CB had the key -- it's mainly down to the detection time. detection time is down to 0 for hydrophones and sonar, brit active sonars (123,128,144,147) have been changed to be consistent w/ the values i've posted previously -- eg searchlight sonar has a beam of 16degrees (don't know the details for us active sonars, or any passive sonars other than on my 2nd link re average detection distances at 4 and 6 knots--see above). sensitivity got tweaked up -- by turning number down.

i've uploaded my sim.cfg, ai_sensors, and a test mission to rapidshare. feel free to further tweak sensitivity -- need to get inc range on both active and passive detection systems. but check it out -- no artificial blind zone using min detect ranges, it all seems to be down to beam geometry e.g. w/ a 16 degree beam, you go from red to green stealth meter at roughly 200m if you're at roughly 56m (200 tan 16 = 56). i've given the searchlight sonars a beam geometry of elevation 90-116 (irl 100-116), various bearing limitations dependent on system, range from sources listed in prev posts.

anyway, i've tried it a few times -- blind spot due to geometry, blind spots due to ships baffles.

feel free to tweak -- at work all day tomorrow, so go for it. :D

http://rapidshare.de/files/8027236/s...-test.rar.html

(and please forgive me if i've gotten it wrong.)

With regards to noise factor,

I was snooping through some files in the libary and came accross what I think was the decoy launcher.

When viewing it,

I notice it has Bubbles set at different rates and also mentions noise factors.

I have no clue as to the relevence but do suspect that DD have a detection on bubbles caused by both the decoys and the sub.

I may look into the sub files and see if bubbles is also mentioned in the zon files.

It is then a matter of seeing any patterns if any at all.

Would like to know if only one decoy launcher is available in later years within the game because as I was looking, there seemed to be different values set so either for different decoys or different states.

I agree that a standard mission should be created as follows to test DD behaviour.


1 map, Late war DD to north, Early war DD to south, Mid range to east and elites to west.

At least then we can test properly.


Can someone whip this up as I have no skills in mission making what so ever.

I will be away with work for the next day or so but will be straight back onto this as soon as I arrive back.


CB

I suspected some interesting results with what you was doing.

If only there was some way to make the late war DD do a larger circular search pattern. This would make them worth their salt.

@ Caspofungin :

Thanks, downloading, i will test.


Where did you found the files about decoys ?
I am interesting into introduce a delay in the decoy activation.

But if you set the beam of the active sonar from MinElevation=90 to MaxElevation=116, then the beam width would be 116-90 = 26 degrees, and the proper calculation for the depth of the submarine to be out of the beam at a distance of 200 meters would be: 200*tan(26) = 97 m... Why are you calculating the beam width as 116-100 = 16 degrees?? Do you think it should be calculated in this way due to a bug in the game???

Perhaps there is a bug in the game that calculates the depth necessary to be out of the beam as:

depth = distance*tan(MaxElevation-100)

and if this bug exists then when MaxElevation=100 the calculation would give 0, and perhaps then the result is discarded (as erroneous) and not applied at all in the simulation. But when you take MaxElevation=116 then the result is applied resulting in the effects you have reported. This could explain why the active sonars with narrow beams (MinElevation=90 MaxElevation=100) seem to bahave as if they had a very wide beam....

Can anybody check this in game ????

Regarding "Detection time", in the sim.cfg file it is stated:

"min detection time."


And regarding "Sensivity", in the sim.cfg file it is stated:

"at (sensitivity * max range) we have a double detection time"


Please, check my ideas in game and report the results here.

Thanks !!!!


Txema

on the noise factor AFAIK it controls the constant level of background noise that exists in the water -- the less noise there is the easier it is for the DD's to "hear" your screws-- rather like lowering the volume of the hyrophone ambient sounds so you can pick out the screw noises from the merchants more distinctly

mind you after the 1.4b patch i'm not sure if it still has any effect/
some of the entrys seem to be "dead" after the patch

I'm in a hurry right now and don't know if this info has been mentioned before. Most likely is... take a look.


"technical and operational information of selected Asdic or Sonar sets. During World War II"


Link: http://jproc.ca/sari/index.html

Looked interesting anyway.

@krupp
that site is where i got some info re british asdics. also some admiralty reviews. couldn't find any specific info re us sonars, though...

@txema
you're right... but when i was initially testing it, i had beam geometry set at 90-106 degrees, so lost lock at 56m. saw some diagrams w/ the sonar beam set at approx 10 deg down, i'm assuming this has something to do w/ scatter from the surface. so it should be 100-116, i made it 90-116 because... well, i don't know.

also, re detection time, i'm fairly sure this is the "sweep" time. when i set it to 0, i got rid of most of the variability in detection ranges for various sensors. made me think that if the sensor missed you on 1 sweep, you would travel that much closer before it picked you up on the second sweep, if there's enough of a time difference.

re "at (sensitivity * max range) we have a double detection time"
yeah, i saw that in the sim.cfg file. not sure what to make of that specific statement though. you'd think that at a given range eg 100, a given sensitivity eg 1 -- then at range 100, you get double detection time. halve the sensitivity 0.5*100=50, so at range 50, you get double detection time. in testing, though, for me anyway, decreasing sensitivity increases the range you are picked up at for a given detection time. setting detection time to 0, logically, should nullify the effect of sensitivity, if our initial assumption is correct. that may be why we're getting longer detection ranges, rather than my "sweep time" assumption. my testing, however, doesn't bear this out -- decreasing sensitivity increases detection range.

anyway, although there is a sonar dead zone, hydrophone effect can still be picked up much closer -- min range is 0 or 10, can't remember. so if you jack your sub up to flank too soon, you'll be heard and the escort will alter course to drop on your head. the baffles are still dead zones for both asdic and h/e, so once the escort is directly overhead or past, you can safely accelerate.

if anyone has info re real life hydrophone limitations, we can certainly implement them easily enough.

re noise factor-- that's somewhat disappointing if all it is is ambient noise level. someone should try jacking it up to 100 or 1000, see what effect there is. i'd try myself, but at work.

regardless, feedback to this thread -- there's a lot of people tweaking and testing, we should get somewhere soon.

It seems as though we need to find a way so as if the hydro does pick up your turns, it should not be instantaneous before the DD copies your move.

Maybe it has to be up to players judgement when to change and turn and slow speed and speed up.

Uboat.net had some statement within it that although equipment was great near the end of the war. They were still gusessing on the last three hundred mtres.


But this game is so unforgiving that it beggers belief.

Can we put a plan into place to tackle each objective in turn.

problem

DD can be so dumb at times, they just do not react.

DD can be so deadly when they do infact launch it dc's.

Plan A = make DD smarter even if this means changing all to elite and veterern.

plan B = Make a test mission as explained before and then we can head of in what direction as to what we want to test.

plan C = Without cutting a essential element of the DD capabilities, make them blind on last 150 mtres both on passive active and Q sensors.

plan D = check if decoy hex file can be influenced to be more of a assistance i.e. make DD fire early etc. I know there is a figure or figures that seems to influence bubbles within the game. Are we sure that all decoys last only 3 minutes cos some numbers I have seen in this partivular file states 7, 15, etc etc. I am presuming it is not minutes.

Any more plans or any plans we should be dropping and getting back on track with original problem of the pin point dropping.

This is all :damn: :damn: :damn: :damn: :damn: :damn: :damn: :damn: :damn: :damn: :damn: :damn: :damn: :damn: :damn: :damn: :damn:

We need a genius to tabulate what is what in the game and other possible remedies.

I tend to agree with Red at the moment about the fact that a sailor has his head sticking out of the keel and is watching you while turning.

Mmhh.....

May be i am crazy but.

I change all setting, and reduce their sonar active and pasie capabilities and they stiil be able to detect my full rudder turns when i do it even when they are just passing over me.......

Which sensor is rsponsible for this behavior ? :damn:

Taking a look into files i found it.

Radar...... its settings has a minimun range of zero, and a spot or beam angle from 0 to 180 :hmm: ???

Zero is up, and 90 is just horizontal.......... and 180 ...what is it ?

Is just down !! :88) :huh:

May be i am just more than crazy, in real life radar waves can not go under the surface, but it is not real life, and that we see is not a sea surface is only a texture.......

May be posible they are detecting now underwater by Radar ?

I will go to do changes in radar now and test, i will change

MinElevatio = 0
MaxElevation = 180

by

MinElevatio = 0
MaxElevation = 90

and minimun range from zero to 300 or 500

:up:

Where are the decoy files gouldjg ? I want to delay its run on bubbles.

I would suggest that for now, we leave decoys out of this. After all, we are trying to fix the pinpoint drops, NOT the decoys.

you could be right about the radar Red it may be glitched slightly allowing some sensor feedback below the surface at close range

you never know-- personally i don't trust the active sonar for the u-boats either - i'm not entirely sure it allways turns off when asked to- it may be slightly glitched allso--somtimes it doesn't get the answers following the technical historical and real life possible answers - you have to rememebr it is just a game and doesn't allways respond to simply writing the historical data into the files-- you have to get a bit spooky with it all

try adding the lose time to the hydrophone and experimenting with the amount of time (as the stock hydrophone doesn't have a set lose time amount) --ive just tried it and the added losetime absoloutely stumped them (i had it set too low)--

i'm not keen on the idea of using set missions to test these factors as the whole thing is more complex than that allows for--different weather conditions do affect the DD sensors both above and below the waterline--
different DD's have different sensors in different years- how can you cope with all those factors and more in a set mission? i just don't know how reliable the results will be when you come to play thru the campaign--

this is why i allways test this stuff in a proper campaign mission and continue to test it as i progress thru each career


with a cheat to make life easier--

crank up your contacts.cfg settings to these

[ContactSettings]
; Contact settings

Display Range To Opportunity Radio Contacts=8300 ;[>0] kilometers
Display Range To Important Radio Contacts=18500 ;[>0] kilometers
Decay Time For Important Radio Contacts=172800 ;[>0] seconds
Decay Time For Opportunity Radio Contacts=32400 ;[>0] seconds
Decay Time For Imprecise Sensor Contacts=600 ;[>0] seconds
Decay Time For Precise Sensor Contacts=60 ;[>0] seconds
Single Contact Min Size=1 ;[>0] minimum numbers of units in this type of group
Small Contact Min Size=3 ;[>0] minimum numbers of units in this type of group
Medium Contact Min Size=7 ;[>0] minimum numbers of units in this type of group
Large Contact Min Size=13 ;[>0] minimum numbers of units in this type of group


and you won't have any trouble at all finding convoys to run tests on-
and as you won't know which DD's and in what number you likely to meet over time you will get a far more balanced set of answers than trying to control every variable within a set mission--- for a start of you need to give the AI chance to breath by starting well outside the normal sensor range and so on--
that's my take on it all
it drives me crazy testing things in single missions- it's too tempting to jump to conclusions- at the very least you need to approach from out side sensor range of the convoy - conduct a proper a full attack on the merchants and make a full escape back to safety--only then can you make some sort of judgement on how the changes are working--
it's a lot of work but try to forget about it as your playing and enjoy the game and your test career

First, I have no intentions to step on anyone's toes here and wan't to say you are doing wonderful job for the SH3 community. :)

I'm asking this only to make it clear to myself. I just had to take a look at those dat files when I installed the Timetravellers Tweaker program.

If all surface detection devices, including visual, have minbearing of 0 (bow)moving left and right towards stern, ending to maxbearing of 180. And minelevation 0 (bow), going over head to 180 (stern). So this way they cover the whole surfased area in their range limits.

This way the ships bow seems to be 0 point with this logig. Now if I have hydrophone settings: minelevation 80 - maxelevation 170, doesen't it mean that the hydrophone arc doesen't begin until pointing 80 degrees down and ends pointing backwards 170 degrees? Should there be negative values here? Or does the negative min values affect that way.

Does the negative min- and maxheight values make the bearing and elevation starting point for underwater device angles being something else than the bow (0)? I don't understand how could vertical axis be 0 when I look all the surface detection device values.

I'm not sure if I could make this to sound rational cos english isn't my native language. So it's easy to lose the point there :oops:

I dont want to be happy before time about it, but i have not more Ubber DDs, may be that was the problem.......... need more test.

Do you any tweaking radar MaxElevation setting ?

About the test mision, i uderstand CB, but i chose the Barham and specially U-505 to test the slow down in performance because it is the mission with the hardest DDs, and all people have them.
Sure any definitive change must to be tested on missions with early and later technology DDs.
But now i am only making test to dicover wich file do wich thing.


@ Marhkimov :

Come-on Marh.... ;) is not for this topic, i just tired :damn: of those bubbles making noise around my hull when i run in silent running.



@ Krupp :

If we are not wrong, zero is just Vertical UP, 90 is horizontal...BOW, and 180 is just vertical DOWN.

Then a hydrophone set MinElevation = 80, MaxElevation = 170, is a sensor wich hear 10 degrees above the water surface...... up to 80 degrees under the surface.

re elevation -- 0 is straight up, 90 is dead ahead, 180 is straight down

@gouldj
plan C works. in my test mission w/ my test settings, if you're deep enough, the sonar will lose you eventually, distance depends on depth. if you're quiet (silent running) you won't be picked up on hydrophones, and there won't be any pinpoint drops. if you crank up your sub too soon, even though you're out of active sonar angles, you'll still be picked up on hydrophones, and the escort corrects. if you want to artificially inc the hydrophone dead zone, just inc the minimum range. however, i haven't seen anything historically regarding hydrophone dead zones in my net searches. the asdic dead zone is well documented, and is rpt is implemented w/ the settings on my download. the only issue i'd like to continue testing is changing sensitivity to get inc range on both hydrophones and asdic, and implementing historical info re hydrophones and us sonars.

re dec radar elevation to 90 -- shouldn't make too much difference, as minimum depth is already set at 0.

i'll rpt it -- w/ the settings available, there seems to be no ubersensor at close range. any pinpoint drops are either a result of you making too much sound and creating hydrophone effect, or by continuing on course, same speed, allowing the escort to drop on your predicted position.

try the test mission w/ your stealth meter on. run silent and deep, and you'll go green when the escort comes close enough and you're beneath the sonar. go to flank, and it'll go red, as the escort picks up the h/e. go silent, and it'll drop to green. try it. it works. alter the test mission to use a late war escort, w/ type 144 or 147 sonars, and it's a lot harder, just as it was irl.

things get a lot harder (as they should) when you have 2 escorts on you -- 1 will almost always have a sonar lock on you, getting free is a matter of maneuvering to break out of both beams simultaneously. if we could get dc explosions to have a negative effect on sensors (?noise factor) then you could use the well-documented post-explosion sensor blackout to get depth/distance, making things easier. and more realistic.


the test misison is set up w/ an early war veteran escort, no depth-finding sonar, no radar, calm conditions, trying to keep things as simple as possible to minimize variables. no doubt, in game, there's going to be different effects. but i believe those effects are going to be due to having multiple escorts attacking you, wave effect on sensors, etc.

finally, i appreciate the difference between realism and gameplay. but as things are right now -- personally, i believe the sensors are nerfed. after attacking a convoy, unless you're spotted on the surface, you have a free run away. the escorts rarely find you if you're dived unless you make noise (reloading, high speed). when they do find you, they have ubersensors (in stock) and overpowered dc's. if it was a viable tactic irl to dive below the sonar beam and escape, then i think we should be able to do that in game. if irl making noise had the effect of bringing escorts down on your head, then i believe that should be implemented too. using historical sensor limitations is just a start. if irl escorts could pick you up on a type 128 asdic at 2000m under ideal conditions, and we have to inc max range to 6000 to get the same effect, then so be it. but i believe the current beam geometry reflects real life limitations relatively well. of course, if further testing shows things to be out of whack, than i'm more than willing to work to get things right. just my minor contribution to the mod community that's made the stock game so much better. :yep:

also, if anyone has printed info on various sensors, we could certainly do with it.

I note that, i note too, radar beam is a cilinder not a semisphere (half sphere, i do not know the name in english).
I think it due to the value MaxHeight and MinHeigt, if it was a half sphere with set a range is enought.
Nay way even with the MinHeight limit, i do not know wich one override wich one, better to set it at surface angle in concordance with MinHeight = 0.


Yes agree, you can remain stealth, but when you make sound and the DDs detect you they are too much hard to shake in later war times.


Tested your missionand it works very fine. :up:
But when run U-505 it is near to imposible to shake them on you using your files, even with only one DDs preying on you. :hmm:
Later war DDs, as those american still Ubber. :dead:


So wonderful if we can obtain that behavior and use their own depth charges against them. :smug:
Still testing here.


Yes same comment as above, in this mission is easy to survive, you need to do nothing special in skill, but when use your files in a mission with later war DDs as U-505..... agh..... they still so hard.



Yes, this was extensively discused in SH2 times, it is normal to stay on this descusion on SH3.

A submerged sub, wich do not make noise, no reloads, no repairs, runing at low speed was near to undetected.

You was detected when you rise periscope, blow tanks, run fast to maneuver, reload, repair.

We need to remember DDs depth chrages was the most unsuccesful weapon against subs in the war, most subs was destroyed by aircrafts, and mines, even by DDs raming on them.
DDs become dangerous only in the last year or year and half of the war.

I i do not remember bad, lethalities by surface unit was about 1 % / 2 % at early days of war, and about 30 % / 40 % at later days of war.

About low than only one third of the U-Boote lossed in combat actions was sinked by surface ships, about 250, and not all them by depth charges.

U427, attacking the convoy RA.66, 29 april 1945, was egaged and was attacked by canadian escorts, HMCS Haida and Iroquois..........
They launch 678 depth charges over the U427......... he scaped and survive.......

U744, a Type VIIC, 6 march 1944, attacking canadian convoy C2, under command of kapitan Heinz Blischke, was engaged by escorts HMS Kenilworth Castle, Icarus, and HMCS Chilliwack, Fennel, Chaudiere, Gatineau and St Catharines.......... U744 was under attack during 36 hours, was forced to surface due to oxigen need, but was not destroyed after 36 hours of attack......

There are many histories like this.............

Words of Kapitan Erik Topp :

" we was never afraid of their depth charges ........."


Russian sunks only 7 U-boote during the all WW 2, and they had used near of 90,000 depth charges to do it.

This was due the lack of technology in detection, wich was not in their hands, but was in hands of north americans and englands but so later in the war.

I think so the matter is not to adjust historical values on sensors, instead obtain a historical DDs behavior and survive probabilities.

:up: WAR TO UBBER DDs ! :rock: