Final career: before i take a little break.

[Ducimus]

I think im going to start one more career, before i give SH3 a rest for a little while. While i havent finished my current one (hes not dead yet, no matter how hard i try to get those damn destroyers to pummel me) , im already wondering about the next one :roll:

So if anyones been following my long winded SH3 career shenanigans, my question to you is, should i start from the beginning in an IXB or VIIB? :88)

Oh.. yeah.. my goal..... ....


"One Miiilllllion tons"
http://www.gazette.uwo.ca/2004/March/25/Pics/15B%20Dr.Evil.jpg

One million tons or until i die, whichever comes first. Considering i play with manual targeting enabled (no silver bullets), and from 42-44 have accumulated only 500K tons in an IXC, this might be a plausable challlenge.

[Keelbuster]

Har! Nice. You know how I feel - VIIB. And don't worry; you can still drumbeat. My little bandit just sunk about 150k in the carribean and near Grand banks during 3 patrols using the Milkcow that's around there in 42. We just got back to Lorient - half a year later. Things have changed now...was almost sunk in biscay by a surprise air attack in overcast weather. Boys were back just time for christmas and I promptly transferred to bergen to wait for the schnorkel. Anyway that's a bit OT. Get the VIIB. Get yer Million tons. It's possible if you start at the beginning of the war (i'm at 850 now, patrol 21, jan 43). If you start in 41/42, it could be a real challenge.

[Ducimus]

Current career its like june of 44, so i got from then to may of 45 to think about it. Personnaly im really leaning on an IXB because of the range and torpedo load, but that dark grey, sleek, VIIB with the net cutter has alot of style . (whats more, look at the readme in my modded files in the mod forum and you'll see what im atracted to it. Ive done alot of work on it, and despite my modding, i still have been using an IXC simply because it has more fuel, and yet theres that VIIB with that stylish netcutter..... :damn: .)

Your right though, milk cows would solve some of my fuel woes :P

[andy_311]

I just finished a Career in an IXB (silly me changed it from an IXC) and loved it I lasted all the way to May 18th 45,
Nine days after the war ended I liked it that much when the 2nd Flottila becomes operational am putting my Transfer in.

[HEMISENT]

Finishing a career. Now that brings back memories.

[JScones]

Finishing a career. Now that brings back memories.
:rotfl: :rotfl:

So now is not the time to say that I've fully rewritten the randomised events feature??



Just kidding!

[JScones]

Ducimus, you in a VIIB? "I'd like to see that".

[Zyco]

VIIB :sunny:

[Umfuld]

That Dr. Evil thing made me chuckle.

Good luck in your attempt.

[HEMISENT]

Finishing a career. Now that brings back memories.
:rotfl: :rotfl:

So now is not the time to say that I've fully rewritten the randomised events feature??



Just kidding!

:damn: :damn: :damn: :damn:

[STEED]

Flip a coin :)

[CB..]

i dunno Ducimus either sounds good!! :up: :ping: but what ever way any one looks at it it says every thing any one needs to know about realism in SH3!!! (there 'aint any!) if even a hard core guy like your self can reasonably expect to reach a million tons in a career-with manual targeting etc etc---arghhh!!

once i get to the top of the historical tonnage Aces board- i lose interest right away-- i hope you make it if only to prove that the realism debate is null and void--
we should be struggling to reach 100,000 tons at the end of a career let alone a million---a large percentage of u-boat commanders never sank anything at all-- :oops:

after thought---- can't help but think it might be more fun if you went for a entirely non realism soloution to the tonnage issue and vastly reduced the maximum range for the torpedoes-- making any attack over 1000 metres impossible..something along those lines would bring some fun back into the game perhaps--this would force you into some sort of conflict with the DD's and reduce the opportunity for multiple "strafing" strikes on convoys?

reckon the tonnage issue is in the end the main "realism" issue--reduce the tonnage scores achieved by the average player to something akin to those achieved over-all (not just on specific succesful patrols- yes we all know on occasion high tonnage was achieved in a single patrol)

but how much more involving would the game be if we were really struggling to get above half way up the aces tonnage board in the game---regardless of how this was actually achieved in game---heck give the merchants armour--reduce the range/explosive capacity of the torps
anything really---if the DD's can't do their job properly we'll have to find another way--worth a thought if your close to giving it a rest altogether what harm could come of it?

me i just edited the campaign so i get stuck with the type II right thro the war-- me thinks i might try the torp range reduction idea to see if that helps--

[Ducimus]

Personnaly, one reason im gonig for a "1 million ton" career, is primarly to demonstrate to myself, once and for all, that all im really playing, is an interactive screen saver. I should be struggeling for 100K.
Instead the real struggle is 100M, and that is mostly a test on my ablity to find shipping and send it to the bottom in the most EFFIECENT manner possible. If i accomlish this, i have a feeling i will be througly digusted and cured of the sub bug for a little while.


Right now torn betwen starting
- U-107, an IXB
- U-46 , an VIIB
- U-69, one of the first VIIC's.


An IX boat early war on a convoy is great fun, mass carnage, i know this much :-j If i go with an IXB, im going to raise my tonnage bar, ill expect more then 1 million .

[lonehawknz]

IXB's in 1940 are the SH3 equivalent of paradise.

Lazily swinging up to the surface and lascerating dozy medium destroyers whose crew AI's are all still crap at the beginning of the war, using the 10.5cm gun at long range, is a true joy... :sunny:

(I use the UZO to range-find for the gun)

[CB..]

Personnaly, one reason im gonig for a "1 million ton" career, is primarly to demonstrate to myself, once and for all, that all im really playing, is an interactive screen saver. I should be struggeling for 100K.
Instead the real struggle is 100M, and that is mostly a test on my ablity to find shipping and send it to the bottom in the most EFFIECENT manner possible. If i accomlish this, i have a feeling i will be througly digusted and cured of the sub bug for a little while.




:up: yup i feel pretty much the same way---that and the mindless and completely un-realistic realism debates that we allways get sucked into just kills my enthusiasm completely--who cares if the sonar on a Hunt II destroyer is accuratley set up and implemented if im getting 300,000 tons a year in game--it's mad hell even using the type II i'm still wiping the floor with the historical aces--and if that's realism then im donald duck (quack) :lol:

[Ducimus]

You know im looking at my current career, and i think this really demonstrates how stupid the AI is.


12 Dec 1943
0915 EF 41 Ship sunk! Buckley Destroyer Escort, 1400 tons
0930 EF 41 Ship sunk! Evarts Destroyer Escort, 1192 tons
1101 EF 41 Ship sunk! Casablanca Escort Carrier, 10400 tons

I'll give you three guess what those 3 ships were supposed to be, and the first two don't count. I didnt get a single depth charge for my audacity. On a funny note, I was watchiing "run silent, run deep" on VHS before i fired up SH3 and did this on patrol in a career game. :roftl: Bungo pete sunk again!


But im looking at my tonnage in this career.

687 days at sea, and i have a combined total of 441,474 tons. Or
412812 of merchant shipping and 28,662 tons of warships.

Thing is, i averaged abut 40K a patrol. I wasn't really trying Hard,i was being lazy. Alot of times Id just park my boat in "tanker alley", max out TC, and sit there and wait for a contact. Most of the time i cut my patrol short because i was low on fuel, or simply got bored. In all cases i returned with torpedo's save one patrol i remember when i shot every fish i had. I wasnt really trying, i was sort of just tyring to get through the war. Now its like febuary of 45 and i think im about ready to retire this current carreer. I dont see much point in sticking it out ot may just to recieve a radio message who's contents i already know.

So im willing to say this particular career survived the war (which is a first for me), and the odd thing was i was trying my best to get destroyers to pummel the crap out of me. I was more or less along the thoughts of, "Please end my misery!" because the allied air umbrella late war is maddening. I was looking for an excuse to quit. :88) Seriously, once your forced to snorkel most of the time, your essentually done without your ablity to move on the surface to gain a firing position.

[CB..]

:up: :damn: yup it's maddening all right--the game just doesn't have a "sweet spot" long term-- when it does presnt a challenge it does it in a really annoying way----i have never ever recieved damage from an aircraft whilst submerged--so it's dive (again) and scratch you head at why the aircraft drop their pay loads to explode on the surface--

so it doen't even get exciting from a gameplay point of view --just annoying--


i did the best i could with the aggression mod idea---using this the DD's ALLWAYS detect me (if i'm within attacking range of a convoy any way) and ALLWAYS attack at some point- but it still doesn't do the job gameplay wise---cos i keep walking away undamaged with a couple of ships sunk--
i made the sub damage zones etc as fragile as a paper cup-- the proof of this was the results of an air attack where i just forgot to dive --was fed up(lol) and everything was destroyed---propellors engines batterys torp tubes radio sonar scopes deck guns aa guns --everything not just damaged but destroyed lol-----still had 100 % hull integrity tho LOL mind you that's the way i like it--i 'd rather have to bandon a patrol because the sub is completely wrecked than just get the game over screen--it's the same thing gameplay wise---what i was hoping for was that the DD's would do the same job----kill the sub's ability to attack without killing me- so i could continue the career but with vaslty reduced tonnage--- but the AI just won't play ball---i gave em uber depth charges i did everything but get out of the boat and wreck it myself lol----it's a pain in the arse --it's a game with no genuinely interesting or fun long term gameplay--i dont want ten hour dc attacks because i haven't got the time---(or the inclination for that sort of gameplay) but i do want to be living on the same planet tonnage wise as the rest of my imaginary flottilla --(see-ing as the rest of my flottilla is just that -entirely imaginary)

there is really only that one issue realism wise and it's allso the major issue gameplay wise---tonnage results--the rest is a load of old codswallop in comparison :-j

[Ducimus]

:up: :damn: yup it's maddening all right--the game just doesn't have a "sweet spot" long term-- when it does presnt a challenge it does it in a really annoying way----i have never ever recieved damage from an aircraft whilst submerged--so it's dive (again) and scratch you head at why the aircraft drop their pay loads to explode on the surface--


Running improved air power? I find that unless i can get below 30-40 meters when i crash dive, i will take some damage. Not H.I, but flooding, and damaged or destroyed components , although this could be the result of a combination of improved airpower with hollywood damage mod.

[CB..]

Running improved air power? I find that unless i can get below 30-40 meters when i crash dive, i will take some damage. Not H.I, but flooding, and damaged or destroyed components , although this could be the result of a combination of improved airpower with hollywood damage mod.

what did they do with the air-power mod?
it seemed to me that the aircraft just didn't actually use depth charges even when set up to do so--i tried stripping the bombs of them and replacing them with all DC load outs but this didnt help--the aircraft are annoying any way--watching 5 sunderlands all behaving like demented sea-gulls isn't terribly immersive--no it's the convoy escorts that are the main enemy AI issue-- my damage set up is as fragile as it can be reasonably made without it being wrecked after a bad sneeze (it's not subtle at all! touch it with a dish cloth and it's destroyed- is basically it)
and i allways dive when an aircraft appears--so i'm usually below 30 metres when it attacks--and of course they allways attack the area where you submerged not the area where you are now etc---so it wouldnt make that much difference at the moment any huw--(no offence at all to the guys)

[CybrSlydr]

but how much more involving would the game be if we were really struggling to get above half way up the aces tonnage board in the game...

More involving on a scale of 1-10, I'd rate it a -3. :down:

[JSalinger]

Ducimus, you're really making me think here! LOL A VIIB is what I'm running now (January of 1940), and quite frankly, I find myself wanting to sink the C3s, T3s, etc. (ran into a KGV battleship on my second patrol north of England...put four torps into him and he didn't sink :cry: ) but putting 2-3 torps into them just isn't worth it with the VIIB's low torpedo capacity. So if it were me, I'd go for a IXB or IXD2 (granted, it has the longest dive time, but all those torpedos...::drools:: ).

[CB..]

but how much more involving would the game be if we were really struggling to get above half way up the aces tonnage board in the game...

More involving on a scale of 1-10, I'd rate it a -3. :down:
oh that's just weird Cyber' :ping: :hmm:

[CCIP]

I agree with CB there :yep:

With Tonnage War and other adjustments, it's gradually becoming more of a reality for me, but I think we still got ways to go.

I had only one career the result of which, I thought, was more or less realistic - my Luth career at WaW, where I just barely passed the 100k mark in 3 years of the war.

Of course it's more involving. I've always loved the feeling of being "just one small boat in the sea"; if I want to be the next Rambo, I'll just fire up an FPS or something :hmm:

[CybrSlydr]

If that's your cup 'o tea, that's your business. :up:

I, on the other hand, am very competitive (yes, even against non-existant people in a video game... :-j ). I want to win, be on top, crush my opponants, etc. My job is to sink boats, so I go and sink boats.

I'm still having a blast - can't wait for my IX-C. A REAL Uboat (this VIIB is nice.... but I want more torps and range).

EDIT: I'd like to add that to me, my goal isn't so much how much tonnage I can rack up - I want to get an expensive boat and upgrade it to the hilt - the finest Uboat in the fleet. To do that, I need to sink lots of ships.

Dream Uboat - IXC/40 with all the bells and whistles. :rock:

[Ducimus]

what did they do with the air-power mod?


Well, basically their bombs are alot more deadly, and they DIVE BOMB your ass now, not just fly over and drop eggs, they DIVE at you. Go download the 2nd file (modvanilla2, 30MB) in that thread i started "Modding vanilla" in the mod forums. In that file i have two mods that you can enable seperatly but are really combined so they work correctly. GPLAY_ Improved Airpower and GPLAY_Hollywood_damge. Theres entries in the hollywood damage mod that add extra effects when you do shoot down planes, but also makes them twice as tough to shoot down. I consdier improved airpower a must have. To the best of my knowledge the latest version came packged in HT 1.47, and works with unified campaign.. and if i didnt work, i made it work if there was any file conflicts.


EDIT: heres the readme for improved airpower, ill haveto fess up and say on my game i removed the AA gun range reduction. :oops: Even so, with this mod i wont engage aircraft unless im caught on the surface at close range and can't dive in time. Id say all but 1 or 2 of all boats ive lost have been to aircraft


"Improved Air Power"

Details of modifications:

1. Airstrike.cfg Default probability raised. Base modifiers raised. Radiomessage probability raised.

2. Crew AI engagement radius reduced by 500m.

3. AI AA accuracy reduced (affects raids by German planes on enemy targets). Aircraft will no longer be destroyed immediately.

4. Aircraft ranges increased. Maximum is 1700 km (B-24). Speeds in .cfg and .sim are now the same.

5. Aircraft armour increased X 2, Aircraft hitpoints increased X 3.

6. Aircraft per Sortie decreased. Land folder contains these modifications in order to reduce the large numbers of planes sent
to attack a discovered U-boat. Sea folder contains airgroup changes for carriers.

7. Bomb impulse strength and radius changed in line with bomb type. Maximum strength is still 1000.

8. Bomb.zon modified to make air dropped Depth Charge the equivelent of shipborne counterpart. Bomb damage and effects increased slightly.

9. Shells.sim range of 20mm reduced by 500m. Also starshell range increased to 1500m.

10. New wing markings.

11. Zones.cfg modified to increase hitpoints and armour of critical plane damage compartments. 1.4 Zones.cfg with Plane entries altered only.

12. Change to B-24 AI (removed "toss-bomb" replaced it with "low-level attack").

13. New B-24 Liberator skin to suit its new role. New Catalina skin. New Sunderland skin. Lightning Skin. Wellington skin.

14. Change to Wellington AI (removed "toss-bomb" replaced it with "low-level attack"). Bugged loadout in 1.4 fixed.

15. Avenger and Liberator loadouts now include Depth charge option.

16. I have removed ay old skins from texture folder. Only my edited ones will be added so any others you have will not be overwritten. Skims added are :
Liberator, Sunderland, Catalina, Lightning and Wellington.

17. New flak sound by Roland.

Jace11


Ducimus, you're really making me think here! LOL A VIIB is what I'm running now (January of 1940), and quite frankly, I find myself wanting to sink the C3s, T3s, etc. (ran into a KGV battleship on my second patrol north of England...put four torps into him and he didn't sink :cry: ) but putting 2-3 torps into them just isn't worth it with the VIIB's low torpedo capacity. So if it were me, I'd go for a IXB or IXD2 (granted, it has the longest dive time, but all those torpedos...::drools:: ).

If that ship is by himself, id put 1 fish into him and then use the deck gun.
If hes escorted id put two in him, magnetic under the keel if possible (and not too early in the war), if that doesnt sink him, it should slow him down. Then when he falls be hind, shell his ass with your deck gun!:P

Only way id use 3 fish is if for one reason or another i couldnt surface, at that point id give him a stern tube shot for the coup de grace since the VII only has rear tube.. thats all that rear tube is good for really unless your shooting at a smaller merchant.


I agree with CB there :yep:

With Tonnage War and other adjustments, it's gradually becoming more of a reality for me, but I think we still got ways to go.


Unfortunatly until the AI gets more aggressive and gives me the "pay off" every time i attack,, most realism modifications seem kind of a moot point. The AI has REALLY got me down on this game right now. I should not be able to shoot merchants out from under Elite DE's and walk away without so much as a ping.







Hoookay, now down to the nitty gritty, (and how i REALLY choose a Uboat) If i go with a VII, which has more flair!

U-46, commissioned in 1938:
http://www.ducimus.net/sh3/u-46.jpg
I like the symbolism, since to me this career signfiies the death of SH3 for me for a little while.


U-69, commissioned in 1940:
http://www.ducimus.net/sh3/u-69.jpg
I like the symbolsim here too, since im laughing at the game and intend to make a mockery of the AI. (as if making a mockery of it hasnt already been done by many people here already). and who can deny the symolsim of the number 69 :D ok.. maybe thats a bit much :roll: edit: ohh and further symbolsim, i usually skipper boats that could be considered "cows" by some :88)


Personnaly i like the VIIC conning tower better then the VIIB. It just looks more sturdy for some reason. But the VIIB has the evercool and symbolic, and iconic for Uboat's net cutter :88)

Wow, am i vain or what?

[JSalinger]

OT: KGV was escorted by 5 destroyers. Thought I'd be able to sink him, then dive deep and go to flank speed to outrun the DDs...partially worked...only took 10% HI off when I was DC'd. I guess my consolation is that Scapa will have him in drydock for months to patch those holes. Went on to wreck a convoy in BF 13 before going back to Kiel. :)

On Topic: Pig boats rule!!! :D Okay, sort of.

[CB..]

[
Unfortunatly until the AI gets more aggressive and gives me the "pay off" every time i attack,, most realism modifications seem kind of a moot point. The AI has REALLY got me down on this game right now. I should not be able to shoot merchants out from under Elite DE's and walk away without so much as a ping.


cheers for the airpower info much appreciated :up: i'd rather make my own stuff tho i must admit---i can definitely see the sense in increasing the airbourne dc and or bomb damage radius etc and so on--will take a look at doing that--(good old time travellor!) :up:
but it's still a little bit of a side issue---albiet an important one--i have a hard time motivating my self to play SH3 at the moment--i fire it up and it is a great game with un balanced gameplay that requires a huge investment in time and concentration but lets it self down at the critical moment----when seeing a convoy thru the binocs--- :damn:

[CB..]

YIKES just increased the depth charge max radius (for the destroyers) to 80 --that certainly did the trick!!! can't get any where near a convoy to attack--blam sunk---i'll try 60 see if that has any loopholes--

found the depth setting for the bombs and airbourne DCs for the aircraft and followed the airpower mods lead and set the depth to 25/30 meteres --that works very well--nice one

have to remember here that i had previuosly set the max depth for all the subs to 100 meteres in an attempt to give the DD's a chance--so perhaps i would have survived if i had been able to go deep and maneuver a bit more--but i'm lazy and want to maintain the ever so slightly faster pace of gameplay allowed when limiting the subs max depth--(it doesn't take 10 minutes to get up the scope depth from 100 metres if you see what i mean)

you can get some sort of half decent danger out of the DD's if you throw the rule book away and hit them with a sledge-hammer mod

[Ducimus]

Im gonna cut the crap and get right to the chase.


Question to VII skippers, what's your average tonnage per patrol and on the average how long does a patrol last in days ?

Heres some rough figures ive been working on. Lets pretend that the torpedo gods we all pay hommage to granted us 2 torpedo kills, and every ship was 7000 tons. (highly unrealistic as some ships take 3 fish, and some ships weight 4, or 5K tons, but lets pretend anyway)

Now im guessing that
For an VII boat, im guessing its on patrol for around 40 days.
I know for a IX boat, your usually out for at least 60.

A VII carries 14 torpedos. Divided by 2 that means 7 ships.
A IXB carries 21 torpedos. Divided by 2 that means 10.5 ships.
A deck gun is at least worth about 1 ship sunk, in the iX case im going to say 1.5 so im figuing a total of:

8 ships or 56,000 tons per patrol for an VII
12 ships or 84,000 tons per patrol for a IX.


Now time wise i figure a VII is on patrol for at around 40 days at sea with a 30 day in port time. That means 1 patrol every 70 days or rouhgly 5 patrols a year. So you figure 56K per patrol, multiped by 5 patrols a year == 280K tons a year times 4 years = 1,120,000 tons achieved sometime in 1944.


An IX is on patrol for at least 60 days, 30 day in port, so your looking at 1 patrol every 90 days, at best. So your looking at around 4 or 5 patrols a year. So you figure 84K tons a patrol * 4 patrols a year = 336K a year * 4 years == 1,344,000 tons achieved sometime in 1944.


Now the reality check is this: Even in an IX boat i dont achieve at least 56K tons EVERY patrol, let alone 84K. Ships vary in tons, torpedos, miss, dud, thud, etc.

I wonder if 1 million tons is achievable in an VII. Your going to need some lucky breaks with a few 10,000 tonners i think.

[Ducimus]

I was wondering if joining the 1M club (im sure it already exists) is possible in an VII, but i went back and reread.

It's possible if you start at the beginning of the war (i'm at 850 now, patrol 21, jan 43). If you start in 41/42, it could be a real challenge.

Sounds possible, although i have to wonder if your using manual targeting and spending much time in port between patrols.

Anyway the more i think about this, the more fun it sounds as a challenge.

- time will be important. Just as time is money, time is tonnage. From the word go your racing the clock.

- that means that you have to be effiient in your search for shipping. Patrol grids are not effiecent, so i think patrol grid assigments are to be ignored.

- Torpedo expenditure youd have to micromanage. For example is sinking two 3000 tons tramp steamers with a single torpedo each going to yeild more tonnage then a mediem cargo which might require a 3rd torpedo?

- Going to have to be very very aggressive. You'll want to use your deck gun alot to conserve torpedos when you'd normally shoot another fish, or go in (shallow) areas in pursuit of ships that you'd normally avoid.

- If you go drumbeating, your going to have to milk that cow for all its worth. That transtlantic trip is basically a month.. thats lost tonnage you have to make up for.

- Early war night surface attacks on convoys wil be crucial to obtaining alot of tonnage while you can still do these attacks. Espeicaly in the case of an IXB, you can make 3 or 4 attacks in a night against the same convoy easily.

[Ducimus]

Sorry CB, i got so abosrbed into this whole 1M thing i totally missed your post.

YIKES just increased the depth charge max radius (for the destroyers) to 80 --that certainly did the trick!!! can't get any where near a convoy to attack--blam sunk---i'll try 60 see if that has any loopholes--

Ever get to thinking the default of 40 was to make up for the AI's lacking ablity? For fun try expanding the explosion radius (not the max radius). Try like.. i dunno... 1000 for fun. Watch what happends, then shrink it back to like 60 or 75



found the depth setting for the bombs and airbourne DCs for the aircraft and followed the airpower mods lead and set the depth to 25/30 meteres --that works very well--nice one


Works well.. oh yes... very painful. Most realistic danger ive faced in this game yet.

[CB..]

Ever get to thinking the default of 40 was to make up for the AI's lacking ablity? For fun try expanding the explosion radius (not the max radius). Try like.. i dunno... 1000 for fun. Watch what happends, then shrink it back to like 60 or 75

no worries :up:
i did try that i must admit it seemed to refer to the way the DC "rocks the boat" but not the actuall damage it self--if i got that wrong that would be use full as what i ideally wanted was a very large damage radius BUT less lethal damage--again in the hope that the DD's will prevent me from sinking merchants by knocking out my torp tubes and or periscope etc etc without killing me out right - making convoy attacks a much more interesting and tense experience

yup the air DC's etc now are worth getting worried about :up:

good luck with your 1M attempt--

[Keelbuster]

I was wondering if joining the 1M club (im sure it already exists) is possible in an VII, but i went back and reread.

It's possible if you start at the beginning of the war (i'm at 850 now, patrol 21, jan 43). If you start in 41/42, it could be a real challenge.

Sounds possible, although i have to wonder if your using manual targeting and spending much time in port between patrols.

Anyway the more i think about this, the more fun it sounds as a challenge.

- time will be important. Just as time is money, time is tonnage. From the word go your racing the clock.

- that means that you have to be effiient in your search for shipping. Patrol grids are not effiecent, so i think patrol grid assigments are to be ignored.

- Torpedo expenditure youd have to micromanage. For example is sinking two 3000 tons tramp steamers with a single torpedo each going to yeild more tonnage then a mediem cargo which might require a 3rd torpedo?

- Going to have to be very very aggressive. You'll want to use your deck gun alot to conserve torpedos when you'd normally shoot another fish, or go in (shallow) areas in pursuit of ships that you'd normally avoid.

- If you go drumbeating, your going to have to milk that cow for all its worth. That transtlantic trip is basically a month.. thats lost tonnage you have to make up for.

- Early war night surface attacks on convoys wil be crucial to obtaining alot of tonnage while you can still do these attacks. Espeicaly in the case of an IXB, you can make 3 or 4 attacks in a night against the same convoy easily.

Your above calculations are correct. As I said before, I man target, duds, no WO, etc. And yea I spend a month in port between patrols, and they take about 1 month themselves. On the other hand, in early war, out of the atlantic bases, you can intercept a convoy in BE and get your fill in 1 week - over and over again. I'm at the beginning of 43, and with another 280 I'll be somewhere near your 1120k by 44. You are also right about the selection of ships. Tramp steamers are worthless (2k) and they often take more than one torpedo. I will settle for a small merchant (3.5k) but usually don't. If I'm goiing to take anything 'small' it will be a small tanker (5k). I don't go after C2 (4.5k). and prefer liberty to C3 (7.5 vs. 6.5k). I don't bother with medium tankers because they are difficult to sink and are only 5.5k. I hit T3s most (8k), passenger liners (10k), Fiji and Southhampton class cruisers (10k), and TROOP TRANSPORTS (12k last time). Even with these modded values (NYGM TW) making 1m is no problem. You will be disappointed by how easy it is. If i had more luck with TFs I would have hit 1mil already.

I conserve torpedoes, I use all of them in every attack, 2 per big target, and I try to cripple ships in order to DG them down. The Gnat is great for that because it often takes out a ship's propeller leaving it for deck gun bait.

For me the biggest challenge is still surviving the war. It seems like you made it with your last boat...congrats! I've never made it through DiD, 100% realism with NYGM TW. That's my goal. I chose VIIB because I thought it stood the best chance of achieving this goal.

Edit: maybe try for 1.5 mil? :D

Kb

[Ducimus]

i did try that i must admit it seemed to refer to the way the DC "rocks the boat"

Thats correct, but what i was hoping you would notice, is how the boat will pick up speed in a depth charge attack from the super huge shockwaves! My suggestion was more out of fun then anything.

[CybrSlydr]

Looks like a bit of an exploit, but you can almost always find a Nelson BB in Loch Ewe with a Fiji Light Cruiser and a small DD off to the west of the port. :shifty:

[CB..]

i did try that i must admit it seemed to refer to the way the DC "rocks the boat"

Thats correct, but what i was hoping you would notice, is how the boat will pick up speed in a depth charge attack from the super huge shockwaves! My suggestion was more out of fun then anything.

yup understood :yep: only reason i sounded a bit non plussed was i had tried this mistaking it for the damage radius a little while ago--it's even more wild in a Type II --the boat very nearly turns completely up-side down!! :up:

[Ducimus]

I was experimenting with explosion radius once and on a wild hair i put it at 2000.

The massive shockwaves taht caused, i had an IXC that was creeping along at 2 kits suddenly being propelled to like 11 or 15 kts.

I think for a more in tune setting though 60 to 75, somewhere in there. Thats where i have mine set, and when a DC is close.. man do you feel it. Doesnt force the boat forward but it really tosses you around.

edit:

On a side note, its 1940 in this game i just started, i sunk this ship in 50 meters of water, and the 3 DDs taht were nearby gave me the most fun depth charging ive had in awhile. Im surpised by their behavior, it was what it should be. I don't get this at all. Why did these early war tin cans work and the later ones suck so bad?

The only thing i can think of right now, is im quite sure these DD's are in the SCR layer, NOT the RND layer. Does the game somehow handle the two differently?

[Alyebard]

the VIIB, was a really workhorse :up:

[CB..]

On a side note, its 1940 in this game i just started, i sunk this ship in 50 meters of water, and the 3 DDs taht were nearby gave me the most fun depth charging ive had in awhile. Im surpised by their behavior, it was what it should be. I don't get this at all. Why did these early war tin cans work and the later ones suck so bad?

The only thing i can think of right now, is im quite sure these DD's are in the SCR layer, NOT the RND layer. Does the game somehow handle the two differently?

that's a distinct possibility-- tho i don't know for sure--but it was probably the shallow water that did the trick-- it's what makes satying in a type II and just pirate-ing around the coast of Britain quite an attractive way to play the game--trying to dodge the DD's stay out of shallow water and find lone merchants at the same time is all very "Star Trek" at times! (if you see what i mean)
there maybe some sensor advantages for the DD's in shallow water allso--
somtimes i think it may be that the Older DD's tend to approach at a slower speed giving them time to get a better fix-- could be anything really no distraction from convoys massed screws et al--but my moneys on the shallow ater being the main element- you can't get deep enough to lose them :hmm: