Surfaced Attacks

Otto Heinzmeir · 03-17-09, 10:16 PM

Found this thread regarding sub tactics.

http://www.uboataces.com/tactics-surfaced.shtml

The one thing that really stood out to me, is there is a line about some targets would take more than 1 torpedo to destroy, but even one torpedo would be enough to slow the ship down and drop it out of formation. Where it could easily be finished off later.

This doesn't appear to be modeled into the game. I have had several occasions where I put a torpedo in a ship and it did not drop out of formation. I don't mean a glancing blow either, but a solid hit like between center and bow or dead center.

Recently I fired at a convoy in poor visibility (Seems I am almost always in poor visibility) I saw the ship when I fired, but by the time the torps hit (two of them) the ship was hidden in fog. I know that at least one hit because my crew cheered. After I eluded the escorts. I am trailing the convoy to find the damaged ship. It never slowed down. With it being at night and in fog there would be know way of locating the same target again.

From reading the articel it doesn't sound like the subs are targeting the engines to slow the ship but are firing salvos. It mentions firing at the ships furthest away first and then at ships closer so the torps hit about the same time. Then supposedly one hit (apparently most anywhere) would be enough for the ship to drop out of the convoy.

RoaldLarsen · 03-17-09, 10:31 PM

I haven't kept careful statistics about this, but it is my impression that most of the time I hit a ship with a torpedo, the ship slows down (if it doesn't sink).

The ones that don't slow down are usually either slightly damaged, or very large.

Hitman · 03-19-09, 11:27 AM

You are basically right, but in any case be careful with what you read in webs like that one....I have noticed several errors on it

Otto Heinzmeir · 03-19-09, 01:45 PM

Oh dear.

Good point. Its very generalized. Articles that are one page tend to put things into a one size fits all category.

nikbear · 03-19-09, 05:28 PM

Not strictly true,have read many books writen by well known Kaleuns,Teddy Suhren,Wolfgang Luth,to name but a few who go on to tell of they're convoy attacks where 1 eeL results in a fireball that engulfs the ship,they're descriptions resemble something out of Dante's inferno and yet an attack on a convoy in GWX results in tankers that require multiple hits with barely a flicker or flame

.Just finished a convoy attack and I have to say it bare's little or no resemblence to anything written by eye witness accounts

2 tankers hit,1 gradually sank after quite awhile,the other hit twice and marched on as if an elephant was swatting a fly

no drop in knots or anything

You would have got more flame out of a candel in a hurricane

Strangest thing was,some time earlier I hit a costal merchant,it went off as if it was loaded up to the gunnals with gunpowder,it was there one minute,gone the next

Its all very strange,and doesn't seem to bare any relation to what the ships might have onboard.You read in many books about seamen not wanting to crew certain ships because of what they have onboard,Iron ore and such like,they sank like stones and crews hated them! And yet when you look in SH3Cmdr to see what is on the list of your sunk ships,the one's that should have gone down like hot bricks lingered the most!!!!

Something is definately not right

Oneshot/Onekill · 03-20-09, 06:20 AM

Actually nikbear, not to starting poking holes in your theory, but there is some realistic relevince to why the tankers you refer to didnt appear to suffer a mortal wound.

Tanker's througout the war weren't just loaded with some type of petrolium product. In many many cases they were only carrying fresh water, or some type of other soluible liquid, which would explain why they did not go up like a roman candle, nor suffer any outward looking structural damage..as the afore mentioned liquid would act as ballast to help keep them afloat.

03-17-09, 10:16 PM	#1
Otto Heinzmeir Weps Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Wilhelmshaven Local Pub Posts: 361 Downloads: 2 Uploads: 0	Surfaced Attacks Found this thread regarding sub tactics. http://www.uboataces.com/tactics-surfaced.shtml The one thing that really stood out to me, is there is a line about some targets would take more than 1 torpedo to destroy, but even one torpedo would be enough to slow the ship down and drop it out of formation. Where it could easily be finished off later. This doesn't appear to be modeled into the game. I have had several occasions where I put a torpedo in a ship and it did not drop out of formation. I don't mean a glancing blow either, but a solid hit like between center and bow or dead center. Recently I fired at a convoy in poor visibility (Seems I am almost always in poor visibility) I saw the ship when I fired, but by the time the torps hit (two of them) the ship was hidden in fog. I know that at least one hit because my crew cheered. After I eluded the escorts. I am trailing the convoy to find the damaged ship. It never slowed down. With it being at night and in fog there would be know way of locating the same target again. From reading the articel it doesn't sound like the subs are targeting the engines to slow the ship but are firing salvos. It mentions firing at the ships furthest away first and then at ships closer so the torps hit about the same time. Then supposedly one hit (apparently most anywhere) would be enough for the ship to drop out of the convoy.

03-19-09, 11:27 AM	#3
Hitman Pacific Aces Dev Team Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Spain Posts: 6,109 Downloads: 109 Uploads: 2	You are basically right, but in any case be careful with what you read in webs like that one....I have noticed several errors on it __________________ One day I will return to sea ...

03-19-09, 05:28 PM	#5
nikbear Sea Lord Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Northampton,UK Posts: 1,859 Downloads: 86 Uploads: 0	Not strictly true,have read many books writen by well known Kaleuns,Teddy Suhren,Wolfgang Luth,to name but a few who go on to tell of they're convoy attacks where 1 eeL results in a fireball that engulfs the ship,they're descriptions resemble something out of Dante's inferno and yet an attack on a convoy in GWX results in tankers that require multiple hits with barely a flicker or flame.Just finished a convoy attack and I have to say it bare's little or no resemblence to anything written by eye witness accounts 2 tankers hit,1 gradually sank after quite awhile,the other hit twice and marched on as if an elephant was swatting a flyno drop in knots or anythingYou would have got more flame out of a candel in a hurricaneStrangest thing was,some time earlier I hit a costal merchant,it went off as if it was loaded up to the gunnals with gunpowder,it was there one minute,gone the nextIts all very strange,and doesn't seem to bare any relation to what the ships might have onboard.You read in many books about seamen not wanting to crew certain ships because of what they have onboard,Iron ore and such like,they sank like stones and crews hated them! And yet when you look in SH3Cmdr to see what is on the list of your sunk ships,the one's that should have gone down like hot bricks lingered the most!!!!Something is definately not right __________________ 'It is not surely known when the grey wolf shall come upon the seat of the gods' Ericksmal.

03-17-09, 10:31 PM	#2
RoaldLarsen Weps Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Control Room Posts: 355 Downloads: 8 Uploads: 0	I haven't kept careful statistics about this, but it is my impression that most of the time I hit a ship with a torpedo, the ship slows down (if it doesn't sink). The ones that don't slow down are usually either slightly damaged, or very large.

03-19-09, 01:45 PM	#4
Otto Heinzmeir Weps Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Wilhelmshaven Local Pub Posts: 361 Downloads: 2 Uploads: 0	Oh dear. Good point. Its very generalized. Articles that are one page tend to put things into a one size fits all category.

03-20-09, 06:20 AM	#6
Oneshot/Onekill Captain Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Drinking a cold one in Davey Jone's locker. Posts: 487 Downloads: 26 Uploads: 0	Actually nikbear, not to starting poking holes in your theory, but there is some realistic relevince to why the tankers you refer to didnt appear to suffer a mortal wound. Tanker's througout the war weren't just loaded with some type of petrolium product. In many many cases they were only carrying fresh water, or some type of other soluible liquid, which would explain why they did not go up like a roman candle, nor suffer any outward looking structural damage..as the afore mentioned liquid would act as ballast to help keep them afloat.