official patch will be out tomorrow!

tater · 07-11-07, 06:39 PM

IJN ASW is hard to characterize. I think the new AI is heading in the right direction, might need some tweaks (perhaps the other way, now?). Shooubg at scopes, etc, is required, IMO. I just read an account of a cruiser firing on a periscope at over 4000 yards. I'm the first one to berate IJN ASW doctrine, BTW, it was neglected horribly.

OTOH, we also know (possibly changed in 1.3?) that the DCs are/were set way too powerful. There is a balance between gameplay and reality call that needs to be made there. I think a desirable goal is more attacks on the player, but they should generally be ineffective attacks unless the player plays like an idiot.

The benchmark of actual subs lost as a function of patrols certainly downplays the risks that subs actually faced. Many patrols were pretty boring. Late in the war, based on my almost completed rereading of Silent Victory, it looks like a large % of patrols came back not only empty handed, but unable to even make contact with real shipping.

The bulk of sinkings came from a few boats. I think risks (lost subs/patrol) need to be weighted some how for actually meeting enemy combatants. Ie: throw away all patrols that were not prosecuted by ASW assets (and desultory DCings nowhere near don't count in some cases (trying to weed out timid skippers, here)).

All in all 1.3 sounds like a major improvement.

THE_MASK · 07-11-07, 06:48 PM

Modders are not going to like 1.3 , not much to do in the way of mods i think . Tweaks yes , mods maybe a few .

Hans Schultz · 07-11-07, 07:08 PM

good news about 1.3, after that I 'll start modding.

tater · 07-11-07, 07:17 PM

That'd make me happy, I want to work on the campaign without having to sweat getting the AI to act decently

The mods that are REALLY needed are new ships, and ideally a new torpedo type (a sub-launched mine). One other mod, if someone figures out how to make a Panama Canal, then the same technique in reverse can be used to make REEFS.

For ships (japanese, allied don't matter at all, IMO) we need:

~300 ton sea truck ("Sugar Dog")
Kaiboukan
Armed Trawler (with DCs unlike the one in game now for allied)
Tiny coastal subchasers (modded PT boat?) ~100 tons, wooden (1xAA gun, DCs)
Small (<1000 tons) tanker ("Sugar Baker Sugar")
Small (<1000 tons) merchant ("Fox Tare Dog")

None of the above are the "sexy" ships people always want like Shinano, instead, all of the above are the most likely targets to actually be seen by players. No question, the best "bang for the buck."

tater

LukeFF · 07-11-07, 08:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sober

Modders are not going to like 1.3 , not much to do in the way of mods i think . Tweaks yes , mods maybe a few .

Yep, I think so. Looking at the list of mods for RFB and comparing it to what is fixed in 1.3, there's a lot that can be hacked out of it for the next release.

Excalibur Bane · 07-12-07, 01:38 AM

Yeah, and unless this uber AI gets adjusted in the final, it's definately gonna need to be adjusted. Way, way too difficult. I think they just looked at all the AI sensor and detection ranges and doubled them all.

It'd be a damn cold day in hell when a DD could spot a periscope at night, during rough weather, at 2,000 meters and I only had the bloody thing about 1 meter out of the water. It was constantly getting submerged by each wave. Pffff.

We'll see tommorow (or is it today now?) I suppose.

The General · 07-12-07, 02:00 AM

Get some!

tater · 07-12-07, 08:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Excalibur Bane

Yeah, and unless this uber AI gets adjusted in the final, it's definately gonna need to be adjusted. Way, way too difficult. I think they just looked at all the AI sensor and detection ranges and doubled them all.

It'd be a damn cold day in hell when a DD could spot a periscope at night, during rough weather, at 2,000 meters and I only had the bloody thing about 1 meter out of the water. It was constantly getting submerged by each wave. Pffff.

We'll see tommorow (or is it today now?) I suppose.

There were always issues in the stock game where some IJN ships have radar early. There is always the possibility the radar fixes for SUBS don't fix the radar for AI SHIPS, and it appeared the AI air search radar was seeing submarines...
We'll have to see with 1.3.

tater

07-12-07, 01:38 AM	#6
Excalibur Bane XO Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 429 Downloads: 20 Uploads: 0	Yeah, and unless this uber AI gets adjusted in the final, it's definately gonna need to be adjusted. Way, way too difficult. I think they just looked at all the AI sensor and detection ranges and doubled them all. It'd be a damn cold day in hell when a DD could spot a periscope at night, during rough weather, at 2,000 meters and I only had the bloody thing about 1 meter out of the water. It was constantly getting submerged by each wave. Pffff. We'll see tommorow (or is it today now?) I suppose. __________________ Looking for a list of mods for SH4? Everything you need is here: List Of Modifications for SH4 v1.3 "The only thing necessary for evil to triumph, is for good men to do nothing."

07-12-07, 02:00 AM	#7
The General The Old Man Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Mountain Ash, Wales, U.K. Posts: 1,548 Downloads: 179 Uploads: 3	Get some! __________________ *THE GENERAL*

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

07-11-07, 06:39 PM	#1
tater Navy Seal Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: New Mexico, USA Posts: 9,023 Downloads: 8 Uploads: 2	IJN ASW is hard to characterize. I think the new AI is heading in the right direction, might need some tweaks (perhaps the other way, now?). Shooubg at scopes, etc, is required, IMO. I just read an account of a cruiser firing on a periscope at over 4000 yards. I'm the first one to berate IJN ASW doctrine, BTW, it was neglected horribly. OTOH, we also know (possibly changed in 1.3?) that the DCs are/were set way too powerful. There is a balance between gameplay and reality call that needs to be made there. I think a desirable goal is more attacks on the player, but they should generally be ineffective attacks unless the player plays like an idiot. The benchmark of actual subs lost as a function of patrols certainly downplays the risks that subs actually faced. Many patrols were pretty boring. Late in the war, based on my almost completed rereading of Silent Victory, it looks like a large % of patrols came back not only empty handed, but unable to even make contact with real shipping. The bulk of sinkings came from a few boats. I think risks (lost subs/patrol) need to be weighted some how for actually meeting enemy combatants. Ie: throw away all patrols that were not prosecuted by ASW assets (and desultory DCings nowhere near don't count in some cases (trying to weed out timid skippers, here)). All in all 1.3 sounds like a major improvement.

07-11-07, 06:48 PM	#2
THE_MASK Ace of the deep . Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 9,226 Downloads: 901 Uploads: 73	Modders are not going to like 1.3 , not much to do in the way of mods i think . Tweaks yes , mods maybe a few .

07-11-07, 07:08 PM	#3
Hans Schultz Sparky Join Date: Apr 2002 Posts: 150 Downloads: 5 Uploads: 0	good news about 1.3, after that I 'll start modding.

07-11-07, 07:17 PM	#4
tater Navy Seal Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: New Mexico, USA Posts: 9,023 Downloads: 8 Uploads: 2	That'd make me happy, I want to work on the campaign without having to sweat getting the AI to act decently The mods that are REALLY needed are new ships, and ideally a new torpedo type (a sub-launched mine). One other mod, if someone figures out how to make a Panama Canal, then the same technique in reverse can be used to make REEFS. For ships (japanese, allied don't matter at all, IMO) we need: ~300 ton sea truck ("Sugar Dog") Kaiboukan Armed Trawler (with DCs unlike the one in game now for allied) Tiny coastal subchasers (modded PT boat?) ~100 tons, wooden (1xAA gun, DCs) Small (<1000 tons) tanker ("Sugar Baker Sugar") Small (<1000 tons) merchant ("Fox Tare Dog") None of the above are the "sexy" ships people always want like Shinano, instead, all of the above are the most likely targets to actually be seen by players. No question, the best "bang for the buck." tater