Yikes, I assumed those were seconds rather than minutes. And I thought Enemy speed factor was the max speed the enemy could go and still hear noise on the hydrophone, I wondered about the visual speed factor. The suggested detection time was to increase from 0.5 to 2.0, if 0.5 is one minute then that would be four minutes - I decreased it from the suggested 2.0 because that seemed too easy. Same with sensitivity, default 0.1, suggested 0.01, mine 0.09 since that was only a slight decrease from stock. Obviously I still don't have a full understanding of what goes where and why.

Hold the phone. I know I'm senile but something here is skewed.

"I can't help but notice your "Enemy speed factor=20". Enemy in this file means you, the sub. The figure of 20 kts means the AI will not be very efficient in detecting you, unless your doing 20kts or greater. Since your not traveling at 20 kts, your speed (wake) will have little effect on the AI detection capabilities."

A Gato on the surface has a max flank speed of 21 knots, "the AI will not be very efficient in detecting you, unless your doing 20kts or greater" would mean that in the stock game the Japanese would almost always have difficulty seeing any sub on the surface, and the Porpoise and S class would be practically invisible. And it makes absolutely no sense for the hydrophone or active sonar, hydrophone speed factor = 15 and sonar speed factor = 20 in the original sim.cfg.

"Enemy in this file means you, the sub."

If that's gospel, what sub exceeds 15 knots submerged other than a nuke, which wasn't available in WWII?

I pointed out there are many factors in determining AI detection. The [Visual] "Enemy speed factor=" (your sub), is just one of them. You can have this factor non existent, yet the AI will detect you through other means (such as "Enemy surface factor=") within the [Visual] category. Or, one of the other sensors (Hydrophone, Radar), or a detection by another [Visual] modeled object like a plane, or shore battery.

Remember, these figures are not the "baseline" for detection.....the baseline comes from the AI_Sensors.dat file. The Sim.cfg file are "multipliers" or "handicapper's" if you will, to the baseline sensor in question.

The fact that the stock game has all of the "Enemy speed factors=" greater than the subs normal traveling range should show one thing.....it doesn't make a difference what your speed is, the AI isn't increasing its detection capabilities using speed as the only basis for detection. I think it should be obvious that the game does not equally give weight to all aspects of detection. Some aspects have greater weight in making a detection than others. I'm thinking the Sub's speed is down the hierarchy.

Hmmm, if that's the case maybe we're screwing with the wrong file. Just did a search for "AI_Sensors.sim", no gots. Is that the actual file name?

When the Sim.cfg file referrers to "Enemy Speed factor=" it referrers to your sub (or any AI friendly ship/plane). When it uses "Speed factor=" it referrers to the AI's speed for increasing or decreasing the particular sensors capabilities. Think of the "Speed factor=10" this way. Up to 10kts the AI will get a boost in detection properties for the sensor.....traveling faster, the AI won't get the boost.....it may even get handicapped (getting less detection capabilities) with the sensor.

The "Detection time=0.5" is not one minute. Its half a minute (30 seconds). To answer your question "What's four minutes?" It's "Detection time=4.0".

The "Sensitivity=" factor is a "multiplier" to the sensors "Maximum Range:" figure (its baseline number) found in the AI_Sensors.dat file. With regular detection time, all things being equal, the detection time is doubled if the object detected is at the Maximum Range. The detection time is less if the distance is less than the Maximum Range. (By what percentage, I don't know....some things the dev's just don't tell us.) By adding the "Sensitivity=" multiplier to the detection time, you're decreasing the detection time even further (you're essentially pushing out the Maximum Range=Double Detection Time further than what the AI_Sensors.dat file states).

So, as you can see, one parameter increases detection time, the other decreases it. Oh what a fine line we walk when messing around with these figures.

Sorry, my fault. Its found in the Data/Library/AI_Sensors.dat file, not .sim file (there isn't one of those). :oops:

As I've said, this file contains the baseline for the sensors capabilities. The Sim.cfg file are parameters that change the baseline figures to suit the various variables that come into play.

Egad, Holmes, the game is afoot! :salute:
That looks like it, max range numbers in particular.

Radar - 25000
Visual - 9500

Radar is okay but visual 9500 is about 4.6 NM - that's kinda pushing it for an object the size of a WWII sub, even if it was painted florescent orange. Original complaint from Captain Neil was they were seeing the periscope from unreasonable distances, so reducing that number to 8000 or so might be the simplest cure.

After that it gets weird, hydrophone/sonar are sdrawkcab;

10:Node - AI Hydrophone lists "type" as "sonar".
14:Node - AI Sonar lists "type" as "Hydrophone".

Max range for the hydrophone labeled as sonar is 6000, max for the sonar labeled as hydrophone is 4000. So I suspect the type labels were reversed, the first actually is hydrophone and second actually sonar regardless what the "Type" says - passive sonar (hydrophone) has a much greater range than active sonar (ping pong), in fact for WWII 4000 yards range for return echos from active sonar is pretty optimistic.

I'm gonna make a copy of the original backup and leave sim.cfg alone, try cutting the range numbers in AI_Sensors.dat in half and see what that does.

Okay, that seems to work a lot better - the enemy is behaving competently but they're not psychic supermen. I restored the original sim.cfg file, fired up Silent 3ditor, opened the AI_Sensors.dat and just changed a few things;

AI Radar - 25000 - reduced to 15000 (Japanese radar was non existent when the war started, never did get halfway decent and wasn't common on destroyers)
AI Visual - 9500 - reduced to 7500
AI Hydrophone - 6000 - reduced to 4000
AI Sonar - 4000 - reduced to 2000

I thought about increasing the minimum range for sonar to more accurately simulate the loss of contact in WWII (150 to 300 yards ahead of the destroyer at periscope depth, more if the sub is deeper) but the present settings seem to be realistic enough to warrant further testing without any more changes.

Here's a weird one, in my WIP mission I decided to mix some destroyers rather than the ever constant Fubuki.

https://fbcdn-sphotos-e-a.akamaihd.n...51554627_n.jpg

That's the usual arc you see on destroyers, outer ring visual, inner ring with the wedge cut out passive sonar, little semi circle in front active sonar. One of the older cans, Minekaze, doesn't look like it has active sonar, only the basic hydrophone;

https://fbcdn-sphotos-c-a.akamaihd.n...01811643_n.jpg

I'll have to poke one with a stick and see if he has a pinger. :ping:

Odd thing during one test, a Mutzuki was getting hammered by a US light cruiser, and I saw this;

https://scontent-b-iad.xx.fbcdn.net/...81473563_n.jpg

The outer ring is gone, did the Omaha kill all their lookouts, or destroy the bridge? Dunno, I switched to external cam to fly over and look, but before I got there a US heavy cruiser had joined the party and blew the destroyer into fragments. :up:

Sniper, where do I get Silent 3ditor?

Just reading through and knew the answer.

http://s3d.skwas.com/

HertogJan, thanks.

Somewhat related:

If I wasn't so adapt at popping the anchor and pulling it up, I would have been run over twice by dumb freaking [massive] tankers out in the ocean in mah mighty 16 foot aluminium fishing boat* as they circled around an island.

Granted, not wartime, but if a literal boat is missed, I don't see how merchants could spot a scope from a boat not moving.

*I wish I had a pair of torps on my boat....

Worst trouble with modern superships is they're bigger than carriers with a lot less power - so their maneuverability is pretty much non existent. By the time they see a collision hazard it's too late to do anything about it. :dead:

Well, March 42, went back to Manila to see what kind of docked ships are available for sitting duck targets. :arrgh!: As I was closing on Cavite a convoy was coming out from Manila with 3 escorts. Edged away to avoid contact, but the wing escort on my side detected me on passive sonar at 2000 yards, sped up and came in pinging. Five hours later I had six destroyers and one sub chaser making runs on me while I'm trying to evade in 100 feet of water, no magic thermal layer cloaking device available. :ping: So with the six cans a few thousand yards west I came to periscope depth and fired two stern tubes at the subchaser, came up to decks awash and went to flank speed to the east - and ran head on into a gunboat. Wasn't about to dive again until them six evil destroyers were far behind, so I engaged the gunboat with the forward BOFORS and sank him with a few clips. Closest tin can was 6500 yards east heading my way so I turned north and kept her going flank speed until they were all out of sight, then turned back southeast to Manila.

Found two carriers, 1 battleship, 1 heavy cruiser anchored just off Manila, sank same. Headed back west toward open ocean, spotted two destroyers circling about 5 miles north of where I sank the gunboat, about the same location where I lost contact with the closest can so I edged further south (into shallower water!) to avoid them. Now here comes three sub chasers from the Cavite, spread out in a line. Turned south again so I'm practically scraping bottom at periscope depth, the middle one passed about 500 yards off without detecting me, but now I'm broadside to the south one too close to speed up. Naturally he pinged me, so two more hours of evading depth charge runs while heading for deeper water. Finally shook them off after getting to 100 feet in 110 feet of water, kicking out several decoys and heading northeast away from the exit to the South China Sea. Apparently they didn't expect that since they continued to head toward Corregidor. Once they were out of range I surfaced (battery down to 10% with all the flank speed sprinting to avoid the ash cans) to air out the boat, then back to decks awash to recharge batteries. Waited until nighfall then headed west again, I've had enough of the Manila Bay sightseeing tour for now. :doh:

In conclusion, the latest AI_Sensors.dat range hack with default sim.cfg does NOT make it TOO easy - for the two days in enemy occupied Manila Bay it was pretty realistic. :up:

Okay, on this;

https://scontent-b-iad.xx.fbcdn.net/...81473563_n.jpg

Apparently my speculator was speculating specorrectly, it happened again while I was looking at one on the map, outer ring vanished while it was under fire from two US light cruisers. This time I managed to get there in time for a pic;

https://fbcdn-sphotos-b-a.akamaihd.n...99950916_n.jpg

No bridge apparently = no lookouts which in turn = no visual sensors. Not a very good graphic, the bottom deck of the bridge structure is even and undamaged like it was sawed off, searchlight and mast are hovering in space right where they would be if still attached to the bridge. Anyway it does confirm what I always suspected, the outer ring on the map is the visual average.