As fincuan said, this is not the RFB FORUM, but it is, indeed, the RFB THREAD.

If the RFB guys want to keep this one thread "on topic," it seems like it would be common courtesy to indulge them.

<S>

tater

Damage models are perhaps one of, if not the most complex thing to mess around with in this game engine. They interact with all weapons systems, even collisions. They need to be tested vs torpedoes, which at least have a limited range of stock damage values, as well as all the surface combatant weapons, bombs, etc. They also need to be balanced vs attacks on other subs in such a way that player subs are not impossible to sink, nor too easy to sink.

In short, a gigantic can of worms. Every single change requires hours of back and forth, in and out of the game from the desktop.

Statistical analysis of actual sinkings—target ship tonnage and type, number of torpedo hits, and end result—are the only data that would be really useful to calibrate the DM vs RL sinkings.

All the RFB guys have ever asked for it to put suggestions regarding such technical changes into that context—WHAT WAS THE REAL LIFE DATA?

Ditto for the (endless) Deck Gun debates. Again, how many rounds fired, how many hit, and in what time frame. RL log data, not navweaps stats on ROF, but actual combat logs, "X rounds expended for Y hits in Z minutes at TARGET, target afire and sinking."

I'm not on the RFB team, and I cannot speak for them, but I am confident that real life data will always be cheerfully absorbed by them.

So you have a problem, fine. Present it as "It takes me X hits to sink Y tons, when JNAC data clearly shows that the median number of hits for 1942 is in fact Y."

Course you have to pour through the data, which is, well, work. Might even be a decent % of the work the RFB guys would do on the damage model in a night or two. ;)

Help more, whine less.

<S>

tater

Who has the data ? In it's absence, we have to consider common sense rules. For example, common sense dictates that a sampan should be blasted to hell with one torp, not continue to float just because it has maybe two compartments, and one of them is enough to provide buoyancy. How many documented cases of destroyers surviving one hit exist ?

Let's pass to tankers, floating bombs usually (documented). In RFB they're like tanks.

I set-up a single mission with practically every type of ship present in this game, and did a shooting gallery.

Tugs are like rocks. Sampans are real armed fortresses. A small merchant doesn't bother if you hit it in the same place with 3 torps. Are you telling me this is real ? :doh: In reality if you hit a ship in the same place, the damage increases, it will most likely break in half.

So is it bad that RFB introduced the new damage model ? Not at all. But it's exaggerated.

Within the limitations of the SH4 engine, the RFB team has adjusted the game to produce what their hours of research has shown to be historical. They have modeled the merchant ships and torpedoes to sink a ship in a manner that reflects what they are able to find out how it actually happened during the war.

I can understand Luke's frustration with a discussion in this thread that endorses changing the Mod to undo all the work they put in to building it. It is appropriate move the torpedo discussion to another thread since the Team has stated that modding the torpedo damage defeats the aim of their work. He spends a lot of time reading this thread to help people and problems to fix.

I was not happy with the difference in sinking that this Mod at first. It went against the way I was used to doing things. However now I think it is just fine since I learned to shoot better. Luke and the team really did explain in the manual and in this thread how to sink ships. His tips have made me a better captain and now I have ships that sink in a short time if my target solution is correct. If it is not then I chase her down and shoot again. The new damage model was not what I was used to, but the old dog has learned some new tricks and likes it just fine.

I sunk a T-3 tanker with two torps. Furthermore, fire is just eyecandy and not secondary damage producer. I hit a small tanker in the bow and it plowed the sea at 4 knots. I just about had it sunk with my cannon at 15 shots before the DD found me the fog. Never had an issue with the Sanpans. A few cannon shots and there done. Most still float because they are wood. I have no issues with the damage mod. I will sink T-3 all day with this mod:D BTW, common sense would dictate you do not use a torp for a lowly sampan!

I truly recommend a fresh install of SH4 and then a fresh install of RFB followed by the last RFB patch. Heck I was missing some camera views with the new RFB and only got them after a fresh install of SH4.

I fully support your opinions! :up:

All in all I am even close to acknowledge that stock SH4 sinking/torpedo damage model, yet primitive, is not so bad. I simply think that SH3/SH4 game engine warps all efforts aimed at introducing complicated or realistic sinking models. That is why we get all these idiotic artifacts during playing as a result. Remember FLYING sampan after torpedo hit in previous RFB version...I suppose only Silent Hunter 4 developers could introduce advanced sinking mechanics properly... :damn:

Kruger, your first statement disqualifies you as a credible source of what is reasonable because it is a bald statement that you have no data.

I can tell you based on data you're wrong on tankers. You're wrong on sampans. You're wrong on ships breaking in half.

As you know, the RFB damage model does not include warships yet and you are just blowing smoke in that area. You know RFB didn't touch destroyer damage models yet. But you persist in misrepresenting the situation anyway.

Credible people with the data you claim doesn't exist (you didn't even look for it) are analyzing real data. Credible people have already put MONTHS of work into this. Where's your hard work? Where's your data? Where's your help? There is none, there is none, there is none.

Mod the game to your heart's content. I suggest my subnuclear weapons and be done with it. No sense in leaving any doubt whether the target should have sunk.

Your concerns have been heard and discounted. Repeating them just brands you a troublemaker. The RFB team cheerfully awaits all real data that will help them refine any aspect of the game.

There are lots of resources on the web for sinkings. Many web sites associated with fleet boats have the individual boat's war patrol reports on them, sometimes reproduced as a scan and sometimes reproduced as searchable text.

There are also a few websites that reproduce, in searchable text, fleet submarine manuals. Then there's the naval mission to Japan, which discusses technical details of battle damage and all things Japanese. There are lots of resources available, all for free. It's important to note though, that when doing research, one must always be careful to understand the source of a piece of information and the impact that has on the information.

Rest assured that if accurate historical evidence is presented, as this is 'Real Fleet Boat', if less torpedoes were required historically to do the job than currently modelled, then I'm sure it will be adjusted to match reality, that is to say history. It's a time consuming process to research things and although the argument may have merit, it has not been presented with a basis. Present an argument based on referencable facts and I'm sure you'll get more air time. My own understanding of certain things would have suffered considerably, if I'd never been challened on certain points.

Here you are your "real" data: in SH4 game modded with RFB mod! :down:

Really? Not only Krueger has "hallucinations"... :rotfl:

If so huge amount of torps had been needed to sink merchants in reality during WW2, submarine warfare would have been forbidden as completely senseless and Doenitz had been sent to mental hospital at best, I am sure!

Was that some subnukes borrowed from Robbins? ;)

I'm sorry. I'm looking for something to respond to here and I am unable to find anything. Doenitz is not even a part of the discussion. Again, best to take it to another thread. The RFB people have work to do and can't waste time responding to irrelevancies.

You make lots of claims Gorshkov. Do you have any data to support them?

I really recommend a complete and fresh reinstall of the game. It cured some issues I was having with textures and missing features for RFB that made a world of difference. Again, I sunk a T-3 with two torps us RFB. Apparently you missed that part of my posts. So, instead of taking the time to fire back at everyone, use the time to reinstall the game and the RFB mod. Really man, it did wonders for my game and it works as advertised.

I don not need those because I am not an idiot! I rather ask if you have some credible data about T3 tanker not being sunk after SIX torpedo hits???

Hell, I will reinstall my game and check this myself! Anyway I wonder using JGSME can mess with game installation.

You're now starting to sound awfully like Subman. Do you have data to support your claims or not?

DUUUUDDDEEEEE..........read my posts. You can sink the T-3 with two torps. I have using RFB. Myself and one other stated it can be done. Mine only worked after a re-install of the game and adding RFB. Stop firing back and look at your game and not the mod. Handfull of others are having no issue yet two are. The odds are, your game needs a reinstall so it works correctly.