RFB 2.0 first experience

[Threadfin]

I also posted this at SimHQ, but thought I would put it here as well.

Recently got back in to Silent Hunter after many years away, and because I recently re-read Silent Victory for the nth time I chose to go with SH4. I played one career with point-and-shoot targeting but after sinking half a million tons in 7 patrols I knew I needed to mod up to get a proper challenge.

Had a look about and decided to give Trigger Maru 2.5 a go. It is a fantastic mod, I like it very much, but the player detection is too much for me. Don't get me wrong, I love a stiff challenge, I'm the sort of player who loves spending hours evading at depth without externals, staring at the gauges and sweeping with the hydrophones, working the plot, calculating speeds, course, AoB -- essentially attempting to re-create the role of a sub skipper (and tracking party) as closely as I can. But I found it virtually impossible to avoid detection by 1944. For example I was assigned a patrol in the Bismarck Sea. Picked up a convoy -- 6 freighters with 3 escorts just northeast of Wewak. I was detected at about 4500 yards, submerged, silent, brief periscope exposures. OK. In two separate attacks I was able to eliminate the escorts, one sub chaser with a Cutie, one weaving, charging destroyer with a down the throat mag shot, and after pulling off and doing an end around, sunk the last escort a few hours later, leaving the convoy shorn of protection.

Did another end around and after a few hours I submerged 6 miles ahead to lay in wait. The convoy eventually hove in to view, and when they got to within about 4000 yards (2 miles!) the convoy detected me and began evading to the south. It's a bit much for me. Again, I don't mind a challenge, in fact I look for it. But the ability of the ships, and not just escorts, to detect my boat is greater than what I would expect, or want.

So that brings me to RFB 2.0. I installed it, along with RSRDC and several minor mods. Now, I've only done my first patrol for the Asiatic Force following Pearl Harbor, in Spearfish, assigned to patrol off Camrahn Bay. Made just one contact (still no surface search radar of course, or SD yet), a 5-ship convoy in column, with a leading and trailing destroyer escort, likely heading for Lingayen Gulf. I attempted to end around, keeping the convoy hull down, but it was bright daylight, no wind, just a blue bird day and we were spotted by the escorts at about 9000 yards as we made the surface dash to get ahead for a periscope attack.

Quickly pulled the plug and turned in on the convoy. The escorts closed the spot we submerged and began a search, but the time it took them to close, and our 7 knots submerged meant they were unable to detect me due to the distance we had moved from the point of submergence. It seemed perfectly realistic. In TMO these DDs would have been on me in no time.

With a bit of breathing room we closed the convoy's track. Due to all the above I was only able to get in position to have a crack at the last ship in line, a big 7000 ton 4-mast freighter. We had tracked them at 12 knots before being sighted, and now that they were zigging mildly we re-tracked them at 8.5. Got within 500 yards and fired all four bow tubes, for one hit, two duds, and not sure what happened to the other torpedo. Luckily, the one hit was critical, and the ship caught fire from bow to stern.

All this time the two escorts has given up looking for me and were closing the convoy. When the fish hit, they started pinging and found me. One of the 'realism/role playing' things I do in Silent Hunter is make trim dives. Of course it isn't necessary in the sim, but I do it anyway, mostly to keep track of the thermal layer. I knew it was at 150 feet. What I failed to do is take a sounding and promptly stuck my nose in the mud.

120 feet of water isn't much and they hounded me, taking turns making runs and dropping strings. Took some moderate damage which we were eventually able to repair, but that precluded silent running and we sought deeper water. With the map/chart I had to work with I had no idea where that would be, but reckoned my best bet was to head east. After a 3 hour evasion I finally found 180 feet of water, dropped below that layer and after a while they returned to their escort stations. One thing I noticed was toward the end of the evasion, the escorts had stopped dropping. They still made runs, but no cans fell. That is wonderful if the escorts can actually run out of DCs in a reasonable time. Is that a RFB thing? If so, great job!

After making repairs and surfacing I set course for Lingayen Gulf as I knew the Japanese would be making their landing on or about the 18th of December and I hoped to get in on it. But as we approached Manila, a message came in changing base to Java, and with just 1/3 of my bunkers still full of oil, I reluctantly turned for Surabaya and made it with just a bit to spare.

Overall it was a 2 week patrol that resulted in 4 torpedos fired, one big freighter sunk and a long, difficult evasion (brought on mainly due to my lack of awareness of the depth of water we were attacking in). But the overall sense of realism, of challenge and of authenticity was as good as any sub sim experience I have had, and I've played them all and for many years. Granted, it's a small sample of a single patrol and my view may shift, but I was very pleased with my first experience. I know Luke hangs out here and I just would like to say thanks and great work to all involved! I especially like the sinking mechanics.

One note, I noticed my first two patrol locations in Spearfish were historically accurate (patrol 2 to Makassar Strait), the same as the real Spearfish was assigned. Has SH4 always been this way, is it a RFB thing, or is it cosmic coincidence?

If anyone else here is, or was, using RFB 2.0, which compatible mods do you use or recommend? (and now that I reposted at Subsim I know the answer is yes, people here are using it!)

[Threadfin]

And as far as mod recommendations, I love maps. What would you say is your favorite map/chart mod compatible with RFB?

[merc4ulfate]

Generic Mod Enabler - v2.6.0.157
RFB_2.0
RFB_2.0_Patch_23April2010
RSRDC_RFB_V575
RSRDC_V5xx_Patch1
Improved Ship Physics_1.1
Real Subs
EAXsoundsim_without_WebstersManeuver_STOCK_GFO_OM

[Threadfin]

Thanks. I installed the Nav Map Makeover 2.1 which appears to be the same map that's in TMO? Sorted there, but still open to suggestions if anyone prefers a different one.

Had to do the Address Array fix because I started getting CTDs when attempting to end the patrol, and sometimes when going to the bridge, and that fixed the issue.

In my second patrol I was assigned Makassar Strait as I mentioned, and developed but one contact, what I imagined was the invasion force for Java or Timor or Makassar City. Huge convoy, probably 20 or so ships with maybe 10 escorts. No way to accurately count them.

Slipped inside the starboard screen in very rough water and let go all tubes at overlapping freighters and got 5 hits I believe. Went deep to evade and thought I had come up empty, but over the next hour 4 ships went to the bottom. I really like the sinking mechanics, and the uncertainty that it fosters.

I was using the Improved Ship Physics, but wasn't sure if it would be compatible with RFB, but I see from the post above it is, so I will install that.

[Pooch]

I just installed this, also. I like the fact that Japanese destroyers aren't spotting me from Tokyo Bay anymore, when I'm still near Hawaii.
One thing I don't like, though. And it's enough to, possibly, make me uninstall. The bobbing from side to side seems excessive.
Now, I could be wrong. I've gone and watched some old WW2 sub footage, though. Scenes from movies and documentaries. I just don't see them heeling over so much. It's almost as though the boat is going to capsize. I realize that they weren't as sea worth as a battleship, but its like being on a cork.
Anyone else feel that way? Haven't seen any other posts mention it, so maybe its just me.
Is there a way to take it out and leave everything else in?

[Threadfin]

Ya know, in my first RFB patrol I saw the same thing. The destroyers especially were heeling over 30 degrees even in calm seas, but for whatever reason it stopped. I know, makes no sense (or I just don't understand) but there ya are. Try a second patrol and see if it stops.

I've now done about 10 patrols. Bagged a Furataka cruiser and a Fuso battleship in a single two-ended salvo on the western approach to Truk. I had been south of Truk hoping to pick up contacts on the Truk-Solomons route in fall of '42 while Guadalcanal raged. I use RSRDC so got a Fox that the IJN was shifting naval units to Truk from home waters and the date on which they should arrive. Shifted over to the western approach and made contact. By sheer luck I was positioned perfectly. Just had to submerge and wait.

I play at 100% with no external cameras and it was night so I never got a feel for the entire composition, but there were cruisers, battleships and destroyers, saw no carriers, probably 12-15 ships in all. I got to a point between the oncoming columns and planned to fire all 10 tubes (Gato class) at two targets. I tracked the task force at 14 knots (nomographs are genius) and positioned my sub 800 yards off the column in front and 1500 off the column aft.

It reminded me of the attacks by Darter and Dace in Palawan passage in the prelude to Leyte Gulf when one of skippers said, and I paraphrase, 'we will let these go by, they're only heavy cruisers'. Two cruisers passed ahead and another two behind. In the faint light though, I could see the 3rd ship in the forward column had the distinctive pagoda superstructure of a Japanese battleship. I would fire all 6 forward tubes at this ship and the four stern tubes at whichever ship was abreast in the aft column, which turned out to be the Furataka CA. Because the CA was further from my position, the stern tubes would be fired first, with the aim of having all torpedos arrive at the about same time.

I was a very tense wait as I expected to be detected at any moment, but the ships plowed on. I use a 'steady wire' firing technique, where I predict the point of firing, usually a 080 track (or 170 for stern) depending on the speed of the ships. That is, I place the wire steady, check the gyros, and wait for the ship to sail through the sight picture. For points of aim I will usually use the forward mast, stack and after mast, but every ship is different. This spreads the torpedos across the length of the ship, and in the case of speed or range errors, will usually result in 2 of the 3 fish finding the target. Of course here we would be shooting all torpedos.

So when the Furataka crossed the wire I began firing the stern tubes. Once all 4 were away I quickly spun the scope back to the Fuso, reversed the AoB, and reset the range. One thing I do not like about RFB is when clicking on the range dial it 'resets'. I cannot just move it a little like I could in TMO or stock. Are there keyboard shortcuts to adjust range? Adjusting range in RFB is rather cumbersome for some reason, or I am clicking on the dial in the wrong place. But got it sorted just in time and let go all forward tubes at the BB.

Then I started down. At least one hit in the cruiser, and several on the battleship, but quite frankly I don't know how many. And a few duds as well, as it's RFB afterall! The Fuso sank within 15 minutes, but the cruiser did not. Eventaully the escorts found us at 315 feet and dropped a few strings, rocking the boat but doing no damage. After a hour or so the DDs left and we returned to periscope depth expecting to find empty sea, but instead found the cruiser dead in the water. It took another 6 torpedos to send Furataka to the bottom because of duds, but eventually one exploded near the forward turret and we cleared the area post haste.

As for RFB 2.0 I am really enjoying it, but I am finding range and endurance an issue. I would always have endurance for minimum 60 days at sea, usually quite a bit longer, but in RFB i can just make 5 weeks out of SubPac. It's fine out of Brisbane or Fremantle, but from SubPac bases it isn't enough as I'm burning 35% enroute to say the South China Sea, and 35% back, leaving only 30% for patrol.

[Threadfin]

Another thing, as I can't be the only one.... Once each on the last two patrols I was cruising on the surface, no shallow water, no enemy near, and I suddenly get a message that stern tubes are damaged (and they are). They get fixed one by one, but only at the next radio message. Anyone seen this?

Using RSRDC, ISP and a map and environment mod.

[TorpX]

Another thing, as I can't be the only one.... Once each on the last two patrols I was cruising on the surface, no shallow water, no enemy near, and I suddenly get a message that stern tubes are damaged (and they are). They get fixed one by one, but only at the next radio message. Anyone seen this?



Never heard of this.

Were you going at higher TC?

[Threadfin]

Yes indeed I was. I know that's generally considered a no no, but I was at high TC. Is it possible to be attacked without coming out of TC? My system runs the sim ultra smoothly, over 200 fps, but perhaps a bomb got dropped without radar or watch picking up a contact?

[Armistead]

Yes indeed I was. I know that's generally considered a no no, but I was at high TC. Is it possible to be attacked without coming out of TC? My system runs the sim ultra smoothly, over 200 fps, but perhaps a bomb got dropped without radar or watch picking up a contact?


Sure it can happen, but depends on the AI settings of the mod. Early war without radar sometimes escorts will blast you out of the water before you get visuals, but more so with TMO. You should always get visuals on planes that will bring you to a default time, usually 8. Now, once you have a contact, if you crank up TC again, you won't get another on that one, so be careful using it after contact. Always be careful near places where shore guns could be, they'll blow you out of the water in seconds at high TC

[Threadfin]

Thanks. The first one happened enroute back to Midway, about 800 miles east of Lot's Wife. The second occurred about halfway between the Palaus and Truk so possible it was a plane, but probably not a shore based gun.

Another strange thing I had happen, and I don't know if it's due to RFB, but in early '44 I was offered a new command while in a Gato, took it, and ended up with a Tambor. Not exactly an upgrade!

[Armistead]

I never played RFB more than a few patrols and that was many years ago. They're numerous AI values including the environment settings. RFB should be easier as far as the ranges that you're spotted than TMO. I don't recall if RFB uses stock traffic or he reworked the traffic like TMO. You may want to try it with RSRD and that should give you correct bases, promotions and traffic.

Keep in mind the larger a plane is the further away your crew visuals and radar will pick it up.

RFB may be set different as far as TC, seems some mods don't default to real time upon radar contact, just give you the contact info block and sometimes by the time you get to real time...you're dead. Most simply hit one key for a compartment like F5 to get to default real time rather than beat on he TC minus key over and over.

The only thing that makes sense here would be a plane. If it happens again and u get damage, just stop where you are at real time for a bit and have a look around, wait and listen, if it's a plane it should be returning back.

[Threadfin]

Thanks, yes I am using RSRDC, and I just hit backspace to return to 1x TC.

Strange, but not fatal so I can live with it.

I started a new career in TMO to give that another shot. I really like RFB but I gotta say the range dial drives me nuts. It works very differently than TMO or stock. And the lack of endurance in a fleet boat is also an issue.

I will just use both mods, since JSME makes it so easy to switch back and forth. I like things about each, and TMO is overall the more polished one, and if I can get the hang of avoiding detection that will end up my go-to mod I believe.

[Sledgehammer427]

As for RFB 2.0 I am really enjoying it, but I am finding range and endurance an issue. I would always have endurance for minimum 60 days at sea, usually quite a bit longer, but in RFB i can just make 5 weeks out of SubPac. It's fine out of Brisbane or Fremantle, but from SubPac bases it isn't enough as I'm burning 35% enroute to say the South China Sea, and 35% back, leaving only 30% for patrol.

IRL the fleet boats would stop for a refuel at midway if they were heading for the home islands.

[Threadfin]

Yes of course, and this is out of Midway. Endurance/range in RFB is far less than TMO or stock in my experience. And that's why I wrote SubPac bases, meaning Pearl and Midway.

As for RFB 2.0 I am really enjoying it, but I am finding range and endurance an issue. I would always have endurance for minimum 60 days at sea, usually quite a bit longer, but in RFB i can just make 5 weeks out of SubPac. It's fine out of Brisbane or Fremantle, but from SubPac bases it isn't enough as I'm burning 35% enroute to say the South China Sea, and 35% back, leaving only 30% for patrol.

[Sledgehammer427]

Ah, my mistake. I haven't had any real issues with fuel, that said, I do remember the devs commenting that the world used in SH4 is cylindrical, and so there's a little issue with fuel usage related to world size. Great circle routes are null and void

[Sniper297]

For fuel problems;

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/downloads.php?do=file&id=4358

I haven't tested for compatibility with RSRDC or RFB, but unless those modify \Data\Campaigns\Campaign\US_NavalBases.mis or Data\UPCData\UPCCampaignData\Flotillas.upc it should be no problem. Flotillas.upc could even be deleted for a Pearl Harbor career since all that one does is change the home ports for Asiatic careers.

https://scontent-a-iad.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-frc1/t1.0-9/1970517_707214969322786_919655070_n.jpg

SPECTRE 42 in Luzon Straits makes a much better refueling stop than Midway.

[Armistead]

Yes of course, and this is out of Midway. Endurance/range in RFB is far less than TMO or stock in my experience. And that's why I wrote SubPac bases, meaning Pearl and Midway.

TMO 2.5 has no issue with fuel do to the fact he adjusted fuel vs. speed. In the past you had to use 10kts for best milage, but now standard speed is basically 15 knots and you get better milage. If it becomes a problem you can slow to 10kts and travel around the game world several times.

I think RFB is adjusted more to reality. The average patrol time was about 6-8 weeks, but they spent a good majority of their time dived at slow speeds during the day.

[TorpX]

As for RFB 2.0 I am really enjoying it, but I am finding range and endurance an issue. I would always have endurance for minimum 60 days at sea, usually quite a bit longer, but in RFB i can just make 5 weeks out of SubPac. It's fine out of Brisbane or Fremantle, but from SubPac bases it isn't enough as I'm burning 35% enroute to say the South China Sea, and 35% back, leaving only 30% for patrol.

I think I can clarify the issue here.

With ISP, I adjusted the range to realistic levels based on 'normal tankage'. Duci based TMO values on 'maximum tankage' (e.g. fuel in FBT tanks). The use of FBT's was not without it's issues, and just assuming every boat to have the extra fuel is, imo, too much of a giveaway. The ranges may not be what you are used to, but they are realistic.

The bottom line is that you really shouldn't have unlimited range to criss-cross the Pacific. If you are heading out on a long patrol, you need to be circumspect about your route and fuel. A full 60 day patrol, cruising all the while (with detours to play hunches), may not always be possible.

[Threadfin]

Thanks fellas, and that makes perfect sense if TMO is modeling fuel in the ballast tanks.

[Threadfin]

I like RFB very much, it's a great mod with some excellent features. In particular I think the sinking mechanics are fantastic. I only wish there were a mod, or a way, to have it both ways. In reality, some ships did indeed explode and go under straight away. Some took hours or days to sink.

Now that I have played for a while there are some things about it that I don't care for. In RFB it's as though there is no resistance submerged, or I am using a prop that's way too small. For example if I am going forward at 2 or 3 knots, changing to back slow it takes 5 minutes to come to a stop and begin to move backwards. I've never conned a fleet boat of course, but plenty of large boats (40+ feet) and it seems too slow to respond. Subjective, I know.

There were other issues and I won't get in to each one, and I won't put all of them down to RFB, like hearing the wrong spoken message. For example I might hear ship spotted, when it is actually a completely different message.

In all though I really like RFB. It's far more challenging in the plotting and targeting aspects than TMO for example, as far less info is handed to the player. The torpedo problems seem to be modeled spot on.

I plan to use both RFB and TMO, but for now I've gone back to TMO as I feel it has more to offer, is more polished. This isn't intended to be a knock on RFB, just personal preference.

Recently I was reading threads here at Subsim, and I read a post by some one who said in effect that they wish people wouldn't automatically use RSRDC since it undoes some of the good things in TMO. Perhaps it was Big Walleye who said it, but I could be mistaken in which case I apologize. What exactly is meant by this? How exactly is it different without RSRDC on top of TMO? I love this sim, and I am always striving to make it realistic as I can. So that means full difficulty (manual, no externals, event camera, etc) and I try to play as realistically as possible. (firing 3 torpedos even though I am sure one would do, diving on every air contact, staying in my assigned area, rarely to never use the deck gun, I even make trim dives even though it serves no purpose in this sim).

But even still, I sink way too many ships for way too much tonnage. I am not saying that to brag about how great I am, but to see if there is more I can do to make SH4 even more true to what a fleet boat skipper experienced in the war. We can't simulate electrical shorts, bad water, balky SJs, squealing port shafts, fogging periscopes, broken crank cases and chattering rudders that real skippers had to deal with. I guess I want to have to work harder to find targets, to make each sinking a real event. In my current TMO career I go out for a month, fire off all torpedos, sink 6 or 8 ships for 30k and head back for a refit. It's fun, but it's a bit too much. I'm the type of player that would like it if I left Fremantle 4 days before, only to say have a main motor casualty and now be faced with the decision of whether to RTB or press on with 3 engines.

[Sailor Steve]

But even still, I sink way too many ships for way too much tonnage. I am not saying that to brag about how great I am, but to see if there is more I can do to make SH4 even more true to what a fleet boat skipper experienced in the war.
Unfortunately that's part of the nature of a sim that is also a game. You're always going to have more opportunities to sink more ships, and you'll always have the chance of racking up scores that would make a real skipper green with envy.

I'm the type of player that would like it if I left Fremantle 4 days before, only to say have a main motor casualty and now be faced with the decision of whether to RTB or press on with 3 engines.
Nothing like SH3 Commander, with its chance of failures and sabotage, has been done for SH4. Fortunately one enterprising player came up with a die-roll system that replicates damage and breakdowns fairly well. Rather than put up a notepad text file in the Downloads section I thought I'd just paste it here for anyone to copy and use.

Ted Healy's die rolls for damage SH4

Make a RTB Roll Check once a week for entire patrol. You may make the roll at anytime in that 7 day period. Ex: You could roll every Tuesday night, or you could roll on the 7th day your first week, and on the 1st day your 2nd week. You might want to vary when you roll based on the situation you are in, but you must make a roll every week.

RTB Roll Check
Roll d6 and add the applicable Die Roll Modifier

DRM
+1 S-Boat
+1 50-75% fuel remain
+3 25-50% fuel reamin
+5 < 25% fuel remain

On a result of 6 or greater, continue on and make a Damage Area roll and Damage Seriousness roll. On a result less than 6, you are done for the week.

DAMAGE AREA
On a 6+ RTB Roll Check, roll d6 and check for area below

Before Mid 1943
1 - Batteries
2-3 - Radar/Electrical (if no SJ radar, treat as Engines result)
4-5 - Torpedoes
6 - Engines

After Mid 1943
1 - Batteries
2-4 - Radar/Electrical (if no SJ radar, treat as Engines result)
5 - Torpedoes
6 - Engines

DAMAGE SERIOUSNESS
Roll d6 for seriousness, add apllicable drm, and check area table for result.

DRM
+3 if identical area has broken down before in patrol (not cumulative)
Results Overview (see specific area table for specific result)
1-5 - Little to minor damage. Fixed in under an hour - In the time it took to explain the problem to the captain, the problem was taken care of.
6 - Moderate damage discovered. It will take approximately 6 hours to repair.
7 - Serious damage discovered. It will take approximately 18 hours to repair.
8 - Very serious damage discovered. It will require cannibalizing parts and days of testing and re-testing and even then it may not get fixed.
9 - Unfixable at sea.

RESULT TABLES

Batteries
1-5 - Last battery check produced unexpected results but upon further inspection, levels look normal.
6 - Cannot go faster than standard when submerged. Can submerge to repair for full 6 hours if wanted. Problem fixed in 6 hours.
7 - Can submerge for up to 6 hours during 18 hour repair time (some time is needed not using batteries to fix them), cannot go faster than 2/3 when submerged. Officers divided on whether or not this is serious enough to force RTB.
8 - RTB suggested by XO, this is a serious issue and not 100% fixable at sea. Can submerge for 1 hour per day for remainder of patrol. Cannot go faster than 2/3 when submerged. Treat further battery results as no effect.
9 - XO and other officers suggest RTB immediately, this is a serious and dangerous issue with the batteries. Cannot go faster than 1/3 when submerged and cannot recharge the battery (turn off battery recharge in command menu immediately upon surfacing every time). Treat further battery results as no effect.

Radar/Electrical
1-5 - No effect, must be gremlins in the system.
6 - Radar unusable in anything but shortest range for 6 hours during repair.
7 - Radar unusable for 18 hours during repair.
8 - Radar unusable until next RTB Roll Check. With limited spare parts, long hours and days, and some outside the box thinking, it can be fixed. Officers divided about RTB issue as the radar seems faulty.
9 - Radar unusable for rest of patrol, XO suggests RTB, but not all officers agree. Treat further Radar/Electrical results as no effect.

Torpedoes
1-6 - No effect, reports from other captains about and your own experience with faulty torpedoes have you on edge over their quality. You have the crew examine the fish (again).
7 - Problem with torpedoes discovered, every single one needs to be checked and rechecked and many worked on before firing them would be considered safe, no firing for 18 hours.
8 - Problem with torpedo tubes/doors, no firing until next RTB Roll Check. The problem is serious and may require someone to go over the side to inspect the outside doors, but the problem is fixable. It will just require time. Officers divided on RTB issue.
9 - Unfixable torpedo problem, torpedo doors will not open, XO and officers suggest immediate RTB unless on spy/supply mission. Treat further Torpedoes result as no effect.

Engines
1-5 - No effect, engines didn't sound right, but appear to be working within tolerance.
6 - A diesel engine has to be shut down for repair. Reduced speed on surface, cannot exceed standard speed on surface for next 6 hours during repair.
7 - Reduced speed, cannot exceed 2/3 speed on surface for next 18 hours during repair, also cannot recharge batteries for 18 hours (turn off recharge in command menu). Officers divided on RTB.
8 - Engines likely to break down soon, something is seriously wrong. XO suggests RTB. IF RTB, cannot exceed standard speed on surface. If continuing patrol, cannot exceed 2/3 speed on surface. Treat further Engines result as no effect
9 - At least one diesel will not work, XO and other officers suggest RTB immediately, do not exceed 2/3 speed on surface. Treat further Engines result as no effect

[Threadfin]

Good post mate, and thanks for that. It's funny but I sort of was thinking along the same lines. Trouble is, I wouldn't do it. But that's the sort of thing I would love to have automated. I do already roll dice to determine the number of patrols I will be in command. I use this handy program http://www.random.org/dice/?num=2

Regardless of what I roll I will still step down when making Captain, which is usually after 7 or 8 patrols. But some careers might go 2 patrols if that's what I rolled, and I imagine I've been assigned to Newport or have become operations officer for Fife or I've been 'surfaced'.

And I get what you mean about it being a game. I just completed a TMO career after the 8th patrol when I made Captain. Started in December '41 in command of Searaven for four patrols, and another four in Triton. 8 patrols for 272,000 tons. More than double what any one boat (with all of it's skippers put together) did in the war. I think I have seen posts by you Steve that mentioned how you like zero patrols, and I think along the same lines.

It's great fun to sink ships in this sim, but I sure would like to have to deal with more of the challenges that skippers faced.

[Armistead]

I haven't played in a long time and my complaint was through the game, regardless of the AI, you could always get unreal tonnage....and how to resolve that. It is difficult due to game code to get that sort of realism, so you make up for that with other difficulty, that's basically what TMO does. If you want that sort of realism, you can get it, but you have to use a few mods and learn to tweak them. You also have to be willing to cut the cams and contacts off. Heck, that alone will give you a fairly realistic game with TMO, but it can be time consuming...
ii
When I played I used numerous mods. I combined parts of RFB and TMO I liked. I used RSRD, but because it weakens the crew ratings of TMO, I went in and edited 100's of ratings in groups, made enemy bases about impossible to get in and numerous deadly sub killer groups. In game, about the only crew ratings mods adjust are the escorts, I did those as well, but adjusted numerous merchants and all capital ships to vet and elite. In doing so, they respond much better to attack and evasion. No mod I'm aware of uses elite ratings, I used them in mass... I also adjusted the AI to be tougher in some ways, easier in others. I used Travs mod as well, a more realistic damage system and crew, although I adjusted it some as well. I used a previous version, as his recent one has some campaign bugs. I also ran my own environment, tuned to the AI for more realistic night surface attacks... and several other mod changes..

The last year I played, I did 5 patrols as well and started over.

[Threadfin]

It is difficult due to game code to get that sort of realism, so you make up for that with other difficulty, that's basically what TMO does. If you want that sort of realism, you can get it, but you have to use a few mods and learn to tweak them. You also have to be willing to cut the cams and contacts off. Heck, that alone will give you a fairly realistic game with TMO, but it can be time consuming...



Thanks for the post, and the thing is I already do that. Not the tweaking, yet, but I use TMO (and RFB), ride out evasions in the control room, for example, and well, I wrote about it earlier.

As for map contacts, I do use them, at least in the way that RFB and TMO allow in the 100% settings. One thing I've struggled with in subsims over the years is the balance between difficulty and realism. For example I am simulating being the skipper. Should I also be the tracking party, and the soundman, and the radar operator and the gun crew? Having no map contacts makes the game more challenging sure, but a skipper raised the scope, called the AoB, and bearing, Mark! There were junior officers to run the plot. I don't necessarily want difficulty for difficulty's sake. I want to simulate the role of the skipper, and really, in the end, be forced to face the decisions the skipper would have to make.

It's a fine line, to be sure.

[TorpX]

Nothing like SH3 Commander, with its chance of failures and sabotage, has been done for SH4. Fortunately one enterprising player came up with a die-roll system that replicates damage and breakdowns fairly well. Rather than put up a notepad text file in the Downloads section I thought I'd just paste it here for anyone to copy and use.

Ted Healy's die rolls for damage SH4



I like it, I like it. :yep:

Unfixable torpedo problem, torpedo doors will not open...

Strangely, I had that happen to me on one patrol. Never figured out why.




***

Having no map contacts makes the game more challenging sure, but a skipper raised the scope, called the AoB, and bearing, Mark! There were junior officers to run the plot. I don't necessarily want difficulty for difficulty's sake. I want to simulate the role of the skipper...

The problem with this, is that the map-contacts option gives you near 100% accuracy in the plot. Real life junior officers could never equal this. Ultimately, their plotting job could never be any more accurate than the skipper's observations, and these are sometimes well off the mark. Of course, you are not alone, many dislike the idea of doing the plotting, but the map-contacts plot will always be more accurate than what we could do, and that equates to more hits and greater tonnage.

I have to agree with Armistead, external cams and map-contacts alone provide a big advantage to the player.

[Threadfin]

The problem with this, is that the map-contacts option gives you near 100% accuracy in the plot. Real life junior officers could never equal this. Ultimately, their plotting job could never be any more accurate than the skipper's observations, and these are sometimes well off the mark.



I agree. And that's part of what I meant by struggling with difficulty vs realism. RFB is a bit better in that regard, with map contacts not visible at the highest zoom levels, putting at least some inaccuracy in the equation.

[Armistead]

The funnest part of the game to me is going to Formosa Strait in 44 and battling all the large convoys that come through, always escorted by the mean Type AB's. Get about 6 of those on you at vet to elite ratings in about 300 ft of water, charges sound like machine gun fire going off. Usually several airplanes join in the fun of killing you.

One thing that helps realism is setting the contact timer high for both search times and time of ships from far away coming to look for you.

I recall a few times having large convoys coming at me north and south, trying to time when they pass each other, often close and attacking. The fun of about 60 merchants and 20 plus mean escorts to deal with..

[TorpX]

Now that I have played for a while there are some things about it that I don't care for. In RFB it's as though there is no resistance submerged, or I am using a prop that's way too small. For example if I am going forward at 2 or 3 knots, changing to back slow it takes 5 minutes to come to a stop and begin to move backwards. I've never conned a fleet boat of course, but plenty of large boats (40+ feet) and it seems too slow to respond. Subjective, I know.



I decided to take a look at this again. I tested it some time back, but I couldn't remember any specifics, to make sure. You are right about RFB (and stock). The eng_power value is very low, and thus you get the behavior you describe - very slow acceleration/deceleration. I'm not sure why they wanted it that low, but perhaps it was to get better battery performance. In any case, you can get much more realistic behavior, if you use ISP.

[Threadfin]

Thanks for having a look and verifying. And I did use your mod to correct that situation. Thanks for making ISP! Another issue I have with RFB is dive times are too fast. 15 seconds or so and ISP corrects that as well.

As for the realism discussion.... one thing I think that would go a long way toward making dropping ships more challenging would be ships sailing faster, and especially zig plans. Most ships just sail along slow and straight. Having ships using zig plans, especially variable zig plans would complicate interception and targeting and allow more ships to TGB.

Ship speeds is one area I find RFB is better than TMO. In TMO too many ships are tooling along at 5 knots. Big transports like a 6700 ton Kiturin Maru capable of almost 19 knots are sailing alone making 5 knots, when it has a normal cruising speed of 16 knots.

http://hnsa.org/doc//id/oni208j-japan-merchant-ships/img/pg023.jpg

This makes them too easy to overtake, intercept and shoot. If this ship were making 16 knots or so it would be more challenging to sink. My experience in RFB has the ships on average sailing faster.

I should add that I was playing RFB with RSRDC, and I am at the mo playing TMO without. Those faster ships speeds could be down to RSRDC and not RFB.

[TorpX]

As for the realism discussion.... one thing I think that would go a long way toward making dropping ships more challenging would be ships sailing faster, and especially zig plans. Most ships just sail along slow and straight. Having ships using zig plans, especially variable zig plans would complicate interception and targeting and allow more ships to TGB.



Oh, I agree completely.

The game could be improved greatly, if we could re-engineer the AI. In fact, if we could do this, the game might be enhanced at the operational level. By this I mean, having the AI reroute convoys around locations where a sub has been sighted, increasing patrols in dangerous areas, increasing probability of having hunter-killer groups sent after you with each sinking, etc., etc.

I do wonder about the constant helming thing. Did the devs intend for ships to do that, or was it a clumsy attempt at making ships zig; something they thought they could fix later?

[B-flat?]

Looks like a lot of us are coming back after being gone. Now to get everything downloaded again.

[Threadfin]

Oh, I agree completely.

The game could be improved greatly, if we could re-engineer the AI. In fact, if we could do this, the game might be enhanced at the operational level. By this I mean, having the AI reroute convoys around locations where a sub has been sighted, increasing patrols in dangerous areas, increasing probability of having hunter-killer groups sent after you with each sinking, etc., etc.

I do wonder about the constant helming thing. Did the devs intend for ships to do that, or was it a clumsy attempt at making ships zig; something they thought they could fix later?

All of these are great ideas. Would love to see these sorts of things in the sim. Local escorts would also be cool. As I'm sure you know the Japanese would often escort convoys and ships through dangerous areas, and then depart, and the convoy would be picked up by other escorts further along. Air escorts attached to valuable convoys would also be welcome.

I think the constant helming is their attempt at zig-zagging and is intentional, because SH3 had the same thing.

Hey TorpX, I see you came out with another version of ISP. Any chance it affects the speed at which ships travel? I would be so great if solo ships sailed at something like 80% or so of their max speed, or what ONI shows as their cruisIng speed.

[Armistead]

Oh, I agree completely.

The game could be improved greatly, if we could re-engineer the AI. In fact, if we could do this, the game might be enhanced at the operational level. By this I mean, having the AI reroute convoys around locations where a sub has been sighted, increasing patrols in dangerous areas, increasing probability of having hunter-killer groups sent after you with each sinking, etc., etc.

I do wonder about the constant helming thing. Did the devs intend for ships to do that, or was it a clumsy attempt at making ships zig; something they thought they could fix later?





How convoys act when spotted, the slowing down and helming is a big flaw. It actually works to your benefit and is unrealistic behavior. However, what I've noticed is some groups actually break up, ships go their separate ways at different speeds and later regroup in formation. In some cases I've noticed TF keep speed and leave you behind. However, this behavior is rare, but it seemed to happen more in stock, but often caused ships to run each other over. I was going to look at the many different settings not commonly used in the ME for group properties and test, but my PC blew up and since I've given up the game and got use to my google notebook.....thinking soon I'll get another.

One thing that can be done is having sub killer groups come looking for you from further away by adjusting the contact timer. It works better for planes if airbases are nearby. I did place many sub killer groups in the shipping lanes of RSRD and often these would come looking for me, showing up the next day. The only problem with it, if you're in an area with ports and airbases near by the response can be overwhelming. Take Formosa Strait, if I got spotted, all the near airbases would send planes, so often they would hunt in rotation until dark, often a dozen planes or more. Then in several hours I would have a few sub killer groups in the area.

One thing I wish lurker had done in RSRD, although with timing it would be hard is used the alternate path function more, where you set a percentage once a group reached a waypoint, it could go a different way...

[Threadfin]

One thing I wish lurker had done in RSRD, although with timing it would be hard is used the alternate path function more, where you set a percentage once a group reached a waypoint, it could go a different way...


That's another great idea. It would certainly create the illusion of a zig plan.

Last night I was playing TMO and intercepted a convoy near Wewak that was headed in a SSW direction. Just as I was getting ready to fire, the entire formation changed course to ESE as if headed for Rabaul. This is the sort thing that helps to complicate targeting and interception, it just doesn't happen often enough.

[TorpX]

Looks like a lot of us are coming back after being gone. Now to get everything downloaded again.

Welcome back from shore leave! :salute:




Hey TorpX, I see you came out with another version of ISP. Any chance it affects the speed at which ships travel? I would be so great if solo ships sailed at something like 80% or so of their max speed, or what ONI shows as their cruisIng speed.

They sail at whatever the mission/campaign layers set for them. So, no change. To really fix that, you would need to redo the convoys and group the slow ships with the slow ship, and the fast ships, with the fast ships. A lot of work to be sure! The reality of convoying ships is that there are significant inefficiencies, and I tend to think RSRDC is pretty realistic.



How convoys act when spotted, the slowing down and helming is a big flaw. It actually works to your benefit and is unrealistic behavior. ...

Armistead, since you understand the way convoys work very well, I'll ask you. Is the constant helming business limited to merchants, or do warships do it as well?

Possibly, if it is mostly limited to merchants, I could manipulate the turning physics, so they slow down less. Of course, they would not turn as well as they should, but this might be an acceptable trade off. What do you think?

[Armistead]

That's another great idea. It would certainly create the illusion of a zig plan.

Last night I was playing TMO and intercepted a convoy near Wewak that was headed in a SSW direction. Just as I was getting ready to fire, the entire formation changed course to ESE as if headed for Rabaul. This is the sort thing that helps to complicate targeting and interception, it just doesn't happen often enough.

he actually used heavy zigs with alternate paths quit often with tmo, easy to get stuck in left field and keeps traffic from traveling the same path.

[Threadfin]

They sail at whatever the mission/campaign layers set for them. So, no change. To really fix that, you would need to redo the convoys and group the slow ships with the slow ship, and the fast ships, with the fast ships. A lot of work to be sure! The reality of convoying ships is that there are significant inefficiencies, and I tend to think RSRDC is pretty realistic.

Thanks, and with convoys I'm OK with the way it is. It's more the ships sailing alone, since they aren't essentially tethered to the slowest ship, that I would like to see moving faster. As in the example I mentioned earlier (in straight up TMO 2.5) a 19 knot transport is making 5 knots.

[TorpX]

[/INDENT] As in the example I mentioned earlier (in straight up TMO 2.5) a 19 knot transport is making 5 knots.

Ok, I'm guessing that in the campaign, a group is spawned and sometimes the game picks only one ship and sometimes it happens to be a fast one. Not sure about this, though. The AI isn't exactly genius.

[Armistead]

Ok, I'm guessing that in the campaign, a group is spawned and sometimes the game picks only one ship and sometimes it happens to be a fast one. Not sure about this, though. The AI isn't exactly genius.




Each group, including single ships, you choose to set the speed as you wish to the ships max speed. With groups, you can only set the speed to the max speed of the slowest ship in the group. The game doesn't consider fuel milage for enemy groups or groups that spawn when you come into contact with them.

Now, depending on the traffic mod, if the setting for that group is "generic" it can pick any ship in that class, simply, a generic merchant could spawn any merchant. Stock and TMO use a lot of generics, RSRD uses very few.

[nionios]

Nothing like SH3 Commander, with its chance of failures and sabotage, has been done for SH4.

However in the official manual it says:"Sooner or later your submarine will suffer a malfunction due to damage being taken
or insufficient care by the crew".

[TorpX]

Now, depending on the traffic mod, if the setting for that group is "generic" it can pick any ship in that class, simply, a generic merchant could spawn any merchant. Stock and TMO use a lot of generics, RSRD uses very few.

Yes, that's what I was getting at.





However in the official manual it says:"Sooner or later your submarine will suffer a malfunction due to damage being taken
or insufficient care by the crew".


But you can't go by the manual; it is notoriously inaccurate.

[Bilge_Rat]

On fuel, RFB and TMO 2.5 have different approches.

TMO 2.5 gives each sub a lot more fuel, basically, the max each sub carried, plus as I recall an extra 22% to compensate for the "flat" SH4 world.

RFB is adjusted to match as I understand it, 15,000 nm @ 10 kts for most Fleet Boats. However, if you look into each sub's file, the fuel level is often less than that, although I am not sure if it is a mistake or intentional.

IMHO, TMO gives you too much fuel and RFB not enough. However, it easy to adjust the figure.

[Armistead]

On fuel, RFB and TMO 2.5 have different approches.

TMO 2.5 gives each sub a lot more fuel, basically, the max each sub carried, plus as I recall an extra 22% to compensate for the "flat" SH4 world.

RFB is adjusted to match as I understand it, 15,000 nm @ 10 kts for most Fleet Boats. However, if you look into each sub's file, the fuel level is often less than that, although I am not sure if it is a mistake or intentional.

IMHO, TMO gives you too much fuel and RFB not enough. However, it easy to adjust the figure.

What he really did with TMO is change the fuel to speed ratio so one could travel at standard speed at 15 kts instead of 10. This was simply done so people could get around quicker, making fuel unrealistic. Heck, if you slow down to the 10 kts in TMO you'll get several times the realistic fuel. Simply, for the sake of speeding up the game for us traveling, he gave up realistic fuel milage.

I just pretend I'm powering my sub off Wolferz's farts....

[TorpX]

On fuel, RFB and TMO 2.5 have different approches.

TMO 2.5 gives each sub a lot more fuel, basically, the max each sub carried, plus as I recall an extra 22% to compensate for the "flat" SH4 world.


Yes, I recall Duci based his figures on the assumption that every sub was using FBT's. The extra 22% "flat-earth" factor seems very high, though.



I don't agree that RFB, or others, don't provide enough. I consider that the game is rather generous.

Norman Friedman gives the figure of 11,000 nm @ 10 kn. for all the fleetboats starting with the SS176 Perch, and continuing through to the Tench class (excepting the Mackerel and Marlin). This is 'normal tankage' and NOT maximum, of course. Neither does it consider battery charging. I believe that it was customary to allow for a 30 % fuel reserve for battery charging, but it is not clear if this is incorporated into the above figures, or not.

Just considering the above facts, one might be inclined to think that our boats should have plenty of fuel, and be able to easily cruise from one patrol area to another, without problems.

But, there are other factors to consider:



Not every boat had FBT's
We don't have to stick to a schedule, or transit at 3-engine speed, they did
We never have to operate in a wolfpack, or chase after doubtful contacts
Game weather increases fuel consumption much less than RL weather

[Bilge_Rat]

Yes, I recall Duci based his figures on the assumption that every sub was using FBT's. The extra 22% "flat-earth" factor seems very high, though.

agreed



I don't agree that RFB, or others, don't provide enough. I consider that the game is rather generous.

The reason I think RFB does not give enough is even though the notes say they give 15,000 @10 knots to most Fleet Boats (except Porpoise/Tench), when you actually check the RFB 2.0 SIM files, the range for many of the early Fleet Boats is 10-11,000nm @10 knots as I recall.



Norman Friedman gives the figure of 11,000 nm @ 10 kn. for all the fleetboats starting with the SS176 Perch, and continuing through to the Tench class (excepting the Mackerel and Marlin). This is 'normal tankage' and NOT maximum, of course. Neither does it consider battery charging. I believe that it was customary to allow for a 30 % fuel reserve for battery charging, but it is not clear if this is incorporated into the above figures, or not.



This is where it gets interesting. I was puzzled by the 15,000nm @ 10 knots listed by RFB 2.0 since all sources list 11,000nm @ 10 knots, but when you read Friedman, he explains that, as you note, the 11,000 figure includes a reserve of up to 30% to cover battery recharge and bad weather. As I understand it, it means a Fleet Boat should have extra fuel to cover bad weather and battery recharges and still be able to cover 11,000 nm @ 10 knots.

Now interestingly, when you increase 11,000 by 30%, you get 14,300nm which is very close to the 15,000nm figure, expecially if you want to give a "Flat Earth" bonus.

so a strict range of 11,000nm @ 10 knots in game may be too low, although it is hard to tell since fuel consumption in game seems to be off from RL.

As an experiment, on my last TMO 2.5 patrol, I had set a range of 15,000 nm @ 10 knots in the SIM file (which is less than what Ducimus used). I was able to go from Midway to the Marshalls at 15 knots, patrol for a few days @ 10, cruise to Truk at 15 knots, again patrol for a few days @ 10, cruise to a point about 500 nm east of the Palaus at 15 knots and still had, as I recall, about 50% fuel remaining or enough to patrol for a few days, before I started heading back to base.

Is it too much? I'm still trying to figure it out. I would like to eventually get to a sweet spot where the range in game is more or less realistic.