sim.cfg - addition or multiplication?
 

There are params as fog factor, wave factor, light factor and so on. So, as i found, Ducimus, in hes topic about, talk that "Fog/light/wave factors. Think of them as enviormental dampeners, or how much the environment handicaps the AI. Smaller the number the less the handycap, the larger the number, the more the handycap" In hydrophone section he talk "waves factor is your standard enviormental handycap. 0.5 being quite the handycap, 0.95 being barely a handycap at all."
On the other side in sim.cfg TWoS file TheDarkWraith written for that " lower values than 1 make it harder for AI to detect you" in each section except visual.

So, i'm confused, or for visual settings and all other there are different methods of calculation, or... and here is the question: what method of calculating handicaps uses - addition or multiplication? Its important, because one way lowering values help AI and other help a player.

I'm feeling that for hydrophones, sonar and radar it's multiplicative, yes. But for visual factors it's not. There are many settings (from what i have read now) where those factors made > 1 and commented as handicap for AI (or player). Ducimus write that he didn't make light factor more than 2 because in sunrise and sunset game works bad with that (destroyers eyeless) and he wrote the configuration where all visual factors was more than 1. That is Trigger Maru settings as i have understood.

Welcome aboard!
 

Don't want to create separate thread. What do I need to change so my periscope would be harder to detect? Because sometimes they detect my scope from 2km. I want to tweak only periscope detection side of things. Visual sensors then surfaced and etc are perfect.

So no one know?

As MM need to see your mod list to give a full answer but...

Honestly, visual sensors and how are detected has no sure fire answer, because there are so many variables to account for. and so man situations I learned this when creating my update mod for TMO. I spent many, many hours testing various settings in the sim.cfg so could make realistic night surface attacks, including getting inside convoys and attacking in certain conditions, mainly moonlight.

Main factors to being visually spotted are light, profile to enemy i.e. AOB, your speed, range, and fog. All of these factors work in conjunction, then others factors are enemy visual sensor type...escorts have different visual "eyes" than say a merchant, and that particular units skill level...a veteran escort will be more likely to spot you than a escort set to competent or novice, but then there are those various factors.

Yes, the lower the number in say light or fog, the lower the handicap. Example, with the darker nights mod added into TMO for more realistic nights, I had to lower light factor to 2.8, because at 3.0 they were blind with the dark nights. Any lower, they tend to get hawkeyed again so 2.8 is balance.


Same with hydrophone and sonar. With hydrophones, in TMO at least have found have to keep wave factor at 0.5 or they hear me coming a mile away in calm seas, even on silent running. However, I have lowered the thermal layer attenuation as well as the wave factor on active sonar. Result has been once I am contacted, waves don't completely nerf their sonar.


Far as the periscope. I'll need to know the mods and circumstances such as date, time, wave condition, your speed etc.

1.From sim.cfg file:

Thermal Layer Signal Attenuation=3.0 ;[>0], 1 means no signal reduction, 3 equals signal reduction to 33%

2.and from sh5 sim.cfg by TheDarkWraith for each section except visual:

lower values than 1 make it harder for AI to detect you

So, i don't know if sh5 sim.cfg work the same way as sh4, but about first thing, as i undestand, if "1" do nothing and number more then 1 reduces signal, then numbers < 1 increase signal by the way of multiplication. But Ducimus wrote in hes manual about hydrophone section that "waves factor is your standard enviormental handycap. 0.5 being quite the handycap, 0.95 being barely a handycap at all." So, for waves, following him, less number = more handycap (reduction, as i understand, yes?), and, if take into consideration what in sh5, same for height factor.

And if follow exactly another Ducimus phrase about visual settings " Fog/light/wave factors. Think of them as enviormental dampeners, or how much the enviorment handicaps the AI. Smaller the number the less the handycap, the larger the number, the more the handycap." there are addition for visual settings, becouse else number < 1 gave more handycap, not less, or numbers > 1 gave more...

So, initially, i thought about addition or multiplication, and looked at the most settings for sh4, i thought that here addition for visual and multiplication for others, what looks strange... But now i don't know. I'm trying to open SHSim.act becouse read that there are some information about formulas, but сonsidering my poor knowledge about programming, don't think it will help.

About mod list, now i installed KSD-II with heavily modified OMEGU environment and there are:

Waves amplitude=0.7
Waves attenuation=0.06

what different from OM as i see... But later may be i will play FotRSU, dunno what i will change, but environment for sure.

Ahh okay, you are in the ATO. That is a whole different ball game. Aside from .cfg settings, the individual sensor type equipped and the range/sensitivity settings on those sensors, if set to 0.0 in the file, they use settings in the sim.cfg but other numbers in file, they take from their own .sim files. The settings for Allied units, esp in the ATO are going to be much different than IJN in order to provide the different experience of Allied escorts and technology vs Japanese.

This would explain your scope being spotted often, as while it has been a while, I recall my scope being spotted often even with great exposure discipline.

Indeed.

I would have to open up the visual sensors files for escorts etc but suspect the minimum height may be set too low, perhaps sensitivity factor of visual sensors are set too sensitive or sim.cfg needs some tweaking.

In TMO and my update, they will spot your scope in day time but if keep exposures at 10 secs or less and careful when close to enemy vessels, can usually avoid it. Night time, rarely spot scope unless close in which is fine. Odds of lookout spotting a periscope at night unless very close or moving at high speed and leaving a "feather" are very low.

But what about all those factors in sim.cfg? If they affect detection. How to calculate, for example, fog factor if it < 1, if we take range from 0 to 1, how it will be: less number = better detection or vice versa? And is it for sure that numbers more than 1 damp detection? That's all my questions.

Yes, and, anyway, may i ask you to know your settings?

"if we take range from 0 to 1, how it will be: less number = better detection or vice versa?" - i mean here, if numbers < 1 will be increase detection capabilities of escort? Sorry, i was too tired yesterday.

My current sim.cfg settings


;AI surface ships sensors cfg file

[Mech]
Waves amplitude=0.2 ;[0,1]
Waves attenuation=0.75 ;>=0

[AI Cannons]
Max error angle=20 ;3 ;[deg]
Max fire range=35000 ;[m]
Max fire wait=8 ;[s]

[AI AA guns]
Max error angle=15 ;[deg]
Max fire range=5486 ;[m]
Max fire wait=6 ;[s]

[AI detection]
Lost contact time=2160 ;[min]

[Visual]
Detection time=0.5 ;[s] min detection time.
Sensitivity=0.1 ;(0..1) min detection threshold double detection time.
Fog factor=0.5 ;[>=0]
Light factor=2.8 ;[>=0]
Waves factor=1.0 ;[>=0]
Enemy surface factor=30 ;50 ;[m2]
Enemy speed factor=14 ;[kt]
Thermal Layer Signal Attenuation=1.0

[Radar]
Detection time=1 ;[s]
Sensitivity=0.01 ;(0..1)
Waves factor=1.0 ;[>=0]
Enemy surface factor=5.0 ;[m2]
Thermal Layer Signal Attenuation=1.0

[Hydrophone]
Detection time=1 ;[s]
Sensitivity=0.15 ;(0..1)
Height factor=0 ;[m]
Waves factor=0.5 ;[>=0]
Speed factor=15 ;[kt]
Noise factor=0.35 ;[>=0]
Thermal Layer Signal Attenuation=1.5 ;[>0], 1 means no signal reduction, 3 equals signal reduction to 33%

[Sonar]
Detection time=5 ;[s]
Sensitivity=0.05 ;(0..1)
Waves factor=0.0 ;[>=0]
Speed factor=20 ;[kt]
Enemy surface factor=200 ;[m2]
Lose time=30 ;[s]
Thermal Layer Signal Attenuation=3.0 ;[>0], 1 means no signal reduction, 5 equals signal reduction to 20%



Far as calculating, honestly I gave up on that long ago lol as can calculate and things make sense, but then do not translate that way into the sim when running a patrol. So operating on some basic info posted by ducimus, I started experimenting with different settings and have gained a feel for how things will be typically. Again, there are a lot of variables here. With sim.cfg modified, you still have no way of knowing a individual units skill level or sensor package outside of well its early war so likely not the top sound gear, but skill level is one of great unknowns. Now, such as in TMO, it escorts are never set below veteran, because they are basically incompetent morons if they are. A few are set to elite.

I would say yes, higher the number, the more the handicap. Example, light factor of 2.8, if I go lower, light does not handicap the the enemy visual sensors enough, but if go to 2.9, they are nearly blind, 3.0, they are blind. Now, this is in TMO where have darker nights than any of the other mods have encountered and this is for escort sensors and they are at veteran and some elite. So in mods with "regular" nights, settings may need to be higher, it can be a tough balance. Again, the settings of the individual sensors files (AI_Visual_Sensors.sim or something named along those lines comes into play as well, perhaps even outside of the cfg.sim. Some visual sensors maybe have their own sensitivity settings .

With these settings, I can on surface , under no or little moonlight, work inside a convoy, pass as close as 1900 yards from a escort (set to veteran skill level) to get inside a convoy , attack, and get out.Most night surface torpedo attacks from from 2000-2500 yards at firing. Come under fire, but can turn and escape and can't recall last time I was hit. Get some close ones, but odds of being hit by gunfire at night at any reasonable distance, especially from a panicked gun crew are low. Can happen, but very rare. Now usually spotted, fired upon, pursued by with the dark night and those visuals, the night time is a shield as it was for actuals subs on surface. Obviously in daylight, they are much more likely to spot me. During end around, I stay at 10 NM from escorts at minimum.


You scope being spotted is likely a result of visual sensors being a little too sensitive, perhaps wave factor is too low and if being spotted at night, light factor too low. Difficult to say outside of modifying and experimenting with settings. I recall stock and sadly carried over to some mods how vessels without radar would spot player submarine approaching at low speed from miles away on surface at night lmao, it was absurd

Thank you, it will help. But about "Max fire range=35000", there what i read: " On a clear, calm day with good light in real life, you can see in excess of 32km" - https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/sho...d.php?t=103968 . And "Fog factor=0.5" - won't it double detection capabilities of escort meaning what i just corrected in my previous post?

There are two useful threads what i found on forum too, may be you read, but:
https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/sho...d.php?t=210786
https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=86629

I made the max fire range 35000 meters or 18. 9 nautical miles, to "encourage" the warships , mainly BB, CA, to open fire at longer ranges in surface battles, instead of always waiting until at what is point blank range... especially in daylight. The default is just 10000 meters. Result thus far has been that in daylight, depending on factors such as fog, type of vessel (BB will engage further out than say a CA) they(capital ships, mainly BB with their main batteries) are engaging at around 13000-18000 yards, sometimes more, depending on conditions.

At night obviously not firing at those ranges as can not see one another that far out so result being get historically accurate (mostly) battles such as Savo Island where they fight at what is point blank range for warships. Then, in 1944 such as at Leyte Gulf (Surigao Strait) US battleships (last battleship v battleship action in history) will open fire at longer ranges now, last testing they opened fire on japanese at 9,000 yards, sometimes little more or little less at night, depending on conditions. Previously, would wait until 5000 yards or so. This is due to improved radars assisting the visual sensors.


Of course this has no effect on their spotting player submarine as too low profile to be spotted or detected on radar at that distance. Again, am in the PTO and IJN radar was not up to par with allied, so that is reflected in the sim with my radar mod. I can pull off night surface attacks on convoys with radar equipped escorts. Now, it certainly makes it riskier and tougher to pull off, esp after torpedoes hit, they are alerted, it helps them locate quicker and maintain contact beyond visual range, also helps with gunnery accuracy but still possible.

At some point I want to worked on some of the ATO mods for SH 4 and maybe even SH 3, to make it where U boats can perform realistic night surface attacks, esp in the early war. Main thing is the nights being dark enough to interact with proper settings for sensors and sim.cfg


Far as the fog factor goes, like I said it's not that is really doubles their visual range, as there are a host of other factors but lowering it to 0.5 does remove some of a handicap caused by fog on visual sensors. I did this because at 1.0 the handicap is pretty strong and when checking weather, there seems to be a light fog present majority of time and noticed it hinders the escorts, allowing player to get away with a bit too much in daylight and esp at night, at times even rendering escorts too ineffective on surface at night, when combined with a dark moonless night, and a fog.

Now, I have two CFG's, one for early to mid war (1941-late 1943) and another for late 1943-end of war. They are mostly the same except for in visual, the enemy speed factor is increased from 14 to 17. and fog factor is at 0.8 instead of 0.5 .


This was done as war changed in pacific and player has to use different tactics, night surface attack became common place while japanese started in late 1943 running more convoys, with multiple escorts vs before most convoys had one, sometimes two escorts and many ships sailed without escort until mid 1943. In late 1943 and especially in mid to late 1944, they adopted some Alliedesque tactics, running large (by their standards) convoys of 12-20 ships with 4-6 escorts, sometimes more. These are convoys, that like actual us submarines did, player can get inside, attack from within on surface and in many cases get outwithout having to dive, emulating what actual US submarines did often. Now, problem is the the early-mid war settings for speed at 14 knots became a problem in late war as at times player at times in order to get inside convoy needs to use high surface speed and even when at reasonable distance during testing, I was getting spotted for going on 14 knots or slightly over due to inherent nature of having to operate closer to enemy escorts and merchants, at times preventing from pulling off historically accurate attacks such as from within, so I raised the speed factor in visual section of .cfg a bit since player in mid to late war will likely be operating on surface Now can still be detected below 17 knots, just provides a little more flexibility. if player needs to speed up momentarily to .

Early war, since not operating inside convoys on surface and escorts are typically ahead of astern, need handicap slightly lower so they can respond esp after attack.

I spent , many many hours during development of mod tweaking this, to balance things properly and found it with the settings I have. Main goal was so player could operate in a historically accurate realistic manner , but maintain the toughness TMO is known for. I am overall happy with results as achieved this, but as has said, there is no one solution because so many factors come into play. May find in one attack the fog hindered the enemy and in next one may find it really did not or it may have helped in a subtle manner during escape.

I think, you have to write this in header of the thread of your mod, it's very important and interesting information, making it much more inviting.

Good idea. I included a pretty detailed write up in the download with a lot of same info but will do so. The surface engagements is something I developed after last release, will be included in next release.

Thanks and glad you found that post. I have read it and consult it often as a reference, if need some refreshing. What Ducimus said is accurate but of course, a lot has been learned about the sim and sensors, since he created that post. Plus a lot of things have been modded as well. Great basic information though.


Something that does not discuss is how your location on earth (in SH 4) has can affect your experience. I was not sure about this, but when explained by a veteran modder or two and base don my experience in extensive testing, would say yes. I was surprised this was modeled in the sim but have learned that SH 4 is a bit more complex than initially seems.

I have noticed that closer to the equator and just south of equator, player is less likely to encounter a thermal layer and enemy sensors even in earlier part of war tend to be more effective.

As a final test of my mod, I played with a Gato from new construction in early 1942 until end of war, patrolling all different parts of the pacific, transferring around to get a feel for things. First time have ever survived the war in anything "les" than a Balao class in TMO, usually in TMO a Gato and lower just don't have the deep diving ability and strength to stand up in later war. Of course, with my changes I made thing a bit more realistic, while preserving difficulty and challenge, so I survived, but in 1943 when operating out of Brisbane, so patrolling near or just north and south of equater, I was getting beat up every patrol, nearly lost boat twice. Enemy just seemed to be tough, even though still did not have the top notch sensors of late war escorts. Interesting enough, it paralleled history in sorts as I had the USS Drum SS-228, which was out of Brisbane in 1943, was heavily damaged in November 1943, conning tower was cracked during depth charging, leaking and began to buckle on next test dive had to go to Mare Island, CA after to have it replaced. I kept pretty extensive notes and wrote up patrol reports posted in the reports thread and on my pc for reference as well, so could see a pattern when read them, which supports this.

Anyway, in 1944/1945 I was out of Pearl Harbor noticed when patrolling further north such as Sea of Okhotsk or North Cost Honshu, enemy sensors, even best were overall not as effective and more thermal layers were encountered. This spurred some discussion and extensive testing and even more after it was explained to me, seems to fit.

I don't have enough experience in the Atlantic side of things to comment on how this plays out there, as may be modeled differently etc . Long and Lat do effect visual sensors as well have been told and noticed, fog comes in to play as does the light. Ah, the complexities of SH 4 lol.