elite enemy gun crews

[clubcat]

when on the serface and many of the armed merchants tent to have extremly trained gun crews who appear unrealisticaly to be able to very acurately hit a sub ,this seems totaly unrealistic for the time,also a hit would sink a sub not merely incurr some minor damages you either hit it or miss ,no inbetween...i wonder if these elite merchant gun crews can be reduced

[Matador.es]

I had been surprised by their accuracy aswell. Even while facing the smallest silhouette they don’t seem to have any trouble with hitting you over 2,5 up to 3 KM. I do not know if that is “adjustable” but I do think your right about the aiming skills of merchants.

[Axeman3d]

Gun crews were often regulars and not merchant marine guys, so you were not always dealing with stokers shooting once in a blue moon. Remember too that at the time big gun battles between ships could be fought at ranges out to 30,000 yards if you could tell where the bad guy was, and even small guns of the period were designed to be very accurate and quick firing. You also have your gun mounted higher and on a much more stable platform than a sub, so are able to shoot more accurately and in much worse weather too. Basically, don't try outshooting a ship unless you really have to.

[Matador.es]

I must admit, makes good sence. The hight and stability is a great advantage.

[Webster]

I must admit, makes good sence. The hight and stability is a great advantage.


actually the height was NOT an advantage except with seeing over the horizon and being mounted high on the bow of a ship you were also rockin-an-rollin pretty good up there too so its not THAT stable but it was a lot more stable then a sub deck.

gun crew being mounted high on the bow of a ship would make it easier to see farther over the horizon and the area around the ship but that would not necessarily make it easier to see a sub thats nothing more then a bump sticking up a little higher then the waves around it so your view being high up on the ships deck could make subs MORE invisible to gun crews.

picture a garbage can sitting on a log then imagine how far away you can hit that garbage can with any accuracy.

also guns of the day were pretty accurate but NOT sniper rifle with scope accurate as the game makes it seam.

as strange as it is, in the game the ship guns get less accurate at shorter ranges as though with reduced range the built in miss percentage variable increases or something. IMO cargo ships shouldnt be any more accurate then one out of ten shots unless its dead calm conditions or in a port raiding situation. as for the sub guns, well you ARE litterally shooting at the huge profile so your gun crew shouldnt be missing it be very often.

as for if ship gun accuracy is adjustable, yes there is a variable to adjust it but i cant remember what its called or the file its in but its a random variable of hit to miss ratio.

[Axeman3d]

Gun height above the waterline has historically been considered an advantage for fighting at sea, since it allows you to fire in heavier seas and at larger angles of heel. In the old days of closer combat, it allowed you to fire down through the deck of your enemy too.

Remember also that these QF guns were originally designed to fight off small, fast torpedo boats and the fastest destroyers, which were the main enemy of battleships at close quarters. They had 4" and 6" guns that could get off 12 aimed rounds a minute with constant aiming. A sub is a small target, no doubt about it, but not fast, not tough and not a good gun platform at all.

[Vanilla]

2-3 km is point blank range for those guns. I think after first 2-4 shells when they got their range correct 8-9 shells out of ten would hit. That is - probably first 2-4 shells miss you but almost all the others hit. And it is not a rocket science. Just try to aim and shoot the deckgun yourself - you'll see it is true. So nothing unrealistic there. The only thing is they should spot you first, but after the look-outs see you - no problem for the guns.

I agree that it should be mostly either miss or kill - 10x10 centimetres hole in the pressure hull means you're unable to dive any more, although inability to dive is 90% death for a U-boat in the long perspective - you would not die straight away though: if you are on the surface it requires many more hits to sink you. On the other hand if you stay on the surface under constant pounding - you would have half of your crew dead very very soon. Hence, giving that we cannot simulate inability to dive, it should be either miss or kill with the gun shells.

[GT182]

Know when to fold em, know when to run away and fight another day. ;) :salute:

I learned in SH3 to never ever get into a gun battle with any armed Merchant or Warship. You will not survive that game. Best to run for cover..... crash dive, wait a while till they calm down or play dead, and then go after them with torpedos. :DL

[Sailor Steve]

also guns of the day were pretty accurate but NOT sniper rifle with scope accurate as the game makes it seam.
2-3 km is point blank range for those guns. I think after first 2-4 shells when they got their range correct 8-9 shells out of ten would hit.
The average hit rate for naval gunnery overall in World War Two was about 7%. Outside of five miles it was only 2%, inside of that 12%, hence the average of seven. Peter Padfield in his book Guns At Sea likened naval gunnery to shooting a pistol at a golf ball rolling across a mantle, while sitting in a rocking chair being rocked by someone else.

The height itself isn't an advantage, but the bigger the ship the more stable. Point-blank range for a tube-sighted gun (no fire control) is going to be 1km or less. The point about the sub's vulnerability is the most important one. Read the accounts on www.uboat.net (http://www.uboat.net), and you'll find that any time a merchant opened fire on a u-boat, the boat immediately dived, and the attack was usually over at that point.

The gunnery should be much less accurate for both merchants and submarines, but a single hit on your sub should at the very least render it unable to dive, if not actually sinking it. We should be terrified of any surface ship with a gun, or the game isn't doing its job.

[Matador.es]

Then i guess the accuracy for the merchant guns should be lowered and the damage done increased?

[Webster]

Then i guess the accuracy for the merchant guns should be lowered and the damage done increased?


yes, my guestimate would be to increase shell damage by 400% and since i believe sailor steves accuracy numbers are about right i would suggest 1 in 20 hit rate to be about right at 5% so when you throw in the games random fluctuations that should be just right in most cases.

a word of caution thou, that would change all shells so during ship on ship battles it will increase damage there as well


what you are attempting sounds easy enough but lots of other stuff is inter related so unintended side effects will happen but im sure a balance can be reached somewhere so you get the right feeling in game without having surface ships sink too easy

[Vanilla]

The average hit rate for naval gunnery overall in World War Two was about 7%. Outside of five miles it was only 2%, inside of that 12%, hence the average of seven.
2% is no wonder since shooting at 20-30km distance was usual.

5NM is 9.26km I am rarely able to spot a merchant at that range, neither they are - so they do not shoot at me at this kind of range. And according to the data you've given although we can barely see the target inside this range we still get 12% precision. And 12% is 1-2 shells out of ten hit if they were able to spot me. Then as far as I remember precision percentage increases exponentialy with range decreasing, doesn't it? So 2-3 km give what 70%?

Let's look at it from another perespective: In the American Civil War (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Civil_War) Confederate troops equipped with barrel-length three power scopes mounted on the exceptionally accurate British Whitworth rifle (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whitworth_rifle) had been known to kill Union officers at ranges of about 800 yards (731.5m)
730m to hit a man in those times! And we are talking WWII and gun shells that are much more precise: they are heavier (less wind and other aerodynamic's issues), many of naval guns aren't rifled - so no nutation issues, etc., and we are not shooting at a person, but rather a U-boot, that is way bigger - the shell can even land a bit short of the target and still hit it (ricochet or underwater hit).
Another example is Tiger tank - its gun was precise up to 3km (Wiki: Tigers were reported to have knocked out enemy tanks at ranges greater than 2.5 miles (4,000 m)), standard range to hit a tank with a first shot was 1.5km. I don't think naval guns are that much different. I agree that the tanks do not rock and sway while shooting - but on the other hand tank is much smaller target then a U-boot. So I am still not convenienced re guns' precision.

Completely agree on the damage part.

[Webster]

- but on the other hand tank is much smaller target then a U-boot. So I am still not convenienced re guns' precision.




not really (except at point blank range) because the only visible target on a sub is the tower so it is about the same as a tank.

as for the accuracy issue,

its hard to find agreement there because if you want to be closest to a fair comparison then you would have to be swaying on a swing and have a target to shoot swinging back and forth on a string in the opposite 45degree angle movements then see how often you can hit it, even at short ranges.

it is not impossible but there is a lot more luck then skill involved in hitting the target and even this example is using 2 demensional movements. it sounds easy enough for a gunner to hit a moving target from another moving target untill you actually try it yourself.

caution should be used in examples of fixed land based guns hitting other land targets because you are only dealing with 2 dimensional movements (often just moving at 90 degree angles) where floating targets are moving in 3 dimensional angles but the guns can only compensate on 2 dimensional axis so you still need to "guestimate" when the target will "happen" to cross a setting you have the ability to make. its not like a free hand rifle where you can duplicate your targets movements.

[Sailor Steve]

Then as far as I remember precision percentage increases exponentialy with range decreasing, doesn't it? So 2-3 km give what 70%?
Not really. Remember the other number - 12% for all shooting inside 5 miles. Even at close range hitting was not guaranteed. I've seen a photograph of and American destroyer shooting at a sampan. Both were in the picture, so the range was probably about 500 yards, and there were three splashes in the picture, which indicates that only two of the five shells fired actually hit the target. And all five were fired in salvo with a gun director and sophisticated rangefinder!

many of naval guns aren't rifled
Not true. All naval guns have been rifled since the 1890s.


Another example is Tiger tank - its gun was precise up to 3km (Wiki: Tigers were reported to have knocked out enemy tanks at ranges greater than 2.5 miles (4,000 m)), standard range to hit a tank with a first shot was 1.5km.
"Reported to" is not enough. Specific evidence or it's just talk.


I don't think naval guns are that much different.
Reread Padfield's comparison. One degree of roll means an elevation deviation of 17.445 meters for every kilometer distant, which makes it very easy to be long or short. Remember that submarines and merchant ships have no fire-control equipment at all.