5 or 10 meter. Makes a difference? - Page 2

Armistead · 11-14-11, 02:01 PM

One of the pains in the game, moreso with mods like TMO is it's very difficult to pull off a night surface attack, but it can be done. The problem is getting close enough, say 2000 yards, the bigger problem is once you attack you get spotted and have to dive or get blasted, so why not dive anyway. The issue is often you have to turn and run and once you get broadside they usually get a visual on you.

I find the better tactic is to setup decks awash or surfaced with the right conditions with stern attacks from about 2000 yards, that way I can just run away. I can put plenty of distance by the time escorts come and why they're searching where my torps came from I can then go in bow making another surface attack and run again, keep repeating until targets destroyed.

Later war when the enemy has escorts I will often shoot decks awash dived enough where engines still run, depending on the mod and radar height values they can't pick me up. However, I prefer being totally surfaced attacking as I said above.

TorpX · 11-14-11, 07:32 PM

Sailor Steve and Sailor Steve:

OK. You have presented very good evidence. I'll concede it was a commonly used tactic. Still seems a bit odd to me, though.

Quote:

He says "The metacenter is a point where the center of gravity of the boat coincides with the center of buoyancy; a very hazardous point which must be passed quickly. If the center of gravity and the center of buoyancy are coincident and if a wave were to hit the boat from the side, capsizing could occur. Those Hollywood movies where a submarine is shown with decks awash, making an approach on the surface is mostly fiction. That is about where the two centers become coincident and it doesn't take much to roll the boat over. "

O'Kane said much the same thing, which is one of the reasons I had my doubts.

I wonder how much they trimmed down their boats and how much speed they lost?

Quote:

One of the pains in the game, moreso with mods like TMO is it's very difficult to pull off a night surface attack, but it can be done. The problem is getting close enough.............

I agree. Night attacks seem tricky. I may try some of your 'decks awash' methods next time I'm in that situation.

Sailor Steve · 11-14-11, 08:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TorpX

Sailor Steve and Sailor Steve:

Both of me, eh?

Quote:

I wonder how much they trimmed down their boats and how much speed they lost?

As I said (and I could be wrong), it's my understanding that it was used for stealth during an attack, and they didn't normally cruise the Pacific in that condition.

TorpX · 11-16-11, 06:50 PM

Quote:

Both of me, eh?

Er, I meant Sailor Steve and Rockin Robbins.

Quote:

As I said (and I could be wrong), it's my understanding that it was used for stealth during an attack, and they didn't normally cruise the Pacific in that condition.

Yeah, I get that, but in the cases I recall, the Captains wanted to be able to move FAST, when the fireworks started. Remember, we had a discussion about how (or if) a fleetboat was able to move at 22 knots (or 23, or whatever it was).

Rockin Robbins · 11-17-11, 09:31 AM

Good point. After sneaking in on my first approach with decks awash to 2000 yards or so, I fire undetected but immediately surface, turn tail and run at high speed. Ususally that results in the escorts doing a pretty perfunctory job of giving half-hearted chase while I get away to end around to the other side of the convoy.

So shoot, helm hard over while the torps are on the way to target. When the boom happens, surface and turn tail at high speed. That's the program on this boat. A boom is a detection and decks awash ceases to be an advantage.

TorpX · 11-19-11, 11:54 PM

What I've done in the past is either cut into the target's track and count on my narrow profile to keep me hidden, or come in on the surface, but submerge before I get too close. In the former case I would not turn away until the torps hit or just before, lest the target see me and evades the attack. (Ships are really way too maneuverable in this game.)

However, I haven't really made enough attacks to have a "standard" proceedure.

scubamatt · 11-20-11, 03:45 AM

For me, making a surface attack usually happens only if I must run on the surface to get into attack range - I encounter a ship moving at medium or fast speed, where I have no chance of getting into an optimum firing position if I submerge.

Decks awash is the best compromise I can make in that case. I run flat out on the surface, getting as close as I dare (this is the point where I catch myself holding my breath in real life). Then it's set my depth at 25 feet (Sargo class), go decks awash and get even closer.

If I'm spotted, I can crash dive fast and evade because the sub is already flooded down. If I'm not spotted I can take my shots, then turn aside and motor away. Like RR said, once something explodes, all bets are off. I figure everyone is looking at me and it's time to beat feet. Surface and sprint (if no close gun threat) or sink like a stone and rig for silent running.

NOTE FOR NEW CAPTAINS: If you've never done the 'decks awash' thing, try doing a crash dive while using time compression. Watch the depth gauge and see how it goes down, then back up a bit and then down..slowly at first...then suddenly plummets. Now surface and do the same thing again, only start from a depth of 25 feet or so (depends on your type of sub). Notice how much faster you are able to get under. Decks awash is also handy if you absolutely must come up for fresh air while there is a serious risk of detection. Come up slowly until you're able to flush your air system (usually a tiny bit deeper than your flooded down depth). You get rid of the CO2 in your boat, but only expose the absolute minimum of your sub to do so. (I don't know if it's TMOwTw or stock, but there is a specific sound effect that sounds like blowers/air rushing when I'm flushing the CO2, and that's my cue that I'm at the correct depth. The CO2 level drops a second or two later.)

jcope · 11-20-11, 11:52 AM

I would like to be able to use the external cam on a few tests to get a feel for how visible I really am in various conditions. I wish there was a way to go to a distant position, pull out binoculars and do try to see the sub. I often wonder whether I'm not spotted because of crew inexperience on the enemy's part or because the sub is really that hard to see.

I will definitely practice the decks awash technique. But it would be good to have a feel for how close to be when it becomes necessary, and when you're too close to even be that exposed.

I have yet to make a surface attack, except an early war shot at some docked ships.

Sailor Steve · 11-20-11, 03:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jcope

I would like to be able to use the external cam on a few tests to get a feel for how visible I really am in various conditions. I wish there was a way to go to a distant position, pull out binoculars and do try to see the sub. I often wonder whether I'm not spotted because of crew inexperience on the enemy's part or because the sub is really that hard to see.

The problem with that idea is that it is after all only a computer simulation. What you could see is what the computer renders on the screen. What the enemy can see is what the computer tells them they can see. This has been show countless times by players complaining that their watch crew spots a ship but they can't see it, or by the opposite - they can see a ship plainly but complain that the watch crew must be blind. Likewise the sonar - you can hear things the soundman can't, because of the way the program translates things to the screen or the speakers.

The only way going to the enemy ship and looking through his binoculars could work is if the program is adjusted perfectly so that what you see and what the AI sees is the same. As far as I know they haven't been identical yet, in any of the games.

jcope · 11-20-11, 04:32 PM

I agree. But it would still be better information than I have now. I think having a rough idea of where I should start worrying about being visible couldn't hurt. Conditions and AI variability can be accounted for as well.

Real life captains must have been able to observe other subs at sea, and must have had feel for how easy to spot they were.

scubamatt · 11-21-11, 12:25 PM

Well you can always pick an enemy harbor and sneak up to it during the day. Pick one without a roving guard ship, like the one on the north east coast of Formosa. You want something that has patrol boats sitting around doing nothing. Unless they detect you, they don't start shooting or move from their spots, so they are a great way to test your visibility.

Move up to it (submerged) until you are about 10nm away. Save your game at this point, so you have the same starting conditions each time.

Surface, then motor straight forward at about 2-3 knots, plain as day. When they finally spot you, make a note of how close you got.

Reload and do it again, only this time set your depth at the decks awash setting. You should be able to get closer before they see you.

Reload and do it again at periscope depth, with your attack scope up and visible.

Then you can compress time and try it again at night if you like. You should see a difference between each method.

(Edit: You can also use an enemy fishing boat/sampan to check this. The next time you encounter one, save your game then try going straight at him surfaced/decks awash/periscope depth. Note the point at which he freaks out and starts making frantic turns to avoid you, then reload and check a different method.)

CapnScurvy · 11-21-11, 02:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jcope

I would like to be able to use the external cam on a few tests to get a feel for how visible I really am in various conditions. I wish there was a way to go to a distant position, pull out binoculars and do try to see the sub. I often wonder whether I'm not spotted because of crew inexperience on the enemy's part or because the sub is really that hard to see.

A few months ago I set up a test mission with several enemy warships at different ranges around an submerged sub. Actually I had saved two identical test setups, one in daylight, the other at night. I reworked the stock "AI_Sensors.dat" file to only have one particular sensor working at a time (its tough to know what exactly detected the sub in certain conditions). My tests were to just work on the subs detection with visual AI. One during the day, the other at night, and eliminating the other possible sensors detection capabilities. I documented the amount of time it took for an enemy ship to detect the sub with a partial periscope rise; a full periscope rise; a partial sub surfaced position (decks awash); and a full surfaced position. I took into account various distances that were between the sub and target ships and attempted to see when an enemy could detect the sub, and when it couldn't. The seas were calm to remove any "Wave Factor" multiplier.

I found some surprising things.

Specific to the visual detection, I found the "Light Factor" actually is backwards to what it should be. In other words, the higher the "Light Factor" figure, the easier it is for the AI to detect the sub at night. Dropping the figure helped in preventing night detection, it also lowered the ability to have the same sub detected during the day! A sub sitting off from a warship at a very reasonable distance was not detected at all during the day. Actually, like in the stock game, they could be made blind as bats during the day, yet detect you quite well at night. Just the exact opposite of what should occur. Because there seems to be a "default" setting for the night time detection, there was no way to get away from this backward detection. I'm not surprised about this with the game, I've seen many issues that have been revealed to be wrong with the games mechanics.

Another thing is the fact that no two detections are the same. There seems to be a random generated way the sub is visually detected, even though the sub is put in front of the enemy equally. One time the sub is detected within a few seconds of exposure, the next time it may take a couple of minutes. If it's detected at all! This made my testing needing to take an "average" of the subs exposure/length of time calculation. No two are alike in detection time.

So what's it all mean?

Well, it means if you expect to have the game allow you to sneak up onto a target under the cover of darkness, you can forget it. Not without throwing off the daytime detection to the point of absurdity. It also means you need to take several tests of the same ship positions in order to get an average of detection specifics. No two are alike. This also means a players ability to slip by a specific enemy is totally random; trying the same mission another time, will probably give you a different result.

mobucks · 11-21-11, 03:58 PM

I find TMO 2.2 to be reasonable in terms of enemy AI detection of my ship. Yesterday I was running at flank speed towards a small TF of 2 small cruisers. They were clearly visible with binoculars. I was running perpendicular to them at full speed undetected, but as soon as I turned and showed them my broadside, they started firing.
Night surface attacks have been made out to 1200m with decks fully awash, the AI merchants never see me on a dark night. I tried a night attack fully surfaced, I think he saw me at 1500-2000yards. I only did this once, so I'm not sure If it was detection or a random zig, I wasnt fired upon because the merchant was unarmed.

TorpX · 11-22-11, 04:21 AM

Poking around in the SH III section, I noticed they have the same issues. Sometimes they have situations where their crews can see enemy ships at long distances, eventhough the enemy was blind and could not spot them. Other times the detection ranges varied drastically, due to a absurdly large random influence. They seem to be making some progress toward fixing it though.

11-17-11, 09:31 AM	#20
Rockin Robbins Navy Seal Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: DeLand, FL Posts: 8,900 Downloads: 135 Uploads: 52	Good point. After sneaking in on my first approach with decks awash to 2000 yards or so, I fire undetected but immediately surface, turn tail and run at high speed. Ususally that results in the escorts doing a pretty perfunctory job of giving half-hearted chase while I get away to end around to the other side of the convoy. So shoot, helm hard over while the torps are on the way to target. When the boom happens, surface and turn tail at high speed. That's the program on this boat. A boom is a detection and decks awash ceases to be an advantage. __________________ Sub Skipper's Bag of Tricks, Slightly Subnuclear Mk 14 & Cutie, Slightly Subnuclear Deck Gun, EZPlot 2.0, TMOPlot, TMOKeys, SH4CMS

11-19-11, 11:54 PM	#21
TorpX Silent Hunter Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 3,975 Downloads: 153 Uploads: 11	What I've done in the past is either cut into the target's track and count on my narrow profile to keep me hidden, or come in on the surface, but submerge before I get too close. In the former case I would not turn away until the torps hit or just before, lest the target see me and evades the attack. (Ships are really way too maneuverable in this game.) However, I haven't really made enough attacks to have a "standard" proceedure.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

11-14-11, 02:01 PM	#16
Armistead Rear Admiral Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: on the Dan Posts: 10,880 Downloads: 364 Uploads: 0	One of the pains in the game, moreso with mods like TMO is it's very difficult to pull off a night surface attack, but it can be done. The problem is getting close enough, say 2000 yards, the bigger problem is once you attack you get spotted and have to dive or get blasted, so why not dive anyway. The issue is often you have to turn and run and once you get broadside they usually get a visual on you. I find the better tactic is to setup decks awash or surfaced with the right conditions with stern attacks from about 2000 yards, that way I can just run away. I can put plenty of distance by the time escorts come and why they're searching where my torps came from I can then go in bow making another surface attack and run again, keep repeating until targets destroyed. Later war when the enemy has escorts I will often shoot decks awash dived enough where engines still run, depending on the mod and radar height values they can't pick me up. However, I prefer being totally surfaced attacking as I said above.

11-20-11, 03:45 AM	#22
scubamatt Mate Join Date: May 2008 Location: Lithonia, GA Posts: 51 Downloads: 21 Uploads: 0	For me, making a surface attack usually happens only if I must run on the surface to get into attack range - I encounter a ship moving at medium or fast speed, where I have no chance of getting into an optimum firing position if I submerge. Decks awash is the best compromise I can make in that case. I run flat out on the surface, getting as close as I dare (this is the point where I catch myself holding my breath in real life). Then it's set my depth at 25 feet (Sargo class), go decks awash and get even closer. If I'm spotted, I can crash dive fast and evade because the sub is already flooded down. If I'm not spotted I can take my shots, then turn aside and motor away. Like RR said, once something explodes, all bets are off. I figure everyone is looking at me and it's time to beat feet. Surface and sprint (if no close gun threat) or sink like a stone and rig for silent running. NOTE FOR NEW CAPTAINS: If you've never done the 'decks awash' thing, try doing a crash dive while using time compression. Watch the depth gauge and see how it goes down, then back up a bit and then down..slowly at first...then suddenly plummets. Now surface and do the same thing again, only start from a depth of 25 feet or so (depends on your type of sub). Notice how much faster you are able to get under. Decks awash is also handy if you absolutely must come up for fresh air while there is a serious risk of detection. Come up slowly until you're able to flush your air system (usually a tiny bit deeper than your flooded down depth). You get rid of the CO2 in your boat, but only expose the absolute minimum of your sub to do so. (I don't know if it's TMOwTw or stock, but there is a specific sound effect that sounds like blowers/air rushing when I'm flushing the CO2, and that's my cue that I'm at the correct depth. The CO2 level drops a second or two later.)

11-20-11, 11:52 AM	#23
jcope Bosun Join Date: Dec 2010 Posts: 66 Downloads: 34 Uploads: 0	I would like to be able to use the external cam on a few tests to get a feel for how visible I really am in various conditions. I wish there was a way to go to a distant position, pull out binoculars and do try to see the sub. I often wonder whether I'm not spotted because of crew inexperience on the enemy's part or because the sub is really that hard to see. I will definitely practice the decks awash technique. But it would be good to have a feel for how close to be when it becomes necessary, and when you're too close to even be that exposed. I have yet to make a surface attack, except an early war shot at some docked ships.

11-20-11, 04:32 PM	#25
jcope Bosun Join Date: Dec 2010 Posts: 66 Downloads: 34 Uploads: 0	I agree. But it would still be better information than I have now. I think having a rough idea of where I should start worrying about being visible couldn't hurt. Conditions and AI variability can be accounted for as well. Real life captains must have been able to observe other subs at sea, and must have had feel for how easy to spot they were.

11-21-11, 12:25 PM	#26
scubamatt Mate Join Date: May 2008 Location: Lithonia, GA Posts: 51 Downloads: 21 Uploads: 0	Well you can always pick an enemy harbor and sneak up to it during the day. Pick one without a roving guard ship, like the one on the north east coast of Formosa. You want something that has patrol boats sitting around doing nothing. Unless they detect you, they don't start shooting or move from their spots, so they are a great way to test your visibility. Move up to it (submerged) until you are about 10nm away. Save your game at this point, so you have the same starting conditions each time. Surface, then motor straight forward at about 2-3 knots, plain as day. When they finally spot you, make a note of how close you got. Reload and do it again, only this time set your depth at the decks awash setting. You should be able to get closer before they see you. Reload and do it again at periscope depth, with your attack scope up and visible. Then you can compress time and try it again at night if you like. You should see a difference between each method. (Edit: You can also use an enemy fishing boat/sampan to check this. The next time you encounter one, save your game then try going straight at him surfaced/decks awash/periscope depth. Note the point at which he freaks out and starts making frantic turns to avoid you, then reload and check a different method.)

11-21-11, 03:58 PM	#28
mobucks Seasoned Skipper Join Date: Jan 2010 Posts: 713 Downloads: 209 Uploads: 0	I find TMO 2.2 to be reasonable in terms of enemy AI detection of my ship. Yesterday I was running at flank speed towards a small TF of 2 small cruisers. They were clearly visible with binoculars. I was running perpendicular to them at full speed undetected, but as soon as I turned and showed them my broadside, they started firing. Night surface attacks have been made out to 1200m with decks fully awash, the AI merchants never see me on a dark night. I tried a night attack fully surfaced, I think he saw me at 1500-2000yards. I only did this once, so I'm not sure If it was detection or a random zig, I wasnt fired upon because the merchant was unarmed.

11-22-11, 04:21 AM	#29
TorpX Silent Hunter Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 3,975 Downloads: 153 Uploads: 11	Poking around in the SH III section, I noticed they have the same issues. Sometimes they have situations where their crews can see enemy ships at long distances, eventhough the enemy was blind and could not spot them. Other times the detection ranges varied drastically, due to a absurdly large random influence. They seem to be making some progress toward fixing it though.