dud torpedos

[midnightrider1818]

I must have got a batch of torpedos. all but only two detonated. tried on impact and magnetic. now take it the seas were awful very rough and very high waves. the torpedos did not detonate early just hit the side of the ship and fall to the ocean floor. uuuugghhh. I was shooting 550 km up to 1000km

[banryu79]

I was shooting 550 km up to 1000km
:o Nice "Hail Mary" shoots you got there!! :O:

[RConch]

That is "going long":D.

You didn't state what year you are in. Early War torps are notorious for failures. Magnetic ones are the worse.

[Kielhauler1961]

I think you may be setting up a too 'perfect 90 impact shot'. A solid hit is not always best - frequently a delicate, glancing blow gives your torpedo a better chance of detonating.

The contact pistols early war tended to deform on direct 90 degree impact, bending the weak linkage and causing failure to detonate.

Try hitting the targets at a shallower angle rather than full on, say 15 to 25 degs either side of 90 degs impact angle - let the 'whiskers' on the pistol edge do their job.

Hope this helps,

KH

[Pisces]

They probably hit the curved underside of the hull as the target moved up. In bad weather that is always a guessing game if it hits correctly. Reduce the torpedo depth setting to make it run shallower and hit the proper vertical side. Obviously this rules out magnetic detonators then.

[HW3]

You also have not said what the impact angle was. Anything less than 60 degrees, or more than 120 degrees impact angle, has a much lesser chance of setting off the charge.

[BigWalleye]

They probably hit the curved underside of the hull as the target moved up.

You are correct. That is a real possibility in RL. But are you sure this is actually modelled in SH3? I have no evidence one way or the other. I just don't view the SH3 models as being that sophisticated. It would be a pleasant surprise to learn that they were.

[Pisces]

You are correct. That is a real possibility in RL. But are you sure this is actually modelled in SH3? I have no evidence one way or the other. I just don't view the SH3 models as being that sophisticated. It would be a pleasant surprise to learn that they were.On more than one occasion I watched the torpedo camera and see the torpedo bounce downward as it hit the curved underside. No detonation most of the time, and when it does, it didn't seem to do much damage. YMMV

[BigWalleye]

On more than one occasion I watched the torpedo camera and see the torpedo bounce downward as it hit the curved underside. No detonation most of the time, and when it does, it didn't seem to do much damage. YMMV

I confess that I have never used an external cam (for anything). The visual evidence you describe sounds convincing.

[Zosimus]

On more than one occasion I watched the torpedo camera and see the torpedo bounce downward as it hit the curved underside. No detonation most of the time, and when it does, it didn't seem to do much damage. YMMV

I have seen the same.

[banryu79]

I have seen the same.
Me too, when I still played with external/event camera on.

[BigWalleye]

So SH3, which has an AI so bad the helmsman steers a drunkard's walk, and a sensor model so bad it does even include thermal layers, has a well-implemented torpedo-impact model, which even graphically portrays the effect of a strike on the hull curve! This game is frustrating!

I'm glad the detailed torpedo-impact model is there, even though I'll never see it. It makes my job tougher and more historically accurate. But, oh, how I wish the devs had invested that level of effort in other areas as well!

The hull-curve effect is more than just eye candy. It has practical consequences. But I wonder: Did Ubi do it just because it makes a cool visual?

[/RANT]