@ maerean_m

So the automatic targeting is giving you correct convertion to yards :huh:, now, that's a good news for those skippers who use automatic. I have never used automatic targeting in sh4 (or sh3), only manual.


@sayaret

Did you find out how to get the right distance from your sonar operator? Diving deeper and pointing the target yourself in the hydrophone station? It is rubbish, that you cannot double check your range to target from the periscope depth just before you attack. Or then I am just using something wrong.

PM or put on the bug list!!!!

Agreed, my Imperial manual TDC is ill. :cry:

Have you guys ever noticed that, when asking for depth under keel, when depth is more than 1000 meters, the officer o/t deck tells you its more than 3182 ft? Why not just more than 3000 ft?

It almost seems as if everything about ranges is taken from SH3 (metric) and converted internally to imperial, instead of just using imperial measurements in the first place.

Changing the way a system works from metric to imperial or the other way would create lots of problems. You have a foundation, it needs to be set in a system.

Considering that Sh4 uses a highly developed version of the sh3 engine and it will probably be further developed for other products, you can't switch measuring systems all the time.

Unfortunately, I think WE are the QA for Ubisoft.....shame on them :nope:

To answer some your questions:

If you play using Imperial measure, the range indicator in the upper right corner of the the periscope/TBT screen is in yards.

What a lot of folks don't know about mariners that use the Imperial system in R/L, is this:

1] They round off a nm from 2026 yards to 2000 yards.
So... this means that every 10th of a nm = 200 yards, i.e.,

.1 nm = 200 yds.
.2 nm = 400 yds.
.3 nm = 600 yds.
.
.5 nm = 1000 yds.
.
.
.
.
1 nm = 2000 yds. pretty simple so far.


If you plot a target, (using the rule of 3 min. between two sights with Imperial), and you measure .6 nm with the ruler tool...the distance travelled = 1200 yds. Dividing by 100 gives you the speed of 12 knots.

With the Metric measure use the rule of 3 min. 15 sec.

1.1 nm = 2200 yds.

1.05 nm = 2100 yds.

...if memory serves me, isn't the ruler tool in SH3 in km...not nm?

...one more thing to take into consideration: Difference in 1940 technology compared to 2007. It just seems we're quibling about inches. It could be the Devs, giving them the respect they deserve, threw in a small taste of reality, or the unknown factor, to heighten the reality aspect? Not every WWII skipper returned home with 100K tons under his belt. Some actually missed, I'm told.

I, personally, am not looking for laser-like accuracy...just being able to hit the broad side of a barn is good enough for me.

Cheers,

I would not assume that is the only cause. In my newest 1.2 campaign, (totally vanilla unmodded game, very hard, 100% realism, asiatic fleet, dec. '41), after carefully calculating range, AOB and estimating speed using the Position Keeper and "Seat-of-the-Pants" feel based on SH3 experience, I fired 10 MK14 torpedoes at two freighters at ranges from 2,200 down to 1,200 yds/meters, 6 hit, so the manual TDC does work despite all the problems posters are pointing out, although I think the dud rate is probably too low during the early war period.


I also echo Don1reed's observations, I dont mind the inaccuracies that make life in SH4 a bit more difficult, such as imperial/meters conversion, recognition manual discrepancy, lack of sonar at PD, no push button way to calculate target speed, can't open all torpedo bay doors at once, etc. since WW2 skippers in RL often had no recognition manual to speak off and had to make up all this data on the fly. It serves as an immersion factor and it makes every kill that much sweeter when you have to sweat to achieve it, but then I am also abit of a curmodgeony old man in RL.:damn:

Yes, you obviously have missed some of the posts. And no, the TDC doesen't work, it doesen't give you ranges from metric to imperial. Not ALL ships had their dimensions porked, some were accurate and some weren't and anything between. So it is possible to get good hits in vanilla 1.2 with some ships. Point is that now the big and small errors have been corrected. And they were errors, not features. Besides, shooting 10 torpedoes with 60% hit rate to some random ship does not qualify your information to say that there's nothing wrong with the game.

What comes to inaccuraties, I rather take a game that's working and has the essential data even somewhat accurate. I can easily find the immersion factors somewhere else than a crappy finishing of the game.

Krupp, you obviously have missed the point of my post. I am not impugning your work on the recognition manual or the presence of bugs in the game, but the manual TDC in SH4, even in its imperfect state, still works better than in SH3 (for me anyway) and still gives you more info than a WW2 skipper in RL would have had.

If people want to use a 100% accurate recognition manual (which never existed in RL by the way) or calculate 100% accurate range, that is their choice, but it is not anymore realistic than the current state of SH4.

Question...Does crew quality affect the accuracy of a TDC solution? Or of a sonar range? (Would a less experienced sonar operator misjudge the range somewhat?).

Also just noticed: I use imperial measurements, but the zoom on the deckgun measures in meters!:shifty:

What about depth indications? Meters or Phatoms????? Makes a biiig diff here?!:lol:

It can go all Bernard if not careful then....:-?

Cheers

Per

In metric system all depths are in meters (including torpedo depth).
In imperial system all depths are in feet (including torpedo depth). In fact, all vertical distances are in feet since is more precise (depth under keel, the mast height ...)

To answer a couple of questions that have appeared late in this thread. Yes crew quality DOES effect information gleaned from them. I had two sensor operators (one with an efficiency rating of 72/70(+2), and the other 79/79(+0) I have no idea which one was operating the sonar, does it make a difference?) and the requested range to target was anywhere between 5970 to 7130 yards. I asked for range repeatedly from them and recieved many different readings in between. After my seventh time, I took an average of the reports (6550 yards) and found it was within 60 yards of my accurate distance. A margin of error of 60 yards in 3.3 nm is good enough for me.

I should point out that like Krupp, I have seen the inaccurate range data and have narrowed it down to the mast height figures through the Stadimeter to be the problem. As far as I can tell, the map Ruler tool in Imperial units is dead on accurate to yards in tenths of nautical miles. I wish it would read in yards or feet but the tenths are OK. Like some of you I have also seen an ACCURATE measurement when in the low realism settings with the computer finding the range, AoB etc. for you. Since I like the idea of Imperial unit of play, this is where I have done all my testing.

I will station my sub on a Longitude, Latitude intersection and compare distances on targets from low realism game play to high realism (with manual targeting and no contact update enabled). This way I know in advance what a given distance will be to a target and apply the range through manual targeting means. In all cases the figures are off when placing the Stadimeter's second image on the top of the mast. To find accurate range, the image must be moved lower sometimes half way between the top mast and the flag, sometimes on the flag, some times well below. Depending on the ship you are targeting , they are all different!

So it brings us to the solution of either changing the data within the game to have the correct mast height as a part of the Stadimeter calculations. Or, change the point of reference on each individual target, when using the Stadimeter to find accurate range.

I know the guys in this community are good but, I don't know if the correct data can be changed within the basic framework of the game engine? Maybe, the work is to check each target ship with a known accurate range. Find the particular reference point on the mast, that releates to the correct range, mark it, then publish those results.

Is this something that would help you?
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=109953

Or do you have some other solution in mind?

Well, obviously there are some conversion problems within the game. That said, I have no problem using the metric system since I'm use to it from using SH3.

It's been noted on other threads that the metric measurements are not suitable for operations in shallow seas in SH4. It seems you need finer adjustments in order not to run aground so the imperical measurements work better. Kind of a catch-22 with the targeting problems to boot.

Obviously, our Devs are on the job, and we'll probably have to wait for the next patch to fix this glitch once and for all.

Krupp, I've got your mod earler today but, I haven't had time to try it. Summer time yard duties etc.

A couple of questions though, is this to by used with the Metric unit of measurement or will it work in the Imperial game play as well? Just call me stubborn but, I prefer playing this American campaign in U.S. measurements.

Also, I noticed (as an example) you changed the Kasagisan's (small old split freighter) mast height to 27.5 meters from 22.56 meters in the .cfg file. Did you have to change anything else to get the Stadimeter to work within reasonable accuracy?

Good work on your accomplishment ! :up:

About using Imperial units, I did several patrols using imperial (manual targeting) and bagged a lot of ships, thinking, this is working pretty well. Then I found in tests that the game doesen't convert to imperial ( with the manual targeting, like maerean_m pointed out ) so I switched back to metric units. I think that it's a lesser detail than use incorrect ranges. But, like I said, it was possible to bag big tonnage using imperial. Shooting from shorter ranges the error is not that big (meters vs yards) in target/impact point.

I made changes to dimensions, speeds and masses and checked the sim-files. But answering your question, fiddling those cfg-values (height) was the cure to fix ranges for TDC stadimeter. (Kasagisan value is not 27.5 meters, but 26.9 from the original 22.56).