Raven, I assume GFO still uses the stock campaign, at that distance its possible you were spotted before you dived and you're only noticing the behavior later thinking it's your scope.

One thing to remember about the AI, escort will come searching for you at your last known position or they will come directly to where torps are spawned.

The AI doesn't cheat, it follows parameters set by values. Simply, it passive sonar has a value for that time, it doesn't alter that to another setting.

The game can be frustrating until you learn all aspects of it, more so if you run harder mods like TMO. I use a version of TMO that I tweaked, because play long enough, even TMO becomes too easy.

One thing you need to do if you're learning is use the exterior cam a lot. Put it on nearby escorts and watch their behavior as you change speed, raise scopes, etc...Find out what you're doing and try something else.

More importantly, learn when to attack and when to wait. If water is shallow and calm during the day, bad time to attack. Try to attack when the values are in your favor, not in theirs. Sometimes it's best to shadow until you find a better advantage.

Even when you get good, often the goal is simply to get off your attack before spotted, knowing you're going to come under attack and it becomes a matter of proper evasion.

It takes time, when I played, I used a very hard AI, edited numerous escort to elite status and still found methods to beat the AI...With any game, once you understand the AI, you can find ways to beat it...if you don't make mistakes.

They're probably 100's of threads on this subject, so try the search function. Take time to read peoples patrol reports, such as paulhager, he gets detailed, but you can pick up good tips.

OK, so how can they spot you at >6k, at dusk, when you're starting (in the case of the "quick mission") at periscope depth with the periscope down? I didn't think their sonar was supposed to be that good?

After the start of that quick mission I'm diving to what I believe is below the thermal layer, and I don't come up again until I'm in position and the convoy is within 3k and even then I only come up to periscope depth and by that time it's night time with only the moon providing light. So they must "spot" me as I'm coming up from below the thermal layer - so again clairvoyant or incredibly unrealistic and good sonar skills.

Sniper297: "The AI cheats, there's no other way."
Webster: "yes the AI cheats, there is no denying it."
Armistead: "The AI doesn't cheat"

Two AYEs and one NAY, any other districts voting? :sunny:
Monica, come out from under the podium and call the roll. :03:

Maybe we need to redefine what the definition of "IS" is, the programming is oversimplified to the point where detection and tracking are so unrealistic it might as well be called cheating. I see nothing, I know - WAIT! I see you now, I see you perfectly, I have your GPS coordinates and exact depth, I planted a LoJack in the crew's head so I'll never lose you unless there's a layer. In which case I'll lose you completely and never find you again unless you come up above the layer inside five miles. :88)

If they took this exact same graphics engine with no changes to art, and merely reprogrammed the physics and AI, I would buy that in a minute.

Main trouble with trying to play full realism is your OWN crew AI - and I do take time at each career start to get rid of all the lubbers like the lookouts with a watchman rating of 9 and replace with the pick of the non-rate recruits which don't cost any renown. The problem is simplified logic and limited canned messages, the crew will report new contacts (all too often if they're zigzagging and enter/leave the detection range frequently) but they have no standing orders to report if a known contact suddenly does something you should know about - like turning toward you at 38 knots and firing ranging shots. Even with a watchman rating over 100 they won't do that one important task, it's not programmed into them. With a really competent crew in your sub you can reduce these problems a little, but not much.

Sniper,
I vote aye.:D
What you wrote about the whole layer thing is really interesting. I mean real submariners have it practically branded across their foreheads that "best depth", defined as best depth to avoid detection, is below the layer plus 200ft. I've been playing this way for years and turns out not to matter; layer plus 60 is fine. Who knew? You I guess.
Plus as you will no doubt appreciate, the idea that an IJN escort, which at the time had no passive capability worth talking about, needs cuing from another sensor to go active just shows you that the folks who designed this had no tactical understanding whatsoever for how real ASW works. In reality those escorts would be actively pinging constantly. An escort with no passive capability that's not active on her sonar is next to worthless and would be so without these give away detections to the AI because not knowing where or if the sub is about, she'd have to ping all the time. The active ranges of the day were so short as to preclude what we refer to today as beaconing. That is the sub homing on the escorts' pings. A good rule on beaconing is the sub can hear the ping at 3-4 times detection range. So if the then detection range was 2,000 yds, the sub hears the ping at 6-8,000. This doesn't pass the so what test in WWII because a convoy of noisy merchant ships of the day sounds like a washing machine full of rocks detectable way beyond the sonar's counter detect range. So there's no penalty for the escorts pinging all the time; the sub's going to hear the convoy long before she hears the escorts' sonars.

Look, Armistead, I apppreciate your answers here, but I don't give a husky crap about what workarounds long term players have come up with to cope with this level of unrealism. You keep telling me ways to win the game against the bogus AI; I'm not interested in that. I could do that if I wanted to already. That's not the origin of my gripes here; I'm not frustrated because I can't easily win. I'm frustrated because it's utterly unrealistic. What I'm trying to find out is how to change it to get more real. So far unfortunately it doesn't look doable.

neilbyrne since you served, you know what the realistic expectation is for even an Elite watch to spot a low scope a mile away.

Unless other files were changed to nullify this method, you can adjust the AI by dumbing down the numbers in sim.cfg to more 'realistic' levels.

Below, is a quote from my notes - I forget who I was talking with but these are the numbers he used.

You can also experiment... find mods that make the AI harder, see what was changed, and adjust yours a little in the opposite direction.

It isn't 'cheating' - you know from real experience how difficult it is to spot a scope, barely above the surface, and moving less than 2 kts, PLUS running silent. With that in mind:
Happy Hunting!

Captain (SIR!), I've been hacking computer games since 1980, I don't consider myself a programmer but I understand the basics of how it works. Making a layer into a flat opaque plane is simple, programming a realistic variable layer which undulates up and down, has holes and thin spots, and is sometimes found by driving horizontally into it and seeing the temperature change requires a lot more ones and zeros. Ideally we should have an actual BT display rather that the whisper, but again more programming required. Alas kids who play computer games are more interested in pretty graphics rather than accurate simulation, so they make what sells the best.

My suggestion, looking over aanker's post, is to open windows explorer, browse to \WhereEverYouGotIt\Silent Hunter 4 Wolves of the Pacific\Data\Cfg folder, copy sim.cfg and paste to a backup. Open sim.cfg in notepad. scroll down to line 20, the datablock labeled [Visual]

Change back to aanker's post, click and drag across his text from [Visual] down to Lose time=30 ;[s] to highlight.

Hold down the CTRL key and hit C (copy).

Change back to sim.cfg in notepad, click and drag to highlight the same four datablocks.

CTRL V to paste and overwrite.

File, Save (not save as) to overwrite, answer yes, I want to overwrite it.

See if that helps in the game, if not then copy your backup sim.cfg and paste into the folder to overwrite the hacked one.

Well, you're refusing to accept how the AI works, it operates off set values which you can adjust to your liking. However, it takes a understanding of how all the values work together, because tweaking one thing to your liking may cause something else you don't like.

Again, I don't have these issues with the scope being seen or being heard from unrealistic distances. It's not a matter of using tricks to fool the AI, because if you follow realistic behavior, you can attack with success. Yes, much about the stock game is fubar, but with the right mods and tweaks you can get a fairly realistic game...

One thing that might help is for you to knock the speed factor down for hydrophone and sonar. Most escorts with convoys travel the speed of the convoy unless they go looking around and most convoys travel at 9kts, so you could set it to say 8kts.

When I get home I would be glad to send you a mod I made, it was mostly to pull off realistic night surface attacks which can hardly be done with stock or other mods, but I also adjusted sensors, some in your benefit, some worse, the goal was to reward you for correct tactics, punish you for mistakes.. I did decrease the visuals of ships to a more realistic level and increased visuals for your crew.. It is for fleetboats, based off TMO/RSRD, but should work with any mod...

Again, the AI isn't bogus, it does what it's told based on values, but because so many play different and have different opinions of what is realistic, take time to learn to tweak values to your liking.

All you have to do is make a mod with the cfg file, that way you can easily unload a small file doing your test...

TorpX: I haven't caught the AI cheating........er ....... too often........

The biggest problem I've noticed with RFB, is that it is possible for aircraft to see, and attack you at 200 ft., though it doesn't happen often. Most other things are minor.

You can put me down for a copy also.

It seems like the longer one plays this game, the more "broken" pieces we find. It isn't encouraging.

I feel the same as you do.

If you cannot get your TMO setup to work, or have exhausted your patience with it, you should consider trying RFB.

Aanker, thanks for the help; I'm going to try it.

Sniper, you too and I'm retired so call me Neil...please.

After I've had time to do these mods and test, I'll post the results.

Again thanks all for the help.

Let us know how it goes...

Happy Hunting!

Very interesting thread, Neil ! I am very curious about your results. :yep:

I am probably making a big mistake stepping into this thread, but the argument that the computer cheats and that the computer is not cheating are both accurate. The computer does cheat because it has capabilities that are above and beyond, even when accounting for challenge upgrades, what IJN ASW could do. However, Armistead is correct that the AI is only doing what it is told.

The problem is actually hard coded into the game and the modders can't touch it because Ubisoft will not release the source code. There is no cavitation model in the game, which directly affected detection rates. The sea state model does not affect detection rates like its should due to coding simplification. Thermal layer emulation is actually both oversimplified and allows the player to cheat because the player's sonar is not affected by the thermal layer. Themoclines, in terms of sound reflection, work both ways. Even without a bathythermograph, the obscuration of a sonar contact should tell the player of passing the thermal layer.

I am a stickler for realism and I certainly do not believe in uber units. However, there is no direct way to resolve the issues because of the hard coding. All mods can do is tweak with the detection ranges to emulate as best as possible with what can be changed to come as close as feasible. The detection model will never be historically accurate without proper sea state and cavitation emulation. These are not in the game and we can only take our mods so far.

You all do realize that by the time period mentioned in the OP post the Japanese had the type 13, 21, 22 and the Tase-2 Type 4 radar units?? I am fairly certain the mod modeled it as well. Maybe not specific types but at least detection ranges.

The Type 22 could spot a ship 13nm away and was installed on many destroyers by 44.

The Tase-2 Type 4 was built as an anti submarine radar unit had these specs:


Wavelength:15.7 cm

Pulse width:3 microseconds

Pulse repetition frequency:1875 Hz

Peak power:1 kW

Range:
1.2 miles (2 km) against submarine periscope
6 miles (10 km) against surfaced submarine
20 miles (30 km) against surface warship

Antenna:Horizontal dipole with 2.5 meter parabola

Weight:4400 lb,2000 kg



By the way if your looking for a perfect simulator you should try the one at Groton. This is a game it is not a simulator. To complain it is not realistic is to lose sight of this fact. Yes many good persons have contributed many hours to creating "more realistic" attitudes from the game platform but in the end it is neither realistic nor a simulator.

I remember many of the same sentiments spoken of 688 when it was released and how many thought it was a simulator. It was simply a game based off what Sonalysts thought might be a good platform as a game/simulator scenario.

I enjoy the more realistic aspects to any type of quasi-simulator. I want it harder to win, I want to be challenged to get better at tactics. I enjoy the escorts as hard as they can be. It only makes me find new ways of winning which is what we all want in the end. Even with the mods I run it is rare an escorts picks me up submerged unless the range is below 2000 yards. I have had some get as close as 800 yards without being detected. I sank one of Karita's Heavy Cruisers as they moved through the narrow Surigao Straight during the Battle of Leyte Gulf. The lead escort never even heard me.

We want to beat the game without dying a single time. A whole career with our fabulous crew racking up a good bit of tonnage and show O'Kane and Morton a thing or two about running a fighting boat.

You just can't let yourself get so caught up in winning that you lose sight of the fact that we are playing a game ... If you do not like the mods francis http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IMtvnAmfuf8 do not use them.

By the way I am all for making mods more realistic ... I look forward to seeing what you come up with neil. I am really hoping someone finds a way of modeling all the random failures and fogged scopes that skippers had to deal with as Captains of submarines. All you have to do is read through the actual reports from the Captains themselves and see how our little game is nothing close to what they had to deal with.

You can find them here:

http://www.hnsa.org/doc/subreports.htm

================================

Generic Mod Enabler - v2.6.0.157
1_TriggerMaru_Overhaul_2-5
1_TMO_25_small_patch
RSRDC_TMO_V502
RSRDC_V5xx_Patch1
Traveller Mod v2.6 TMO
#1 Real Environment mod install
Traveller Mod 2.6 Patch 1 - ISE v3 Patch
#4 Warships retextured
Traveller Mod 2.6 No Midway Transfer
Traveller Mod 2.6 No DC Camera Shake
Traveller Mod 2.6 Larger Search Patterns
Traveller Mod 2.6 Harder Enemy AI Escorts
Traveller Mod 2.6 Automatic Ship ID
Traveller Alternate Main Loading Screens
Convoy Routes TMO+RSRD
tambor198's TMO+RSRDC missions pack

P.S. :

I forgot to mention that it would a great mod to have if someone created one where when you sink a ship it removes it from ever showing up in the game again during a career. I had one career where I sank the Yamato 5 times ... since there was only one of her and her sister ship the Musashi it really makes it not realistic to have 5 ... then again the way I run my boat there might not be much for Halsey to sink with me around LOL

Just as in the SH1 - SHCE games, I didn't feel that I needed to attack everything, the same can be done with SH4.

I didn't attack every convoy or task force in SHCE, a person can attack one out of five, one out of twenty, whatever they choose - to eliminate the complaint of too much traffic.

Regarding capital ships, if a player uses a Warship Restriction List, once the two Yamato class SBB's are sunk, I pretend I don't see any more, even if I see them. Same with CV's of various classes, once they are sunk, I pretend I don't see them.

I wish SH4 had made a 'restriction list' in the game engine but they didn't, so I use the WRL.... lol

Happy Hunting!