:rotfl:

i don't think though that anyone's saying it was a cakewalk and beery (as usual) summed up the situation quite succinctly:

btw, capt beach is wonderful!! what terrificly human accounts he gives of his experiences! 'full of wit and fascinating detail. 'highly recommended to all (as i'm sure most reading these forums already know).

Another good read with lots of info is 'Silent Running' by by James F Calvert. I downloaded the audio book and it's a great listen with lots of info on the operations of the Jack.

Well said! :up:

BTW, just to avoid misunderstandings - I'm fully on the side of those who say "Please don't make this Atlantic Campaign II". It wasn't. There were plenty of unescorted merchantmen underway in the Pacific etc. But that's only part of the story, not the end of it and I find the notion of some people that this simulation must be boring when properly patched/modded a bit uninformed, frankly. It's not gonna be boring, but it's not gonna be suicidal either.

Hehe, I ordered it from Amazon this morning. :up:

Congrats!!! The bible of the sub war in the pacific!

All of the later mods used lots of stuff the community modded before 1.4. I don't think people who never used RUb realise that both NYGM and GW used a whole bunch of stuff from RUb and other early mods. The SH3 Mod team allowed ANYONE to use the mods we created - no restrictions - because we felt the community benefitted most if we shared the knowledge as widely as possible. That's how mod development got done so fast, and that open attitude played a big part in how NYGM and GW became so good so fast.

I must admit to being a bit taken aback by what seems to be a generally held notion that RUb was somehow a mod of lesser importance in the SH3 mod world. It is a major mod that is as good quality as any, even now. It was the only game in town for the best part of a year (you only have to look at the readme file for RUb to see that prior to SH3 version 1.4 the SH3 Mod Team had already done the majority of the mod work that was ever done on SH3), and as I understand it both NYGM and GW used RUb as their basis and added their authors' tweaks to it. In short, the SH3 Mod team built a very solid foundation for the modding of SH3 - a foundation that later modders relied upon extensively when they created mods that had different focuses than that of RUb.

As for waiting until the devs are done, I agree, but you should understand that RUb always got updated and was ready with a new version within 24 hours of every official patch. The reason I agree with you is that this time I don't want to be working 20+ hour days updating the mod after every official patch.

Anyway, if you use the mod enabler you won't have to worry about official updates forcing you to reinstall the game, and you won't have to delay using mods - all mods install and uninstall flawlessly when using the JoneSoft Generic Mod Enabler.

That's why I don't like to use words like 'cakewalk' when describing any activity that involves significant risk. A death toll of 22% among Pacific submariners, when compared to the 75 to 80% of German U-boat crews, might seem tame in comparison, but if I was to do an activity that had a 22% death rate I'd enter it with great care and not a little trepidation, and I'd avoid it if I possibly could.

The thing is, players know they can always start over, so there's little downside in a short but eventful campaign. Real life is a lot different.

YES!! Silent Victory is a true gem! I'm reading it for a second time now. It is full of useful descriptions of just about every aspect of the US Pacific Sub Campaign. For instance, I just read last night that the largest Japanese Ship sunk solely by deck gun was only 3000 tons. That deck guns were mainly used for sampans and such. Little tidbits like that should be helpful when modding the game.

The appendix also has a wealth of information on individual sub patrols, their tonnage sunk, and other data.... A good resource all in all...:up:

Hehe, I feel a disturbance in the Force - either a "deck gun reload time" discussion is about to develop, or I shouldn't have eaten that corn dog I had for lunch.

Very true. I try to simulate "fear of death" or something by playing "Dead is Dead" like many others here seem to do and this indeed can make you go ahead with realistic caution.
There are many other simulations (actually, most if not all) where your casualty rate is way below the 80% of the U-Boat campaign. I don't know a flightsim where I would die in 8 out of 10 missions for example, online or offline. The submarine war in the Pacific was a combat operation. And in combat, when there are people out there wishing you ill, and there are bullets flying or explosives going up around you, odds are that you'll die, and the more mistakes you make the higher those odds become, or as the saying goes "the one making the least mistakes will win". The thing in the Atlantic was that later on many U-Boat crews didn't return even when not making any mistakes, except for the one of sailing out at all.

However even that 22% came from the issue that the boats were used to cover japanese main harbours like Truk which were well defended or they were ordered to attack highly risky areas/ targets (like landing crafts or merchants supporting japanese troops on Guadalcanal). At least til mid 43 merchants were ignored by sub command.

Interesting. Was that official policy? If so we might be able to reduce the renown points (or make them negative) for sinking merchants before that time.

Forlorn's statement is incorrect, official policy from dec. 7 1941 was to sink anything that had a japanese flag on it, warship or merchantman.

That is true. Guys were trained for battles vs battleships only, and there was no concrete doctrine to get actually the most important stuff on that area - supporting merchants - every Navy was pressing for a "final" battle and tried to damage the other Navy. So basically by orders I am wrong - but by what was actually done I am right.

Run, Stand, Chase
 

During the first 9 months the US was completely on the defensive. Coral Sea and Midway are defensive battles. The next 9 months the US and Australia were locked in a better fight of attrition in New Guinea and the Solomons with Japan. The few subs available were tasked to screen for, harass, and block Japanese fleet operations, which is pretty dangerous stuff close to their main bases and often under enemy air. Like Japan, pre-war US doctrine was for the subs to act in support of the battle fleet.

After that there were enough boats available for the US to go on the offensive and go after the main lines of communications and supply in the enemy's rear areas. The sub force also realized from it's own experience and the German example what subs were really good at doing and how best to use them. Not to mention that they began to get the torpedos to work.

I just dont want Beery to go off on a tangent, a ship was a ship and a skipper who sank a merchantman got as much credit as one who sank a warship, it's the ones who came home without a catch which were given a desk job. Right from the start, PH was sending patrols off of Japan and other areas of the pacific to snag merchant traffic.

One mod which would be correct would be to end the career of a player who sinks no ship in two consecutive patrols prior to summer 1944, since that was more or less official practice.

Forlorn is right that due to circumstances, many fleet subs were assigned to indirectly support military operations and attack warships and troop/supply convoys (ie SE Asia in 41-42 and around guadalcanal in 42-43). Its only in 43-44 that enough subs were available to regularly send alot of subs to the prime fishing grounds around Japan and Formosa.

I don't think the statement the US was entirely on the defensive is accurate (IMHO).

Even before the April Doolittle Raid the USN was conducting hit and run raids on japanese outposts. Not major offensive action, but not entirely defensive, either. Midway would have been defensive if it had been reactive, but due to codebreaking it was really an offensive action IMO. Nimitz chose to engage the IJN on his own terms. I'd tend to call an ambush "offensive" thinking.

If you define "offensive" as taking land, then yeah, 9 months it is (Guaadalcanal).

you wont regret it, you may never want to go back to the Atlantic!:up:

Also incorrect, to a point. There was a list of priorities, and warships were Number 1. I'll have to look again to see where the merchants landed. I agree, they were to sink anything they could, but on the other hand even Lockwood didn't act like Doenitz: there was no applied anti-merchant campaign with a central commander sending boats en masse to chase known convoys. In fact, for most of the war the separate commands were just that; they didn't even have an established set of operative rules that all commands were to follow.