ryuzu, I should have been clearer about the 'range measurement tool' apologies for that.

I agree that manually calculating the speed is the most time consuming part of setting a solution on the TDC and that doing it manually is more realistic than clicking a stopwatch.. but I don't agree that unless you do it this way you may as well use auto TDC. On a pitching sea it can be time consuming to even ID a ship, and then to get a range with the stadimeter. Waves often block the periscope view leaving only fleeting glances at the target. The AOB setting is also, at some angles, quite hard to get right. This needs to be done before the situation changes significantly, requiring a re-positioning of the sub. Certainly very different in my opinion to pressing 'L' to lock the periscope and then press 'fire'!

Infact, although more time consuming, getting a speed measurement in my opinion would be the easiest of the 3 if you had an accurate way of measuring it on the attack map.

No not at all :)

I'm just saying that using the stadimeter is a straightforward task. There seem to be a lot of people complaining about the lack of an automatic method for speed determination.

All I'm trying to point out is that historically, there was no automatic means for determining speed - if you relegate the speed determination to a couple of left clicks, then you've removed the most difficult part of using the manual TDC.

So, if you're trying to go for realism in TDC operations, the speed determination is where the main work for the player lies - this is the step that will differentiate a hit from a miss. Removing that work by using the clock aid means that the manual targetting is greatly reduced in difficulty and the process is not much more difficult than auto-TDC targetting.

Ideally, I'd like to see the auto-speed tool removed altogether and in it's place an option to ask the navigator to provide a target solution based on observations to that point - that would be more historically accurate. Particularly if the navigator's accuracy was improved as more (and correct!) observation data was provided. Then you can make it an option to make the navigator always 100% accurate or not as a realism setting.

r.

Yes in bad weather the whole process is tricky and this is a reflection of history where commanders would either miss more often or hold their attack until the weather cleared or scrub the attack altogether.

If you're struggling with the stadimeter in bad weather (or good for that matter) there is the option of using sonar (either active or passive) to get a range.

The AoB can be tricky it's true, but then again, I try and manoeuver to a postion perpendicular to the predicted target course and then I set the AoB to what I expect it to be be - I don't usually set the AoB to an observation I make - then I wait for the target to get to that Aob (nearing 90 degrees generally).

r.

Oh, I see now!

Even in SH3, the accuracy of the speed observation was depending on the accuracy of the range measurement you took earlier.

Agreed - the ruler would be excellent if it would show Nms and Yards rather than Nm and 1/10ths of Nm - but it doesn't.

However, if you're trying to use the 3 minute rule, the distances covered over that period of time make the difference of a 10th of a Nm relatively small - perhaps the difference of 0.5kt which should still result in a hit.

As for the different lengths - I haven't looked at that in detail, I don't normally measure 0.1Nm vs 0.2Nm but there could be a bug with it I suppose. However, one other possible cause is your monitor and resolution settings - are you using a widescreen monitor or resolution at all?

r.

I've started doing this lately. Position myself so the ships will pass at 90 degrees port or starboard and set the AOB at that in advance.

So far I've only played subs that don't have radar.. but that's ok, I like the difficulties getting range, etc in bad weather. It's just the speed estimate that's giving me the problems.

edit - I'm using 15*9 widescreen res.. So far I've used 1 minute for the speed calcs.. I'll try lengthening this to 3 mins

Thanks for the advice :)

I don't know how you came to that conclusion. The mast length is clearly wrong for various ships in SH4. I had huge problem using the stadimeter on the Nagara Maru "Large Modern Composite Freighter", it was impossible to get the right range, no wonder when the Recognition Manual says 30m when it really is 36.5m. It wasn't until Krupp fixed this (link) I could use the stadimeter fully. Sure this might not matter at close range but at 1000m and up you'll run into problem.

So this might be part of the problem that the boats had in the Real Pacific Theater. Many boats came home having shot 6, 8, 9 or more torpedos and not hit anything..I guess SH4 is just realistic in that part as well..:|\\

Real boat was buggy as hell - SH4 is buggy as hell.

Real skippers did not bitch to much, they just tried and tried and tried. And for them it DID take 20 days to even get to the patrol area, to me it takes mere 30 min's or something:arrgh!:


Not even going to mention the hardship the S-boats had around the Aleutians.

Well, I don't bother with shots much above 1000m - in the pacific theater it's not worth it. May as well get in close and give yourself the best chance of scoring a hit.

As for the mast height issue - at 1000m the difference between a 30m mast and a 36m mast is ~ 0.3 degrees in the scope. A significant difference true, but not so wildly out that you would completely miss with a spread. At longer ranges, the difference becomes smaller to the point where it would be well within the limits of accuracy of the stadimeter itself.

As you point out though, there is a mod/fix for that particular issue now.

r.

Yes the 3 min approach will minimise the errors further. In principle you could reduce 3 mins to 18 seconds, but the short distances invovlved make it very tricky to get an accurate speed.

There is a mod though that adds yards to the bearing plotter on the Nav Map so you could use that for a more accurate distance measurement....

However, the most consistent approach I've found is to use the length of the target ship (this is listed in the printed Rec Manual and poster that come with the game - in metres though so take that into account) and time how long it takes for the bow to stern to pass the periscope cross hair. This works best at or near to 90 degrees AoB, but is quick, doesn't require any plotting and gives a pretty accurate mathematical solution for speed at good torpedo ranges (~ 1000yds). I use this for my final speed entry into the TDC once I've set up the attack.

r.

I've tried that mod (mast height) and gone from missing with 16 torps in a row (oh the shame!) to hitting with 5 out of 6. It may be a coincidence because prior to my 16 misses I was hitting with a few at least.. but it does seem to be having a beneficial effect.

edit:alas I don't have the rec manual version of the game - sounds like a nice way of doing though

I think someone in the mod forum made a html version of the data if you can get it.

r.