It's likely due to the fog of war. American intelligence data on the Shokakus was never that great. The range displayed in the TDC is whatever measurement system you are using (I ran a test mission with a stationary Shokaku, and the range difference was about the same that you came up with). In the case such as this ship you are, then, much more wise to measure from a higher point, such as the top of the bridge.

This was the intelligence information the Allies had on the Shokakus:

October 1942:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v258/LukeFF/ONI2.jpg

The mast height shown in the 1945 intelligence manual was practically the same (I'd show the pic, but I'm having a problem with my PrintScreen function at the moment).

Looking at that, it makes sense. :)

Comparing that picture to the actual ship, I get the impression that the manual indeed estimates the flightdeck to be a fair bit higher then it actually is. Thanks for clearing that up. :up:

I had no idea the intel could be so far off. Then again, in hindsight, it can't be easy to get a good, detailed look at a warship accompanied by a substantial escort and a squadron of fighters overhead providing aircover. :hmm:

I would like to start my modding experiments by adding ship lengths to recognition manual (RFB compatible, so that's why i post this here...). I edited the names.cfg file in SH4 folder, but somehow i can't see the results. I quess that should be enough or is there something that i'm missing?

hey guys...long time lurker here and have a quick question. Sorry if this is answered somewhere in here but I can't quite find the answer. by the way great mod! this brought me back to playing this game.

I'm playing this with the map contact updates turned on and was wondering if when a visual contact shows up on the nav map if there is some error coded in so that it's not an exact distance? i'm assuming there is otherwise why would you ever need the stadimeter but am curious how reliable it is to plot course and speed with??

Some players, using the manual targeting options, will use the map contacts and plotting tools to double check their torpedo input settings. It's generally good enough... not exact, which is the way it was historically. There was almost always a "fudge factor" unless the target and sub were both stationary. ;)

While I don't know much (anything) about coding and the game engine, I have two cents to share at this stage:

After running a couple patrols and sinking a couple ships, I have to say that this mod is really very impressive. A few gripes and weirdnesses to overcome due to being a spoilt brat but when you take the lock issue etc as read, it makes for a very intense gaming experience. The damage model in particular is very impressive.

Much has been said about the ships sailing away after being hit and about the fix which is currently being worked on and I was wondering: Is is possible to trick the AI into thinking that the ship is not, in fact, alright?

What I mean is this: history tells me that most crews would abandon ship after being hit. Sometimes, if the lifeboats weren't picked up, they found the ship still afloat at daybreak and might try to get her underway again, but I never seem to read much about ships running away after being hit. It strikes me that the realistic and most satisfying damage model results in extremely unrealistic and unsatisfying AI behaviour because even the smallest vessel will keep going after being struck. So that's why I thought: could it be possible to trick the game into abandoning ship (cutting the engines) upon torpedo impact with maybe a 10% chance of bravely sailing on, while the actual sinking of the ship is left to the damage model.

This way, we would all still have to hang around to actually nail them and be credited, but we won't have to spend many frustrating hours trying to get a decent solution on a 8000 ton ship which zigzags at 12 knots, despite the three large holes under the waterline. Randomness and defiance are still cool of course, and we wouldn't want to have every single ship sitting dead in the water after a torpedo hit, but i'm personally quite bored with chasing every single ship as they run away.

I think that this sort of solution would be satisfactory from both a gameplay and realism point of view

If i'm completely wrong, don't hesitate to flame me, lol ;)

The biggest issue regarding the game AI is that a lot of it is hard-coded. The RFB mod changes a number of settings in config and other external files that get called by the engine, but the core control code is compiled, therefore somewhat out of reach...

That been being said, we're discovering new "tweaks" almost daily. The RFB Team is working on quite a few aspects of sinking and ship propulsion physics, so we're hopeful we'll have something for the next release...

Cheers!

Two quick questions from a noob, with greatest thanks for this remarkabla mod, which looks very very detailed and accurate.

can someone tell me what this means>..... i am going thru the Changes list carefully

and i noted a early change that said that it is almost impossible to now sink a large frieghter with the deck gun....is this still tru of the mod?

thanks

See my first post on this page:
http://forum.kickinbak.com/viewtopic...=1110&start=20

:o
exactly what i was looking for. and i noticed some more things on that forum which make me very very happy

I prostrate myself humbly before you, people. you rock :rock:

They made the deck gun look crappy!!
Loads very slowly and doesn't do any damage at all almost.

Yesterday I attacked two fisherboats with my deckgun and they didn't even caught on fire at my 10th shot ! They were like undestroyable :damn:

NOTE: The only way to sink fisherboats is to bash in to the boat, then it rolls , caught fire and voila you are a really notorious u-boat captain :up:

And plotting system is alsow different, more in a negative, more difficult way.

I'm not saying that RFB is crappy but it sure does have it's down side

How many times does it have to be said? RFB is a REALITY mod, that's it. It's modeled as well as can be done within the confines of SH4 to reflect more closely the operations of actual WWII subs... If RFB is not your liking, may I suggest you play stock or TMO and cut the negativity crap?

Anyone who enjoys running over fishing boats to sink them is probably NOT the kind of person who would enjoy the level of realism RFB affords. :shifty:

I always thought that watching boats burst into flames was sorta weak, myself.

I've read a few real reports of attacking small craft with submarines, and they specifically talk about putting many hole in them, and they float on (being made of wood).

I also know they'd go right alongside and torch them as a reliable way of setting them ablaze.

I do like the level of realism. In fact I play on 92% Reality except of the dud torpedoes. I'm just saying that it is completly nuts that a deck gun of a submarine can't even sink a fishing boat, and be honest. The attack map is completly worseless. It doesn't provide information at all. If you're using nav. map to attack ( wich probally be the case ) you will find it more difficult than the stock game. Believe me or not. So why don't u cut with giving critism to my opinion.

If you're not using RFB, you CAN sink those fishing boats.
But common, you should be able to sink them, right ? <- not using my technic.