Sure, release if the hospital ship if you have the time, I know you're probably busy with other things though...
I managed to make a campaign rnd that doesn't crash the game, and includes a lot of new ships in convoys...I guess I'll just have to wait till i run into them on patrol now.
I really need to replace some of the small and medium merchants though.

Nice job w/the new model and the hospital ship. This is such a far cry from earlier sims where it was basically impossible to diversify shipping.

I definitely agree that the hospital ships should all be under the Red Cross nationality - otherwise a very large number of the transports that the campaign spawns will be hospital ships. Plus, the SH3 AI has no sense of ethics, and will sink them on sight if they're of enemy nationality. I remember creating a single mission where a German hospital ship passed through an allied convoy. The British DD's on escort duty hesitated for a long moment... Then they reduced her to a flaming wreck and went on their merry way. :dead: It would be interesting for SH4 to have enemy units interacting in more complex ways. For instance, sparing humanitarian craft, not firing on superior forces to avoid detection, letting small targets go to conserve ammo, and maybe even attempting to capture merchant vessels.

Looks like I can't replace the landing craft with lifeboats - the textures will not match and it will take a lot of time to position them correctly (since the landing crafts are not attached to their davits/cranes). I don't have that much time right now. :( maybe later. Of course if anyone wants a hospital ship with landing crafts, then let me know. :rotfl:

Iambecomelife, you should release your liner hospital ship skin from the MVP with a PPL clone and make another hospital ship yourself. :yep: I cloned one with that skin (just for my own purposes). and it looks really good.

Being they are a class 103 I dont think they will appear unless you manually enter them into the .RND or.SCR file.It could always be changed to a class 102 which will spawn randomly but I am not sure how often it will show up or if it will show up too often.

So I will hold off downloading until someone with more understanding of the editor than I have places them into the Grey Wolves campaign.However they look terrific and will add much to the game.

I put a lot of the new ships into the games convoys, using the GW/NYGM UC campaign rnd.
I haven't had time to test it extensively though.

I can upload it if you like?

Please upload it, as I have little understanding of how to use the editor.

See here:

http://www.subsim.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=51122

I would think long and hard about changing this to 102.
Many cargo ships are not named but are simple 102 to randomize.
You would see too many many hospital ships.

Since 103 ships are almost always named you can click edit find 103 and change the class name to NHOS in the random single ships sailings. They would rarely be in a convoy as they were best protected being alone.
Although haveing one in a convoy posses a problem, the nervous kind

I also suggest Serg's transport be included in the game with the NHOS in the these random sailings so you have the ultimate dilemma at night.
I have actually come along side these and shot out the search lights so I could tell if it was the NHOS or not. (The search lights back lighting makes it impossible to see the crosses even close up)
I had reduced one darkly painted NHOS to a wreck sure it was not a NHOS only to finally see the crosses.
I love this kind of uncertainty.
Anything that confounds and annoys should be embraced.

IMO the Coastal tanker should be a 104. Making it a 101 means it can spawn in mid Atlantic convoys which would be inaccurate. As a 104 it will been in coastal traffic which seems appropriate.

One can also easily edit the convoys so some ships have their class names removed which allows them to change each time. With the NKGN in the game it would be available to show up.

Simply delete the class line as the example below.

Note, before editing any RND or SCR file make a copy and save it so if you made a mistake you have a good back up. Never edit a file without a copy somewhere safe.

[RndGroup 63.RndUnit 6]
Class=KSS
Type=102
Origin=British
Side=0
CargoExt=2
CargoInt=0
CfgDate=19390201
No=4
Escort=false
SpawnProbability=100
CrewRating=2

[RndGroup 63.RndUnit 6]
Type=102
Origin=British
Side=0
CargoExt=2
CargoInt=0
CfgDate=19390201
No=4
Escort=false
SpawnProbability=100
CrewRating=2

Wulfmann

Wulfman,

I agree. The Coastal Tankers should be 104s.

I see. :hmm: I will have to make it a 104 in the next release (for now, it is easy for the individual to change with wordpad). I actually intended the vessel to appear as regular traffic, in order to scale down the overall tonnage. However, the vessel may be better suited as a coastal craft.

EDIT: Has anyone actually seen a Coastal Tanker yet? I haven't heard of a single one being spotted or sunk in a campaign.

As for the hospital ship entries - it wouldn't really matter what the designation was if you are using a Red Cross nationality - that 'country' would have only hospital ships anyway, and thus even generic entries would be guaranteed to spawn a hospital ship of some type. Any Red Cross entries would have been already balanced to avoid having them appear too often, so there would be no worry of having even more hospital ships appearing.

If you are NOT using a Red Cross nationality and are assigning hospital ships to individual nation, then follow Wulmann's advice in full. A 102 entry will spawn way too many hospital ships in the campaign, as a huge number of single 102 contacts are indeed generic (without a specified class).

@ AG124:

Have you thought about using type 100 (Replenishment) for odd ships like the factory ship? That way, one could make all cargo and tankers in convoys generic without the worry of seeing too many oddities. Then, an entry could be added with low spawn probability to some convoys for generic replenishment. That way, we could see few of these types in convoy but nonetheless there would be a chance.

I think the coastal tanker should remain a tanker. First of all, that gives it the option of having fuel as cargo (I like big oil slicks). Second, sometimes smaller ships did travel in convoys. I wouldn't be bothered seeing one in a convoy at all, it would look neat to see the size differences between all the ships.

Has anyone tried to add entries to English.cfg? There is plenty of room in the numbering. I'm thinking type 106 hospital ship, type 107 whale factory ship, etc...

Spoted a costal tanker, just the other day. It was doing 12knots heading toward Bristol from Spain. I tried a surface run to get in range but was forced under by what seemed to be the total strength of B-24's in England. Had to give up the chase with 12% hull strength left.

My 37mm gunners were disapointed. They were looking forward to fireworks! :rock:

Re: New Ship Released - Chatham Transport and Hospital Ship
 

AG124,

Can you say a few words on how the damage model of this ship was taken care of? What was the parent ship? Did the hull was changed in any way, scaled etc.? Were other imported objects aligned with respect to damage zones so that there is no mis-alignment when gunning them down? Or was the ZON file adjusted to fit the new 3D profile (if necessary)? Maybe it is a good idea to provide such an info for other ships upon their release.

The parent ship of the Chatham was the Transport/AMC, although the hull is actually that of the C2. The damage zones are the same; there should be no problem with the engine room, keel, or ammo magazine (they are the same as for the Transport). I am a little concerned about the propulsion hit zone, as the Transport's was further to the stern of the Chatham's propellers' position. However, the ship continues to stop when torpedoed, so maybe it is alright.

As for the .obj deck files, (vents, cranes), none have been seriously resized from the originals. And although just about every single one of them has been moved, they have been moved with Pack3d so the damage files were not misaligned. There should be no problems with any of them.

what was your source for the model?