View Full Version : Just got Trigger Maru, and it rocks. Mostly...
The revamped UI is nice, as well as a lot of minor and major changes that add up to make this game look a HELL of a lot more polished. From what little I've played it, it seems to be AWESOME.
Just one minor drawback....
I am beginning to call into question the ancestry the Mark 14 Torpedo.
Seriously, whoever designed and tested these things can bite my submarine's shiny metal ass. :x
I got lucky and spotted a lightly defended convoy on my first patrol, while proceeding to a new area after completing a recon mission.
I manage to coast into the perfect angle, as the Destroyer and Subchaser escorts are in the wrong place, at the wrong time. :yeah:I attempt to fiddle with the fickle TDC, and launch all 4 forward tubes, then (fearing Trigger Maru's reputation for having much more robust AI) begin to dive deep.
I listen..... I listen....
"Did I miss? Where the hell's the boom!?", I ask? :hmmm:
Thud.
Thud.
Thud.
Thud.
"Torpedo was a dud, sir!" 4 Times. :damn:
Bah. Curse you, you stupid torpedoes. Plus side is my first real test up against competent AI and I avoided em pretty well. I had a habit of playing cautiously before, and was playing it extra safe this time given the mod's supposed to have much better AI.
I did notice the destroyer made rather too accurate a guess as to what my position had been when I fired my torpedoes, which is a little worrisome.
Don't blame TMO.
Blame the Bureau of Ordnance.
Bothersome
09-12-10, 09:55 AM
TMO 2.0 is pretty good.
I'm playing it now too. I actually have two saves that I play and name them accordingly. I play the Germans on one and the Americans on the other.
My American campaign is on hold till I come up with a better strategy. I am sitting in the Bismark sea with a large convoy coming directly at me. I am sitting still at periscope depth in a the USS Seahorse (US-307). The lead destroyer is about 19,000 yards away and closing. If I stay here I will be at about 2000 yards from his port at closest point, if he maintains course.
I've already tried the scenario, so I don't get any kills but I have escaped each time I've tried it. So do live on. There are 4 escorts in this convoy. I have escaped each time I have tried this usually unscathed. I have even attacked the DDs and sank 2 run-off one and not even touched the other. But I cannot make a kill on any of the merchants BECAUSE, no matter what I do, the DDs get wind of a sub in the area, even though they cannot find me. Before they get wind, they move in a relatively predictable course. Usually straight ahead. But once they get close, the DDs start searching and the merchants start zigging. I'm supposed to be a hole in the water here. HOW DID THEY GET ALERTED? I'm sitting ultra quiet. Even at 540 feet down, ultra quiet, they still get wind.
That is the part that sux with TMO. It's just harder to play, not more realistic.
There is a modlet on the first page of the TMO thread that ducimus made to tone the AI down some.
If you read the readme, you'd know that the POINT is to make it harder. It's not a "realism" mod in the sense you are thinking. This has been discussed from the beginning, but the realism in TMO comes from the way the harder (not "more realistic") AI changes player behavior. The idea is that if the AI is too easy, the player behaves in an unrealistic way—even if the too easy AI were strictly speaking, "realistic."
By making the AI harder, the player is forced to behave more like a real skipper.
It's a trade off.
Using the toned-down AI mod will still alter your behavior, but will be less extreme than "stock" TMO. My suggestion would be to play with the AI reduction until you get so good with TMO that it seems like shooting fish in a barrel, cause I think it will still be tricky enough to reasonably alter your behavior.
I'd need to check, but if RSRDC for TMO keeps the historical loadouts of DCs, at the very least the escorts will run out faster.
Sailor Steve
09-12-10, 10:18 AM
Read this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_14_torpedo
Then complain about the torpedoes. :sunny:
There is nothing wrong with your torpedoes. You are obviously using them incorrectly. You need to train in proper torpedo usage, and your crew needs better training in proper torpedo maintenance procedures. The Mark 14 torpedo with Mark VI Exploder is a perfectly fine weapon, and if y'all weren't such dunderheads, you might actually sink something.
BuOrd
I wonder how the course of the Pacific War might have gone if the torpedoes weren't so bad, or if the problems had been recognized and corrected very early.
Armistead
09-12-10, 12:21 PM
Even with TMO it's far from reality, harder yes, hard enough to match reality, not even close. We can still still 10 times what was possible in real war.
Don't like the M14's, load the M10's...less powerfull, but they work most the time early war.
tomoose
09-12-10, 01:41 PM
....the Illudium Q Space modulator? LOL.
Queue Marvin the Martian:
"Where's the kaboom? There was supposed to be an earth-shattering kaboom?"
:03::O::D
Even with TMO it's far from reality, harder yes, hard enough to match reality, not even close. We can still still 10 times what was possible in real war.
Don't like the M14's, load the M10's...less powerfull, but they work most the time early war.
In Ruhe's book, the Seadragon had a nightmare of a time with mk 10 torpedoes. They were old, and the spindles would not reliably update the gyros. As a result, they ended up shooting almost all fish near zero gyro angle, and they had the torpedomen update the gyro settings by hand. This fouled up many of their approaches, and caused them to completely miss a few opportunities to fire.
The failure stuff in SH4 is crude enough to not give that kind of control, so we get overly reliable mk10s I think.
Yeah I've recently re-read that book.
Even with the the torpedomen updating the gyros by hand, they would still stick, resulting in a few lost opportunities.
By the time they had the gyros set the target had sailed on by.
BTW the book is 'War In The Boats' if anyone's interested.
I heartily recommend it. A damn fine read.
I'm thinking of making "Ambon Charlie" for ducimus to use :)
Oh yah, I am well aware of the reliability issues torpedoes had in the early part of the war.
Just actually having to deal with it being an actual problem when I was used to stock. So while I knew it was coming, still makes me grind my teeth when I actually manage to use the TDC properly and hit a ship full on with a salvo of duds. (I'm starting to get the hang of it, at least).
Atm, I'm on a patrol to the east of Formosa and there are planes all over the place, as thick as mosquitoes. Rarely encountered this many even on stock. So I suspect there's at least one carrier in a task force that passed by me a short while ago. (I'm not attacking that until I get used to this mod's difficulty :P) Atm, it's too risky to surface by day, so I'm just diving and waiting until night.
But man, I'm having a ton of fun. Shooting stuff and watching it sink with big holes is fun, but having the escorts actually hunt you is fun, too. :DL
Probably the most entertaining fiasco I've done since installing the mod was when I pressed the wrong button and actually blew my ballast right next the the destroyers. Whoops. :doh:
To quote, I got "blown away like an oragami display at a sumo wrestler's chili festival."
I wonder how the course of the Pacific War might have gone if the torpedoes weren't so bad, or if the problems had been recognized and corrected very early.
I doubt it would be anywhere near as much a difference as reliabel Grman torpedos would have been. For one thing, Britain wouldn't have had Winston Chruchill. (In 1939, Churchill was attending a meeting aboard a battleship that was torpedoed by a U-boat, but all three torpedos hit without detonating.) All relaible US torpedos could have done was shorten the war. Reliable U-boat torps could hav changed the outcome.
WarlordATF
09-13-10, 05:26 AM
It might have prolonged the war, but i doubt it could have changed the outcome unless the US never got involved. The Germans were busy just dealing with the Royal Navy and Allied Merchants, Once the US got organized and started cranking out ships the Germans just didn't have enough U-Boats to be everywhere at once.
The whole point of the Liberty Ship was to be able to produce them faster than the Germans could sink them. It was a numbers game and with the Allied Bombings the Germans just didn't have the material available to keep up.
Now if Hitler had kept his non-aggression pact with the Russians, it might have been a totally different war IMO.
Sailor Steve
09-13-10, 09:27 AM
Just actually having to deal with it being an actual problem when I was used to stock. So while I knew it was coming, still makes me grind my teeth when I actually manage to use the TDC properly and hit a ship full on with a salvo of duds. (I'm starting to get the hang of it, at least).
Still it could be worse. At least we know what's going on. Try to imagine the game if the pre-dets worked properly. You'd hear the explosion at about the right time and think you had good solid hits, and then find out out later that you didn't hit at all. I can't even imagine the frustration.
One thing to remember about "simulation" and different takes on the same events in RL.
TMO has FAR more prematures than RFB, for example. RFB used some data from various sources that listed their RL estimates of premature rates, and used that number. It is realistic. TMO has a much higher % chance.
The trouble is this, we all KNOW that the mk14 is crap. We all KNOW that they ran on average 11 feet deep and never at set-depth. We all KNOW that the magnetic exploder does not work. In RL, the skippers were trained to fire the fish just below the keel. This was their doctrine, their training. ID target, estimate how loaded the ship was, set the fish just under the keel. They'd to this, then the fish runs 11 feet below that and does nothing.
Most misses were very likely the 100% deep runner rate.
So players probably universally drag the torpedo depth setting to as shallow as it goes, right?
I think in this sense TMO is making the unreliability a-historically high (based on reading %s in S3D), but is getting the end result RIGHT.
This goes to the basic paradigm of TMO as a "reality" mod vs, say, RFB. RFB tries to get the numbers right, but sometimes the outcomes end up wrong. TMO often doesn't get the numbers even close to right—but the often the outcomes are spot on.
I personally like TMO with the AI toned down a little, and I have trouble with escorts with too many DCs (perhaps because I spent so much time researching this). I realize that my "numbers right" take here can result in poor outcomes because of the way escorts prosecute targets in SH4 vs reality. It's a tough call. My preference (maybe because I'm not as good at DC evasion as some) would probably be to really slow down the ROF od some DC launchers, and increase the persistence of escorts so they drop fewer per run, and hang around longer with the far fewer DCs they carry.
It's interesting how there are different paths to realistic outcomes, though, and they are not always intuitive.
I'm thinking of making "Ambon Charlie" for ducimus to use :)
Now that would be fun. :yep:
Now that would be fun. :yep:
Of course I need him not to shimmer if you hit him.
Hans Uberman
09-13-10, 11:37 AM
But I cannot make a kill on any of the merchants BECAUSE, no matter what I do, the DDs get wind of a sub in the area, even though they cannot find me. Before they get wind, they move in a relatively predictable course. Usually straight ahead. But once they get close, the DDs start searching and the merchants start zigging. I'm supposed to be a hole in the water here. HOW DID THEY GET ALERTED? I'm sitting ultra quiet. Even at 540 feet down, ultra quiet, they still get wind.
If you read the readme, you'd know that the POINT is to make it harder. It's not a "realism" mod in the sense you are thinking. This has been discussed from the beginning, but the realism in TMO comes from the way the harder (not "more realistic") AI changes player behavior. The idea is that if the AI is too easy, the player behaves in an unrealistic way—even if the too easy AI were strictly speaking, "realistic."
By making the AI harder, the player is forced to behave more like a real skipper.
It's a trade off.
If it's one thing I can't abide, it's obvious cheating on the part of the computer. I've been testing out TMO here and there, while mainly playing SH3, but this talk of destroyers knowing you're there when you've shouldn't be detectable goes against what submarines are about. The dud torpedoes, I can live with, but not this method of increasing challenge. I'm going to have to pass on TMO if this proves to be the case in my continued testing. :down:
Have you tried the mod on the first post of the TMO thread that tones the AI down?
The readme is explicit. TMO has base AI settings that exist to CHALLENGE a very good player. The idea was someone like ducimus, coming from SH3 (modded), and used to Allied escorts with very good ASW would be bored to tears in the PTO. So he ramped up the AI---but the AI is still less capable than Allied units in SH3.
I'm not sure the TMO sensor settings are all that far off reality in some ways, a fundamental SH4 problem is in the depth charge paradigm. DCs are aimed at specific targets depths in SH4. The IJN simply did not do this. They had a few depth serttings, and dropped DCs in patterns---both in throw out to the side of the ASW ship, and in depth. So some go at 30m, some at 60m, some at 90m in each pattern. In SH4, if you are at 75m depth, the DCs go off at 75m +- an error. There is no way to fix this. (well, I have an idea I have not tried, actually).
Even if fixed, the players would then game it and always be safe.
BTW, not abiding "cheating" misses the entire point of a few posts I have made. Sometimes "cheating" has realistic outcomes. Outcomes are all that matters. If subs in RL got held down, sometimes for over a day (they did) then if the game can only have this ever happen by "cheating" then "cheating" is the proper tool for the desired end-result.
Think in terms of realisitc OUTCOMES and reexamine the issue. So do subs ever get held down so long they MUST surface---something that really happened on more than a few occations? Do skippers have to pay attention to the approach? Do skippers sink about the same amount as RL skippers, or are they all submarine gods?
Hans Uberman
09-13-10, 12:05 PM
I'm sorry, but haven't missed the point of your posts. I don't care what the outcome is, I care about how we arrive at that. If the destroyer is detecting me when it obviously shouldn't, it's not a proper subsim. Sure, it would be nice to increase the challenge, but not by this method. If one is fine with the method used to gain the outcome, then that's perfectly fine. I'm simply not one who finds the method as acceptable.
I don't care what the outcome is, I care about how we arrive at that.
OK
Then I think you should give RFB a go.
I think you'll probably find it more to your liking.
Hans Uberman
09-13-10, 12:21 PM
OK
Then I think you should give RFB a go.
I think you'll probably find it more to your liking.
I'll most definitely do so, but still want to test out TMO more, to give it a fair judgment, and see if this detection business is entirely as pronounced as it sounds. It's a perfectly excellent mod in a great many respects. I will take your advice on RFB in a month. Thanks.
I'm sorry, but haven't missed the point of your posts. I don't care what the outcome is, I care about how we arrive at that. If the destroyer is detecting me when it obviously shouldn't, it's not a proper subsim. Sure, it would be nice to increase the challenge, but not by this method. If one is fine with the method used to gain the outcome, then that's perfectly fine. I'm simply not one who finds the method as acceptable.
Except the outcome is all that matters.
I started out on a similar page as you, actually. But having things meet RL values when the game cannot deal with that does no good in the least I discovered. Some times stuff needs to be fudged.
You might need to make rifle caliber ammunition do damage like 20mm to have it have ANY effect in game, for example. You presumably would call this "cheating" and have all weapons smaller than 20mm have no effect--in some cases that is what we are talking about, have the game "cheat" or accept the game doing nothing, instead.
Another outcomes vs "settings" example. You can set the max range of a sonar to some value you read somewhere, say Roscoe. The game, OTOH doesn't treat max range the same way the USN treated it at all. Max range is the range at which the detection chance is down by 1/2, say, and is altered by other factors in game. To get the sensor to act like the real thing, the max range might have to be set ridiculously high.
Anyway, you could simply try the lower AI settings and see what you think---the mod is on TMO's first post, you can try RFB, or you can whine about either or both of them---or make your own mod, and see if anyone else likes it.
I'd try the lower AI first.
Bothersome
09-13-10, 12:43 PM
I'm pretty much in agreement with Hans on this issue.
I tried RFB some time back but I had a slow machine for running the game and it caused problems for me. So I've been on TMO. But I think it time to go back tor RFB again and give it another go.
I'd rather have a simulator that simulated what actually used instead of a game of challenges. If I know history, then that is just my advantage. The simulator is one of events that happened in the past. Knowing that torpedoes didn't run proper is intelligence that can be applied. Unless you want to make a game that offers random happenings that just happen to be similar to those that occurred on this planed back in 1940's and admit to it.
We are all aware that SH4 cannot duplicate the exact experiences that happened in WW2. But at least we can play with simulated things that were available back then. So why mess that up? Maybe I just picked the wrong mod from the beginning.
TMO is good in that it fixes a lot of wrongs with the stock game. It has very good looking environment fixes. It just over does the AI to make it challenging to the point of making it a game changer. DD alerting that an ultra-quite sub way down is somewhere around kind of takes the fun away of being the silent hunter.
Hans Uberman
09-13-10, 12:50 PM
Except the outcome is all that matters.
I can't agree with you there. Humanity has suffered many a monster due to that line of thinking. How you get somewhere matters quite a bit. Now I know what you're discussing isn't anything equal to certain events in world history, this is just a game, but the underlying principle is the same for me. Things only need to be fudged if you're willing to compromise your vision, and this being only a game, I don't see why I should. If I can't play SH4 with a sub capable of occasionally being stealthy, I don't need to play it. I can try another mod, and failing that, I have dozens more games to play.
I think TMO is great overall. Yet, I'm not going to change my mind on this, if these issues prove true.
Humanity has suffered many a monster due to that line of thinking
Really not relevant within the context of this discussion.
Context is everything.
If I can't play SH4 with a sub capable of occasionally being stealthy, I don't need to play it
This is massively overstating the abilities of the escorts in TMO.
With a little bit of planning and noise discipline I can approach and attack escorted targets the vast majority of the time.
Your statement implies that this should be impossible (in TMO).
That is not the case.
I can't agree with you there. Humanity has suffered many a monster due to that line of thinking. How you get somewhere matters quite a bit. Now I know what you're discussing isn't anything equal to certain events in world history, this is just a game, but the underlying principle is the same for me. Things only need to be fudged if you're willing to compromise your vision, and this being only a game, I don't see why I should. If I can't play SH4 with a sub capable of occasionally being stealthy, I don't need to play it. I can try another mod, and failing that, I have dozens more games to play.
I think TMO is great overall. Yet, I'm not going to change my mind on this, if these issues prove true.
That is frankly bizarre. You do realize that not only is SH4 "just a game" but not even a fraction of real things are modeled. Asking for the values to all be historical, when the game is working in non-real units and without huge amounts of "real" simulation is absurd.
The only possible measure of the effectiveness of the simulation is to look at the outcomes.
It's why some old-school games that use statistical methods to determine damage, etc have more realistic results than computer simulations. There is a crowd at ww2ol that thinks that artillery is best simulated by simulating it. Meanwhile, the one guy at the forum who actually does such simulation for a living for the Army keeps telling them that a statistical approach is the only way to get realistic effects. Yeah, that means that the game will not track every secondary shrapnel and protect you because your head did not get hit by that tiny chunk, instead, it will "roll a die" and kill you or not. The end rtesult in an arty barrage would, however, be for more accurate (this from a guy paid to do computer sims that result in weapon and countermeasure designs).
Ships will drop DCs as the launcher bears, if it has reloaded, and has ammo.
This results in Sh4 escorts using all their ashcans very quickly. We could a-historically make each launcher have incompatible reload times, then only some will fire on a pass instead of the proper pattern, but it will preserve DC for longer attacks.
A-historical setting, far more realistic outcome.
Setting historical also entirely forgets that the game cannot drop DCs with only a few depth settings as the IJN did. Something has to be fudged. Typically it is to apply a much larger error in depth placement on DCs. In RL, 30m DCs almost always exploded at 30m, but we instead give them a big error bar---otherwise the game is constantly shacking you at the right depth.
I'm goin' down
09-13-10, 02:38 PM
Ducimus has created a TMO_Easier_AI mod for 2.0. I would be using it, but I am trying his Beta update, which when activated, is apparently not compatible with the Easier_AI mod.
Hans Uberman
09-13-10, 02:39 PM
You keep making assumptions, of the either all or nothing variety. I don't want or require everything to be realistic, I want realism in one very key area. Stealth. Nowhere did I say that I wanted everything to be realistic, that was your interpretation.
Submarines are not battleships, they sneak around. This is one of the most important aspects of realism in a submarine simulator. It's fine with me if not every aspect is realistic; realism was never the point of my posts, the lack of stealth was.
I can see why you might want challenge so much. Perhaps, the game has became old-hat to you, and quite easy. Challenge was the way of keeping it interesting. If this is the case, I can entirely understand why you might be willing to make a compromise to get this. I'm not at that point, and I don't need it so much that I want to dismiss stealth, which is so intrinsic to the nature of a sub sim. I have said that I will keep my mind open though, and continue testing TMO. There's really nothing more to say.
I immediately suggested you try the lower AI settings, which would do exactly what you ask without having to abandon tmo entirely.
I was merely explaining the rationale for the base TMO settings. My other point was that the outcome become player specific. A really good skipper in Sh can play, say, stock, with virtually no chance of being detected. They might even play RFB or TMO with the "easier" AI and never get detected. Never getting detected is as unrealistic as always getting detected.
FWIW, I have TMO on the easier AI settings because I basically agree with you (and I'm not good enough (more likely too lazy) at reducing my profile, etc, to stay undetected).
In general, I think the "harder" aspect of TMO makes me play more realistically than RFB does---OTOH I have played RFB a lot more, so I likely have internalized "gaming" the system.
We all do that, too. Ducimus talked about constant helming the sub to escape a really tricky situation for someone here, and I noticed that effect very early testing my DC mods (In that case I was TRYING to get not only hit, but I wanted "skin hits"). I found the escorts were pretty baffled by the sub maneuvering in a particular way, so I stopped doing those things in game cause I thought it was cheating on my part.
Armistead
09-13-10, 03:47 PM
I'm pretty much in agreement with Hans on this issue.
I tried RFB some time back but I had a slow machine for running the game and it caused problems for me. So I've been on TMO. But I think it time to go back tor RFB again and give it another go.
I'd rather have a simulator that simulated what actually used instead of a game of challenges. If I know history, then that is just my advantage. The simulator is one of events that happened in the past. Knowing that torpedoes didn't run proper is intelligence that can be applied. Unless you want to make a game that offers random happenings that just happen to be similar to those that occurred on this planed back in 1940's and admit to it.
We are all aware that SH4 cannot duplicate the exact experiences that happened in WW2. But at least we can play with simulated things that were available back then. So why mess that up? Maybe I just picked the wrong mod from the beginning.
TMO is good in that it fixes a lot of wrongs with the stock game. It has very good looking environment fixes. It just over does the AI to make it challenging to the point of making it a game changer. DD alerting that an ultra-quite sub way down is somewhere around kind of takes the fun away of being the silent hunter.
TMO in no way makes the game harder than realistic war, it provides a better balance, but far from reality. Those that play TMO still have no problem racking up huge tonnage way beyond belief. So why it's harder than stock, it's no where near the reality of real war.
You can still outsmart the AI with the same correct tactics used in war. You don't get by with mistakes. Do the right things, I can attack every convoy or TF I run into. Make mistakes...lol. If you want a arcade get by with anything game then TMO isn't for you.
Ducimus
09-13-10, 03:55 PM
RE Dud's:
I designed the failure rates and prematures the way i did so the player can't "Game the game" as much. Everyone hates duds, so if they know if they do X, Y and Z just so, they can avoid them. I did it to where you can't avoid them as much.
RE AI:
Setting AI detection is tricky. The summation is however, that avoiding detection is much like threading a needle. How hard it is to thread the needle depends on how small or large the needle eyelet is. Some players are very adept at threading the needle. Others, not so much. No matter what I set the AI at, someone will complain. Some, will find it too easy, others, too hard. Besides player skill, weather has a large hand in it. Eventually with enough time and practice I feel most players can thread a fairly small needle because they learn the limits of what they can do. Afterwords, the game becomes extremely dull because everything becomes routine.
( Now having said that I am aware that there is one hydrophone sensor that is acting a little too good. Not exactly high on my priority list since it seems to be infrequently equiped )
RE Depth charges:
If i could slow down their drop rate, id reduce the number of DC's carried. Having tin cans run out of DC's because they sow them over entirely too fast simply will not do in my book.
"Ends justify's the means" vs "The means justify the ends"
Lovely debate going on there. I'm and end results kind of guy. IMO the ends justifies the means where modding sub sim's is concerned. To that end, im my mind:
- You the player should experience X amount of duds because real captains did.
- You the player should fear destroyers, planes, etc, because real captains did.
- You the player should fear reaching crush depth because real captains did.
- You the player should not be making 60,000 ton patrols and 300,000 ton careers because real captains didn't either. (I suspect im failing in this regard)
So if i made prematures a little higher here, made the AI a little tougher there.... then so be it, so long as the end results are achieved. If you don't agree with that, then there are always other mods to choose from. No one mod can accommodate for everybody.
Hans Uberman
09-13-10, 04:07 PM
I immediately suggested you try the lower AI settings, which would do exactly what you ask without having to abandon tmo entirely.
I was merely explaining tNever getting detected is as unrealistic as always getting detected.
I entirely agree. For instance, I often find that the introduction of the thermal layer that SH3 Commander can add makes it too easy for me to get away. Takes a lot of the fun away to be sure.
Thank you for the stimulating conversation btw. I'll definitely keep at TMC, and in a couple days try the easy AI mod. Later, I can try RFB and compare. Thanks for the help.
Sorry, if I sounded strident, it's just sort of an old conversation, and I think I tend to start off at the "page" some of us are on here at subsim. For me, page 1 of this thread was already discussed on page 200 of some other thread, and the conversation by then was already at a different, and perhaps less civil level :)
I also jumped in because I actually find this discussion very interesting and important for sims in general—what do you mean by "simulate" and how does one get there.
Ducimus says it well for his mod, and we've had the same discussion publicly and privately :) TM (and his mod before) were never pitched as "realism" at first, but I quickly decided that it modified player behavior in a way that ended up producing realistic engagements.
BTW, i have some ideas about slower DC attacks, as does Peto. The only trick with slowing the reload speed (which works) is that the first pass will certainly be an "alpha strike" with all DCs dropped. Of course without slowing reloads, they fire all of them every pass anyway. Note that slowing the reload rate is "unrealistic" because we might set a DC to take 20 minutes to reload, for example, which is absurd. The end result, however, a ship that drops DCs a few at a time, is entirely realistic. I actually have many test mods with DC variations for all the escorts in Real IJN, some with varied reload times. I know far more than I did back then, too, so I think it would be straightforward to mix things up a little.
Oh, Ducimus, don't mistake what I said. While the dud encounters are frustrating, I still almost love it because real skippers had to grind their teeth at the mark 14 for 2 years or so.
This mod kicks more arse the longer I play it.
I'm actually having to play cautiously, lest I pay for my mistakes. For example, I am learning to be VERY touchy about taking any damage. And being very cautious with how deep I dive if I sustain any.
And one of my main reasons to applaud you is the new aircraft.
Before, they were a *constant* irritant I avoided by just diving to periscope depth. Now they are less common, but I have to be a lot more careful around them, and I frequently am just staying submerged during the day if there's a lot of air traffic in the area. Further, if one spots you, you have to be sneaky for a while because the bastards love to bring buddies.
While I've been buggered more frequently for using high TC, that really was a bad habit anyways.
And I feel while you may not have eliminated the ability to be a "submarine god" who rakes in totally absurd tonnage, you may have done as much as is possible without totally reworking the game's engine.
Seriously, well done. Not had this much fun with a single-player game in a long time.
Bothersome
09-13-10, 09:39 PM
Not trying to hi-jack the thread or anything. But the discussion is right on TMO vs RFB...
Soooo. I decided to put both mods on.
Stock > TMO 2.0 > TMO Patch > RFB 2.0 > RFB Patch > SS285 USS Balao_Clean
Is my mod order.
I got to thinking, TMO has one nice looking environment. But I just don't like the excessive challenges that don't feel real. RFB is what it stands for Real Fleet Boats. Sounds real to me. So RFB should over write TMO stuff that should put the boats back on keel.
Anyway so far it's looking real nice and the sounds I've encountered so far are real nice.
Here is a screen shot from a GeForce 470 running at 1920 x 1080 with forced 4x and high quality settings. She's still smooth as glass.
It's almost like a brand new game now!
Oh yea, and I'm really got the USS Balao US-285 this time. So I guess I better take care of her. :D
http://img251.imageshack.us/img251/5024/sh4img20100913211048156.th.png (http://img251.imageshack.us/i/sh4img20100913211048156.png/)
You cannot run them on top of each other. They alter so many of the same files it's a wonder there is any RFB there at all. Since the bulk of the environment mod stuff is in just a few files, what you are seeing is TMO, not some hybrid.
That's an accident waiting to happen.
Bothersome
09-13-10, 11:46 PM
Whatever mod you put last will be all there. There will only be remnants of TMO remaining. It seems to be working normally so far. I have yet reach my patrol area. My orders are to take a few photos of a Japanese carrier.
It's a bit early to say much about anything of the way things are happening. But I noticed the weather is a lot nicer now. In TMO it seemed there were 15 knot winds as normal and if you got calm weather (5 or less) then it was kind of considered rare. So far with the TMO+RFB combo, I got good weather with only a day or so of 15 knot weather. Which I consider a bit more like it supposed to be. But like I said, it's still a bit too early to say what is normal.
I guess I'll just be the guinea pig on this then.
I read the order backwards.
There is nothing of TMO left then. You showed an env pic, but scene.dat was overwritten by RFB, among many others.
Rockin Robbins
09-14-10, 11:26 AM
Well, that is not quite right. Anything that TMO changed that RFB did not subsequently change will remain. What that is exactly is a total crapshoot.
There is one guarantee though. The results will be messy and bad. If you want RFB then install only RFB and leave out TMO. With JSGME you can always go back and forth at will anyway.
Keep the mod list short, simple and compatible.
Bothersome
09-14-10, 12:26 PM
There is one guarantee though. The results will be messy and bad. If you want RFB then install only RFB and leave out TMO.
You don't know that. You're just making blatant guesses. Have you ever tried? Do you know anyone else that has ever tried and reported the results? The authors only say they can't predict what will happen because they don't want to offer any guarantees on their stuff with unknown stuff installed afterwards.
You can't even say the results will be "bad" without trying it yourself. And the term "bad" is relative to the perceiver. So quit speaking for me.
In case you're curios, these mods are NOT code, like a computer program. They are simply a list of settings and parameters for the game engine to work from. So if you mix settings from one mod that relates to diving speed for instance. It has no effect on another mod's settings as to what the enemy ship speeds will be. And since a single file that comes from RFB would over write entirely a file that came from TMO, all settings in that file will be complete. Other files that didn't get over written will retain their qualities from TMO.
Is any of this getting through. I've made changes to a few mods before too. So I'm not totally blind to how this works here.
Just because it's not approved in your Bible of Sub Operations doesn't mean other people can't try permutations to those ideas.
And by the way, you're not my master, so don't be trying to tell me what to do. I'll install what I want.
The results will, without question be bad. TMO has a campaign. RFB dos not, but RFB sets some ship cfg files to different values than TMO. It WILL almost certainly CTD. Period. But what do I know.
Capt. Morgan
09-14-10, 01:17 PM
...Do you know anyone else that has ever tried and reported the results?
Subsim is filled with posts asking for help with problems that are ultimately the result of a "bad" mix of mods.
I'm goin' down
09-14-10, 03:17 PM
RE AI:
Setting AI detection is tricky. The summation is however, that avoiding detection is much like threading a needle. How hard it is to thread the needle depends on how small or large the needle eyelet is. Some players are very adept at threading the needle. Others, not so much.
I am unable to evade dds' AI in TMO. The problem is that I cannot sew.
Ducimus
09-14-10, 03:18 PM
RE Mixing mods.
Applying mods isn't like applying another coat of paint or varnish to get a better finish. There are a lot of file dependencies. Many tweaks are done with other tweaks in mind. The "bad" isn't always immediately obvious. "bad things" can range from a CTD at startup of game, a CTD when the game spawns a specific unit, to various parts of the simulation being really hard or really easy. The problems are not always immediately obvious.
Bothersome
09-14-10, 05:28 PM
I'll just keep trying it for hell of it. If it crashes or does "bad" things, I'll let yall know.
You won't even know some of the "bad" things. TMO has DM tweaked for a stock gun doing certain damage to your sub. RFB alters that stock gun to totally different damage numbers. You get attacked, and survive, huzzah! Great, except in either mod you'd be dead, but the DMs are completely incompatible.
BTW, the first time you encounter a subchasher, you will CTD. Ditto minesweeper.
Type=3 in TMO campaign, type=1 (5 for MS) in RFB cfg. BOOM.
Ducimus
09-14-10, 06:05 PM
Meh, I wouldn't worry about it tater. I learned awhile ago, people are going to do what they are going to do, regardless of what the mods author say's, does, or warns, and i'm fine with that. Because the instant another mod is overlayed on top of the one i'm responsible for, i'm absolved of all responsiblity for it working correctly. :O:
Armistead
09-14-10, 06:32 PM
Running a supermod over another supermod is a big no no.
I'm all for mods that add to the game, but I want them to work with TMO.
There are many smaller mods you can use to get better results that work with TMO, before running RFB on top of it. That just can't be done with good results.
Another thing, you could get some serious mod fubar. Files from either mod could get corrupted, plus the game itself. Highly possible you'll have to DL clean mods and reinstall the game to boot.
There are several places for sure will give you a CTD, probably corrupt any saves, ect.
So when it goes to crap and you have to do a clean install of everything, well, don't say you weren't told.
Jan Kyster
09-14-10, 07:26 PM
Just one comment on the idea of "us" being in a sneaky, ultra silent quiet sub...
...DD alerting that an ultra-quite sub way down is somewhere around kind of takes the fun away of being the silent hunter.In 1946 the U.S. Navy conducted some tests with the IJN equipment - were you within 1000 meters from their passive sonar, you would be detected.
Ultra quiet or not...
You can find that and other interesting stuff here: REPORTS OF THE U.S. NAVAL TECHNICAL MISSION TO JAPAN (http://www.fischer-tropsch.org/primary_documents/gvt_reports/USNAVY/USNTMJ%20Reports/USNTMJ_toc.htm)
Bothersome, let me be frank. You're being rude. These people are trying to help you by warning you that what you're doing has a good chance of causing errors. In response, you got on the defensive and started making accusations. From what little time I've spent of these forums, I already know some of the people you're snapping at go out of their way to provide assistance and advice. They do not deserve the crap you're giving em.
Nobody said you couldn't do what you want with your computer. Nobody is trying to boss you around. They're just speaking from their experience and trying to warn you of the risks so you don't have to learn the hard way.
To sum up, ease up a bit and recognize that these people are taking time out of their day trying to help you, and you in turn are being quite disrespectful and ungrateful.
Bothersome
09-14-10, 08:59 PM
First, Thanks to tater for offering up some useful information about TMO. The damage model was one of the reasons for wanting TMO in the first place. I'll give it a bit of research.
Second, Thrair, you seem to be making a lot of assumptions on your own part. And it did seem there was one user trying to TELL me not to do or do a certain thing. Like I'm some sort of subordinate of his. Yeah, I get a bit defensive when people assume they have some sort of authority over me. He may be trying to help, but his wording sucked. I'm sure mine does too, I never was a sugar coater (I usually use a different terminology for that). And from the wording of your last sentence, it seems you are trying to issue a few orders too. You are also not my master.
Thirdly, I didn't ask for help from anybody on this. I was stating my opinion on what is wrong with TMO. As if I were casting a vote to help inform the original poster so he may make a wiser decision. But it seems the pom-pom brigade has taken offence to my voicing of my own opinion as though theirs is the only view to be voiced.
As I as said, I seems this way to me. But I was gonna keep quiet about it but since you need it to be explained in detail, here I am once again.
Everybody get a hold of this idea... If I want to mix mods on MY computer on MY time, then I damn well will. If it runs into problems, I'm not gonna blame you guys. I'll fix the problem from my end. And I am NOT asking any of you for any help.
That being said, you guys are doing a good service for other people to counter the idea that I posed. If it causes problems that you are aware of, then yes you should post the reasons why to inform other to not do the same mistakes. But don't word it as though you are giving me a command as forbidding, it is all I ask.
I'll take what you all say into consideration. But it would add weight to your arguments to say why it won't work. And I am pretty good at recognizing the BS that people just parrot from others.
Armistead
09-14-10, 09:11 PM
Some people trust the experience of others. It has been a common theme and common knowledge you can't mix supermods. You'rethe first person I've met that is doing it willingly. There are no such things as giving commands on the net, you were being advised not to mix any supermods because the end result will be failure.
Understand we have many that make the mistakes of mixing supermods, once warned, they correct it and thank people. It's now obvious you're not interested in game play and want to do it regardless of all the warnings just because you can. You can drive on the wrong side of the road if you want.
So have it, really now that people understand your motive, no one will care what results you get.
No worries, do what you want, but it will, without question CTD when you play TMO campaign. It might even with rsrdc because I think there are random calls for some unit types that might blow up with a TMO unit or two.
Bothersome
09-14-10, 09:21 PM
OK, thank you for the warning Armistead and all the other nice folks here. I've been warned.
It's still my time and it won't crash your computer if I try it here. So, let's just let me try it and if it crashes and I now really do believe it will, it will just crash. I know how to remove the mods in the reverse order they were put on. It's not the end of the world. It's just a game and one that's on my computer.
Thank you once again for the warning.
I still think I will try it till it does run into a problem, just to watch it die, to take up a note from Johnny Cash.
If anyone out there is having mental fits knowing that there is a user out here in internet land that is doing something that will intentionally crash a computer program,... Well, I'm just,... not effected by that.
Ducimus hints at this, but as modders eventually learn, everything is connected. You think the env merge looks good, but what has it done to the AI since sensors drive AI, and ENV mods can totally fubar AI with seemingly subtle changes.
Nothing will work as designed, and there are almost certainly unexpected consequences (heck, the actual self-contained mods usually have some of this, it takes gajillions of hours testing to find many).
Ducimus
09-14-10, 09:49 PM
RE File dependencies.
Here's a really gross example, on the upper end scale of file dependencies.
Let's say, for whatever reason, the wave attuenation and amplitude settings are altered in the sim.cfg file. Doing so, properly, can get you a nice rolling ocean better then just tweaks in the scene.dat file alone can. Mind you, this is just two, small entries in an ascii text file.
here's the fallout:
- AI Visuals need to be recalibrated in the sim.cfg and AI_sensors.dat.
- wave/wind settings in the scene.dat file will need to be recalibrated.
- ships may start to explode or sink after 20-30 minutes, so you'll need to adjust the damage zones crash depth (i think), and possibly tweak some of the damage zones themselves in the ships indivdual zon files.
- ships may not be riding correctly, so you might have to make sim file adjustments.
- ship AI crew avatars on ships, sanpans and the like may not display correcty.
- Your sub may or may not be riding the waves correctly, so you'll have to adjust the subs sim file.
- your watch crew is appearance is probably fubar, so you'll have to adjust the subs cfg file so they don't disappear and reappear constantly while cruising.
Just in case anyone's' wondered why I haven't messed with those two variables in a very long time...... there ya go. :O:
I'm goin' down
09-15-10, 04:23 AM
Here is a reasonable mod list for TMO that gives you a fighting chance to finish a mission and sink some tonnage.
TM0 2
TMO Easier AI
SCAF for TMO 2
Max Optics IV for TMO 2
Stock Map Icons
Extra Allied naval bases for SH4 + UBM + TMO
Convoy Routes TMO + RSRD
TGT Dials to PK FIX - TMO
EAX Sound Sim
I have given up playing TMO without an easier AI. It is simply so hard that I find it too difficult.
Without SCAF, Max Optics does not permit an accurate aspect ratio or distance on certain ships, so I opted to reactivate SCAF.
I dropped RSRDC because I prefer to attack more TFs, and while RSRDC covers the important battles, it seems a little lean on TFs, so I decided to try TMO 2 as a stand alone mod.
If the TMO 2 Beta would not conflict with the Easier AI mod, I would activate it. The increased speed of the subs is a big benefit.
I do not know if this is in the correct thread for this post, but here it is anyway.
I'll look into SCAF. Thanks for the heads up. :) However, I personally enjoy the tough AI, so I might skip on the easier AI mod. Been sunk a few times by the bastards, which never really happened on stock. It's actually fun. Makes success more satisfying with the harsher consequence for failure, I think.
It's very difficult to attack task forces now (As I've learned the hard way). Mostly I'll get moderately close, lob a salvo in their direction and hope for the best while I try to sneak off and hope they don't notice me. :P I have enough torpedoes to make a couple such attacks per patrol. Usually, I am now using my first few torpedoes fairly recklessly like that, and holding the last few in reserve so I can snoop around looking for lone merchants or lightly defended convoys while my fuel lasts. It's really fun and seems a lot more realistic.
On a side note, I'm finally getting the hang of the TDC. Problem was probably me not using the Stadimeter properly. I've come to find you have to be really careful with it. Even being a little ham handed with it will throw off the results.
Anyone have any tips on using the Stadimeter in rough weather? If the waves get really choppy, it makes it a lot harder to use for me. Only thing that seems to help with me is if I know the resulting speed's malarky, I just make a guess and go with that.
And that reminds me: With TMO, I am starting to notice the weather may be a little rougher, overall. Which is both a blessing and a curse. As it makes using the TDC a right arse, but also makes it easier to approach the ships undetected. Am I just imagining it, or was this one of the changes I missed when reading on it?
WarlordATF
09-15-10, 05:42 AM
My Install has parts of TMO,RFB,OM and alot of other mods and i can tell you that it was far from easy to make it work right. I wanted my game to look good, but still keep all the stock features and add things like more ships,subs,Aircraft,Raising Radar Antenna,correct crush depths,new interiors and many other things.
I started with a stock game and took what i liked about each mod and worked them in one by one. After each thing was installed i would test the sim and usually spent many hours debugging it.
I can't imagine just dropping one mod on top of the other, theres far too many things that are tied to other things for that to work. If i lost it all there is no way i would do that again.
Bothersome, I wish you the best of luck, but i can tell you there will be issues. However if you are doing this to learn how to mod this sim, go for it! I mod almost every game i own so i can understand why someone would want to experiment and learn. Just be prepared to spend alot of time digging through the old and new threads here at subsim to figure out how to fix the issues you will run into.
I have learned alot about this sim, but i still don't consider myself an expert modder. I can make it do what i want, but there are still areas i don't like to mess with. I'd advise anyone interested in modding to go slow and be ready for alot of headaches along the way.
...
Anyone have any tips on using the Stadimeter in rough weather? If the waves get really choppy, it makes it a lot harder to use for me. Only thing that seems to help with me is if I know the resulting speed's malarky, I just make a guess and go with that.
...
Other torpedo firing techniques. Check the forum's "stickies".
.
Bothersome
09-15-10, 09:13 AM
My Install has parts of TMO,RFB,OM and alot of other mods and i can tell you that it was far from easy to make it work right. I wanted my game to look good, but still keep all the stock features and add things like more ships,subs,Aircraft,Raising Radar Antenna,correct crush depths,new interiors and many other things.
I started with a stock game and took what i liked about each mod and worked them in one by one. After each thing was installed i would test the sim and usually spent many hours debugging it.
I can't imagine just dropping one mod on top of the other, theres far too many things that are tied to other things for that to work. If i lost it all there is no way i would do that again.
Bothersome, I wish you the best of luck, but i can tell you there will be issues. However if you are doing this to learn how to mod this sim, go for it! I mod almost every game i own so i can understand why someone would want to experiment and learn. Just be prepared to spend alot of time digging through the old and new threads here at subsim to figure out how to fix the issues you will run into.
I have learned alot about this sim, but i still don't consider myself an expert modder. I can make it do what i want, but there are still areas i don't like to mess with. I'd advise anyone interested in modding to go slow and be ready for alot of headaches along the way.
Thanks for the encouragement. I kind of done the same as you in an earlier run. I had taken TMO 1.9 and ripped back out the crazy super airplanes and put back the stock ones so they could be shot down. Fixed a bunch of radar stuff and pulled in a few enhancements from other mods I liked. I worked on it for a few months there getting it right. I had it all right to my liking there for a while. And if I look around hard enough, I might can find a backup I made for it somewhere.
But I made a new computer to play my games on and it has Vista on it. So I started over again with installing all new stuff. And TMO 2.0 came out about that time with version 5 environments. So I wanted to start from there but haven't yet re-installed all the modding tools that are needed. I don't really know if I want to get back into it this time. I'm just barely hanging on to even play SH4 anymore. I've done it all aready. Some many times over. It may be time to move on.
But I can say, that the best of SH4 is in TMO environments and RFB's sub and ship performances. The eye candy is very nice from RFB too. It's just a damn shame that RFB wont run on top of TMO.
If we could get just the environment package and then apply RFB on top that would be good enough for me. I think RFB has an older environment mod or a different version built in. It's just not good enough. Once you've seen the best, you just can't go back easily. I may go back and find the environment parts of TMO and make them work with RFB even though it might screw up the sensors again. I fixed it once, I can do it again. I'm just wondering, after the time spent doing it, will I play SH4 long enough to make it worth while.
Anyone that's piloted a sub from RFB can tell you they feel a LOT more like a large boat then those in TMO. TMO feels like a game whereas RFB feels like simulator. But TMO has the best looks for the environments. RFB runs on top of TMO but it will crash eventually as it runs into conflicts with certain ships/equipment. It may be easier to hunt down those conflicts and remove them or change them back to stock for RFB's sake.
TMO is trying to simulate the captain's experience and RFB is trying to simulate the equipment used. I am the captain, I don't need to be simulated.
Rockin Robbins
09-15-10, 11:11 AM
If you're shooting down airplanes, you have a big captain problem which needs adjusting. TMO is guaranteed to adjust your attitude.:D
And anyone who says the TMO plotting system isn't the best, preferring RFB's contacts vanishing because you stood too close to the plotting table, (!!!!!) substitute the profanity of your choice there, and then claims RFB simulates the equipment..... I just about guarantee that on the real sub the closer you stood to the plotting table the better you could see the plot. I like RFB just fine but always layer TMOplot (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/downloads.php?do=file&id=151) on top of it to get rid of that craziness. For reasons I've gone into elsewhere in excruciating detail, TMO plotting system is by far the closest to reality SH4 is capable of delivering. The rest either give you too much info or toss out the baby with the bathwater and leave you driving the car with a paper bag over your head.
Ducimus, did you ever think that someone would say the best part of TMO was the eyecandy? That's one for the ages!:har:
But this is a game. As such everyone is able to modify it to their liking. Some of us just enjoy simulation.
I'm goin' down
09-15-10, 11:44 AM
Toss in the nisgeis' 3D TDC mod, delete stock map icons, swap the easier AI for the newly released TMO 2 Beta, switch to map contacts to "Disabled," and SH4 will be as tough as it gets.
Stadimeter issues. I presume you are referring to the Attack Dials (upper right of screen.) The trick is to match the ships' dials on TDC dial (upper left of the screen) to the target's course. To do so, I recommend that you activate the Easy Aob mod. The mod permits you to rotate the Aob dial on the Attack Dials (upper right) and change the target's course that appears on the ships' dials (upper left.) The ships' dial on the TDC screen (upper left) will rotate in corresponding fashion as you rotate the Aob dial on the Attack Dials (upper right) using the Easy Aob mod. If you find this explanation confusing, see below.
Here is the basic procedure. First, plot the true course of the target using the Map/Ruler Tool. Second, enter the target's speed on the Attack Dial. Third (here is where the Easy Aob enters the picture), set the target's course on the TDC screen (upper left) to the target's true course by utilizing the Aob Dial on the Attack Dials screen (upper right) to rotate it unitl it matches the target's true course. Fourth, turn on the PK, thus activating the TDC. Fifth, get the range/aspect ratio using the Range Dial on the Attack Dials screen (upper right). Sixth, check the solution on the Attack Map. When the solution (the white X and the white line showing the aspect ratio) match, you are in business. If they do not match, adjustments are necessary. See the Easy Aob thread in the mod forum under Neal Steven's sticky re popular mods for further discussion.
RR-I have tried TMO plot and EZ Plot. I am now using a mod that restores stock map icons. It works well, and the icons are in color too. I gave up on nisgeis' 3D TDC because it took too long to plot, etc., plus I always managed to mess up the speed calculation. I tried one of your subnuclear torpedoes. It blew a destroyer a couple hundred feet in the air!
Rockin Robbins
09-15-10, 01:21 PM
RR-I have tried TMO plot and EZ Plot. I am now using a mod that restores stock map icons. It works well, and the icons are in color too. I gave up on nisgeis' 3D TDC because it took too long to plot, etc., plus I always managed to mess up the speed calculation. I tried one of your subnuclear torpedoes. It blew a destroyer a couple hundred feet in the air!
Yeah, that's what EZplot does: restores stock game plotting in TMO or RFB. Any other mod too if they change it.
Subnuclear torpedoes: not too realistic, but too fun to ignore! Destroyer gymnastics are the bee's knees!:D
http://i196.photobucket.com/albums/aa293/RockinRobbins13/Silent%20Hunter%204/SS%20Research/Asashio--OhtheHumanity.jpg
Compatible with RFB, TMO, GFO or any other mod combination except RSRD. Not compatible with human life.
Bothersome
09-15-10, 01:33 PM
If you're shooting down airplanes, you have a big captain problem which needs adjusting. TMO is guaranteed to adjust your attitude.:D
I think that is an opinion of yours and not a fact of the matter. You don't have enough information to think about the situations that require me to put boat in that position that dictate me trying to shoot down the occasional plane.
And anyone who says the TMO plotting system isn't the best, preferring RFB's contacts vanishing because you stood too close to the plotting table, (!!!!!) substitute the profanity of your choice there, and then claims RFB simulates the equipment..... I just about guarantee that on the real sub the closer you stood to the plotting table the better you could see the plot. I like RFB just fine but always layer TMOplot (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/downloads.php?do=file&id=151) on top of it to get rid of that craziness. For reasons I've gone into elsewhere in excruciating detail, TMO plotting system is by far the closest to reality SH4 is capable of delivering. The rest either give you too much info or toss out the baby with the bathwater and leave you driving the car with a paper bag over your head.
"And anyone who says..." :: Just what are you getting at here. You seem to be rambling, but I'm not following. Your thought drift into problems associated with RFB I think. It took me a while to figure out what your saying here. In RFB, real settings include map contacts. But I usually turn those off because I don't like answers just handed to me (location, course, etc). They are off in TMO, so I turn them off in RFB. You seem to be stating your findings on one vs the other, I have nothing to add your experiences.
Ducimus, did you ever think that someone would say the best part of TMO was the eyecandy? That's one for the ages!:har:
But this is a game. As such everyone is able to modify it to their liking. Some of us just enjoy simulation.
Go ahead and laugh, I still stand by my statements until TMO proves otherwise.
Yes some of us do enjoy simulation. In my case, simulation of the hardware, not the experience. You see, I can read about experiences that those people went through from a book and get a pretty good understanding of what they went through to get the job done. But I wonder what I would do, knowing what *I* know. So I need a simulator that gives me what they used. So I can try *MY* ideas to see what would happen. I'm not looking to simulate the experience, but to simulate the situation at hand to see if I could find a different outcome.
Anyway, I'm done with this.
Ducimus
09-15-10, 03:13 PM
Ducimus, did you ever think that someone would say the best part of TMO was the eyecandy? That's one for the ages!:har:.
Nope. Never thought that. But from digs made on the sly, I've already figured out he doesn't like me, nor my work, nor does he realize just how many hours has been poured into the mod over the course of a few years. Though I have some choice words in response to those digs.......that fine, whatever. I didn't mod this game to make friends and appease people.
edit:
I still stand by my statements until TMO proves otherwise.
Ok, I'm saying this to everybody, God, and Sunny Jesus.
A modder, is NOT a service provider. You the user are NOT a customer. You are not entitled to anything. You pay nothing for the mods which your downloading unless your ISP is metered. The mods cost you nothing in labor excepting the 5 minutes it takes to install it. To use the mod or not, is entirely by choice. Nobody is forcing anyone to D/L it, install it, or use it, in any way shape or form.
Therego, the mod or the modder, does not, and should not have to prove anything, to anyone. Period.
I'm goin' down
09-15-10, 07:09 PM
having heard arguments for and against TMO, please retire and decide if Ducimus is liable for intentionally inflicting severe emotional distress on those captains injured when activating and playing SH4 with his supermod.
Armistead
09-15-10, 08:16 PM
The good news is each can play as he wishes, it's not online play. I have honestly cussed Ducimas 1000 times while playing TMO, but not ever condemned the work. It was mod of the year for a reason. Still, it's not close to reality, so how people complain that it's hard. I can easily sink 50K every patrol at 100%, no cams or contacts.
Alas, I still await reality, but mine is more convoys that go an average of 14kts, convoys that don't slow down when attacked, ect...
Since I started playing Duc has made many changes, actually listening to the wishes of what people prefer.
Galanti
09-22-10, 01:39 PM
If the TMO 2 Beta would not conflict with the Easier AI mod, I would activate it. The increased speed of the subs is a big benefit.
How do the two conflict? IIRC the Easier AI only contains three files relating to sensors, I had no conflicts showing in JSGME when I flipped it on.
Rockin Robbins
09-23-10, 05:46 AM
I think that is an opinion of yours and not a fact of the matter. You don't have enough information to think about the situations that require me to put boat in that position that dictate me trying to shoot down the occasional plane.
Shooting at airplanes at any time with a real submarine was utter foolishness. There was less chance of damaging the plane than if you pointed your finger at it and said "Bang! Bang!" However, there was a very good chance that your expensive, difficult to replace submarine would be destroyed by that cheap, easily replaced aircraft. Excuses don't cut it. All information is irrelevant, as it is NEVER appropriate. Efforts are better spent avoiding the plane as plane vs. submarine is a colossal mismatch in the favor of the plane.
"And anyone who says..." :: Just what are you getting at here. You seem to be rambling, but I'm not following. Your thought drift into problems associated with RFB I think. It took me a while to figure out what your saying here. In RFB, real settings include map contacts. But I usually turn those off because I don't like answers just handed to me (location, course, etc). They are off in TMO, so I turn them off in RFB. You seem to be stating your findings on one vs the other, I have nothing to add your experiences.
You opened the door to my "rambling" with your casually rendered observation that RFB simulated the equipment. I am merely highlighting the falsity of your statement by a simple observation, that in RFB as you increase magnification of the nav map contacts vanish. I'll bet that is how the real equipment worked too. No? Just like all mods, RFB makes appropriate and inappropriate analogies. Claiming any simulation of the real equipment is far beyond reality.
Go ahead and laugh, I still stand by my statements until TMO proves otherwise.
If you don't like TMO it is you that has something to prove. You have to prove that you can do better. Where's your mod? Ducimus' mod has been stellar for several years now and will continue to share the spotlight as best of the best, along with a tiny handful of SH4 supermods.
The water's warm. We await your mod.
Yes some of us do enjoy simulation. In my case, simulation of the hardware, not the experience. You see, I can read about experiences that those people went through from a book and get a pretty good understanding of what they went through to get the job done. But I wonder what I would do, knowing what *I* know. So I need a simulator that gives me what they used. So I can try *MY* ideas to see what would happen. I'm not looking to simulate the experience, but to simulate the situation at hand to see if I could find a different outcome.
Anyway, I'm done with this.
You sure picked the right handle! There you go back to claiming that RFB somehow simulates the equipment better than TMO. I'll let you in on a dirty secret. RFB and TMO share a lot more than they have in differences. And it goes in both directions, with a TMO idea migrating to RFB as often as it goes in the other direction. You are making some kind of conflict between the mods that simply does not exist in reality.
No simulator can give you "what they used." Running with map contacts off leaves you with no radar and no sonar vectors. Both radar and sonar contacts would be plotted on a submarine's real plot, so right away you are running the sub with a paper bag over your head, denying yourself information available to any submarine captain in the war. That ends your simulation of the equipment right there.
Any decisions you make based on this bogus information set does not reflect the reality of the real submarine, so you can toss your "I'm not looking to simulate the experience, but to simulate the situation at hand to see if I could find a different outcome" right out the window. That 6 knot current at 150' is really making operations difficult down there, isn't it? What? There really is no current in the game? Where are your decisions on how to handle the negative buoyancy tank while on the surface? Are you riding the vents? I'm sure you perform daily trim dives to mark negative for neutral buoyancy, right? How much freeboard are you electing to carry while on the surface? How are your batteries holding out and what's your schedule on checking specific gravity of the electrolyte? What? None of that equipment is available to you? Hell, you can't even make ice cream! And you say SH4 is an equipment simulator? No way, no how.
So I guess you can toss writing your own supermod out the window. You're going to have to produce the first perfect simulator from scratch. Have fun.
SH4 is a GAME. It loosely, and that is being generous, gives the general impression of a small set of decisions captains made in operating a World War II diesel/electric submarine. Mods are to supply small details that make that impression more aesthetically pleasing to the modder. You have nothing to do with that evaluation. If you like the mod, use it. Otherwise you are in no position to demand anything from anyone. Your presumption of doing so is irritating.
WernherVonTrapp
11-03-10, 07:42 AM
I'm currently giving TMO 2.0 a shake down cruise (played 1.9 for a little bit) and so far, I love it. Just like when I first played RFB, it's going to take a little "getting used to" with the differences. I started out in my first S-Boat of any version of the game. Boy, are these pig boats slow or what? Still, I like the fact that the subs are much more maneuverable on the surface and submerged, than they are in RFB. In RFB, they were so slow and cumbersome, especially under water (though this may just be peculiar with the S-Boats -I haven't received a newer boat yet). I love the environment. No doubt, this took a lot of time to develope and it seems nothing was left out of consideration.
I especially love the various/different explosions. Never saw anything like that in RFB. I swear, I actually saw what looked like a shock wave coming from one merchant.:o Haven't had to tangle with any DDS yet. Not really looking forward to that. Didn't enjoy it in any other version either so, I think I'm in for a rude awakening if it happens.:oops: A lot of new and different vessels, and a lot of smaller add-ons are already incorporated into TMO meaning, I don't have to add them afterwards (big plus).
Had a little trouble finding targets on my first few patrols but, experienced the same thing in RFB. All in all, I love the difference in gameplay, keeps it all interesting.:yeah:
Man, this thread has been shifted off-topic, turned into a flame-war, morphed into an off-topic flame-war, then shifted away from the flame war onto a different topic. All of this about 5 times.
It's also been necro'd a few times. :P
Bubblehead1980
11-03-10, 08:24 PM
I like them both, both have their pros and cons but mostly pros.I play TMO because I like the challenge in addition to some smaller gameplay things I find much more of a challenge.However, RFB is great also.Rather rude to get on here and bash someone's hard work, esp work that is loved by this community.
Ducimus has a great point about those who use the mods are USERS and not customers.Ducimus is graceful enough to take suggestions from time o time and include them.I suggested long ago on the UBI forums that we needed some type of warning equipment for later war patrols, ducimus was kind enough to create one for fleet boats and include it, because he understood it's vital piece of equipment really once IJN vessels have radar a good portion of the time.
So, if you dont like something you should go about it like this:A keep your mouth shut and use what you do like OR nicely bring the issue up and see if they agree and who knows it may get changed.Most modders on here are nice people overall and will respond to questions etc but not rude remarks.
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.