Let me assume that you are referring to the Real Battery Life (Advanced NASA Battery Fix), which covers the batteries of all subs (plus it fixes the XXI battery bug)

I have released a version for GW, but I do not know with what .sim files you end up after a GW + NYGM combination. My best guess is that any difference would not be noticeable, Mainly very minor surface range differences. The battery would work fine in any case.

Check:
http://www.subsim.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=49412

But, if you mean the XXI Battery fix, I do not know if you are ever going to see one (XXI, that is), since NYGM is a realism oriented mod and probably you are "allowed" to use the XXI only for one or two patrols just berofe the war's end. (like in RuB).

:lol: speak of the devil an look who pops up. Von is the man best suited to answering your question. I strongly suggest you address any futher quires to him and read his posted link.

Thx Von ;)

We posted at the same instance!

You're welcome Cdre :up:

Re: Bit of help
 

You should try Wazoo's Manual Charting & Targeting Tutorial (http://www.paulwasserman.net/SHIII/) if you haven't already done so... It helped me a lot :)

Hello again captains!

Ive been tinkering with the mods latelly to achieve my goal of realism (plus eyecandy to my taste) and i think i found the solution. I stumbled on another problem however which i will describe further down.

First off, this is my current setup (in the order installed) using JGME

1) 1.4b patch
2) GW + 1.1 patch (mergend in one directory THEN enabled)
3) NYGM 1.0.3 (dir removal is made from within JGME MODS folder and THEN enabled)
- >removed dir Crew
- >removed dir Env
- >removed dir Markings
- >removed dir Menu
- >removed dir Misc
- >removed dir Movies
- >removed dir Sound
- >removed dir Textures
4) EUC GW+NYGM (dir removal is made from within JGME MODS folder and THEN enabled):
- >removed dir Env
- >removed dir Markings
- >removed dir Menu
- >removed dir Misc
- >removed dir Sound
- >removed dir Textures
5) NYGM SOUNDS (took delayed sounds from NYGM and anabled them last for control)


I removed those dirs from NYGM and EUC because i wanted to keep the eyecandy from GW. So far no glitches and everything runs honky dory (tested 15 minutes though so im not quite sure). Can anyone please tell me if in my current setup, NYGM DAMMAGE FILES are retained?

I ran SH Commander and set up for a single mission. SHC settings are as per NYGM recommended ones:

• Use fatigue model (unchecked)
• Adjust water density (unchecked)
• Max 88mm deck gun reload time = 15 seconds
• Max 105mm deck gun reload time = 15 seconds

Further checked ALL in career options minus "set numeber of days spent in base) and checked "Use realistic crew configurations"

NOW THE PROBLEM: I set up SHC for a single mission, selected VIIB, 1940, and fired SHIII. When selecting ANY single mission ingame i get the message:
"TOO MANY SAILORS. GO TO BARRACKS"

Im stuck...dont know what to do to fix it. There was a thread on this forum on the same problem and the only solution suggested was to reinstall SHC (which i did)..and besides that was on a RUB installation.

Any help greatlly appreciated.

Calm seas and fair winds,

GreyOctober

Ok, thats because NYGM has reduce some of the subs crew numbers.
In your CFG folder you will find a few files like this :

crew_config_II_3.cfg
crew_config_VII_3.cfg
crew_config_IX_3.cfg
crew_config_XXI_3.cfg

Those files are the cew your boat will use in either SP maps or MP maps, plus when you start a campaign. However in campaign mode you have the ability to swap the crew around and fix the to many crew msg. In SP and MP you dont. The solution is easy. Start campaign mode, choose the sub u want to use, arrange the crew how you like, launch th mission. Save the game, exit. Goto your Doc's folder SH3 and into your career folder, inside that you will see a cew file called - Crew_Career_00.cfg. IF you have chosen a Type IIA/D boat copy all the info inside the Crew_Career_00.cfg file into the crew_config_II_3.cfg file. Same deal if you chose a Type IIVB/C then it gos into the crew_config_VII_3.cfg. Again if you chose a Type IXB/C then its the crew_config_IX_3.cfg type files you copy and paste into.

Now you will be able to play an SP game with no probs. However you now will have that crew every time you start a new career but you can always goto the barracks and swap the crew around.

IF like myself you mainly play MP games, then you can work up an experianced crew in campaign mode for each type of boat and save those into the

crew_config_II_3.cfg
crew_config_VII_3.cfg
crew_config_IX_3.cfg
crew_config_XXI_3.cfg

files so that when online you dont have a crew that are totaly bloody useless.

Thanks Gibbs! BUT, doesnt that mean that i cant play single missions with anything other than the starting subs? I wont be able to play a singlemission with a type IX sub because i cant start a campaign with a IX :-?

And how is SHC related to this? because i didnt have the problem BEFORE running SHC. Furthermore, reverting SHC back has no effect and im still getting that message. :damn:

Thanks

G.O.

EDIT: no longer bilge rat. im "upper class" now! :D

I probably should have pointed this out long ago, but the battery range "fix" mod is not realistic. There is no conversion error by the developers in the code. There is a fundamentally bad (extremely bad in fact) battery charging and discharging model built by the developers that I have not yet been able to circumvent. I'm still waiting on the answers to some questions from the developers in this area. Probably nothing can be done, so it will be handled in another way in the next version of NYGM Tonnage War.

The battery "fix" is not realistic for the following reasons:

1. It artificially reduces the battery charge to result in the "battery empty" message at the appropriate distance. First of all, a battery is never empty unless someone dumps the sulfuric acid and lead/lead oxide plates out of the individual cells. The battery is really fully discharged. Secondly when that message is displayed the battery is not really fully discharged. It actually has some charge left (~3-5%). This is reflected by the continued forward motion at about 1 knot and by simple inspection of the battery voltage meter. I have tested this and traveled for over 3 days at 1 knot on the electric motors after the battery empty message.

2. The developers did not choose to model house loads. When the battery is fully discharged, internal loads (such as the lights) should dim or become unusable as the battery continues to discharge (remembering the largest load by far is the electrical propulsion motors). For lead acid batteries battery state is measured by the number of amp-hours discharged, individual cell voltages (to prevent a cell reversal) and battery specific gravities with specific gravity being the most accurate method of measuring battery charge.

3. The battery range "fix" also incorrectly reduces the time required to charge the battery by the amount of time proportional to the adjusted range. For example if the battery charge time with the submerged range set to 80 nm is 6 hours, when the submerged range is reduced to 64 nm, the battery charge time will be reduced to 4 hrs 48 min. This give the uboat an unfair advantage especially when not using the snorkel.

4. At extremely low speeds the LI is still able to maintain perfect depth control. This is extremely difficult and unrealistic.

When you get the message that there is only 10% charge left in the battery, it is in fact fully discharged for the purpose of using the electric motors.

Have you tried the NYGM Crew Management Mod? I would like to challenge you to do so, for a few patrols, as you have challenged others for the RUb fatigue model. I would also like to point out that it is much more than just fatigue. It is a holistic crew management model that takes into account the positive and negative effects of fatigue. As with the RUb model however, it may not be to everyone's taste, but it is certainly as realistic as possible within the limitations of the SH3 code base.

I'm seriously considering it. I've examined in detail the information for the mod, and there are a lot of things I like about it, but the one thing that really keeps me from using it is the Milk Cow mod. If it was only fatigue I'd use it without thinking twice, since if I don't like the fatigue I can use SH3 Commander to reinstate RUb's fatigue. The Milk Cow mod is the big stumbling block for me (well, that and just plain old lazyness), for reasons I've stated earlier. I guess I could just take out the Milk Cow parts for my own use, but it's been so long since I messed with the game that I fear I'd be lost. Anyway, like I said I'm considering it.

bump

As others have pointed out, you don't have to use the milk cow mod. It is pretty unobtrusive, and can be compensated for through the older range extension method. Just a thought...

I'm pretty sure you can pick a period in time (say after 1942) in a campaign career start where at the Flt you choose a Type IX is available, if you cant afford it (due to renown) then a few patrols later you should be able to do so. Then do a few more patrols in the Type IX to sort out your crew to how you want them and save as stated above.

Since I dont have SH3C I have no bloody idea, sorry. All I know is that those files I stated are the normal crew set up files for all the sub types. If SH3C has those same files its self then I'd say its a good bet its overwritten them and somehow the rollback didn't take properly, but in truth its something SJones would be the better person to ask. I must admit tho, I dont see a need to run SH3C if all you want to play are the SP missions, but thats just me. It certainly be of no use for MP, as it would change to many bits to enable you to play online.

It's a pitty you didn't contribute to the Battery Fix thread, but I have to disagree with you regarding the developers error. If we exclude the XXI, which is mal-modeled, IIRC the offset error was "systematic" ie repeating for all boats, therefore an error.

E.g. for the Typ IID:

The underwater ranges in the .sim files are supposed to be nautical miles, but they're not. They are what I called "UBI-pseudo-units". The SH3 engine mutiplies them with a factor (1,8 IIRC) to convert them "again" to nautical miles.So the underwater range of the IID in the .sim files (in "ubi-pseudo-units") is converted in my fix to 36 or 37. The game muliplies this by 1,6 and you now get ~57 (reference range is 56). Bear also in mind that the SH3 ruler measures in kilometers.

Sadly I have thrown away all my handwritten notes from this work and cannot give you references for the measured distances with the ruler; but believe me I have triple-checked the results, and they were OK.

I understand about the "drifting" with 1 knot. But this not useful speed to go anywere or evade DDs. Also you would die from CO2 before the three days...

I agree with you that the battery model (charging / discharging) was not very detailed. But you know, these guys (developers) have many more importand part of the game to fix (the battery model is the 0,1% of the game) :-j

I totally agree. It would add to the excitement to have your lights dimmed etc. But this does not make my modlet / fix less realistic. Probably you mean the current battery modelling is not realistic.

Yes, I agree. This would involve fiddling with the engine settings as it was done with the temporary battery fix of the XXI. The marginal utility of my free time prevented me from diving deeper on this. I hope you have more luck on this.:up:

This sounds good (at least as an option; not for everyone), but has nothing to do with the batter.

With 10% you can still go with 1,5 - 2,5 knots IIRC. Not very useful speed, but at least it is something. IMHO, the correct level for not using your e-motors is the battery Empty.

Impressive work you did for the tonnage of the ships! :up:

I did not realize it was a problem until much later into the battery fix issue. In fact I never even knew this was a problem until this issue was raised because I have never operated the SH3 uboats in this area. After that, I had to test the issue to my satisfaction, and then model an appropriate method to evaluate the correct battery discharge and charge rates, within the limits of available data. Changing the few available configuration entries left me with more questions than answers at which point I tried to seek answers from the developers. Unfortunately I haven't been very successful in this respect.

Repeatability of results does not imply a consistent offset. It in fact only implies a consistent model used on all SH3 uboats (excepting possibly the XXI). This fact is borne out by the consistent contributor to battery charge/discharge time being the underwater range. This is further indicated because changing both electric motor horsepower and/or diesel engine horsepower have no impact on battery charge/discharge time meaning they must be independent of battery capacity. This implies a static electric motor and diesel engine size for all uboats with respect to battery charge/discharge (unlikely) or a single variable input associating battery size (in amp-hours) with underwater range (more likely given the results evidenced through testing).

The units used in the *.sim files, and the ranges used in SH3 are only relevant in the SH3 world, therefore it is impractical to assume that variance between results must be due to a conversion error.

For example, using a Type VIIB with the AFA27MAK740, nominally rated for 6940 amp-hours:

This battery has the following entry in the basic.cfg:

Please note the Energy2=1 entry. This entry is in fact as critical to the submerged range of the uboat as the *.sim entry. It is just as easy to get exactly the same effect by reducing the basic.cfg entry to 0.8 instead of changing the submerged range in the *.sim file. This further demonstrates the relationship between battery capacity and underwater range (single variable relationship).

Take for example the AFA27MAK800, nominally rated for 8480 amp-hrs. This represents a 22% increase in battery capacity. Now the basic.cfg entry:

In this case the developers have chosen to only give a 15% boost in range. Perhaps because of the shockingly bad battery model, or was it better data from research? One can only speculate.

Finally, the AFA33MAL800, nominally rated at 9160 amp-hrs. This battery represents a 32% improvement over the original AFA27MAK740. In this case the SH3 developers have chosen to give nearly the full credit, a 30% increase:

As I mentioned above, it is actually simpler to modify the values in the basic.cfg rather than change the values in the *.sim files.

But, to continue with my example. Using the stock underwater range in the *.sim file for the Type VIIB, when the battery only has 10% charge remaining the boat has traveled 135.8 km (plus or minus a few km) at 4 knots. The proscribed underwater range for the Type VIIB with the AFA27MAK740 battery is 80 nm at 4 knots. Furthermore, by this time, the speed has fallen to about 2 knots. As previously noted, the boat continues to drift (actually under propulsion) for another 22 (plus or minus a few km) when the speed falls under 2 knots. At this speed the LI would be unable to maintain depth control easily, yet the SH3 uboat is perfectly on depth. This translates to 85.6 nm. I'd call that close enough.

I agree, however let me point out that with your battery fix, there is a substantial amount of time drifting around at only slightly more than 1 knot. This is necessary to get the required range from the boat. In fact, one must do so for 24 nautical miles (44 km) in my Type VII example above.

I do mean the current SH3 battery modeling is not realistic, but I also mean that your reduced ranges are equally unrealistic. This is because the range is based on this "battery empty" message, something that is not technically possible in the world of lead acid batteries, but more on that in a minute.

As I mentioned above, the engine settings have no impact on battery change/discharge time. I tested this on a Type VII. While it may in fact be different for the XXI, that does not appear to be the case for the other boats.

Actually it has everything to do with the battery. The batteries main function is to provide power to the electrical motors which in turn provides propulsion. Propulsion is crucial to helping the LI (or the DOOW - Dive in my jargon) keep depth control. Any good Dive will tell you depth control depends on three crucial elements: planes, angle and speed. This speed is a crucial element provided by the battery.

As I've mentioned above, "battery empty" is technically incorrect. The battery is fully discharged. First, we have no idea where the developers intended to make operation of the electrical propulsion motors impractical from a battery charge perspective. It appears as though this may have been 90% discharged. This is reasonable from a technical perspective because we really have no idea the capacity (in amp-hours) or discharge rate of the battery as modeled in SH3. Furthermore it's unknown if they did this to factor in effects such as low ICV and cell reversal (cell reversal can ruin a battery and potentially place the ship in danger). Secondly the speed drop (though this is another area of very possible poor battery modeling) at 90% discharged implies the practical limits of battery propulsion power have been reached.

Thanks!

I'm not trying to be argumentative (or mean), I'm just trying to point out why reduced ranges in the battery fix mod are not realistic from a technical standpoint. I probably should have commented on this earlier, but I had hoped for a response from the developers to provide some additional support for my conclusions.