I know modders do this on their free time, they are not paid etc etc I have pretty large modding, beta testing and scenario design experience in couple games myself, and I absolutely know it's very time consuming, aggravating and often frustrating. No need to tell me that....:damn:

However, I don't think we should go easy on anybody if we are not pleased with the final product of one's work.

A ridicolous result is a ridicolous result, why should I accept the ridicolous result in silence just because I didn't pay for it?? It's not about money, it's about getting the best results from this engine. If it's about money, then let me pay full price for RFB - no problem - will I then have more rights to demand realistic outcomes?

It's tiring to see every mod criticism end with same ole arguments: "it's free", "if you don't like it play something else". On SH5 boards people are very vocally protesting a game that is not even OUT yet, should we go tell them to "play something else" or listen to their complaints if they are valid?

5 torps for small merch is ridicolous. It's ridicolous for a free mod, and would be equally ridicolous for a 300$ professional simulator. RFB is currently the "only game in town" when it comes to relistic mods for SH4. This status brings some responsibility within this community. You can't just mess up the model and use "it's free" as your best argument. RFB guys should accept criticism or they should never have touched RFB at all.

I am accepting criticism. Again, the only warships at this point that have been modded are the destroyers. Other than that, the only aspect of the DM that would affect CVEs is the hit power of the torpedoes.

If you have issues with DM of the ships that have been modded, then by all means let me know which ships are affected and why you think they aren't sinking properly. I (and Observer, who unfortunately hasn't been around lately), have repeatedly tested these ships, but there's always the chance that a slip-up made it into the mod.

And no, ships cannot sink due to secondary damage.

Bubblehead1980:

I tested out the Taihosan Maru tonight. It sinks with one hit under the stack in less than 10 minutes.

- Problem: Determine the number torpedoes it takes to sink a Taiyo class CVE in RFB and Stock SH4 v1.5

- Test conditions:

Date: 1 June 1944

Sub: Balao Class SS

Target: Taiyo Class CVE

Location: West Coast of South America. This is to ensure no interference from any other units.

Weapons: Mk23 torpedoes

Setup: Balao SS at periscope depth head north a 0 kts. Taiyo CVE bearing 000 at 1000 yards, heading 090 a 0 kts (ship set to “dock mode” in mission editor so it can not move)

Sub targeting set to Auto with periscope locked on center of Taiyo CVE

Torpedo depth set to 10 feet. Torpedo pistol and speed set to default

First torpedo fired with a spread angle set to 0
Second torpedo fired with a spread angle set to 2 degrees left
Third torpedo fired with a spread angle set to 2 degrees right
Fourth torpedo fired with a spread angle set to 4 degrees left
Fifth torpedo fired with a spread angle set to 4 degrees right

Special note: Modified the Balao .upc file to ensure that both Stock and RFB version of the subs had a full load of Mk23 torpedoes.

- General Comments:

There are two files that control the damage model for any unit. First, the units.zon file and system level Zone.cfg file. Neither RFB nor RSRDC changes the .zon file of the Taiyo Class CVE. RSRDC does not change the Zone.cfg, but RFB does. After examining the .zon file for the Taiyo Class CVE to determine which sections of the Zone.cfg that where used, it was found that the only differences between the Stock and RFB was the values for Flood time ( values were on average 3 times that of Stock ) and the addition of “special effects” (explosion and fires). It also should be noted that the “aim points” for the “test case” are near the forward and aft ammo magazines, fuel bunker and engine room. Each of these areas has a 5% chance of catastrophic failure that will cause the ship to sink immediately.

-Test Runs: Conducted ten runs for both Stock and RFB, After firing first torpedo, confirmed hit, then used TC to advance time 15 minutes and observer results, repeated firing torpedoes until ships sinks.

Run one - Stock: 3 Torpedoes / RFB 3 Torpedoes
Run two - Stock: 3 Torpedoes / RFB 3 Torpedoes
Run three - Stock: 2 Torpedoes (catastrophic failure)/ RFB 3 Torpedoes
Run four - Stock: 3 Torpedoes / RFB 2 Torpedoes (catastrophic failure)
Run five - Stock: 3 Torpedoes / RFB 3 Torpedoes
Run six - Stock: 3 Torpedoes / RFB 1 Torpedoes (catastrophic failure)
Run seven - Stock: 3 Torpedoes / RFB 3 Torpedoes
Run eight - Stock: 1 Torpedoes (catastrophic failure) / RFB 3 Torpedoes
Run nine - Stock: 3 Torpedoes / RFB 3 Torpedoes
Run ten - Stock: 3 Torpedoes / RFB 3 Torpedoes

- Conclusion: There is virtually no difference between Stock and RFB in the number of torpedoes it takes to sink a Taiyo class CVE. The only difference noted was it took on average it took the RFB ship 25% longer to sink by flooding.

Luke, thanks for checking it out.Maybe a freak thing or I guess being such a small ship I expected it just blow up and go quickly like I read about the small ships doing in RL.Doubt a smallfry could hang out for ten minutes after being sunk you know? I recall that I hit it dead center for one an after an hour was still there, so fired another thinking it would surely sink and didnt, repeated and after a long time and 5 fish, it went down.Maybe just a freak thing, who knows.Still, nice work though:salute:

Was just reading this thread. I have nothing to add, and no requests or complaints. I just wanted to say that with so many people praising certain SH3 supermods, some spreading around is due to those who put in their time and effort building, listening, talking, tearing down and rebuilding.

RFB TEAM, you guys rock!:rock:

Sorry for wasting time and space, but I just felt compelled to anti-vent.:sunny:

Agreed, they have made a great mod:salute:

Thanks for checking. However, the fact it's not changed from stock still does not mean it's realistic. Perhaps it means it should be changed.

I noticed couple more oddities, not *nearly* as irritating as damage-resistant Klingon IJN ships, more like simple bugs, I'll report zhem in separate message(s).

Oddity no 1. Again, 1.5 + RFB 2.0 and RSRDC for RFB are only mods I have installed.

March 1944, I am sent to do photo recon of three Japanese islands, one of them is Saipan. It's night. Travelling to Saipan from south I notice fire on Tinian (island just south of Saipan, incidentally Enola Gay flew from there), went to investigate and the scene looks as if there's been aerial attack during the previous day, some ships sunk, some burning etc. Nothing strange, however among the IJN ships there is one trawler with US flag :timeout:

Perhaps this is RSRDC thing....

Odditiy number 2 - the ghost ships. Several times I've seen big cargo ships that well, look like ghost ships.

I have screenshots and the exact date of at least one such incident (and there were several). Yap atoll, 25 April 1944, 21.00 hours.

Ghost ships are noticable only from VERY close, the crew sees them (radar, radio, visual). They can be torpedoed, torps explode, ship sinks extremely quickly, there is debris etc. However there is no wreck. Sinking is reported as: "ship sunk, 0 tons" (no ship type, no tonnage).

I have noticed the ghost ships before when I had intell gathering missions. they seem to function as the objective trigger for mission completion. the mission completes at quite a distance from the 'ship' so i guess you aren't supposed to get near it.
I notice them most when there is a fog effect.

Visibility and Fog
 

First of all I have to say that Environment 5.0 looks really neat.

However, I seem to have some problems with it:

- Under excellent visibility the detection range of a target is app. 13.000 to 19.000 yards by the AI (The latter one was a large modern tanker under ideal conditions... daytime, no waves, no wind, excellent visibility).

- However, when there is "good" visibility, the visual detection range is below 5000 yards (usually around 1500 to 3000 yards) and there is a heck of a fog

- In "fair" visibility, the fog gets even denser, the detection range is nigh non-existent. The fog

- I did not encounter poor visibility yet but I assume that the fog will cause me not being able to see the bow of my own boat anymore.

- It appears that during nighttime, the fog is less dense and even less present if it is raining.

Based on these observations, I think this needs some fixing. Good visibility needs a lot less fog (the present settings would be good for fair visibility) and an increase in visual detection range (I think around 8000 yards in calm weather would be appropriate). Fair visibility would need the fog of the present good visibility with visual detection range of app 3000 yards.

Updated readme for the upcoming RFB patch:

Work continues on the patch at this point. It is hoped that it will be released "soon." ;)

Oh, and this one's for Bubblehead: :D

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v2...030653_808.jpg

I am sure I am doing something wrong, but I have installed RFB 2.0 and separately the RFB 2.0 patch, both through JSGME, but I still get no map updates on the NAV map even though it is enabled as a game option.

secondly, is there a way to re-enable the ATTACK map to work as per the stock game, with the black and white solution/sound contact lines?

great work by the RFB team, but I would like to keep the stock above mentioned aspects on my SH4 instal.

thanks for any help.

p.s.- never ye mind, problem solved, I had not installed the wee mod properly.

You moved the ladder, very nice work.

The patch looks good from what you listed.Only thing that concerns me is having all the fleetboats only able to make 18 knots.

Gato, Balao and Tench could make 20 knots easy and if needed ememrgency, could operate past the rec limits and make 22 or 23 knots periods of time, read about it in O Kanes book I believe.

Porpoise, Salmon, Sargo, 18 sounds about right.

So possible youll keep it at 20knts for the Gato, Balao and Tench? Dont think many of us would care for only being able to make 18 knots in a new Balao or Tench.

You're just reading the readme info a bit wrong. What I mean by "Fleet subs: 6, 12, 15, 18, max speed for class" is that the max speed for each class is slightly different, depending on what class of fleet sub is being played. In other words:

Ahead 1/3: 6 knots
Ahead 2/3: 12 knots
Ahead Standard: 15 knots
Ahead Full: 18 knots
Ahead Flank: max speed for class.

I know, it wasn't the best wording on my part. :D

Ah ok, it happens. :salute:

I have the same "problem" as Nephandus concerning the weather. :hmmm:

Maybe I am missing something, but what is the crush depth of the various fleet subs in RFB? I did not see anything in the RFB manual.

In a "Gato" class boat, for example, there is a red line at 300 feet and when I exceed it, a little icon pops up that I am exceeding crush depth. I presume I can go deeper, but what is a safe rule of thumb without running undue risk, say 100 feet more?