Revisiting SH3, looking for enlightenment
 

Hey, first post so just a quick intro. 41 y.o. who after a few years away from SH3 decided to revisit this game. Very soon I realized I'd need some help. So, here I am.

Ok, mods I use right now
GWX Gold
MooseMeasure

First question. MooseMeasure is great for accurate distances but have there been a bearing tool (nav map) mod that sorted the misguiding bearing marks? 1 degree matters quite a bit at a distance, I found out :/

Second: The flak tutorial, what's with that? 5 times in a row, within the first 2 minutes, the tower and flak cannon destroyed and 2-3 sailors dead, critical floodings and not much cheering. Not bad for a "simulated" attack. Q: Is that right at all? I really don't remember it being that tough to survive the tutorials.

3: On the tutorial theme: Every instructional vid I've come across so far
plays it on close to zero realism. I'm not going for 100% just yet but manual targeting/plotting/solution is where the fun is. Enter the torpedoing tutorial. Is that meant to be played without auto-everything in the torpedo department?

4: Stadimeter. How do one use it? I know how to get _a_ reading but I remember I gave up on it fairly quickly because the readings just couldn't be trusted. I've experimented with keeping one line at the waterline, I've kept it at the horizon, couldn't even tell which was right, the results were way off (300-600 m) at less than 1000 metres. Question then: What is a reasonable margin for error here?

5: Attack map. Was there ever a mod that gave tools like on the nav map?

6: In the ship recognition book, some ships appear 2 times. I've gathered one is the lit, the other the unlit version. Correct me if I'm wrong. What confuses me more is some ships appear to look identical while being different ships. Since they have different dimensions, are there a way to tell them apart, other than sail up to them and ask?

Last Q: My pc isn't a powerhouse by today's standards. 2.8 GHz dual core, 2 GB ram, GeForce GT 220. With that in mind, are there any GWX compatible mods you would recommend for any reason, gameplay, realism, fixes etc?

I am looking into the 4 bearing method. I came across Kuikueg's (hope I got his name right) method and it blew my socks off. Years ago I knew it should be possible from a stationary position but I never found the method, despite sleep loss for weeks! On the move I dared not believe could be done. So a huge thank you to Kuikeg for ending my search and sleep loss!

WELCOME ABOARD! :sunny:

Just a wee lad then. :D

Ok, mods I use right now
GWX Gold
MooseMeasure[/quote]
I would highly recommend SH3 Commander. Not a mod but a tool that helps you get the most from your campaign. Works with any mod (needs an extra file that comes with GWX).
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/show...7&postcount=12


Don't know the answer to question one, as I don't use MooseMeasure.

GWX made the AA tutorial very hard. To compensate you get the full 1500 renown bonus for passing the Navigation class, so you don't have to do any of the others.

For all the experience I have, I still can't answer any of your other questions. The mods I use are all geared toward a realistic feel without having to actually have the skills of a real submarine captain. I'm old, tired, lazy and stupid. Sorry.

3. You can play it with auto or manual, whichever you want. Go for full manual. That would be what you would have learned by the time you was given a U-boat to command and it's much more fun having those torpedoes miss at times.

4. The stadimeter is a bit unrealistic anyways. The Uzo for example didn't even have that if I remember correctly. Try Magui Final, OLC GUI, Hitman's Optics or U-Jagd tools mod. They will add to your gameplay and teach you more about manual estimation.

5: I don't know about that.

6: I think you could try Ric's recognition manual. That has different paint schemes for the two similar looking ships and helps you recognize which ship of the two types you are seeing. Anyways the difference is so small that it does not really count. The real life Kaleuns didn't always know what they were shooting at. They just estimated the ship's size.

Last Q: I recommend the mods seen in my signature.

Welcome to Subsim :arrgh!:

Thanks for the welcome and replies, guys!

Just a wee lad, eh? Nice, I like that :haha:

Still, so old my memory gets sunk at 2:30AM. It's not MooseMeasure that has the bad bearing markers. Still, the sub marker overlay on the nav map WITH the bearing markers, any mod with those markers correct?

As of now, the only way I know of to get a good bearing would be to plot my exact heading then calculate what the angle on the first leg on the protractor should be. Then, with the protractor, find the two extremes when the angle would change, mark those two lines with the ruler, half the angle to get the exact angle halving the possible error.
Needless to say it's a bit tedious.

OR I would calculate the tangents and measure up a triangle. Not as tedious but kinda silly.

The problem with plotting exact bearings is one I am very keen on sorting out.

Sailor Steve: I know SH3 Commander from before my GWX days. A must have. After GWX however, and the needed file, I don't really know what happened but I ended up with no SH3C. I am far from being a computer wizard.

Sublynx: I will certainly look up those mods. As for the torpedoing tutorial, I wouldn't mind go all manual but the initial position... someone should sack the instructor who sailed the sub into that position... As it is, I don't quite see how full manual is doable in the tutorial but then again, I'm barely a cadet.

As for getting target recognition all botched up, I have no problems with that, it does add a nice touch. Just making sure there wasn't anything I missed, so to speak.

Yea, the UZO only had a vertical line and range was estimated by how much
of the scope the targeted ship filled. Or something like that. :O:

Welcome aboard Von Due! :salute:

To plot bearings I believe stock GWX comes with a compass scale on the line tool. (it's been ages since I played GWX modless) It should have South/180 on top, and East/90 on the left. There is nothing wrong with that one. It is deliberately rotated 180 degrees.

1: Take the bearing,
2: add your course to it.
3: Then reduce it with 360 if the result is more than 360. Now you have what is known as "True bearing"
4: start a line from your location.
5: draw the line out in a direction that makes the (true) bearing pass over the scale mark

I personally tweaked these files so I have that 'rotated' scale on all 4 line-based maptools. See this file: http://www.gamefront.com/files/22006..._all_lines.zip Anyway, you should be able to use these. It's JSGME friendly.

I come from a habbit of wanting to be uber accurate. But it just can't be done. The bearings provided by the crew isn't going to be any better than 1 degree. So no point in getting that halve degree with the protractor. It's better to average your plots over a longer time. More time to do it in so less taxing on the nerves. And more time to see if it changes behaviour. Averaging plots over 13 minutes means speed is accurate to a quarter knot.

Oh yeah, instead of the periscope or uzo, I often rely on the watch officer to report bearing and range when he's on top. You gotta delegate responsabilities right. ;)

In my Gamefront filehosting page is also a tutorial on 4 bearing line interception by Nefelodam, it predates Kuikeg. But they are changing file hosting policy so don't expect it to be there for long. I'm going to set up my own file server instead. But that might take a while yet.

Thanks, Dowly!

One more questions:

The crew's reknown. Does their reknown influence anything? Reason I ask is, I now run SH3Cmnd with GWX. One officer is at the top of the ladder and I am considering replacing him before first mission with a torpedo officer I can shape to my likings. I might even replace all officers with fresh out of academy ones. But, if the original officer's reknown of 1001 matters a whole lot, I would reconsider.

EDIT: Thanks to Pisces too.

Yes, you are right, total accuracy is impossible but I figured by finding the exact angle, at least my error is halved. An example: At 10,000 metres, 1 degree means roughly 175 metres uncertainty. By halving the angle, I get an uncertainty of about 88 metres. By observing from the surface and keeping an eye on the TDC, I can reduce the uncertainty even further by eyeballing fractions of a degree. I just did a test with god's eye enabled and at 3000 metres the position I found was off by roughly 10 metres from the ship icon on the map. The 3 readings I made gave 2 intersecting points that were less than 10 metres apart.