DicheBach Questions

[DicheBach]

I asked a couple questions in older threads that haven't seen any action so I'm starting a thread where I can post any simple straightforward questions I have. If anyone else wants to use it that way too, that is great; sort of a "Quick Questions/Quick Answers" thread.

1. What is the range on a hydrophone?

2. Do "thermal layers" block hydrophone detection by destroyers?

3. How the hell does one use the stadimeter? (incredibly vague how to match up the two images)

4. Using the U.S. TDC, how do I get my aft tubes to just shoot STRAIGHT out? I've managed to get it to do it a couple times, but it often seems to want to curve the damn thing around 150-degrees as if I was aiming at something in front of me.

5. Assuming IDEAL circumstances (Hard difficulty), what are the exact steps one should follow to hit a slow moving lone merchant with a torpedo (and assuming you have already intercepted him and are a few nautical miles (nm) in front of him and 1/2 to 1 nm off of his projected course?

I've got better than 'random' with #5 (have probably sank 30 to 40 merchant men but that is from firing probably 200 torpedoes! :doh:), but I still feel like surfacing and swimming circles around them at high speed and lobbing shells at them is an even better tactic (though risky). I've now managed to sink about 6 destroyers and about 4 of those were from deck gun fire, not from torps.

. . . so many questions . . . this is just a good start. Game is truly amazing. Needs to be expanded to include all naval warfare, not just subs . . . the naval gunnery thing is like Space Invaders on crack . . .:O:

[DicheBach]

Heh . . . just sank 3 destroyers within about 30 minutes in game time. Stalked a convoy that was reported at like 19 hours distant. Caught them, moved slightly in front and to their starboard. Realized it had 3 escorts not just 1, decided to attack on the surface and take out the escorts.

Did that, and didn't even take a scratch!

Backed off and let the (now helpless) convoy of like 15 ships resume its course. After a couple hours came back toward them then went to periscope depth (shallow water though). They detected me and started to scramble.

Fired all 8 torpedoes in a Sargo class, not one hit. Its like they need to be staying EXACTLY on course, and crawling like a granny AND within 500 yards at the time you setup the shot (otherwise the stadimeter is all but useless because the image is so hard to make out detail on).

How do you masterful skippers get one shot torpedo kills!?

I've seen YTs of guys doing this, but I suspect they had their computer opponents scripted to act passive, because in my games, they almost NEVER proceed blithely and as soon as you fire that first shot they start ducking and dodging and causing you to waste ever subsequent shot unless it is just plain lucky.

[torpedobait]

Heh . . . just sank 3 destroyers within about 30 minutes in game time. Stalked a convoy that was reported at like 19 hours distant. Caught them, moved slightly in front and to their starboard. Realized it had 3 escorts not just 1, decided to attack on the surface and take out the escorts.

Did that, and didn't even take a scratch!

Backed off and let the (now helpless) convoy of like 15 ships resume its course. After a couple hours came back toward them then went to periscope depth (shallow water though). They detected me and started to scramble.

Fired all 8 torpedoes in a Sargo class, not one hit. Its like they need to be staying EXACTLY on course, and crawling like a granny AND within 500 yards at the time you setup the shot (otherwise the stadimeter is all but useless because the image is so hard to make out detail on).

How do you masterful skippers get one shot torpedo kills!?

I've seen YTs of guys doing this, but I suspect they had their computer opponents scripted to act passive, because in my games, they almost NEVER proceed blithely and as soon as you fire that first shot they start ducking and dodging and causing you to waste ever subsequent shot unless it is just plain lucky.

Here is a hint. Fire at the farthest target first; then using the distance difference between that one and the next closest, and the time it takes a torpedo to travel that distance, fire at the second farthest when the time difference expires. Using this method will get simultaneous hits on up to four targets (the most I've ever tried). They don't have a chance to dance out of your way. While a single hit may not sink any of them, it will cripple and slow them down for finishing off after you reload.

Disclosure: I do use auto-targeting (on the premise that my crew would have done the calculations for me anyway, and I hate math), but even if you do it yourself the method above will work.

[DicheBach]

Here is a hint. Fire at the farthest target first; then using the distance difference between that one and the next closest, and the time it takes a torpedo to travel that distance, fire at the second farthest when the time difference expires. Using this method will get simultaneous hits on up to four targets (the most I've ever tried). They don't have a chance to dance out of your way. While a single hit may not sink any of them, it will cripple and slow them down for finishing off after you reload.

Disclosure: I do use auto-targeting (on the premise that my crew would have done the calculations for me anyway, and I hate math), but even if you do it yourself the method above will work.

Cool! I'll try that.

I've got a bit better with actually using the stadimeter, and using the TDC. I still use the "cheat map" (I think it is called the combat map in the game).

I'd say can sink on freighter per about 3.5 torpedoes now; maybe 4.5.

I devastate those escorts though. My new tactic is to just charge a large convoy, get the escorts to come at me wheel around and take them out one by one with the 4" 50 cal. I think in my current career up to about July 1942 I must be up to 8 destroyers 1 sub chaser and 5 gun boats killed and maybe only one of those was with a torpedo.

If the navy would let me pack more ammo for that deck gun, I'd take out the whole damn Jap navy! :Kaleun_Wink:

[torpedobait]

Cool! I'll try that.

I devastate those escorts though. My new tactic is to just charge a large convoy, get the escorts to come at me wheel around and take them out one by one with the 4" 50 cal. I think in my current career up to about July 1942 I must be up to 8 destroyers 1 sub chaser and 5 gun boats killed and maybe only one of those was with a torpedo.

If the navy would let me pack more ammo for that deck gun, I'd take out the whole damn Jap navy! :Kaleun_Wink:
Wow! I've never tried taking them head on with a deck gun. They are usually so accurate and do so much damage that I don't take them on while on the surface unless it is that or die. I do dive and turn towards (right at) them, periscope up to give them a good reference point, wait until they are just inside 800 yards, and give them a Mark 14. They will almost always initiate a turn upon spotting the torpedo, which will catch them in the stern quarter no matter which way they go. It the first one is not a fatal blow, their turn brings them broadside - an easy kill. I'd like to not "waste" a torpedo that way, but survival comes first.

Playing with realism @ 75% (camera on and auto-targeting, with difficulty set to "Realistic").

[DicheBach]

I'm on "Hard" in career mode which I think corresponds to "High" in the game options. I think that is about 75% ball park. Only things that make it easier are : 1. map contacts are turned on. 2. external views are turned on.

I tried playing a career mode in "Very Hard" (which corresponds to those two advantages turned off) and found it was (at my level of mastery of skippering) damn near impossible. Maybe after Hard gets boring I can do Very Hard, but at this point I just don't have enough situational awareness about the geometry. I can however see that those abilities are increasing as I play it on Hard.

I was surprised at how easy I find the Destroyers to take out. As long as I can take them on one by one--or at least engage only one of them at relatively close range while the other two or three are still at some distance--they are challenging but doable. I find they are terrible gunners, but then I'm going like 18 to 21 knots and weaving 5 degrees or more to port and starboard just about every other shot. The hard part is determining the range and for that, I use the compass on the navigation map. The technique is about like this:

1. Figure out how many escorts there are while submerged or at range with the sonar.
2. Position so that only one is closer.
3. Surface and charge him at flank speed starting at about 10 to 15,000 yards or so.
4. Once he sees you, he'll charge you too.
5. Using the nav map, estimate a good point to turn. There are two ways to do this, and a combination of both tends to work.
A. approach him at about angle so that he is in the <=345 or >=15 bearing
B. Turn and move away at anywhere from a 90 to a 180 degree (90 is hard because the range tends to change too quickly). Moving away with him somewhere in the 155 to 205 bearing ball park is good.
You can set up step 5 with waypoints and just make the turn away point far enough that it will take you 30 minutes to get there, this will be the course you follow as he chases you and you blow him to smithereens.
6. Plot this "running away attack" trajectory in the nav map and with a goal to make your initial turn in the 7500 to 4500 yard range.
7. Once you are in that ballpark (depending on visibility) you are in business as far as starting to get some hits (I have actually managed hits from as far as 12,000 yards I believe but it was a very slow moving target and involved lots of map interpolation).
8. Just switch to the nav map, use the compass to get a general idea of his range, switch to the gun and set the range and start trying shots.
9. Once you get one hit on him, it is generally easy to keep landing them next 5 to 10 and generally it never takes more than 15 hits to kill one, and I have on occasion killed one with only 3 or 4 hits.
10. The trick is just to anticipate what his trajectory and velocity are, lead your shots, and change range appropriately between each shot, switching to adjust course ("weave") using the rudder control as needed.

Out of the 12 or so I've killed in this career, I believe I've only been damaged twice, maybe only once.

[Rockin Robbins]

I devastate those escorts though. My new tactic is to just charge a large convoy, get the escorts to come at me wheel around and take them out one by one with the 4" 50 cal. I think in my current career up to about July 1942 I must be up to 8 destroyers 1 sub chaser and 5 gun boats killed and maybe only one of those was with a torpedo.

If the navy would let me pack more ammo for that deck gun, I'd take out the whole damn Jap navy! :Kaleun_Wink:
I invite you to try that with TMO or FOTRSU. The DDs will fire at you from a mile outside your range, as they did in real life. Their aim is better than yours too. I assure you, no American sub took out "the whole damn Jap navy" in the war and neither will you. You won't sink one DD.

Let's see what happens in Game Fixes Only when you give both the sub and Japanese warships Slightly Subnuclear Ordinance. Even with ultimate power the sub just doesn't stand much of a chance.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o3upMQBo1m4&t=51s (https://youtu.be/o3upMQBo1m4)

[DicheBach]

I invite you to try that with TMO or FOTRSU. The DDs will fire at you from a mile outside your range, as they did in real life. Their aim is better than yours too. I assure you, no American sub took out "the whole damn Jap navy" in the war and neither will you. You won't sink one DD.

Let's see what happens in Game Fixes Only when you give both the sub and Japanese warships Slightly Subnuclear Ordinance. Even with ultimate power the sub just doesn't stand much of a chance.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o3upMQBo1m4&t=51s (https://youtu.be/o3upMQBo1m4)

Yeah I did give that a whirl in FOTRSU, and yes they are more difficult!

However, I still have managed to sink a couple :03:

Computer algorithms are just not as good as me :D

ADDIT: 20mm subnuclear flak gun! :)

The first one or two that I took on were disasters, but I realized I was facing a more competent computer opponent and adjusted my tactics: higher speed, more weaving, keep the rear-end in his direction, and ideally, engage in rough seas.

I cannot recall now if I've managed to sink only one or two DDs using FOTRSU with "Hard" difficulty campaign, but definitely one. That one that I can defintely recall was in a storm, probably 6 or 7 foot waves, night time, raining, windy. He only hit me a couple times and I was down to about 75% hull, but the problem with a computer opponent is: even when what they are doing is not winning, they keep doing it. Once you've baited him into chasing you, as long as you keep him lined up properly you have a decent chance. The proper response from a human controlled DD skipper facing an annoying cheeky Yank sub nutjob would be to get a good radar range. turn to a nearly right angle on his general course, train ONE gun (not all) at under range, reduce speed and start walking in the shots. Once the range is established unleash with all guns.

Instead, what the computer opponent does is: he does not fire much at long range, preferring to close the distance. He does weave a bit but not nearly enough to deter a skilled human gunner. Between getting the Watch officer to tell me the ranges (and quickly converting them to yards), using the compass on the nav map. It doesn't take too many shots to get a general range on him. Once that is accomplished it is generally no worse than a 1 shot in 3 hit to miss ratio and with that sort of punishment (even with a 3" gun) the DD just cannot survive.

I would think that the really unrealistic part of all of this was that my gunners didn't either drown or wash overboard. Not sure if those guns could be manned while the sub was being periodically about half inundated or not . . . If they used tethers/straps to stay seated then I suppose it was doable as long as the gunners were serious adrenaline junkies and had nerves of steel! :gulp:

[Rockin Robbins]

Isn't that Subnuclear 20mm Flak Gun the most fun you can have in Silent Hunter?:har::har:

[DicheBach]

I really wish they'd use this engine to develop a more complete naval warfare game. One that allowed the player to command various surface ships, and with a variety of career campaign modes and mission modes. The naval gunnery is awesome in this game.

[Sniper297]

1. What is the range on a hydrophone?

Enemy destroyers, about 2900 yards for passive sonar, 550 yards for active. Sub sonar will pick up contacts around 7-10 miles.

2. Do "thermal layers" block hydrophone detection by destroyers?

Yes. In the stock game the hydrophone is reduced to 33% effectiveness, active sonar to 20% if your sub is 60 feet or more below the layer (the BT is on the keel, so you have to get the whole sub under the layer). It's rather unrealistic and oversimplified.

3. How the hell does one use the stadimeter? (incredibly vague how to match up the two images)


Waterline of the top image on the top of the mast for the lower image gives the range, provided you have the correct mast height dialed in.

4. Using the U.S. TDC, how do I get my aft tubes to just shoot STRAIGHT out? I've managed to get it to do it a couple times, but it often seems to want to curve the damn thing around 150-degrees as if I was aiming at something in front of me.

Set the scope to 180, click SEND RANGE AND BEARING TO TDC, and the fish will go straight out of the aft tubes - if the speed is set to zero. Having a speed and AOB dialed in will change the gyro angle.

5. Assuming IDEAL circumstances (Hard difficulty), what are the exact steps one should follow to hit a slow moving lone merchant with a torpedo (and assuming you have already intercepted him and are a few nautical miles (nm) in front of him and 1/2 to 1 nm off of his projected course?

The very first and most important thing is to hit the Q key, then W then Q, repeat until ALL the outer doors for the tubes are OPEN. The game is set up to automatically open the outer doors if you forget to, but there's a time lag of several seconds if they're not already open when you fire - and that means the fish leaves the tube with ancient history instead of the current solution. That's the single most critical part of the firing solution, because it uses the solution at the moment the fire button is hit, which is no longer valid if there's a delay while the tube door is opening. 90% of misses can be eliminated if you get in the habit of checking that the tube outer doors are open before firing.

[DicheBach]

1. What is the range on a hydrophone?

Enemy destroyers, about 2900 yards for passive sonar, 550 yards for active. Sub sonar will pick up contacts around 7-10 miles.

2. Do "thermal layers" block hydrophone detection by destroyers?

Yes. In the stock game the hydrophone is reduced to 33% effectiveness, active sonar to 20% if your sub is 60 feet or more below the layer (the BT is on the keel, so you have to get the whole sub under the layer). It's rather unrealistic and oversimplified.

3. How the hell does one use the stadimeter? (incredibly vague how to match up the two images)


Waterline of the top image on the top of the mast for the lower image gives the range, provided you have the correct mast height dialed in.

4. Using the U.S. TDC, how do I get my aft tubes to just shoot STRAIGHT out? I've managed to get it to do it a couple times, but it often seems to want to curve the damn thing around 150-degrees as if I was aiming at something in front of me.

Set the scope to 180, click SEND RANGE AND BEARING TO TDC, and the fish will go straight out of the aft tubes - if the speed is set to zero. Having a speed and AOB dialed in will change the gyro angle.

5. Assuming IDEAL circumstances (Hard difficulty), what are the exact steps one should follow to hit a slow moving lone merchant with a torpedo (and assuming you have already intercepted him and are a few nautical miles (nm) in front of him and 1/2 to 1 nm off of his projected course?

The very first and most important thing is to hit the Q key, then W then Q, repeat until ALL the outer doors for the tubes are OPEN. The game is set up to automatically open the outer doors if you forget to, but there's a time lag of several seconds if they're not already open when you fire - and that means the fish leaves the tube with ancient history instead of the current solution. That's the single most critical part of the firing solution, because it uses the solution at the moment the fire button is hit, which is no longer valid if there's a delay while the tube door is opening. 90% of misses can be eliminated if you get in the habit of checking that the tube outer doors are open before firing.

Ah thanks Sniper!

I've been experimenting with NOT using position keeping and just trying to "guesstimate" when to fire by setting the AOB to zero, range to max, and speed to zero.

I've found that, if one is within about 500yards, you can do reasonably well just by keeping the cursor locked on zero relative bearing in the periscope (or 180 if firing the aft tubes), better in many instances than plugging in the data and letting the position keeper program each fish as it leaves based on the currently inferred position. The problems I see with using the position keeper:

1. AOB: there are two ways to estimate this

(a) the unrealistic but somewhat more accurate way (plot ones course and that of the target on the map, then use the protractor to set an angle along the targets course that measures where the hypotenuse is subs course). This is ostensibly the most accurate as it allows you to measure all three angles in the triangle and reconcile if they don't add up to 180. But it is obviously unrealistic, and the time lost from switching back and forth between nav map and periscope tends to mess up the freshness of readings.

(b) assume a 90 degree intersection of ones course and the targets course (in fact one can do a bit better than that by observing the targets course by plotting dots leading up to the last moments before firing, but they always seem to wobble a bit, and the escorts weave around like rattlesnakes. Read the relative bearing, add/subtract a bit for what it will be in a few moments, add the two together and subtract that from 180 = AOB. The trick of course is that, all this math goes right out the window seconds after the skipper of the target ship tells his helmsman to turn hard.

It seems to me that the "precision" of all these readings is often specious for the simple reason that the target ships characteristics can change before you get all your readings and plug them in! With that in mind, just eyeballing it seems "just about as good," no?

2. I'm not sure if the position keeper continues to adjust angle on the bow or not? If it does then it isn't as bad as I would think. I've noticed the range resets (which I assume reflect a counter that ticks down the range assuming everything else stays the same in the equations) after readings are taken, but unless this "position keeper" analog computer had a laser lock on it, I don't see how it could compensate for slight changes in the targets course and speed. So the whole idea of "position keeper" seems to be farcical, no? More like "Inferred range keeper (based on your speed and course and that numbers you plugged in for your target a couple seconds ago . . . which might have changed by now).

3. The actual instrumentation is problematic. I had figured out how the stadimeter works (waterline, the FoTRS help clarified that, but I don't think the stock did) and it is actually reasonably useful to get an estimate on range. For speed, I find its utility limited because it depends on an accurate AOB reading. If that is off, then the speed inferred can be badly off, even when the image matching is good. A speed estimate from two dots on the map seems better to me: you can take it before the target you up periscope (and even at considerable range using the hydrophone) and given every other tabulation method involves "assuming" no change since last reading, then two timed dots at the hydrophone prong (which of course is not realistic I would guess?) seems just about as good as what the stadimeter provides.

So the method I'm evolving toward is:

I. Immediately after hydrophone contact, plot one to three points at 1 minute intervals. This will define the targets course and speed.

II. Setup an intercept course that is a 90 off of their course and sufficiently far ahead that you can get into position stealthily.

III. Lurk about 500 to 1200 yards from where their course is supposed to place them.

IV. Set the TDC to zero speed, 0 AOB and max range.

V. Observe how the hydrophone prongs move and adjust position accordingly, trying to maintain a 90 orientation on the targets course and within about 500 to 1000 yards of where they will pass.

VI. As they get close enough, up periscope and eyeball when to fire the torps so that they will hit him in the side. I think there are probably even some decent "rule of thumb" conversions for "degrees of relative bearing crossing" (assuming a 90) at any given speed and range, but I haven't thought through those maths recently.

[Sniper297]

Yeah, to me the whole realistic targeting is more trouble than it's worth. The AOB in particular changes very slowly until the range closes, then changes too rapidly to keep up with - my method was to manually set it to 80 when the target was within 2000 yards, just so I could do the "final bearing and shoot" with the AOB already set to near the correct angle.

The angle-off method is easier, set the range to whatever, speed to zero, ignore the AOB and set the scope for a straight out the tubes bearing. Then offset the scope for the lead angle, if the target is coming from the right set the scope 10 to 15 degrees right of zero. Target is a MAYA, when the forward turret hits the crosshairs, fire one. Bridge in the crosshairs, fire two. Stack, fire three, aft mast fire four, essentially spreading the shots along the length by letting the forward progress of the target advance the impact points.

Then all four fish miss astern because I forgot to hit the Q key, then the W to cycle through all the tubes to open the outer doors BEFORE the target came into range.

I emphasize that one factor, DO NOT EVER allow the automatic outer door "feature" to open the outer doors for you, because it's the single biggest cause of misses astern. In fact one of the first things I did after getting Silent 3ditor was to open the \Submarine\NSS_18\NSS_18.sim file, go to wpn_SubTorpedoSys and change auto_open = True to auto_open = False, then repeat for all the other subs. That way if I forget to open the outer door it just won't fire and waste the fish. It's only a few seconds, but all too often that's all it takes to miss.

[DicheBach]

Had a little jaunt in the Nautilus (this is with Fall of the Rising Sun mod, which is quite good, not sure if the V-boats are in stock). Neat boat but boy is it slow to dive. That career was going good for about a month, then I befell a common foible I make: interloping into enemy harbors and either detecting naval mines or sub nets (or stealthy Krakens, I'm not sure) the "wrong" way. As they say, any ship can be a minesweeper . . . once.

I'll generally give myself one or two "reloads" or esp. when it was for reasons other than me just making really bad decisions. Reloading right before turning point moments in battle can be a good way to learn how different choices work out. But in general I prefer a "dead is dead" playstyle in character-based games like this one. It forces you to learn to be better I think. Plus lots of restarting careers helps to iron out the exact mod configuration, which for me is just FOTRS for now (albeit with the changes from Crew Fix plugged in manually by me).

I guess I'll start a new one in a Salmon class in Cavite. The Nautilus seems awfully vulnerable to aircraft attacks and I'm bad about forgetting/risking going to periscope depth in daylight. The S-boat was interesting, but of course the main goal is "survive long enough to get assigned a better boat." Would be neat to check out those two 6" guns in a brawl, but Rockin' Robbins had gone and given me a complex about my big gun fetish so I guess I better learn to rely 99% on torps like a real sub ace :)

Actually that reminds me, a "sub" that I'd love to see in this game: the the French "submarine cruiser" Surcouf! (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_submarine_Surcouf)

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/32/Surcouf_FRA.jpg

It was on its way to the Pacific under Free French command and it got plowed by a freighter coming out of the Panama canal. Not a hard "what if" to consider that it didn't get rammed and actually wound up serving in the Pacific. Would be very cool to see how it performs! :)

[Rockin Robbins]

the French "submarine cruiser" Surcouf! (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_submarine_Surcouf)

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/32/Surcouf_FRA.jpg

It was on its way to the Pacific under Free French command and it got plowed by a freighter coming out of the Panama canal. Not a hard "what if" to consider that it didn't get rammed and actually wound up serving in the Pacific. Would be very cool to see how it performs! :)
Let's keep score. Surcouf encounters a merchant with three deck guns running by itself. It's pretty even: Surcouf's two 8" guns against the frieghter's three 5" guns. However the frieghter is a very superior gun platform to Surcouf.

Although the 8" guns have longer range, Surcouf's lousy surface handling properties mean that she must be at lower range to get any hits. Let's say they both open up at 6000 yards. Surcouf is carrying only 60 shells, barely adequate to sink one and if very fortunate, two freighters. However one hit from a single shell to Surcouf's pressure hull means that the submarine can still dive but will never surface again. It will take several dozen hits from Surcouf to cripple the freighter. My money is on the freighter to sink the Surcouf without suffering a single hit.

Surcouf was fancifully built as an "underwater cruiser." Obviously the crazy French had fantasies of running gun battles between Surcouf and some cruiser out there. It would have been her last and would have lasted several minutes.

Surcouf: Frankenboat! Failure as a cruiser, failure as a submarine. Looks cool though!:D:D:D

[DicheBach]

Let's keep score. Surcouf encounters a merchant with three deck guns running by itself. It's pretty even: Surcouf's two 8" guns against the frieghter's three 5" guns. However the frieghter is a very superior gun platform to Surcouf.

Although the 8" guns have longer range, Surcouf's lousy surface handling properties mean that she must be at lower range to get any hits. Let's say they both open up at 6000 yards. Surcouf is carrying only 60 shells, barely adequate to sink one and if very fortunate, two freighters. However one hit from a single shell to Surcouf's pressure hull means that the submarine can still dive but will never surface again. It will take several dozen hits from Surcouf to cripple the freighter. My money is on the freighter to sink the Surcouf without suffering a single hit.

Surcouf was fancifully built as an "underwater cruiser." Obviously the crazy French had fantasies of running gun battles between Surcouf and some cruiser out there. It would have been her last and would have lasted several minutes.

Surcouf: Frankenboat! Failure as a cruiser, failure as a submarine. Looks cool though!:D:D:D

Yep, probably a very fair assessment of how it would play out. Still would be fun to play with in the game, if it were represented anything like 'reality' just to see what it maybe could have done.

There was some weird ass **** they came up with in the 1920s, actually quite a bit into the 1940s too . . .

There was a web page I found years ago through one of my WWII game communities that I've lost the link to. It had a series of "fanciful" parody WWII technologies for each nation, each one meant to reflect the fanciful notions that each nation seemed to entertain in engineering and operational doctrine. So for example, the Japanese tech was a bicycle powered balloon lofted "bomber" that had a basket with either bombs or rabid dogs underneath.

The Soviet one was this enormous bomber with like 12 engines, etc., Wish I could find that stuff.

This Surcouf thing seems pretty good as an analogy of French interwar fantasies, sort of a Jules Verne thing :)

[Rockin Robbins]

Yep, probably a very fair assessment of how it would play out. Still would be fun to play with in the game, if it were represented anything like 'reality' just to see what it maybe could have done.

There was some weird ass **** they came up with in the 1920s, actually quite a bit into the 1940s too . . .

There was a web page I found years ago through one of my WWII game communities that I've lost the link to. It had a series of "fanciful" parody WWII technologies for each nation, each one meant to reflect the fanciful notions that each nation seemed to entertain in engineering and operational doctrine. So for example, the Japanese tech was a bicycle powered balloon lofted "bomber" that had a basket with either bombs or rabid dogs underneath.

The Soviet one was this enormous bomber with like 12 engines, etc., Wish I could find that stuff.

This Surcouf thing seems pretty good as an analogy of French interwar fantasies, sort of a Jules Verne thing :)
Yes, it's EXACTLY what you'd expect to encounter in a Jules Verne novel. We had some real winners too, like a plane mounted to the deck of an S-boat and the Nautilus with two 5" deck guns .

The Japanese had huge subs with aircraft hangers on deck and torpedoes with incredibly long ranges that couldn't be aimed well enough to hit anything at that range (it's always something....)

The Germans had little submarines up against 1000 ship convoys so that if they hit a different ship with each of their not enough torpedoes they still wouldn't have any influence on how many supplies got through. And they chatted on the radio like schoolgirls, then wondered why they were being sunk all the time.

Americans had this super sophisticated TDC that succeeded in making targeting more complicated but not more effective. All had deck guns and AA guns, whose main function was to make noise when submerged so enemy escorts could find them easier.

[DicheBach]

I think I'm getting the hang of this American TDC . . . or rather "better" with it. Of course, if one indulges in all the unrealistic perks afforded by "Hard" mode, hitting is just a matter of constant flipping back and forth between the nav map and periscope. Still a challenge, but it gives an unfair advantage.

I haven't figured out how the actual periscope operator would determine the course of the target, and I would think the TDC would include features for that. But the way I do it (which is maybe only "partly" unrealistic).

I use either a visual contact (more realistic) or a sonar contact (possibly less realistic, but I notice those sonar prongs tend to be pretty far off of the ship blob determined visually, so maybe not so "unrealistic") and plot two dots at a sufficient time interval = enemy course and speed. This is ideally done with the target already on a more or less perpendicular course and closing toward the subs vector, maybe 2500 yards? That seems to be about what the TDC can lock on reliably even in ideal atmospheric and sea conditions . . . maybe 3250.

With those two bits, it can be done without going away from the periscope (now that I've tinkered with it to make sure how it works).

Assuming he doesn't change course and assuming the intersect of the two vessels course is in fact 90 degrees (and I would guess that having the sub at very low speed if not stopped is important to the math too): then the relative bearing in the periscope IS part of the equation for determining the AOB (this was what I had inferred based on the geometry, I mean hey . . . triangle can only have 180 degrees inside eh!?)

180 - 90 - Relative Bearing = Angle on the Bow.

With the speed already plugged in from the sonar/visual plot and assuming the courses remain the same it becomes a relatively simple matter.

1. Set AOB dial on the TDC to some future value based on the targets actual relative bearing right now. For example, if the middle of the target is at 60 relative bearing (actual AOB = 30 right now) then assume you'll be ready to make the shot in 10 or so more degrees (if he is going "medium" speed of 6 knots). So 90 - 50 = 40. Dial in 40 AOB.

2. Start taking range measures. Repeat every couple seconds so you're confident you are in the ballpark. Try to time one last range measure with the stadimeter when the middle of the target is at about 48 or 49 bearing.

3. Fire one.

4. Dial the AOB up a few degrees (maybe 45). Take another range measure.

5. Fire two.

I had one perfect setup in a career (glassy seas clear night one old fast merchant at 6 knots going almost exactly south into the Surabaya harbor) and I replayed that a couple times and managed to get 3 hits in a row using that method.

I'm still not sure the "Position Keeper" is that useful, but it does seem to adjust the AOB so I may experiment with it too.

With the Position Keeper you could replace step two with:

2. When you get a range measurement you are confident of and with the relative bearing very close to what you had "predialed" for corresponding AOB. Hit Position Keeper.

3, etc. Just starting firing at intervals

I guess there was some sort of an socket that connected the TDC to each torp? The TDC must've had a bunch of gears and cogs in it that calculated this ****, and would adjust settings based on the last readings when Position Keeper was set. At the moment fire tube command was given, the last set of data from the TDC set the gyro on the torp to correspond to what the current position keeper values were?

[Sniper297]

"whose main function was to make noise when submerged so enemy escorts could find them easier."

Until the GUPPY class, none of the US subs could go fast enough for long enough submerged to make either streamlining or flow noise a real issue. I understand your distaste for deck guns and AA guns, but the theory at the time was if caught in shallow water and/or with low batteries, it was better to have secondary weapons and not need them, than to need them and not have them. :up:

"the relative bearing in the periscope IS part of the equation for determining the AOB"

Nope. If your heading is 000 true and the relative bearing is 090 he's off your starboard beam and also at 090 true. If he's heading 270 the AOB is 0, if he's heading 180 the AOB is Starboard 90, if he's heading 315 the AOB is Port 45. The Angle On the Bow is how YOU bear from HIM, not his bearing from you.

As for the PK, the primary purpose for that was to keep track of his "probable" location while the periscope was down - in the game you can unrealistically leave the scope sticking up indefinitely outside 1000 yards, in real life they tried to keep the exposure down to a 10 second observation every 2-3 minutes, which made the PK actually useful. Again the PK assumes no change of speed or course by the target between observations, it was considered a "working fiction" strictly to assist the tracking.

[DicheBach]

Nope. If your heading is 000 true and the relative bearing is 090 he's off your starboard beam and also at 090 true. If he's heading 270 the AOB is 0, if he's heading 180 the AOB is Starboard 90, if he's heading 315 the AOB is Port 45. The Angle On the Bow is how YOU bear from HIM, not his bearing from you.

As for the PK, the primary purpose for that was to keep track of his "probable" location while the periscope was down - in the game you can unrealistically leave the scope sticking up indefinitely outside 1000 yards, in real life they tried to keep the exposure down to a 10 second observation every 2-3 minutes, which made the PK actually useful. Again the PK assumes no change of speed or course by the target between observations, it was considered a "working fiction" strictly to assist the tracking.

Whaa, whaa, what!? :O:

Oh man, I cannot believe I had that wrong.

But that just does not make sense to me. If I set AOB to 0, the corresponding image on the dial is of a ship's cross section with the bow pointing toward zero. If I set it to 180 it is the ships bow pointing away from 180.

If him coming at "me" at a right angle to my heading were to equal "AOB" zero, then setting AOB to zero, speed to zero and range to max should cause the torp to gyro out in as extreme a starboard turn as it can make, no?

But that is not what it does. It goes straight out and maintains a trajectory in line with that of the ship at the time it was fired (zero relative bearing if fore tubes or 180 relative bearing if aft tubes).

Either what you just said doesn't make sense or I'm completely confused.

How do you determine AOB in the most "realistic" way you can in this game, i.e., using nothing but the periscope?

[Sniper297]

Determining AOB was more of an art than science, real sub skippers practiced using tabletop models with protractors and odd stuff like that. Again, one of the main reasons I use auto targeting instead of manual is because in real life I would have had a whole plotting team to do all the math for me, and it's just too much tedious work for a game. It's supposed to be entertaining, and I am not entertained by math problems.

That said, I would advise using training wheels - use auto targeting but take notes and screenshots to use it as a learning experience rather than loafing along with your mind in neutral.

AOB illustrated (with the AOB dial moved over for a smaller pic):

https://scontent-ort2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t31.0-8/17349877_1413069382070671_1924529488612320374_o.jp g?oh=ea4a638ca82a2bc1bcb9b31cae0a0362&oe=5967344B

In this one the relative bearing FROM ME TO HIM is about zero, the AOB (Relative bearing from HIM to ME) is about Starboard 42.

https://scontent-ort2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t31.0-8/17359168_1413069378737338_8299918141797488033_o.jp g?oh=fe760fe4fddb8b24adf307f66dce188a&oe=596BE682

Relative bearing here is about 355 (close to the same) but since he's facing directly toward me, the AOB (again, relative bearing from HIM to ME, not the same as from ME to HIM) is about zero. The "mini TDC" part of the scope view shows YOUR SUB in the lower dial, and the target in the upper dial, which gives you a tactical picture of what's going on.

[DicheBach]

Ah thanks Sniper. Training wheels is a good suggestion!

I DO like math (especially geometry) but not "good" at it; gotta work at it, but I tend to enjoy it.

ADDIT: yeah I think those pics you posted will do the trick and help clear it up for me. Thanks.

One other question though: I see you have the same periscope as me--must be an improved one that is common to good mod packs (or maybe you too use FOTRS?).

What are the hash marks on the two axes in the periscope? Degrees? If that is the case, then I suppose that even without the stadimeter, if you know the mast height, and can do the trig, calculating the range is easy. Same principle as what the stadimeter is based on but without that annoying image to match up.

[Sniper297]

Ever since I got ahold of Silent 3ditor;

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/downloads.php?do=file&id=4489

I've been modding and tweaking the game to suit me, so the periscopes, TBT, and binoculars are all changed so they do 3 different ranges. Couldn't tell you exactly how since it's been a long time since I made a lot of these tweaks.

As for real life, yeah, the hash marks were used to estimate range and lead angles - again, using the training wheels, take screenshots and get an idea of how many "divisions" in high and low power different ships fill at different ranges. Do that long enough and you'll have a fair idea of approximate range at first glance. Like the old joke about how do you get to Carnegie Hall...

[DicheBach]

That is a good one :03:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6UlaKYpMXQI

I can see how the navy of the era would've appreciated something like Silent Hunter. But at this point I guess the torpedoes know pretty much what they are doing all by themselves . . . Still practice makes perfect I suppose.

[propbeanie]

Had a little jaunt in the Nautilus (this is with Fall of the Rising Sun mod, which is quite good, not sure if the V-boats are in stock). Neat boat but boy is it slow to dive. That career was going good for about a month, then I befell a common foible I make: interloping into enemy harbors and either detecting naval mines or sub nets (or stealthy Krakens, I'm not sure) the "wrong" way. As they say, any ship can be a minesweeper . . . once.

I'll generally give myself one or two "reloads" or esp. when it was for reasons other than me just making really bad decisions. Reloading right before turning point moments in battle can be a good way to learn how different choices work out. But in general I prefer a "dead is dead" playstyle in character-based games like this one. It forces you to learn to be better I think. Plus lots of restarting careers helps to iron out the exact mod configuration, which for me is just FOTRS for now (albeit with the changes from Crew Fix plugged in manually by me).

I guess I'll start a new one in a Salmon class in Cavite. The Nautilus seems awfully vulnerable to aircraft attacks and I'm bad about forgetting/risking going to periscope depth in daylight. The S-boat was interesting, but of course the main goal is "survive long enough to get assigned a better boat." Would be neat to check out those two 6" guns in a brawl, but Rockin' Robbins had gone and given me a complex about my big gun fetish so I guess I better learn to rely 99% on torps like a real sub ace :)

Actually that reminds me, a "sub" that I'd love to see in this game: the the French "submarine cruiser" Surcouf! (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_submarine_Surcouf)

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/32/Surcouf_FRA.jpg

It was on its way to the Pacific under Free French command and it got plowed by a freighter coming out of the Panama canal. Not a hard "what if" to consider that it didn't get rammed and actually wound up serving in the Pacific. Would be very cool to see how it performs! :)
I just stumbled across this again: [REL] Free French Submarine Surcouf mod (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=177802) I've never tried it myself, but anything from Keltos is good. It'll give you an idea of what the beast could - er, couldn't do... :lol:

[DicheBach]

Wow! Ask and ye shall receive! :Kaleun_Salute:

[DicheBach]

General question about how "closely" the enemy spawns match historical events.

As an example: in my Yank career (starated in Cavite in a Sargo and now in a Gar out of Brisbane), I've just arrived at the patrol area for my 5th or 6th patrol, northwest of Bourgainville Island (north of the strait separating the Rabaul cluster on the west and the other Solomons on the east).

I'm aware that, in a few days, there are about to be some very famous and interesting battles down southeast near Guadalcanal. Most notably:

7 Aug: U.S. landings on Guadalcanal begin
August 8-9, 1942: Japanese battleships attack the American fleet. (http://kylejaredcole.weebly.com/timeline.html)

August 20, 1942
Nineteen Wildcat fighters and twelve Dauntless dive bombers arrive at Henderson Field.
August 21, 1942
General Ichiki orders the first attempt to retake Henderson Field.
August 21, 1942
General Ichiki commits ritual suicide.
September 12, 1942
Japanese attack Henderson again but fail losing 1200 men, the Americans only lose 446.
October 11-12,1942
Japanese cruisers Furutaka and Fabuki are destroyed.
October 13, 1942
Japanese battleships Kongo and Haruna shell Marine positions at Henderson Field.
October 14, 1942
Japanese cruisers Chokai and Kinugasa bombard the Marines.
October 24-25, 1942
Battle for Henderson Field.
October 26, 1942
Battle of Santa Cruz Islands.
November 12-15 , 1942
Naval battle for Guadalcanal. Japanese lose battleships Hiei, Kirishishima heavy cruisers Kinguagasa, three destroyers and seven transports. American loses heavy cruisers Atlanta, San Francisco, light cruisers Juneau, and seven destroyers. Japanese heavy cruisers Suzuya and Maya.

etc., etc. all the way through eventual Japanese withdrawal in I believe Feb of '43 . . .

How much trouble is it worth to try to be "on scene" to try to get involved in any of these battles?

So far, I have not been impressed with how easy or clearcut it is to get involved in famous historical battles in a career campaign, even when the game is giving me signals that that battle is about to take place, and/or is taking place, and subsequently more messages that it took place.

More than once, I've been smack in the middle of the general region where the Japanese carrier TF should have been during Battle of Midway. I saw crap tons of planes behaving in ways that convinced me I could follow their trajectories to find me an aircraft carrier kill . . . but to no avail. I must've spent 10 hours of game play and nearly a full week in game trying to hone in on Kido Butai and save VT-8, etc. from the carnage, but . . . nope. No dice.

So tell me: is there any point at all in trying to participate in historical battles in a career campaign in this game?

[propbeanie]

The battles are not very accurately modeled, and for several reasons, not the least of which is that it is a bother of nth degree to get even close to the ship level, much less accurate ship representations. I have no idea how many different types of vessels there were in each of the navies in WW2, but I do know that even with FotRSU, that you don't even see 10% of what was there as far as "Classes" go. Then there's the shear number involved in the battles. The game chokes sometimes on one airplane and four ships, so imagine if you've got something with hundreds of planes and hundreds of ships. lurker_hlb3 tried to be reasonably accurate with his RSRDC (Run Silent Run Deep Campaign), but had to make "compromises" with the available ships and numbers used. One of the big things is that if you get within 20km of a spawn site, the entire group will not spawn, so you might be short a few dozen vessels / planes from the scenario if you're in the "wrong" place. On top of all of that, the opponents and their associated AI do not "perform" battles very well. The airplanes won't even shoot at each other... All that said, it's still grand fun, and I couldn't care less about "historical accuracy"... :salute:

[DicheBach]

The battles are not very accurately modeled, and for several reasons, not the least of which is that it is a bother of nth degree to get even close to the ship level, much less accurate ship representations. I have no idea how many different types of vessels there were in each of the navies in WW2, but I do know that even with FotRSU, that you don't even see 10% of what was there as far as "Classes" go. Then there's the shear number involved in the battles. The game chokes sometimes on one airplane and four ships, so imagine if you've got something with hundreds of planes and hundreds of ships. lurker_hlb3 tried to be reasonably accurate with his RSRDC (Run Silent Run Deep Campaign), but had to make "compromises" with the available ships and numbers used. One of the big things is that if you get within 20km of a spawn site, the entire group will not spawn, so you might be short a few dozen vessels / planes from the scenario if you're in the "wrong" place. On top of all of that, the opponents and their associated AI do not "perform" battles very well. The airplanes won't even shoot at each other... All that said, it's still grand fun, and I couldn't care less about "historical accuracy"... :salute:

Very interesting, thanks Beanie!

I'll be honest, I'm a bit disappointed to have my observations confirmed: the game is not a historical war game, so much as a "sub simulator" based on WWII. I come from the hard-core "spreadsheet" paper-&-chit historical war game school of thought, so naturally that is my implicit expectation.

But yeah, I can totally appreciate how difficult it would be to make this particular game bridge from "shooter" scale (with all the quality it currently achieves representing that scale) all the way to the "strategy" scale. And yes, it is great fun just how it is.

But I think if a team really set out to get this engine to span that "divide" it could be done.

So RSRDC does more along this line than FOTRSU does eh? Sounds like I should get an RSRDC install going with MultiSH.

ADDIT: as far as the "number of ships" I don't think SH4 is too far off, at least based on my "War in the Pacific Admiral's Edition" knowledge base. Until Leyte Gulf, my undertanding is that, the numbers of ships and planes in the air at any given moment rarely got into the ~20 ships & 200 planes ballpark. These battles were very dynamic things so it is difficult to generalize but . . . take for example the Battle of Sunda Strait (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Sunda_Strait) I was looking up the other day (when I was trying to meet up for that battle in the strait between Java and Sumatra in a recent career playthrough)

Strength
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
American:
1 heavy cruiser
Australian:
1 light cruiser
Dutch:
1 destroyer
---------
Japanese
1 light carrier
1 seaplane carrier
5 cruisers
12 destroyers
1 minelayer
58 troopships
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Casualties and losses
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
1 heavy cruiser sunk
1 light cruiser sunk
1 destroyer sunk
1071 killed
675 POWs[3]
---------
1 minelayer sunk,
4 troopships sunk or grounded,[3]
1 cruiser damaged,
10 killed,
37 wounded[4]

Anecdotally, that is a pretty typical "battle." Some were bigger, some were smaller and bigger ones tended to happen more as time went along (leaving aside Pearl Harbor which was a lot of airplanes in the air at one time, though not really that many ships being attacked).

I'd have to go back and consult the exact chronicles, but even Midway . . . any given engagement during those four days of running battles? Maybe 8 or 12 ships in a task force being attacked by 30 or at most 40 aircraft and defended by 20 or 30 at any given time?

[Bleiente]

Sounds like I should get an RSRDC install going with MultiSH.

I thought you were playing the RSRDC ...
The campaign is included in my ModPack. :03:

[DicheBach]

I thought you were playing the RSRDC ...
The campaign is included in my ModPack. :03:

Yeah, I'm actually creating an install for that right now. Because the game wants to put all the data/cfg/ stuff in one directory, its a problem to have multiple mod installs (or so i've gathered).

But Rockin Robbins "Multi-SH" application makes it pretty easy.

[Sniper297]

I made a fictional battle of Manila Bay for an Asiatic career start;

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

Start your career next to Manila docks and get bombed and strafed, then fight your way out of the harbor to open sea. Not even remotely historical, but fun. :rock:

Problems due to the game itself;

1. Credit for destroying enemy aircraft and ships goes to the last hit - if you put 6 torpedoes into a KONGO battleship, he starts to roll over, a US dive bomber strafes him with .50 cal and gets the last hit, you get zero credit for the sinking. None. Zip point diddly-squat, no "shared" credit. That's the one thing that's been wrong with this game from the beginning, other sub sims credit a career with some points for ships damaged but not sunk, just like in real life. SH4 completely ignores damage, you either sink it or you might as well not bother to attack.

2. Allied ships don't see your torpedo tracks, so if you fire at an enemy ship and miss, and the torpedo hits a friendly ship instead, you'll be spending the rest of the war in the brig.

3. No help at all from friendly fighters - enemy and friendly planes will fly right past each other without firing a single shot. If enemy dive bombers are making runs on you a flight of Wildcats will go right past without even waving.

The number of planes and ships involved in the battle is doable today, but I don't think it would have worked back in 2007 - original system specs for the game called for;

Supported OS: Windows XP / Vista (Only)
Processor: 2GHz Pentium 4 or AMD Athlon (3GHz Pentium or AMD Athlon recommended)
RAM: 1 GB (2 GB recommended)
Video Card: 128 MB RAM DirectX 9-compliant video card capable of rendering Pixel Shader 2.0 (256 MB RAM recommended) (see supported list*)
Sound Card: DirectX 9-compliant sound card
DirectX Version: DirectX 9.0c or later (included on disc)
DVD-ROM: 4x or faster DVD drive
Hard Drive Space: 6 GB

Got a lot better hardware now, so we can get away with saturating battles with lots of ships and planes without dropping the framerates to 5FPS. Earlier mods had to compensate for computer limitations.

[DicheBach]

I DID manage to get in on Battle of Sunda Strait using Ralles Mod soup. But to no avail. too many escorts, couldn't get close enough.

[DicheBach]

Here is a new question:

Are "deck crews" (the deck gun, the AA gun, the watch crews) in fact, vulnerable to attacks that target the upper part of the ship, even when the ship is submerged?

I see there are some old discussions of this, and at least some discussion of mods or personal tweaks to create a "Hogan's Alley" extension to the Damage Control box in the crew management screen: a place where the deck gun and AA gun (if not also the bridge/watch crews) can be placed when submerged?

What I had inferred is that: when SH4 was initially released, the game treated each crew member as ALWAYS being in the location of their duty station, and so even while submerged, "deck crews" were treated as if they were on the deck/upper works of the ship? But I roughly inferred that this issue had been fixed in subsequent patches/updates to the game?

Related to this: I would in fact like to create a mod for this game (if such a mod does not already exist), something like a "Enhanced Crew Management" mod. What I'd like it to include:

1. A fix for this "vulnerable deck crews" issue if it is still an issue in the game.

2. A "Crew Berths" section of the crew management screen: basically a space to place excess crew (injured, dead, else in port, crew that one is moving around as part of reorganizing). The idea is: if any crew member is in this section when a patrol begins, they get moved out of the ship; so it doesn't increase the actual capacity of the ship while at sea, but it does afford more space for crew while in port, and allows a safe place to move crew for various reasons while at sea. I haven't throught through exactly how large this space should be . . . maybe just as many spots as the total for the ship itself . . .

3. A number of "organization" functionalities that would then make the "Crew Berths" (maybe not the best name) truly functional. Most of these would ideally manifest througha right click menu activated on any crew man, but perhaps also some from a control toggle (if that is doable in a mod).
A. a right-click "mark position" functionality: basically right-click a crew men, it marks his current slot as his slot for
i. primary slot
ii. secondary slot
iii. tertiary slot
B. return to position functionality for all three above
i. for single crew man
ii. for all of a shift/compartment
iii. for all of a compartment
iv. for the whole ship
C. Specific to the "Crew Berths" grid:
i. move to (at least for single and whole ship, but possibly the other two as well)
ii. return from crew berth
iii. sort/filter

The sort/filter functionality would be the real point of this whole thing: move crewmen to the crew berths: filter: Guns >= 30 & Mech >= 30 + Sort by Guns highest to lowest . . . Would make staff management more fun.

[propbeanie]

The Deck Crew is vulnerable when you are submerged. Though you don't see them, they are still at their "duty stations" up top, holding their breath, anxiously awaiting your surfacing of the boat again... so if you expect an attack, move your deck crew to the Repair Crew section. As you mention, some of the mods do create a "Hogan's Alley", but you still have to drag the fellers by the hair over into those slots. Nothing can be done to "automate" it. You'll notice that if you take a depth charge near-miss, and you get the message "Periscope damaged sir!", you might also hear a cry "Medic!" (or even a SpongeBob "Muh ~LEG~!!!") and a couple of the fellers on the watch crew have either been wounded or killed. Similar happens to the gun crews if they were manned... Like that flag on the boat, nothing really "disappears" when you submerge, it just becomes "invisible" - but it's still there...

[DicheBach]

The Deck Crew is vulnerable when you are submerged. Though you don't see them, they are still at their "duty stations" up top, holding their breath, anxiously awaiting your surfacing of the boat again... so if you expect an attack, move your deck crew to the Repair Crew section. As you mention, some of the mods do create a "Hogan's Alley", but you still have to drag the fellers by the hair over into those slots. Nothing can be done to "automate" it. You'll notice that if you take a depth charge near-miss, and you get the message "Periscope damaged sir!", you might also hear a cry "Medic!" (or even a SpongeBob "Muh ~LEG~!!!") and a couple of the fellers on the watch crew have either been wounded or killed. Similar happens to the gun crews if they were manned... Like that flag on the boat, nothing really "disappears" when you submerge, it just becomes "invisible" - but it's still there...

Shame that Ubisoft didn't fix that.

Is it the same in SH5?

So, do I infer that: some players will leave for patrols WITHOUT anyone in the deck gun or AA gun slots, and then (when battle is joined) MOVE crew out of other slots into those slots?

I don't know the details of WWII submarine staffing but . . . having half-dozen guys on a sub that do NOTHING but man the deck gun / AA gun in the rare instances that those are actually used seems a bit of a waste. On the other hand, I'm not sure what jobs could necessarily spare crew when/if those roles need to be filled.

[BigWalleye]

The deck crew can be "taught" to go belowdeck, using an external mouse-automation program. There are several around. (I forget which I used, and I'm on travel status right now, so I don't have my SH3 PC handy.) It's a slight chore to program the mouse moves, and it does take time to execute - actually about as long as it took a well-trained fleet boat crew to submerge. But it's better than leaving them "outside."

And, of course, it could be done in-game, just as h.sie did for the "Lazy 1WO" in SH3. It would just require someone to reverse-engineer the sh4.exe, which AFAIK no one has done for SH4. The modding interest for SH4 seems to be an order of magnitude less than for SH3, so many possible SH4 enhancements will likely never see the light of day. But that does not mean they are impossible, just that someone with the requisite skills and motivation has not tackled the problem.

[Bleiente]

The problem was already fixed within TMO.
The best thing to do is to put the team in this constellation on...

https://preview.ibb.co/iNPBRF/2_SH4_Img_2017_03_10_16_39_41_098.png (https://ibb.co/nyS9Dv)

Thus, all crews are uniformly protected and, if necessary, the repair team is shared with the individual guns.
And in my opinion ... if you need the guns, the crap is really steamed.

:salute:

[BigWalleye]

You are saying that TMO automatically moves the bridge watch to a safe in-hull location upon diving? Does it move them back to the bridge on surfacing?

[Bleiente]

You are saying that TMO automatically moves the bridge watch to a safe in-hull location upon diving? Does it move them back to the bridge on surfacing?

To my knowledge, this was a major concern for Ducimus.
This applies also to the repair crews ... only the crews for the deck weapons (cannon + air defense) are unprotected in their slots.

[BigWalleye]

If Ducimus fixed this problem, then why does the TMO manual, page 46, state:

Deck and AA gun crewman being killed while submerged. This is due to a design flaw of the game. Place your crewman in “hogan's alley” (after battery crew berthing) when not in use.

Doesn't sound like it's fixed in TMO.

[Bleiente]

I do not want to argue about it.
But ... in my experience it works with my above-mentioned constellation problem-free. :03:

[DicheBach]

Well, my experience is more limited than any of you guys.

But . . . in my experience, playing with both FOTRSU, and Ralles Real Mod Soup . . . even the Deck Watch crew MIGHT still be vulnerable when the sub is submerged.

Obviously, given TMO is not part of FOTRSU, we expect that the deck gun crews, if not also the damage control crew, and possibly the deck watch crews ARE vulnerable to damage the sub experiences in those regions, even when the sub is submerged and they are presumably "in a different part of the sub" (or in reality would be).

What I'm saying is: even with TMO installed (as part of Ralles) I have the suspicion that ALL of these locations remain vulnerable.

[propbeanie]

What we need he-ahr, is a voll-uhn-TEa-ahr... Those willing please take a step forwahrd!... (most take a step back, leaving DicheBach standing alone)... Why thank you mis-tah DicheBach. How GREY-shush of yuh sahr!... Now then, your task is to surface your submarine nearby to some enemy destroyers, and get them to chase you as you submerge. Leave your watch and deck gun crew manning their positions as you crash dive. Get yourself depth charged, and damaged of course. See who, if any of your crew, is injured. You may have to do this multiple times, with multiple boats (if you happen to get sunk the first try...). Subsequent "tests" of course, we want you to move your crew into the Damage Control Team's slots in an attempt to protect them when you get depth charged ceaselessly... Lastly, an attempt at same with a mod with the Hogan's Alley implemented, and report back with your success or failure... Of course, if memory serves me correctly, there should be several threads around here somewhere on the very subject - which with my limited skills at "searching", I cannot find just yet... :lol:

Where's THEBERBSTER when you need him?... :D

[DicheBach]

Any particular mods that include a Hogan's Alley?

I see that, many of the boats in Ralles have one of the compartments changed a bit (either added or changed from what it was in vanilla) and it is called "Crew Berth" (on the S-18). I think in the Salmon or Sargo class it is called "After Battery."

I'm not sure if those _are_ Hogan's Alley or what.

Those generally tend to comrpise about 9 slots, so that is enough to take the deck gun crew plus a couple of the DC but not enough for the whole deck watch for most ships.

So I'm guessing that these added/changed compartments are NOT "Hogan's Alleys?"

I'll be happy to do some testing, just . . . if an actual mod that adds additional space for crew to be moved "below decks" is around I'd like to have that running s I can redo from a specific save where there are one or two destroyers on hand with multiple different crew constellations.

[propbeanie]

Any particular mods that include a Hogan's Alley?

I see that, many of the boats in Ralles have one of the compartments changed a bit (either added or changed from what it was in vanilla) and it is called "Crew Berth" (on the S-18). I think in the Salmon or Sargo class it is called "After Battery."

I'm not sure if those _are_ Hogan's Alley or what.

Those generally tend to comrpise about 9 slots, so that is enough to take the deck gun crew plus a couple of the DC but not enough for the whole deck watch for most ships.

So I'm guessing that these added/changed compartments are NOT "Hogan's Alleys?"

I'll be happy to do some testing, just . . . if an actual mod that adds additional space for crew to be moved "below decks" is around I'd like to have that running s I can redo from a specific save where there are one or two destroyers on hand with multiple different crew constellations.
Anything that has an area like what you describe in Bleiente's Soup, or TMO 2.5 has it too, I think... it's only been a few weeks since I played it, but I very seldom pay attention to the interface anymore... :o - but, I do distinctly remember the "After Battery" being described as one, as was "Crew Berthing". I can't remember off the top which mod called it "Hogan's Alley", but they all serve the same purpose, and you do have to manually drag the crew into the slots. Or should I say, ~I~ drag them into there... :lol:

[mikesn9]

Hogan's Alley is slang for After battery.

[BigWalleye]

I do not want to argue about it.

It is probably prudent to defer to Ducimus when it comes to questions of what his mod actually does.

[propbeanie]

He does mention it in the ReadMe stuff in the mod

[DicheBach]

Hogan's Alley is slang for After battery.

Ah cool beans.

So I got an S-18 that is out on patrol on my career and my last save had a KMCSHansa coming in to attack range. Easy spot to test from I guess. Only thing is, not enough space to put all the deck watch below decks but I guess enough to put some below decks.

So lets see here, we have a couple of hypotheses here:

1. damage to deck gun vicinity of sub while submerged with deck gun crew in deck gun crew slots = harm to deck gun crew. Easy falsification premise for that.

2. damage to deck watch vicinity of sub while submerged with deck watch crew in deck watch slots = harm to deck watch crew. Also easy enough to falsify.

No AA gun on that ship so cannot test that, but if the deck gun crew is getting hurt then I think it stands to reason the same thing will happen with the AA gun crew.

One last thing to consider, but I doubt it is a real issue:

3. damage to upper hull / deck vicinity of sub while submerged with damage control crew in damage control slots = harm to damage control team.

So I'll surface within about 1500 yards of the Hansa, draw his fire for a couple shots, then submerge to radar depth or slightly less deep and see what happens. Rinse repeat with crew in different constellations (i.e., moving a few guys into/out of the deck watch and deck gun slots and also the damage control if I see them take damage.).

ADDIT: prelimnary findings.

Method:

S-18 boat just north of Rabaul harbor, a save file from an ongoing career play up to early summer 42. I had spotted a lone merchant coming north from Rabaul just before I signed off last night. Interesting thing is: it seems to respawn as a slightly different class of ship when you reload from the save file. Last night it was a KMCSHansa, and today it has spawned at least once as an M3SHansa.

The distance at the actual career save is in the 15,000 ft ballpark (not sure why the deck watch officer reports visual contacts in feet . . .) but apparently that is too far for those drunken freighter crewmen to spot a sub.

I move toward the from their port bow approaching at about a 35-degree AOB. When I get to about 6000 feet I initiate a drive to Radar Depth. He still has not opened fire and apparently not even noticed me (I had to experiment with this a few times to get the desired effect, namely, he doesn't notice me and start firing until AFTER I'm at radar depth).

At 984 feet, I'm now past his midships port side, and moving behind him still at about the same angle. I haven't fired any shots. All but three of my deck watch crew are in their slots and one of the deck gun crew, the other four are in the "Crew Berth."

Once I fiddled with this a few times I realized, the trick is to get close enough that he starts shooting AFTER the ship is already at radar depth, and then to let him shoot ONLY until he causes damage. Pause and see where the damage is, make note, un-pause very briefly to see which crew are injured, pause again. Test over. Repeat. This is necessary because, if you let it keep running, it quickly becomes impossible to "correlate" damage that has been done to a particular section of the sub with harm to crew men. But it isn't too bad. He generally hits within 30 seconds of opening fire and reloading the save only takes a minute or so (btw, I have the save if anyone wants to try it themselves, though not sure which files have to be exchanged).

I've only run about 6 or 7 runs of the experiment.

Two or three were inconclusive, either because I didn't pause it soon enough, or I provoked him to open fire too soon (before I was at radar depth) and thus had sufered damage before the sub was mostly submerged. So out of that, only about 5 are truly valid tests.

Two of those were inconclusive because he got no hits within a minute or so of shooting at me, so I suspended the test. Here are the results of the three meaningful experiments:

Test; Compartment damaged; crew harmed

1. Control Room / control, sensor, damage control, deck gun
2. Engine Room / no one
3. Deck Watch Compartment / deck watch crew

Deck watch crew hurt
http://tw.greywool.com/i/fcocn.gif

Deck Watch "compartment" damaged
http://tw.greywool.com/i/tNaCH.gif

So that is only a sample size of one, but it does suggest that:

Even when the sub is submerged, damage caused to the upper works of the ship (the deck watch "compartment" and devices there) causes (or has at least the potential to cause) harm to the deck watch crew.

Tiny sample size, and there are a lot of assumptions that are questionable, but on the whole: suggestive that my anecdotal observation is correct. Deck watch crew are NOT treated as being in an "interior" part of the ship while the ship is submerged and consequently they can be hurt when the ship suffers damage to the deck watch compartment.

[Sniper297]

My experience with depth charges close enough to kill crew members is that they usually wreck the sub anyway, so I never bothered looking for a way to protect the deck crew. One obvious option would be to select crewman with high numbers in mechanics, guns, and watch, put them on deck when surfaced and move them into the forward torpedo room and damage control when submerged. If you stop and think about it whenever you're reloading the tubes or repairing damage you're usually submerged anyway, so you don't need deck watch.

Other item that might be worth experimenting - \Data\UPCData\UPCUnitsData\UnitParts(subtype).upc seems to focus on the deck crew;

[UnitPart 1.Compartment 1]
CompartmentType= 1
StatusActive= Yes
ID= PorpoiseConnWatch
NameDisplayable= Deck Watch
Type=NULL
FunctionalType= ObservationRoom
MechanicalCoef= 0.2 ;0..1
ElectricsCoef= 0.2 ;0..1
GunsCoef= 0.2 ;0..1
WatchmanCoef= 1.0 ;0..1
WatchStandingCoef= 0.048
MaintenanceCoef= 0.0144
RepairsCoef= 0.072
ReloadingweaponCoef= 0.072
SleepCoef= -0.12
LeadersSlots=3
CrewMembersSlots= 9
EffciencyDenominator=4
EffciencyDenominatorBS=8
Hitpoints=200
CrewExposure=0.3
EquipmentsExposure=0.1
WeaponsExposure=0.1
ExternalDamageZoneTypeID3D= 31
DamageDescription1= NULL, 0, 0.2, 0, 1, 1, Minor damage, 0, 0, NULL, 0, 0.2, 0.2
DamageDescription2= NULL, 0.2, 0.6, 0, 1, 1, Medium damage, 0, 0, NULL, 0, 0.2, 0.5
DamageDescription3= NULL, 0.6, 1, 0, 1, 1, Heavy damage, 0, 0, NULL, 0, 0.2, 1

[UnitPart 1.Compartment 2]
CompartmentType= 2
StatusActive= No
ID= PorpoiseConnAA
NameDisplayable= AA Gun
Type=NULL
FunctionalType= FlakRoom
MechanicalCoef= 0.2
ElectricsCoef= 0
GunsCoef= 0.5 ;0..1
WatchmanCoef= 0.5
WatchStandingCoef= 0.048
MaintenanceCoef= 0.0144
RepairsCoef= 0.072
ReloadingweaponCoef= 0.072
SleepCoef= -0.12
LeadersSlots=0
CrewMembersSlots= 0
EffciencyDenominator=1
EffciencyDenominatorBS=1
Hitpoints=200
CrewExposure=0.3
EquipmentsExposure=0.1
WeaponsExposure=0.1
ExternalDamageZoneTypeID3D= 44
DamageDescription1= NULL, 0, 0.2, 0, 1, 1, Minor damage, 0, 0, NULL, 0, 0.2, 0.2
DamageDescription2= NULL, 0.2, 0.6, 0, 1, 1, Medium damage, 0, 0, NULL, 0, 0.2, 0.5
DamageDescription3= NULL, 0.6, 1, 0, 1, 1, Heavy damage, 0, 0, NULL, 0, 0.2, 1

;------------------------------------------------------------
; CREWMEMBER SLOTS
;
;
;Type= Officer ;for Officers slots, which should be located in the Command Room and give bonus to the entire unit
;Type= Leader ;for Leaders slots, which give bonus to the compartment
;Type= Crewman ;for crewmember slots, which work and get poor pay :D
;

Changing crew exposure to something like 0.01 MIGHT reduce how much exposure they have to getting wounded. I say "MIGHT" because I haven't tried it, and you have to keep in mind that SH4 is really SH3 with heavy modifications, and the ubisoft programmers didn't bother deleting half of the u-boat files and/or programming from SH3 which are not actually used.

Example;

[Unit]
ClassName=SSGato
3DModelFileName=data/Submarine/NSS_Gato/NSS_Gato
HumanPlayable=YES
Interior=data/Interior/NSS_Gato/NSS_Gato
UnitType=200
MaxSpeed=21
MaxSpeedSubmerged=9
Length=95
Width=8.3
RenownAwarded=130

You would THINK that it's possible to change the max speed of the sub in that file, but it actually does nothing since the performance data used is in the NSS_Gato.sim file. SOME of the data in the (subtype).cfg file IS used, but other parts are ignored. Only way to find out is experiment with it.

[DicheBach]

I just got awarded a new command, a Sargo running out of Brisbane, which will be good with the Guadalcanal part of the game coming up. The S-18 and the Mk 10 torpedoes was fun, and June 42 is a bit early to be depending entirely on Mk 14s but I'll just shoot more and hit less (and use the deck gun more).

The crew configuration I am now using given I know that deck watch crew can be hurt even when submerged:

http://tw.greywool.com/i/F8OcL.gif

When I submerge in a combat context, the deck watch will move to the After Battery and empty engine room slots. When I need to use the surface guns, the highest rated guys from various places will get pulled.

[DicheBach]

So my next question:

I guess mega mods like Ralles and FOTRSU don't allow the player to play as Japanese submariner or in other ships?

Are there mods that do allow that form of play?

Being quite new to the Silent Hunter series, I'm really impressed. I'd have to say SH 4, even just vanilla, is about as close to "perfect" as any game I've ever played. Of course no game can do everything, but the extent to which a game fulfills the limited intent it is designed for is what I mean by "perfect." SH 4 seems to do what it intends to do better than most games I've ever played. When I combine this with the facts that: (a) it manages to create seamless game play across huge expanses of time and space and (b) does a reasonable job of conveying the texture of obscure, subtle and complex historical war time dynamics, I conclude that it is in the very top 1% of games I'm aware of.

Not sure I'd call it my favorite yet, though it vies for that. It doesn't cover enough of the operational and logistical dynamics, nor are the character elements as rich as I would like for it to vie for favorite.

With all that said, I'm really surprised it took me this long to learn about this game, and I'm also surprised that Ubisoft has yet to build expansions on this engine that add additional WWII era naval and air warfare dynamics.

Long-term, I would love to be involved in developing a game that combined the best elements of the Silent Hunter series with something like War in the Pacific (http://www.matrixgames.com/products/351/details/War.in.the.Pacific.-.Admirals.Edition). There is already a precedent for this type of game design, the Battle of Britain II Wings of Victory game (http://www.matrixgames.com/products/353/details/Battle.of.Britain.II.-.Wings.of.Victory), in which the player can play the game at the level of a strategic commander, handling the distribution, and to some extent crewing and logistics of air groups, or play as a crewman on a specific aircraft, or both.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YhgAv7XmsTM

[propbeanie]

To check it out, in FotRSU when on the Single Mission (or is it Quick Mission??), click on the "Change Sides" button, and you could do some German Missions - if there were only some German missions to PLAY!!! - oh wiat, there is... 721_SK_UboatMissionsPatrols_FotRSU.7z (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0ByHI54u9iyJ8N2ZOWVUwMVp0VzQ/view?usp=sharing) - but you must test them... endlessly... :lol: They may not stay compatible as they are, but that is the plan for the future. Now, there is also some Quick Patrols in there, and the regular U-boats Career. That package is originally for Stock v1.5, and is available here at SubSim but I can't find them now... hmm... There is also one set-up for surface play http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/downloads.php?do=file&id=41, where you bring your own boat, and I've not played that... Also, coming soon to a computer near you will be the "Climb Mount Niitaka" mod from Keltos and Peabody, with some touches from a few others of us, and it will be a Japanese submarine Campaign... There are other mods by others that can take you into the Mediterranean on either side, the Atlantic on either side, and a few others that I can't remember right now... the Black Sea?... Some of those are Bonus Mods, others aren't

[DicheBach]

To check it out, in FotRSU when on the Single Mission (or is it Quick Mission??), click on the "Change Sides" button, and you could do some German Missions - if there were only some German missions to PLAY!!! - oh wiat, there is... 721_SK_UboatMissionsPatrols_FotRSU.7z (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0ByHI54u9iyJ8N2ZOWVUwMVp0VzQ/view?usp=sharing) - but you must test them... endlessly... :lol: They may not stay compatible as they are, but that is the plan for the future. Now, there is also some Quick Patrols in there, and the regular U-boats Career. That package is originally for Stock v1.5, and is available here at SubSim but I can't find them now... hmm... There is also one set-up for surface play http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/downloads.php?do=file&id=41, where you bring your own boat, and I've not played that... Also, coming soon to a computer near you will be the "Climb Mount Niitaka" mod from Keltos and Peabody, with some touches from a few others of us, and it will be a Japanese submarine Campaign... There are other mods by others that can take you into the Mediterranean on either side, the Atlantic on either side, and a few others that I can't remember right now... the Black Sea?... Some of those are Bonus Mods, others aren't

Cool. I have played a bit as a Monsun Gruppe skipper, but good to know there are other options as well.

Really enjoying the attention to historical detail in Ralles mod soup. My most recent patrol started on around July 29 from Brisbane. I basically just ignored the mission to go waste time north of New Guinea and headed to Iron Bottom Sound to see if the U.S. landing force arrived on Aug 8;.
Right on time!

http://tw.greywool.com/i/vaejs.jpg

With this in mind, and the fact Tulagi now has a replenishment port, I'm going to be getting in on a lot of the Guadalcanal knife fights :Kaleun_Periskop:

[torpedobait]

Any chance you could do away with that moving background? Very distracting and unnecessary. Thanks.

[DicheBach]

Any chance you could do away with that moving background? Very distracting and unnecessary. Thanks.

Uhh, you mean the fish in the loaf of bread?

Isn't that something the whole site is "experiencing" at the present time??
http://tw.greywool.com/i/0Vz3G.gif

Not sure how my user account could possibly be the source of THAT!?! :)

[Bleiente]

Any chance you could do away with that moving background? Very distracting and unnecessary. Thanks.

Set the background color of the forum to admiral blue ... then the spook is over. :timeout:

Is an April joke by Uncle Neal... :doh: :haha:

[DicheBach]

So, I've reached the conclusion that "Realistic" (aka "Very Hard") difficulty in a career is not necessarily more fun. More tedious, but not necessarily more challenging.

Thoughts?

[Bleiente]

Moin, Moin...

Do you mean now the "realism" settings of SH4 or the level of the AI in the modpacks?

I myself prefer/play on 90% ... thus with external view and map contacts.
But everyone has their own preferences and can do what he likes.

[DicheBach]

Moin, Moin...

Do you mean now the "realism" settings of SH4 or the level of the AI in the modpacks?

I myself prefer/play on 90% ... thus with external view and map contacts.
But everyone has their own preferences and can do what he likes.

I mean when you start a career, you pick one of the "difficulty" levels. I first played on Hard but started a career on "Realistic" (which I think is labeled "Very Hard" in the game Options window which only seems to affect missions).

I agree: external camera and map contacts on is I think my sweet spot.

[Bleiente]

You have to go to the radio at the beginning of the campaign in the office on the left.
There you have to make your desired settings.
This is unfortunately something unhappy with SH4...

You have to set it up at the commandant's office, where you can equip your boat at the beginning.
To do this, on the left of the desk on the board is a radio... click on it and make the desired realism settings again.

:salute:

[torpedobait]

Set the background color of the forum to admiral blue ... then the spook is over. :timeout:

Is an April joke by Uncle Neal... :doh: :haha:

Thanks. Obviously I didn't get it. Now that I'm retired almost 3 years I find it hard to keep up with the calendar!

[DicheBach]

Can anyone explain to me what this gadget is called, so I can maybe find the directions for how to use it?

http://tw.greywool.com/i/e3KcF.jpg

Been "away" from SH4 for a long time. Refired it up last night and realized I had forgotten almost EVERYTHING I had learned about how to play with all the realism-adding mods I have and at say 85 Realism.

I cannot figure out what this thing is called nor what mod it comes from.

My mod list:
http://tw.greywool.com/i/_Ljsm.jpg

[Fifi]

It’s called the Nomograph.
Drawing a line from whatever Knots to whatever minutes it gives you the distance travelled.

[DicheBach]

Ah! A LINE! :k_confused:

Thanks!

ADDIT: so let me make sure I got this right. I'm following along with Cap'n Scurvy's fantastic "High Realism Tutorial. pdf" which if included in one of these mods, and got to the point where you estimate speed, and it would seem the nomograph is perfect at that point?

Got a true bearing to target and distance and plotted it, ran chronometer for 2m 58s and then rechecked range and true bearing: measured distance between first plot point and second = 500 (yards I suppose it is).

Then I took my ruler and drew that line from just less than 3 on the far right "time in minutes" through 500 and thence on to 5.25 knots.

http://tw.greywool.com/i/ueOB_.jpg

Correct?

[Fifi]

:up:

[DicheBach]

Merci!

I think I've _pretty much_ regained my previous skill level . . . well 75 or 80% of it. That last 25 or 20% of "polish" on the skills will take many hours of play.

[DicheBach]

It is May '42. I graduated out of my S-class and into a Salmon and headed to Rabaul harbor, one of my favorite "haunts" for sniping motionless IJN ships. As usual there is a monitor in the outer harbor (and new to me, maybe the mod setup I'm using, ALSO one in the inner harbor).

In the past I had found I could slip past the outer guy by hugging the southwest shore and keeping it slow and quiet. This time I figured I'd try something different.

So I spent a good 2 to 4 hours in game time (and probably an hour in real life) crawling along across the deep part of the outer harbor from NE to SW ish and using my sonar ray marker to plot approximately where he was every couple minutes. This was only mildly tedious at 8 TC speed.

This is what I came up with
http://tw.greywool.com/i/YgGj1.jpg

Having now positioned myself at the point in the shallows just east of the small promontory on the south shore (there is a circle and some lines there) to setup a shot at him with an Mk 14 (or 8 . . .) I've watched him do a full lap at least 5 times and he never deviates from it.

It may be the exact coordinates of his route are not identical each time, it is impossible to say with certainty just based on any available in-game information, but he is DEFINITELY sticking to one route.

This is the downside of learning C++ and a bit about how games work :) !

You realize how challenging it is to create bug-proof ANYTHING, and so how the best "solution" to creating the illusion of "intelligent" computer opponents is often to "cheat!" :arrgh!:

[DicheBach]

I'm well aware of the real life historical problems of the Mk 14 brand torpedo, and that the vanilla game as well as mods (my own list of mods is up above there) models these flaws in the torpedo.

However, I have now consistently seen something in the course of about 4 different sessions (May 42 ish in game).

For at least 18 maybe 24 torpedoes in a row, every single torpedo veers hard to port (relative to its own nose). This is after I have methodically setup shots (generally against stationary targets, but some against the moving target in the previous post).

Does that sound like a problem in the actual software or my mod settings maybe?

My understanding of the causes of the erratic circular runs in the torps were that it had to do with deficiencies in the design/quality/manufacturing of the gyros that correct for the course after the torp completes its ~200 yard exit phase, the torp would attempt to turn to correct itself and get on its proper "heading to target phase" and then junk would jam up and it would stay in that turn. But 24 torps in a row all with the exact same malfunction!?

Is it possible that I'm somehow inputting my TDC stuff in such an incredibly reverse fashion that the data are "telling" those torps to all turn hard (like 30-degrees hard) to port!? I find that hard to conceive.

I had no such problem with the Mk 10s in the S boat, my torps went where I aimed them, so I don't think that is a reasonable explanation given I'm using largely the same procedures to launch these Mk 14s on their merry way.

I'm very conflicted about this from a gameplay standpoint. On the one hand, I appreciate the "realistic" modeling of historical challenges faced by USN submariners. It is incredibly annoying to spend an hour or so setting up the "perfect stealth kill" and then watch as 4 torpedoes in a row head off toward Timbuktu, apparently possessed by the Ghost of Penguins Past . . . so it must have been REALLY! annoying, like hopping-made ANNOYING! :doh: for the poor fellers on those boats . . . I'm surprised there were no murders much less fist fights when some of the field commanders/crew confronted some of the intractable, self-important HQ brass on these torps . . .

So: modeling it is cool.

From a game play standpoint, the prospect of starting at beginning of war and trying to make it all the way through is intriguing.

However, from a game play standpoint, it honestly feels like I'm wasting my precious play time spending hours going to locations to set up attacks then watching my torps behave in what I would think are even MORE absurdbly erratic manner than they did in actual reality. I mean come on: 18 to 24 torps in a ROW all veer hard to port!?

Any thoughts, suggestions, ideas, or heckles?

[propbeanie]

It looks like you have a proper activation order for Ralles Mod Pack. There have been others that have posted about the issue:
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?p=2577267#post2577267

Don't forget about the v1.3 update, if you hadn't done that:
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?p=2394280#post2394280

Sometimes the torp mods will affect things, other times not. I was looking for Bleiente's post where he mentions turning down the errors a pinch for the next version, but only for the gyro - but I might not be remembering it correctly, since I couldn't find that post in his Mod Pack thread... :salute:

[DicheBach]

Thanks Prop! I posted in Bleinte's thread to see what up.

[propbeanie]

He was keelhauled, and won't be able to reply here. A few posts above yours is one with a link to his Facebook page. He did have plans for another update, but probably hasn't had time to do much on it just yet. :salute:

[DicheBach]

He seriously was banned!? :doh:

[DicheBach]

Here is a new question.

I stumbled through a wikipedia browsing session and wound up reading this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torpedo_net

Seems like these things were not "uncommon" during the peak of WWII, eh?

So why none in SH4? Does SH5 have them?

[propbeanie]

Here is a new question.

I stumbled through a wikipedia browsing session and wound up reading this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torpedo_net

Seems like these things were not "uncommon" during the peak of WWII, eh?

So why none in SH4? Does SH5 have them?
That first sentence says: "Torpedo nets were a passive ship defensive device against torpedoes. They were in common use from the 1890s until the Second World War. They were superseded by the anti-torpedo bulge and torpedo belts."

A picture is worth a thousand words:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c5/HMS_Hotspur_%281870%29.jpg

Imagine getting to set that up every time you docked... Yikes! They were used on some 700 traveling ships, according to the article, and did protect the majority of them during most torpedo attacks, but not all. You can simulate the effect of a torpedo net in SH3 & SH4 on docked ships with the use of the anti-sub net, just making it a small one, floating on the surface, and around an individual ship. Modeling a net on a moving ship would require at least the booms added to a ship, but getting torpedoes to explode before actual impact with the ship would be a trick... :salute:

[DicheBach]

Right! It does look like a very laborious and high-maintenance contraption. However, I was also under the impression the net would be used even while the ship was underway. Recall a statement that it only reduced speed by about 1 knot?

If they were used, I imagine it was mainly in the Atlantic and if at all in the Pacific then by the Yanks or perhaps the Brits?

So what I'm gathering is: for SH4, the omission isn't such a glaring oversight, as it would not likely have been very common for an allied or even a German submariner to encounter a target ship using one in real history.

So what about SH5? Still no torpedo nets?

[propbeanie]

Yeah, that's what I meant with the "traveling ships" above, in that they were used on only 700 ships during the war, out of the thousands and thousands. It would be interesting to put some on a couple of ships in the Atlantic, like you say though... I wonder if the subnet could be "attached" to a ship?... :hmmm: :salute: