Destroyers Discussion (getting rid of pin point drops)

[gouldjg]

I think it will soon time for new threads with a summary for what has been discovered to date and how it seems to be working in game.

It is fairly obvious we all have different approaches and maybe we should do a upto date summary on a new thread for each approach. I know work is still continuing and nobody is really wanting to place any full mod out due to the (not everyone will be happy syndrome) but maybe we can start a new discussion so more people can get the instant benefits of some of the things that are available to try.

We can still dicuss and proceed with further developments as we go also.

I am finnishing off my stuff and trying it all on RUB with IC and no detection metres to see if difficulty has gone up and uberness has gone down. If this works for me to a satisfying level then I will post my settings including the changed RUB crew ratings campaign files.

This will take me a couple of more days to wrap up and test but I am now tired of chasing the DD, DE ai. I suppose when I have no external view and sensors or warnings, the game will be better immedietly.

I will just live with it and be happy that somethings have been improved for me.


@ Redwine

I would be greatfull to try your actives and radar settings red once your happy with them. Please post or send after your done.

@CB

I am watching your progree with the RPM and engine speed tweeks with gret interest an dhope you crack it.

@TT

Thanks for all you tools as they have been a absolute essential element in improving this game for everyone.

If any person deserves the Modders freind award for this game, it is you in my book.

@Hemisent

Thanks for the feedback, I can now look into those aspects that were failing at the time.

@Col7777

Thanks for some super info

@Others

Thanks for helping with tests, ideas, and general chat

I am not finnishing or anything, I am just half convinced that we are stuck with the ships ai as it is without DEV team hard coding.

I think any noise added to dc explosions will cause side effects that DD will carpet bomb that area.

I am happy with hydrophone settings that I have done.

I just want better active settings now IMHO

I also want better Visual settings

And have to trust Redwine with the Radars cos I am cluless on their history or game effects.

I need to start looking at damage setting for myself now to see if I can only get deaths through sinking & Flooding.

I want collisions to be almost certain death or at least crew get killed and I am on the way down.

This alone takes a lot of time to do but hopefully TT's new sound tweaker can help me in some areas that were previously going to hinder some of my plans.

Thanks folks

Will keep reporting anything new should it come up as an issue.

[Redwine]

Originally Posted by Kaleunt

Redwine, be carefull, all sensors from type 268 down to type 286 are
british radars not active sonars!

Agree Kaleunt ...... ,my problem now is those old radars do not detect my periscope, then it make your life too easy.

But with an averaging the other sensors, Clase C, J and Flower become a little bit dangerous now, even if they radar cant detect my scope.

The objective i follow is :

Just imagine there ar 4 leves of dstroyers

Dummy - Experienced - Veteran - Elite

I want to convert Dummies into Experienced

And Elite into Veteran.

So have only two levels, not too dummy and not to elite.

[Redwine]

Originally Posted by gouldjg

@ Redwine

I would be greatfull to try your actives and radar settings red once your happy with them. Please post or send after your done.

http://rapidshare.de/files/8688662/7_Stage.zip.html

This set of files has not the same behavior than the set making me happy last two days....

After found some radar settings zeroed with Mini Tweaker, and replace the file, behavior changes.

But after many touching, it is so similar.

I can understand those extranges behaviours, in example if you dont remove the renamed files, or this case, when i found some settings zeroed, but after reinstall the files they was not zeroed, may be the game was making no sense of some data, sadly i can recover that exact behaviour, but it is good.

Not finished, need extensive tests, specially in campaingn, i am testing only in single missions, with early DDs and with later DDs.

Try and comment. I think so i dont forget any file in the pack.....

[Kaleunt]

Redwine, i think that the AI_sensors.dat you use is the file with the snorkel
fix from Jungman. To make the snorkel quasi undetectable from airborne radars Jungman has
tweaked the minsurface and the minheight values of all AI-Radars.
The MinHeight value was "0" in the stockgame AI_Sensors.dat, Jungmann
has increased this value to 2,5m for all AI-Radars types. So all
destroyers are blind from sea level up to 2,5m from the surface. A periscope is by this way impossible to detect by radar. The minsurface value (the surface(m²)of the object to be detected ) was modified too.

[Ducimus]

Originally Posted by gouldjg

I think it will soon time for new threads with a summary for what has been discovered to date and how it seems to be working in game.

It is fairly obvious we all have different approaches and maybe we should do a up to date summary on a new thread for each approach.

A recap / summary is probably overdue. We have 23 pages of brainstorming here. I think a summary is in order for clarification, and as a general report on what progress has been made and what remains a problem.


Personnaly after the tests ive run on sonar, im a little burnt out and have resigned to myself that the problem is the AI itself. To me, that just ruins the campaign game entirely. Its just a shooting gallery. Ive avoided unrealistic things in my play in order to increase the challenge, but after this i think i may just uberize the DD's, grab myself an XXI in 43', play tell 45 and just go nuts with the tonnage.

[gouldjg]

Just one last thought I had.


I was looking at the visual settings and noticed enemy speed = 15

Any ideas????

I am hoping this may be part of why they sometimes do and dont spot torpedoes in the water plus the waves factor etc.

We all know that ships have evasion in built i.e. the acadamy and that ship that shoots off as soon as you launch.

Can this be exploited to work better?

I wonder if ????????????

[Col7777]

The problem of having ANOTHER thread on the same subject is we will be jumping back and forward all the time, I can see post like:

"Not sure which thread it was in but... " and/or "I think I saw something about this in the other thread."

I won't know which thread to report any changes if any, or shall I report on both threads?

[HEMISENT]

Good point Col7777, I'm confused enough jumping between all these pages.

[CB..]

i agree don't go starting a new thread--this one's not done yet by a long shot--

continuing the slight poetic theme--

There comes a time
in every mods development,
where in mystery it can
find it self in envelopement,
but keep on and persist
and finally in the end,
we'll all find out
it isn't a white elephant--

i thank you--

[Redwine]

Originally Posted by Kaleunt

Redwine, i think that the AI_sensors.dat you use is the file with the snorkel
fix from Jungman. To make the snorkel quasi undetectable from airborne radars Jungman has
tweaked the minsurface and the minheight values of all AI-Radars.
The MinHeight value was "0" in the stockgame AI_Sensors.dat, Jungmann
has increased this value to 2,5m for all AI-Radars types. So all
destroyers are blind from sea level up to 2,5m from the surface. A periscope is by this way impossible to detect by radar. The minsurface value (the surface(m²)of the object to be detected ) was modified too.

Yes i based on Jungsman mod, wich is my standar installation before this changes.

If not remember bad Jungman set for min height is 1m not 2.5m.

I think so 1m is a good value, i set it, if you maintain your scope under 1m it will be not detected, it looks easy but not, waves make the scope rise and down height and you see how the sthealt meter become green/red.

But Jungman min surface are 0.03 m2 for later radars, wich is a surface of 10cmx30cm, about 4x12 inches wich is so sensible, it is 1/3 of the surface of your keyboard.

But the early radars was a min surface of 1.5 m2...... a little bit poor sesnsibility.

If you see in the settings, i reduce the min surface for early radars and increase it for later ones.

I rise the early radars to the min surface or middle age, and decrese a little bit the later ones.

Any way, even with this help, early radars can not detect my scope, i need to increse their sensibility, may be real in early war times, but make the game so easy, ........ i am thinking in to put all radars as later war times.

[Col7777]

CB,

Your thoughts/advice please, did you read my above post where I said, if a line is edited out of the Sim.cfg using the ; I'm thinking the game might use the default from the Sim.dat file.
I'm wondering which lines you recommend if any to edit out to try this, I tried a few but I might be editing the wrong line, it might have been my imagination but there was a bit more aggression from the DD's, I used the stock Sim.cfg btw.

[gouldjg]

Sorry guys

Ok no new threads,

This bloody site is not letting me in lately anyway.

How many player here use sh3 commander?

@redwine

Have you tried stiebler uboat radar mod. I suppose with this you could use later war settings anyway if it is not so bad.

I have not yet tried your settings due to work issues but will do tonight or tommorow.

[Col7777]

I tried most of the afternoon to access the site.

This RAND stuff I think isn't being read, I tried putting the RAND in a different place like in the mission files like this example:

Detection timeRAND=1
SensitivityRAND=1
Fog factorRAND=1
etc etc

All it did was act like the renamed cfg we did earlier, the DD's were uber.

[CB..]

Originally Posted by Col7777

CB,

Your thoughts/advice please, did you read my above post where I said, if a line is edited out of the Sim.cfg using the ; I'm thinking the game might use the default from the Sim.dat file.
I'm wondering which lines you recommend if any to edit out to try this, I tried a few but I might be editing the wrong line, it might have been my imagination but there was a bit more aggression from the DD's, I used the stock Sim.cfg btw.

yup Col that's basically the trick i'm relying on by using these hydrophone section entrys (or where-ever the game gets it's defaults from at leat even if not from the AI_sensors.dat)

[Hydrophone]
range factor=1 ;[>=0]
fog factor=0 ;[>=0]
light factor=0 ;[>=0]
waves factor=0.2 ;[>=0]
speed factor=0.5 ;[>=0]
enemy speed=0 ;[>=0]
aspect=0 ;[>=0]
noise factor=1.0 ;[>=0]
sensor height factor=0 ;[>=0]
already tracking modifier=20 ;[detection probability modifier]
decay time=150 ;[>0] already tracking bonus decay, in seconds
uses crew efficiency=true ;[true or false]


note there's NO sensitivity entry--which is why (using your discovery ) the phones get a substantial boost--which was task number one for me--



i think i have now a set up which i would be happy (if i was going to release a mod) to call DES1 for SH3

based on prolonged experiences in campaign patrols--

one--
the DD's are doing their job--as they have a RIGHT to do--they are not fast asleep untill you get detected--they are pernamently on duty -as far as the events you percieve in the game go anyway-- your just another "possible" sub contact to the DD's - not GOD
two--
it is possible to get well within torp launch range 2 - 3000 metres of a convoy undetected---the "detect-O-meter" may be red tho--
but being in the right position for a torp attack is extremely difficult as the DD's know where the best positions are and are usually there before you--
making this extremely dodgy--
three--
any torp attack on any convoy results in an instant response from the DD's-- usually a very dangerous one--if you had one DD sniffing aound before the torp attack --you suddenly get a whole lot more coming over and joining in--resulting in dangerous and effective DC attacks on your approximaite location--and it's possible to evade these attacks and lose them again (the degree of difficulty depending on the date and how much you use the AIDS external view etc etc)
four--tonnage is no trivial matter to accumalate--
and allways involves risk-
five-- the entire situation during a convoy attack is extremely fluid-- and impossible to predict--it could ALLWAYS go either way--
six--
LOL-- the little sub detection meter--is now a HUNCH-O-METER
you now have a hunch that you have been detected--not a definite comfirmation-- which is a whole lot more fun---
seven--
the decoys are VERY effective -- but this comes at a price--deploying a decoy is a great way to confuse that lone tracking DD into dropping his DC's in the wrong place--BUT don't expect him to be a LONE DD for long once you've deployed a decoy-- oh no--you just 100% CONFIRMED your self as a definite sub contact---and the other DD's are now going to get involved--and they have the right to do this--a decoy is SUPPOSED to attract attention after all--
so the decoys are more fun to use--and are highly tactical

and finally ALL these effects are there every time i play a campaign patrol--

i get far less tonnage -- and have far more fun--not a set up for the faint hearted tonnage kings!!--

[gouldjg]

CB

I am sold

Give it to me Please pretty please.

If this leaves me in some dark as to what is happening on the sea level then I am happy to try it out and provide some feedback.

I am at a loss with anything more to add unless any new discoveries are made.

I also want to move onto sub damage and sinking work.