D . Anyway, this is a parameter that h.sie can easily change. The same holds for the number of reports required before the wolfpack can assemble. I guess the values of these two parameters will always be a matter of taste. There is no fundamental problem here.

Shadowing: I don't know how hard/easy it was in real-life when the sea was flat :hmmm: From my experience the problem is not really the shadowing itself, but the sending of the reports, i.e., getting close enough so that the game allows sending the report. Based on this, I think the best solution would be if it was possible to send reports even without the visual contact :-?. Probably this would be a better solution than messing with the sensor settings,... From my experience this should solve the shadowing problem.

Convoy course / TDC dials: IIRC, Hitman once pointed out that the AOB and bearing dial in stock SH3 are interchanged (the graphics and the 10th degree dial). In Hitman's and other GUIs this has been corrected. Maybe this is the reason for Hitman's observation with the wrong course :06: The variable that h.sie uses does not contain the value from the bearing, but from the AOB or something similar :hmmm:

Cheers, LGN1

h.sie

09-26-11, 04:32 PM

I made a new, hopefully easier, Test Mission "Wolfpack easy" with some of Stieblers settings: Windspeed 12m/s, Crew competence=2, and 3 Black Swan instead of 5 Tribal escorts. Not tested. JSGME.

http://www.mediafire.com/?ijjph9nrxcijaag

The bug Hitman reported (convoy course 180° inverted in some situations) must be fixed.

I will talk with LGN1 about changing the report interval. But if we enlarge it to, say, 2-3 hours, we have to enlarge the minimum possible time to 2 hours. Then, 1 hour interval is not possible. This restriction is caused by our algorithm.

Hitman

09-26-11, 04:38 PM

I'll try that tomorrow, but probably I will first try to ensure I get clear weather with no fog in the original one and make another attempt.

Pdubya

09-26-11, 05:09 PM

Hey all:
I have been lurking around every few weeks for the past couple years, but I never "saw" the threads with h.sie's discovery.

Truly amazing progress everyone! I am stunned that in what seems a very short period of time (for me) many of Silent Hunter's most vexing problems are solved or well on their way.

I uninstalled my old SH3/GWX and started over fresh with one of my two copies of the Encore version, loaded GWX and SH3CMDR and then V15G2. So far, so good. I am starting a campaign and due to finish up the shakedown cruise shortly. Looking forward to rediscovering that feeling of newness when I first played SH3.

Thanks again guys- and I mean everyone. I will do my best to contribute here in the future.
Cheers! :salute:

makman94

09-26-11, 09:33 PM

@Stieber: GREAT!

I could try to tweak all AI_Visual sensors ONLY when they look at the player Uboat so that they cannot look more than , say, 10000 or 12000m,

i have allready done that at my visuals sensors for MEP . i can't remember now exactly the distances but i had ,for sure , adjust them somewhere between 10000 to 12000m when weather is fine and enemy 'see' the full length of sub . give it a try ...maybe the behaviour of these visuals is closer to the objective here

....WITHOUT changing their behaviour for smaller distances or other Objects. WHat about that idea? Maybe possible?

not sure that i understand exactly what you mean here....
you mean other sensors for far distances and other sensors for short distances ? if yes ....then there is the hope to fix at last this 'vampire nights' issue that is killing totally the immersion during night ! (other sensors for day and other sensors for night)

..... Staying in hourly contact with the convoy forces TC=32 for most of the day, which results in slow play.

Stiebler , i have set at main.cfg TC=128 when you are at hunter state . that way you will avoid this '32' .

Slow TC has another side effect: the crew tires quickly, which makes crew management more of a nuisance too.

Stiebler.

just a guess:i think that almost all,me including, are playing the game with crew fatigue = 0
I really don't see where is the interesting part to manually arrange the crew at compartments but this is just my opinion.

.... The variable that h.sie uses does not contain the value from the bearing, but from the AOB or something similar :hmmm:

Cheers, LGN1

i think you are wrong here LGN1 . the variable that H.Sie is using containes exactly the value from bearing . match your scope's bearing with the convoy's course (that you want to send) and send the report . you will see (at message) as convoy's course...exactly the scope's bearing (which is also the value on tdc's bearing dial).

h.sie

09-27-11, 01:28 AM

h.sie

09-27-11, 02:13 AM

There is some confusion about the convoy course and speed estimation:

course:

It is indendend to be completely independent from the periscope bearing. It's ABSOLUTE and not relative to the players submarine current course. If the convoy is heading north, course is 0°. If it's heading west, bearing is 270° (or -90°) and so on.

A wrong course estimation will not automatically cause the wolfpack to fail. The course estimation is not used every time to lead the wolfpack. In some situations it is required, in other situations not, so I strongly suggest to make an estimation for every contact report. It is sufficient to make a coarse estimation with approx 10-20° (in)accuracy.

speed:

A very coarse estimation is sufficient. If you don't know the convoy speed, just input a typical value for convoys, maybe 7knots.

If the estimated speed value is high (fast battleship convoy), chance rises that BDU will order to attack alone.

Hitman

09-27-11, 02:22 AM

Well I thought when you input the enemy AOB and speed in the TDC it would gather automatically the course (Calculating it from your bearing & heading plus the set AOB as in real life). All the time I have been doing that while looking at the convoy with the uzo, may be that's the problem, but that's how I understood the instructions :hmmm:

However, a different and easier solution could be available:

Make the game pick the current player's speed and course for the radio message to BDU :up:

Since you will shadow on paralell course -no matter if a bit ahead, abeam or behind- and at the same speed, this should suffice perfectly and will considerably liberate the player from the task of entering data in the TDC, allowing him to concentrate as the real Kaleuns in steering the boat in the proper shadowing course.

If you can implement this, I will make a readme with a diagram explaining how to shadow a convoy and report it, so that people get it quickly :yep:

h.sie

09-27-11, 02:34 AM

@Hitman: Me (and surely LGN1 too) love the current solution. If you track the convoy course in the NavMap, you can easily see it's main course.

N = 0°
O = 90°
S = 180°
W = 270°

NO = 45°
SO = 135°
SW = 225°
NW = 315°

Even an (in)accuracy / error of about 20° should be sufficient to lead the wolfpack to the right position.

Hitman

09-27-11, 02:36 AM

Well as long as you manage the game to calculate the convoy course from the TDC input, then it's OK. I just suggested the alternative in case it is easier than solving the problem of periscope bearing.:up:

Stiebler

09-27-11, 03:51 AM

@H.sie, LGN1:

It seems that there are two potential fixes for the problem of difficulty in shadowing in good weather conditions.

The first is to alter the ability of the escorts to see long distances visually. This could be altered in the sensors files or, as Hsie has suggested, a hard-code fix. I think something will have to be done here, regardless of the second option.

The second is to provide options to the player - a realistic option (hourly signals) and an easy option (fewer signals). LGN1 has stated previously that the key variables are a) number of contact signals sent; b) time between signals.

I could easily make these user-adjustable options with the 'Options Selector'. I don't think it would be necessary to provide slider gauges for these values, as suggested originally by LGN1 (in a PM), simply a one-off 'easy' option with preset values for (a) and (b) above.

Thus when you activate the 'WolfPacks' option, you would get a child-dialog box which asks you to click on either of:
Realistic (many hourly contact reports, reduced chance of seeing a wolfpack, slow game play)
Easy (fewer contact reports at no fixed interval, [and therefore] greater chance of seeing a wolfpack, faster game play).

When stated as simply as that, I think I know which option most people would prefer. I have shadowed around ten convoys now - and the novelty of spending about half-an-hour of real-time on this has worn off. (TC=32, but falls often to TC=8 whenever a further ship from the convoy comes into view again.)

Yes, I know that HunterState=32 can be altered in its cfg file, but this is the setting I prefer for most purposes, and it cannot be altered just for shadowing.

Stiebler.

toolsey2

09-27-11, 04:07 AM

First of all h.sie and LGN1 and others thanks for this game changing mod, yesterday I tried it on a stock SH3, no more playing about with convoy this was deadly stuff, in the early morning quick surface signal then down to the depths again, Hitman please could you do a shadowing readme if possible I think I need all the help I can get.

The reason I used this mod with stock SH3 is because I was not sure how to add it to my other versions, I could use some help with installing it in NYGM and GWX please.

Toolsey

Hitman

09-27-11, 04:20 AM

The first is to alter the ability of the escorts to see long distances visually. This could be altered in the sensors files or, as Hsie has suggested, a hard-code fix. I think something will have to be done here, regardless of the second option.

I would strongly advice against hardcoding such thing. We have been suffering for too long hardcode limits before H.Sie jumped in, and as modder I certainly would prefer to adapt my own mod with an extra sensors patch by me or a 3rd party, rather than have again a hardcode limit! At most, make it optional in the dialog box for those that want to quick-play.

Hitman please could you do a shadowing readme if possible I think I need all the help I can get.

Will do once the final version of the mod is ready :up:

PapaKilo

09-27-11, 04:32 AM

Hitman with all respect, I wouldn't want less to see dialog boxes poping up asking what level of difficulty should I choose.

It remainds of some arcade style instantly, where you choose difficulty :nope:

There was no easy options in RL and of course all they were tiring.

It's up to the player. If he wants help he has to show it with patience. However I still don't like hourly radio contact requirements..

h.sie

09-27-11, 04:33 AM

I would strongly advice against hardcoding such thing. We have been suffering for too long hardcode limits before H.Sie jumped in, and as modder I certainly would prefer to adapt my own mod with an extra sensors patch by me or a 3rd party, rather than have again a hardcode limit! At most, make it optional in the dialog box for those that want to quick-play.

This I don't understand. You said that you suffered from hardcode-limits for a long time, and now you advice against hardcode changes??? What is the logic behind this?

The problem I see with conventional modding are the side-effects. I think all environments/sensor combinations are well-adjusted and mature in the meantime, and if you now change them to make shadowing possible, other situations, which worked well so far, might get worse as side-effect.

On the other hand: If there is a working env/sensor-combi that allows shadowing, why not use it? Wolfpacks could be worth a change.

h.sie

09-27-11, 04:35 AM

@PapaKilo: He means dialog boxes in the OptionsSelector. Not in game.

makman94

09-27-11, 04:36 AM

@makman

Thanks for posting the screenies of your battle.

1) I have a problem: On the one hand I agree: If there is a working sensor/environment-combination, I see no need to fit my Mod to non-working combinations (non-working here is meant only with focus on convoy shadowing). On the other hand I try hard to be compatible to all supermods and environments and don't want to stick on one certain environment. I'm not Microsoft.

2) I meant: Selective restricting sensor range only if enemy "looks" at player Uboat: Enemy is blind for the player sub if its range is more than, say, 10000m. I could also program selective sensors regarding sun position: If day: Range=12000. If night: Range=6000. BUT: This is a new project.

3) Agree: Just set at main.cfg TC=128 when you are at hunter state

4) Agree: Bad Crew fatigue behaviour also is not a strong argument for me. If it is bad for low TC (realistic play!), there is something wrong with the whole fatigue model, and I have a problem to consider that.

5) I try to make the course estimation INDEPENDENT of the periscope bearing. This current dependency was not intended. Try to fix it.

I will discuss with LGN1 about new settings and I'm sure we find a solution.

hi H.Sie,

1) no no ....i didn't meant to use the MEP AND my visual sensors but only my tweaks at visual sensors on your current environment (preferebly must be a 20km one). i think that ,generally speaking,will work ('problems' may appear during night but again ....sensors never worked correctly at any of sh series,especially during night). in ''M.E.P v3-fix pack+Sensors'' there is a pack of sensors for each supermod so it is easy to just give a try only to visual sensors .
i am also with the opinion that your mod must be indepedent from envs but , as i said, a 20km one must be the main choise.

2) ....:o:sunny::sunny: !!! THIS is FANTASTIC news !!! one of the biggest dissapointments with sh series is exactly the non correctly working sensors ! if you can programm 'selective' sensors will be heaven .... we will be able to have then different settings during night and the whole thing will raise very high the final user's immersion !!
this project (selective sensors) will be a fantastic project H.Sie ! when you are ready to start it ...just call me to help - test where i can !

5) in fact , i like very much the way it is now ! i think it is brilliant and very comfort !user have only to input the convoy's speed at tdc dials,after that for import and the convoy's course.. user have to turn only the scope and send the message ! fast ,easy ,comfort ...brilliant ! i don't know but i like this very much

PapaKilo

09-27-11, 04:37 AM

@PapaKilo: He means dialog boxes in the OptionsSelector. Not in game.

aaaah, Ok then :)

PapaKilo

09-27-11, 05:09 AM

Makman, could you drop me a link to the info about u-boat watch crew ship spoting distance ?

Hitman

09-27-11, 05:17 AM

This I don't understand. You said that you suffered from hardcode-limits for a long time, and now you advice against hardcode changes??? What is the logic behind this?

Sorry if I worded it wrongly, I mean that right now we can modify sensors with Silent Editor easily, but if you make hardcode changes in them, then ONLY you will be able to reverse that, and people who want to update their mods or adapt them to your patches will not be able to work themselves in that. I just wanted to express that anything you hardcode might result in a "locked" feature for the rest of us. Therefore it is great when you modify things that were already "locked" in the game, but if you start modifying things that all of use could so far tweak and lock them for us, then this is a problem.

Hitman

09-27-11, 05:22 AM

The problem I see with conventional modding are the side-effects. I think all environments/sensor combinations are well-adjusted and mature in the meantime, and if you now change them to make shadowing possible, other situations, which worked well so far, might get worse as side-effect.

On the other hand: If there is a working env/sensor-combi that allows shadowing, why not use it? Wolfpacks could be worth a change.

It is perfectly possible to do that, and I myself did it for MEP3 more or less long ago (Not a perfect thing, but good enough for me). It just will involve lots of testing and a specific sensors pack for each environment and mod, but I think updating GWX, NYGM and WAC stock and then MEP and Riks environment will have 95% of users covered. I already mentioned, however, that this should be deferred to a separate thread and that IMHO it is a task to be done by 3rd party guys, and not by you H.Sie, as it is too time consuming and your efforts are better employed in your current work.

In any case, it is something only worth doing for 16k and 20k mods, as 8k mods are way too restricted to have the proper long distance shadowing working.

h.sie

09-27-11, 05:42 AM

@Hitman: Thanks. Now I understand. I agree: Hardcode-Fix only if conventional methods fail.

@Stiebler: I also thought about different options in the Selector. Thanks for that offer.

Jaeger

09-27-11, 12:23 PM

I will make a readme with a diagram explaining how to shadow a convoy and report it, so that people get it quickly :yep:

This would be huge!!! I am waiting for this!

h.sie

09-27-11, 12:28 PM

before tweaking any visual sensors it must be sure that really these sensors are the problem. maybe the contact reports "wake" the escorts??

Depth Charger

09-27-11, 12:44 PM

Ummm... This has the potential to cause more sick leave days than the last swine flu epidemic... Have you told the WHO what you are doing?

Downloading now and it's going to be a long night. This is a huge step in the right direction! Thanks!!!

rik007

09-27-11, 01:18 PM

2) I meant: Selective restricting sensor range only if enemy "looks" at player Uboat: Enemy is blind for the player sub if its range is more than, say, 10000m. I could also program selective sensors regarding sun position: If day: Range=12000. If night: Range=6000. BUT: This is a new project.

H.sie this could be a breakthrough to realistic surface attacks! That's the other feature still missing in SH-series! Kretschmer e.a. used for example the tactics that they actually emerged inside the convoy at night. His crew on the bridge could see the merchantmen smoking on the deck of ships. :rock:

Pdubya

09-27-11, 01:41 PM

A bit like the Holy Grail of the sub service, eh? Same kind of accounts from Kaleun Siegmann in Werner's "Iron Coffins". It would be beyond amazing if we could eventually get there.

Oh, also H.Sie... call me overcautious, but I was worrying to myself that these "discoveries" you have uncovered might be lost. I know some of the data on where things reside is here on the forums, but I would feel a lot better knowing you are documenting memory locations and functions, etc, etc., for any future modders. :oops:

Not being critical, just wondering... keep up the great work!

h.sie

09-27-11, 02:24 PM

@rik007: realistic surface attacks at night are already possible using OLCE (GWX3 16km atmosphere) or M.E.P.v3. The nights are very dark, so that the AI_Visual sensors are competely blind. Too blind IMHO. You can even surface at a distance of say 100m without being seen. I don't know how your SH5_Water_for_Sh3 behaves at night, because the frame rate is too low when I run it on my PC.

@Pdubya: I have given all my assembler sources to a person I trust. If I get Swine Flu, he/she can continue. I'm not planning to share the sources and findings with the broad community, since with them, it would be very easy to do "bad things" with the sh3.exe.

h.sie

09-27-11, 02:49 PM

My problem with the "Easy version" of a Wolfpack Mod is as follows:

I think most of the time boredom dominated the life of a Uboat crew. A convoy attack or even a wolfpack attack with lots of sinkings was an exception, rare. And rare things are valuable.

Same in the game. As long as convoy battles are rare, players will be glad so see one. Wow! What a battle. They will be happy to finally be part of a wolfpack. "Well done, h.sie".

If I make an "Easy version", wolfpack attacks will degrade to daily events and lose their value. I bet that there will be some experts which will start sh3 only in order to trigger and analyse these battles under the microscope. And since the battles are not perfect, they will find weak points:

"Your wolfpack mod is not bad, BUT......":::

"Too many/few sinkings. Not realistic".

"Explosion animation not nice".

"The AI-Sub doesn't behave realisitc."

and so on.....I'll wager that this happens......

Depth Charger

09-27-11, 02:57 PM

Looks like I caught my own flu already. I downloaded and went through the install for V15G2.

It went well, notes were easy to follow. SH3 launches fine but if I try to start a career or single mission, the candy bar gets about 80% of the way, and then it just stops...

I unchecked the 4GB option and tried again with no luck in case it was my video card...

My mods are GWX, GWX Color Contacts, Mighty fine crew and Raphael's GUI. nothing else.

Any ideas and all help appreciated please.

Thanks.

h.sie

09-27-11, 03:03 PM

just wait some more time. gwx needs some minutes to load. don't trust the candy bar. test with unpatched exe. surely same behaviour

PapaKilo

09-27-11, 03:13 PM

If I make an "Easy version", wolfpack attacks will degrade to daily events and lose their value.

Hah, absolutely true, make them fight for what they wanna see :up:

h.sie

09-27-11, 03:14 PM

@Hitman: In order to input the convoy's course, you have to switch TDC to manual settings. then, bearing dial and periscope are decoupled. If you have switched TDC to auto, the bearing dial is coupled with the periscope and automatically shows the bearing (great finding) but not the convoy's course.

I like this solution.

Depth Charger

09-27-11, 03:17 PM

just wait some more time. gwx needs some minutes to load. don't trust the candy bar. test with unpatched exe. surely same behaviour

Waited 5 minutes and nothing. If I press the escape key, it closes back to windows...

Depth Charger

09-27-11, 03:18 PM

Waited 5 minutes and nothing. If I press the escape key, it closes back to windows...

Forgot, Unpatched loads and works fine...

complutum

09-27-11, 03:29 PM

h.sie

09-27-11, 03:49 PM

@DepthCharger: Are you in full-screen mode? if so, change into window-mode, because sometimes there is an error-window that is hard to find in full-screen mode.

@complutum: No idea when it will be finished.

h.sie

09-27-11, 04:04 PM

LGN1

09-27-11, 04:12 PM

I've got my SH3 patched to V15G2 plus Stiebler's surrender. Before aply your wolfpack patch i want to know if there is a starting date for it to work. I mean, in my current career i'm on september 1939 and i wonder when in real life started wolfpacks and if ingame is the same or if i shadow now a convoy i could get a wolfpack so early in the war.

Many thanks for your hard work

There is a time- and position-dependence, i.e., the chances to see a wolfpack depends on the date and position. For instance, you will not see a wolfpack in the Black Sea and not in 1939.

Pdubya

09-27-11, 04:18 PM

Depth Charger

09-27-11, 04:28 PM

[QUOTE=h.sie;1756919]@DepthCharger: Are you in full-screen mode? if so, change into window-mode, because sometimes there is an error-window that is hard to find in full-screen mode.

Update - All installed and working great incl the wolfpack mod.

I am struggling with the contact by site bit and I really hope that you also make it good for use by Hydrophone at some stage.

Else I am enjoying the patch tremendously.

thanks again

dc

h.sie

09-28-11, 01:25 AM

Regarding "Lost messages":

If one sends a contact message before he gets the BDU's response to his previous contact message, the BDU response to his previous report gets lost. This is stock sh3 behaviour and not intended by me. This behaviuor wasn't visible since now, because so far we could send only every 12 hours.

I hope now that these "lost messages" are not unrealistic. In the Web I found an interesting document (in german) about radio traffic.

http://www.cdvandt.org/Funkf%20Kap8.pdf

If I understand this document right, the messages have not been sent directly from BDU headquarter to the receiver UBoat. Instead, because of the restricted range, the message was sent over several stations, and even UBoats acted as relais-stations in order to transport messages to UBoats far away from BDU on the atlantic.

If that is true, lost messages seem to be not unrealistic to me.

PapaKilo

09-28-11, 01:28 AM

What if BDU sends a radio message as respond to specific U-boat, but she had to crash dive to the abyss because of enemy ?

Resp;onse might be lost this way.

Stiebler

09-28-11, 05:10 AM

H.sie said:
For times up to 3 hours between two contact messages you don't get any penalty, that means, the chance won't rise that the wolfpack loses the convoy. But for longer times than 3 hours, this chance rises.....

But you should still try to send hourly contact reports whenever possible, in order to lead the wolfpack to the convoy using the shortest and fastest route.
Good idea, I think that this should solve all difficulties.

Stiebler.

Robin40

09-28-11, 07:40 AM

No renown gained for shadowing convoy?

makman94

09-28-11, 07:52 AM

Makman, could you drop me a link to the info about u-boat watch crew ship spoting distance ?

here you are PapaKilo : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horizon

especially the part called ''Objects Above the Horizon''

makman94

09-28-11, 07:59 AM

...For times up to 3 hours between two contact messages you don't get any penalty, that means, the chance won't rise that the wolfpack loses the convoy. But for longer times than 3 hours, this chance rises.....

But you should still try to send hourly contact reports whenever possible, in order to lead the wolfpack to the convoy using the shortest and fastest route.

Good idea, I think that this should solve all difficulties.

Stiebler.

yes...i second this :up: seems pretty good deal !

h.sie

09-28-11, 09:56 AM

No renown gained for shadowing convoy?

I don't care about renown.

sharkbit

09-28-11, 01:08 PM

If I make an "Easy version", wolfpack attacks will degrade to daily events and lose their value. I bet that there will be some experts which will start sh3 only in order to trigger and analyse these battles under the microscope. And since the battles are not perfect, they will find weak points:

"Your wolfpack mod is not bad, BUT......":::

"Too many/few sinkings. Not realistic".

"Explosion animation not nice".

"The AI-Sub doesn't behave realisitc."

and so on.....I'll wager that this happens......

My 2 cents, for what it is worth:
Personally, I would rather have the "hard" version where wolfpack attacks are rare and so when they do happen, they are the "crown jewel" that you find and I can say, "Wow! Thanks h.sie(and Stiebler) for all the awesome work that you do!"
But....
Many people do not want to play "Silent Hunter 3: Sail Around the Atlantic Looking for Ships All Day and Becoming Bored to Tears" ;) (believe me-I've had days where that is what I thought I was playing :O:)

Some people may want to play a ahistorical "easy" version of your wolfpacks. I'd probably do it a couple of times just so I can see it work and get a feel for it before I went back into "hard" mode which may be more realistic.

As far as people complaining...if your mod helps create a historical feel while not behaving in a perfectly realistic manner, so be it. As long as it captures the "feel" for the tactic, who cares?
I believe that is Duscimus' philosophy behind his TMO mod in SH4. Allow the mod to make you behave like a real sub commander will, even though how the game does it might not be completely "realistic". After all, it is still a game.

:)

PapaKilo

09-28-11, 01:26 PM

How will AI boats behave in bad weather ? Will they still attack with deck guns ?

And if it's heavy fog and night ? Can't they just pass the convoy by... or even between the convoy columns without attacking any ship ? :o

PapaKilo

09-28-11, 02:02 PM

After a short discussion with LGN1, I will make a new version in the next days with the following change:

For times up to 3 hours between two contact messages you don't get any penalty, that means, the chance won't rise that the wolfpack loses the convoy. But for longer times than 3 hours, this chance rises.....

But you should still try to send hourly contact reports whenever possible, in order to lead the wolfpack to the convoy using the shortest and fastest route.

You made a short discussion with the man who created and is using frequently his "more zig zaging units" ? So as I understand basicaly nothing has changed for ppl who will not use "more zig zaging units mod" anyway. Forcing Kaleuns to risk their boat and crew every 3 hours for a bloody report ?

Perhaps there should be separated option in OptionSelector not in the difficulty settings: HARD or EASY, but for those who prefer to hunt with "more zig zaging units" and for those with GWX basics ?

Restrictions to report convoy position every 3 hours is about the same as report every 1 hour which I find funny. Convoy traveling 7-9 knots is far from a speeding car on the road. Say conv speed is 8 knots in 3 hours it will make about 45 km progress ? This distance is nothing in the Ocean :)

If AI of U-boats can rearange their courses depending on reports, why there is a restriction for 3 hours ? :shifty:

I realy don't want to sound rude, but this time it gets on me, sorry :)

Capt. Morgan

09-28-11, 02:19 PM

In order to satisfy the players natural curiosity about what a Wolf-Pack attack will look like, perhaps you could include a demo mission (I'm assuminng you probably already have one for testing) rather than making an "easy" mode.

CCIP

09-28-11, 02:23 PM

Forcing Kaleuns to risk their boat and crew every 3 hours for a bloody report ?

And how do you think some of the real U-boat captains felt about that prospect? If wolfpack operations were a piece of cake, why would you get into them in the first place? Noone's forcing you - just disregard BdU instructions and attack yourself!

Personally I don't understand the desire to have your cake and eat it too when you're not interested in doing a reasonable amount of work for it. If you're not interested in a cat-and-mouse game of contact, perhaps you're not really interested in wolfpack operations in the first place. This mod is a bit of a waste unless you are imo - there are far easier ways to get some AI boats to cause some havoc in the convoy than what this mod is trying to do, and I don't think h.sie is interested in that - other people have already done those mods. The uniqueness of this mod is that it does allow you to sink your teeth into the real difficulties and complexity of those ops.

PapaKilo

09-28-11, 02:37 PM

And how do you think some of the real U-boat captains felt about that prospect? If wolfpack operations were a piece of cake, why would you get into them in the first place? Noone's forcing you - just disregard BdU instructions and attack yourself!

HAH! Like real U-boat captains or navigators weren't capabe of calculating interception point by given location, speed and course!
When there gonna be radars in 1942 and after everywhere you will not get a chance to chase the convoy in first place. Not to mention about sending a contact after it's visual of 2-3 ships by game limitations ?

3 hours or 1 hour of surface activity is going to be an invitation for trouble. So it is correct in late war.

I planned to send reports at night during early war. But if visual sensors of Escorts remains unchainged - spotting 3 ships in convoy on surface will be a risky buisiness :hmmm:

PapaKilo

09-28-11, 02:39 PM

CCIP

09-28-11, 02:49 PM

HAH! Like real U-boat captains or navigators weren't capabe of calculating interception point by given location, speed and course!
When there gonna be radars in 1942 and after everywhere you will not get a chance to chase the convoy in first place. Not to mention about sending a contact after it's visual of 2-3 ships by game limitations ?

3 hours or 1 hour of surface activity is going to be an invitation for trouble. So it is correct in late war.

I planned to send reports at night during early war. But if visual sensors of Escorts remains unchainged - spotting 3 ships in convoy on surface will be a risky buisiness :hmmm:

Well, in a sense that's a completely separate issue with the AI - yeah, the AI sensors may need another look with this development. They ARE probably too good. I'm pegging my hope on people like Stiebler with his work on keeping up NYGM to have a look at that aspect of the game and balance it while accounting for this new development. Perhaps down the road some of the 'certainty' that the AI always seems to have about your position can also be watered down via these .exe fixes.

But other than that, 3 hours and necessity of keeping frequent contact doesn't strike me as excessive. What if the convoy zigs instead of zagging? What if you are indeed driven down and the pack has no idea where the convoy is for a while? What if indeed the enemy has very good radar? These are some of the real difficulties that ultimately defeated the wolfpacks. In a sense, if by later 1943 you can't win in a convoy battle, or even maintain contact, that's a sign that the mod is working correctly.

h.sie

09-28-11, 02:50 PM

@PapaKilo: No videos available in this thread.

For my work it is not relevant what could have been wise or logical for a Kaleun to do or not to do. For me it's relevant what happened in the past. We have historical info that homing signals had to be sent hourly - sometimes even every 30 minutes. Do you have any historical information that approve your point of view?

Using this Mod, you are free to decide how frequently you send contact reports. You can even send every 12 hours - or - more secure: never. But you have to live with the consequences - as in real life.

Using your style of argumentation, I could say: "From my point of view it would have been much more wise and logical NOT to start the second world war, thus, it makes no sense to play silent hunter at all".

PapaKilo

09-28-11, 03:10 PM

I Love SH3 I love GWX. If I like something I will deffinetly discuss/argue about some aspects of it :)

Anyway the idea of wolfpacks is great certainly. Too great projection of it in my mind perhaps, but the cake isn't yet baked to judge about it's taste :yep:

Best of luck :shucks:

complutum

09-28-11, 03:44 PM

Just only one thought, as Stiebler has made the smoke detection perhaps it would be possible to make that during daylight you could send the homing signal using it instaed needing to see the ships, while during night you can go closer to get visual range

h.sie

09-28-11, 03:45 PM

I think it is necessary to have environment/sensor - combinations that allow a shadowing of a convoy from large distances without risking to be detected. Makman94 said that his M.E.P.3 already works fine.

The time between the first contact report and the wolfpack attack of course depends on the distance between the UBoats and the convoy and in the Mod it will take between 2 and 24 hours of game time (hourly reports assumed). I think that is not too long.

Nevertheless, the forthcoming Alpha2 version will contain a switch to activate a LITE version for demonstration purposes that will halve this time.

@complutum: I discussed that with LGN1 in the past, but making contact reports independent from visual contact is a very hard task with bad side-effects. Thus, I firstly try without that idea.

complutum

09-28-11, 03:48 PM

I think, as far as i know by reading some sources, that reports hourly it's not unreal so i agree that it gives you more approach to reality

Pdubya

09-28-11, 07:13 PM

H.Sie:
I initially put a short inquiry over on the GWX thread as I thought my trouble lay in that direction. However, after some more testing today, I believe that there may be an issue with V15G2 I am running with a NonSF, GWX3 Gold, SH3 Cmdr setup.
Everytime I try to start a new career, either 1st, 2nd, or 7th, after I comply with the GWX special instructions to make a short shakedown patrol and dock again I cannot "advance" the Mission page. Instead of giving me the "start of hostilities" briefing, I am still getting the GWX intro page.

Here is my JSGME list:
GWX - 16km atmoshere/Enhanced Damage Effects/Integrated Orders/No Medals on Crew/Open Hatch Mod
Merchant Fleet Mod 3.2
O2-Gauges v2
Supplement to V15G2

Saving the career and starting up the save (via SH3Cmdr) in port before the next mission had no positive effect- no mission advancement.

I did a small test by rolling back SH3Cmdr, unloading all my mods and reloading all except your O2 and Supplements. Resumed career in SH3Cmdr and loaded last save in port. Advancing the mission now works correctly. I got the "commencement of hostilities" short message.

By the way, time was advancing normally. Started 01.08.39; docked in Wilhelmshaven 06.08.39. Choosing mission advanced the date to 28.08.39, but not the briefing orders.

Let me know if there are other tests I can try for you or if you have any other questions I may have overlooked.
pw

PS. Windows 7 64-bit/4Gb ram Nvidia 460 with latest drivers. Intel Core2Duo E8400 chip. Using 4gb option in selector.

h.sie

09-29-11, 01:25 AM

@Pdyubya: Since until now 99% of the problems that seemed to be related to my patch, at the end were caused by corruted game installations, I ask you to

1) do a fresh GWX3 install without any further mod. (Also, compress your fresh install into a ZIP, RAR or 7z archive for later use. This will save a lot of time for re-installing a fresh GWX.)

2) Then try whether all works fine.

3) Then apply V15G2+Supplement. Start NEW mission and try again. Does it work as intended?

Do NOT load a saved game with V15G2 that has been saved without V15G2 and vice-versa.

Often enabling / disabling mods and forgetting a Rollback in SH3Cmdr rises the risk to corrupt the installation.

PapaKilo

09-29-11, 01:31 AM

Often enabling / disabling mods and forgetting a Rollback in SH3Cmdr rises the risk to corrupt the installation.

True, and if you ever had CTD, check the SH3Cmdr, you have to make roleback manually, despite your settings says "Rollback automatically after exiting SH3"

h.sie

09-29-11, 02:54 AM

@Stiebler:

You wrote that you did your tests with TC=32. The convoy zigzags, so maybe your reaction on a course change of the convoy was too late due to high TC, so that the distance between your Uboat and the escorts accidently became too small. Maybe shadowing maneuvre needs TC=1 and full player concentration all the time. It could be worth to try out if shadowing is possible at TC=1.

If I have to choose, I would optimise the mod to work for TC=1, not TC=32.

Looking forward for your test results next week, hehe.

Hitman

09-29-11, 03:22 AM

Regarding the difficulty of shadowing, we know that the problem is that you need to get too close for your crew to be able to "detect" at least three ships. We have been discusing the idea of decreasing or revising enemy AI sensors, and that is a solutionthat will certainly need studying, but also an alternative would be to INCREASE our own crew detection capabilities (visual sensor). There is no need for it to fall again into the dreaded vampire vision, but allowing them to see the smoke in the horizon even if youas player can't really see it would help a lot.

It is important to note that real crews were able to follow convoys over the horizon by just seeing tips of masts, and that means sometimes even 30 kms and if smoke is involved, even 50 kms :o

One more thing H.Sie, have you by chance during your study of the code seen where the rendering limitation of the units is? SH3 will not render anything beyond 20kms, but the units are IIRC spawned and considered individually by the game up to 40kms (Beyond that they are just a theoretical dot travelling in the map, as seen in the mission/campaign editor). If we could have them be rendered even at 40 kms, that would be a huge improvement because we could easily add a 40kms environment mod with corresponding sensors.