Tater, just FYI, your depth charge settings could concievably change if you use some of the changes ive done to the submarines zon files ive been yapping about since last night.

I'm sure they will, lol.

I assume that in game the damage falls of linearly with distance between MinRadius and MaxRadius.

You dropped the armor, but not the ALF, right? So 20*4=80. 80 is now the damage cutoff.

So if a charge can do 230 points at 4.5, it will do 115 at 9.5m, it'll do 80 at 11m. Outside 11m it does nothing at all.

tater

I love what you're doing to try to make the D/C experience more realistic, BUT, I hate to say it but this is a pretty meaningless poll/question the way it is posed in a relative vacuum.

If (and this is an assumption I acknowledge is true for me but not necessarily true for everybody) the "best" realism is one which achieves a realistic end result - in this case a realistic chance of escaping with damage vs being destroyed - then you can't really answer this question about what an essentially direct hit would do to your sub unless you can also answer/address the question of whether the percentage chance of these direct hits is reasonably accurate/realistic in the game. Obviously, if it is, then you would want the results of those direct hits to also be reasonably accurate/realistic. BUT, if for some reason the AI escorts typically get a much higher percentage of such direct hits than would be historically accurate, then for sure you would not want to make the effects of such direct hits be too lethal (even if they would be IRL) because then you would have distorted the lethality outcome too much to the deadly side.

From the comment below ("Watching a zillion DC attacks with external cam on, I was stunned at how many DCs it took to kill me where they were touching or even inside the sub.", it's hard to tell for sure what was happening on a percentage basis, but it sounds like maybe there were a large number of direct hits. If there weren't all that many US subs lost due to D/C attacks, and the game is throwing off a lot of direct hits, then it doesn't sound like a good idea to make direct hits too lethal unless you can also reduce the number of direct hits experienced.

The best result would seem to be some way to increase the number of minor (but significant) damage results, such that D/Cs would be something to fear and could cumulate to deadly damage, but where the player would still have a reasonable chance to at least try to deal with the damage most of the time. After all, if you're not playing with external views on while you're being attacked, then you really don't know or care how close the D/Cs really are (i.e., whether they're 20 feet or 30 feet away) - all you really know is are they close enough to be damaging you or not.

Of course, that assumes that the damage control model in SH4 works or can be made to work like it eventually did in SH3 with LRT. So far, I haven't encountered the right circumstances to test the damage control system meaningfully, so I don't kow whether it works or not, but I hope so - otherwise, you might as well go for the instant screen of death with super lethal D/Cs and spare us the disappointment of dealing with a damage control feature that doesn't work.

Excellent points.

One thing, my changes to the DCs also includes accurate loads of DCs on the escorts. So some might carry 18 DCs instead of what they now carry (80).

Also, I should be clear. I was trying to get shacked. My test case was a single DC exploding so that the explosion graphic touched my sub. I made an Elite Minekaze with 1 roll rack and used TM sensors, and loaded up the Minekaze like bungo pete with sensors on top of that. If a DC exploded nearby, but didn't touch I quit the mission and started over.

Even then, had I been trying to evade, and/or deeper than 100 feet, he'd not have hit me often in all those tests.

Really, the point of the poll is to find out how many folks think that it should be possible for a single DC to take out a sub. I agree that if they are shacking you all the time, then they need to be toned down to have historical outcomes. I would assume, however, that the sub goes deep and tries HARD not to get hit as a baseline as well (I'm sure skippers treated a DCing as the life or death situation it was).

I might also be inclined to make single DC kills unlikely for the type 95s since in RL they only had 2 or 3 depth settings, and the deepest was 60m for most of their lifetime in service.

tater

Understood - I certainly think it should be possible for one DC to kill the sub, though hopefully not that likely, and it'd be nice if it weren't the immediate sceen of death, but where you'd have at least a minute or two maybe to try to blow tanks and make it to the surface, or maybe hit bottom if you're shallow enough and send the survivors out through the escape hatches with the breathing gear :lol:

3 and C :dead:

Yep, i very much agree with this! I miss such moments so much in SH4&SH3 although it occured to me in SH4 some very few times in somwhat shallow waters... For me, the most interesting subsim regarding damages management was by far SH1. Never found a subsim getting that fun with it. I remember patrol in sh1 where i got plunged to seabed due to heavy damage and Heavy flooding and still being alive having a thin chance of repearing the sub. Crew was working several hours, you were seing parts gradually being slowly repaired, several hours later pumps were repaired, then water would gradually be pumped out of compartiments whilst lowering the few pressured air level remaining. All of this would take times while CO2 level would come to raise to a worrying level adding to the tension. I remember sometimes even a fire would light up in a compartiment adding to the extent of damages to repair and eating valuable oxygen. Then, after a struggle of several hours, everything was almost repaired and your sub would gradually come to the surface as buoyancy becomes positive... All of this made up for a tremendous experience where you had the feeling of living that famous repair scene in das boot.
I still wonders why it has never been done near that good in SH3 and SH4... Sometimes there's regression compared to old so called less complex games...:shifty:
And that's a problem since i always found damage struggles to be a very immersive factor in a subsim. It takes an important place as it makes up for very dramatic moments. Movie directors know this very well and you often have this kind of scene in a sub movie

I completely agree about nasty damage being immersive. In flight sims some of my more memorable flights have been nursing a damaged ship home after getting badly shot up.

That said, this is not about that. Severe damage would still of course be possible from DCs that do not explode in virtual contact with your sub.

The point of the poll was that in SH4 a single DC NEVER kills you, regardless of where it goes off. Navies all around the world were under the impression that within a few meters would likely kill any sub. Were they all wrong?

I'm just looking at boundary values, really.

I'd like to see "skin hits" on your sub be very likely deadly. That doesn't mean you need to instantly sink, it just means that the damage WILL sink you at some point most likely.

So a single DC shacks you, and you start flooding, and find yourself settled on the bottom, desperately trying to repair it before it's too late—and there is a good chance you will not succeed. Meanwhile, you better hope Tojo needs a hearing aid, cause even a near miss will likely finish you for sure.

Another boat manages to dodge and weave, and the closest DCs are between 6 and 10m. The crew is rattled, and the sub likely needs an overhaul back at Pearl, but she'll make it home.

I'm interested because in addition to being realistic (I think), it certainly encourages realistic behavior on the part of the skipper. If you fight the boat with the thought that even a single good DC hit will likely kill you, you are more cautious,and you take a more active role in avoiding the enemy during DC attacks than you would when you know it might take 2-4 very close DCs to actually sink you. Particularly if the escorts are modded to have realistic numbers of ashcans.

It's really not hard to get what you want, Tater. Just reduce DC blast damage radius, but greatly increase DC blast damage. I think think that is what you might be looking for. If you increase DC blast damage enough, then a single DC would be enough to eventually sink a sub from flooding or whatever. But a lot of other compartment and equipment settings need to be adjusted also. I have a lot of experience with this in modding SH3. You should be able to get what you want by doing it this way.

Yeah, I think I can do it. I've done many experiments so far, I had DCs doing MinEF 499, MaxEF 500, with a 14.5m radius (4.5m Rmin) and that didn't do it, not even close. I was surprised.

I have it OK right now, perhaps a hair nastier, since aside from one 162kg DC, the IJN used 100kg, 105kg, and 110kg DCs. I'd expect them to only have a shot at a 1-hit kill on a direct hit.

Needs playtesting as much as anything. Just trying to get a feel for what the folks want, so I can make a couple versions for different tastes :D

tater

I agree: 2 and D are the best options. If it actually goes off nearly touching the hull there shoud be a real good chance of a kill. We're not forcing people to use it, and it's great for the realism and sweat factors.

I like swdw's list. I've also read that doubling the size of the charge had the wonderful effect of raising the kill radius from 25 to 30 feet.

Too bad we can't have 2 different audio files for them. I've heard they were a bit louder :o .

Cheers!

2 - 3 and D. The sub is approx 100 yds long so depending where the hit is would be a factor - plus depth for severe/fatal damage - and of course the more the boat is hit (even within 100 yds) should be considered IMO.

Art