v1.3 Patch And Japanese ASW

[BH]

tater- Is there another supermod in the works to address these issues?

[tater]

True. There are a few campaign mods in the works. Hopefully a couple or 3 will combine since it's a lot of work.

I have a start at one right now. I am altering the stock layers. Large changes in ship content, and most units will be found zig-zagging. I use multiple routes, I even have some TFs or convoys put in to a place like truk, spend a few days, then leave for another port.

The 3-4 escorts for a single ship thing is possible, and I do it. In the random layers you can make say 4xMutsuki DD as escorts for some merchants. 1 merchant occurs 100% of the time, another 15%, 3 different other ships at 5%. I might set the DDs to 20%. Maybe a subchaser or minesweeper (I have the 2 types changed to be "corvettes" so they both will act like escorts) at 10%. When that group generates, you get 1 merchant, but you might get no other ships, or you might get 4xDD and no other ships, or you might get 1 DD, 1 minesweeper, 3 merchants.

So it's possible to get highly variable convoys. I also add some combatant ships to convoys that go to palau, truck, kwajalein, etc. A small chance for a minelayer, or CVS, CL, or possibly a plane ferry (Akitsu Maru).

You are right about the losses in 1943, for all the reasons you mention. There were also simply more patrols, and possibly a higher % of "aggressive" patrols. The patrol areas were better picked for making attacks, and possibly more counter attacks happened as a result.

I'm also looking for an idea set of mods to AI capability. I want to have them spo and attack frequently, but succeed only rarely. Easier said than done


tater

[Steeltrap]

I think the biggest issue being faced is that SH 4 has been developed from what was a flawed platform, SH 3.

Consider the following:

1. USA subs COULD NOT use their periscopes for considerable periods of time, especially night where there was not strong moonlight. This also lead to blindness in the morning twilight. The result? Subs either attacked in DAYLIGHT submerged or NIGHT surfaced. Now, who has managed a surface attack in SH4, and when? If you're like me, the answer is "never"! Why? Because the problem existed in SH3....I remember reading a lot about what was required to make it possible to overcome the majority of problems. So, no surface attacks.

2. Many escorts were not part of the IJN, technically. Also, those IJN units assigned were used in sectors, as has been mentioned. This meant wildly different experiences in terms of escorts numbers and capabilities.

3. Spotting periscopes has become absurd. It doesn't seem to matter what the sea state.....even MERCHANTS spot it. The allies didn't develop ship-based radar reliably detecting periscopes until early 1944, I think.....or at least that was when it was widely deployed. The IJN didn't HAVE radar on the majority of its destroyers, PERIOD! As for escorts? Forget it! Read Clear the Bridge - many of Tang's attacks were on the surface, and we're talking through 1944!

4. The behaviour of AI is still retarded. Witness the example from Switch posted earlier. My experience so far tends to be....
- detect convoy WITH SONAR while moving at 12kts (ridiculous in itself).
- approach to visual.
- dive to pd immediately.
- approach at silent speed.
- take shots.
- dive below layer.
- creep off at 2-3kts.
- watch DDs mill around dropping charges while trying not to collide.....often this leads to them blowing their own DC racks off their sterns sue to self-imposed damage from dropping while moving at 2-5kts (so far I've counted 3 DDs actually destroying themselves through this method).
- come back to PD to shoot at remainder of convoy that has obligingly hung around instead of maintaining convoy speed with some escorts.
Rinse and repeat for next contact......


Most of these problems (if not all) existed in SH3 (such as uber escorts or complete idiots, nuclear DCs etc.....). So, they exist in SH4. We would all have been better served had they written a NEW SIM, not tried to squeeze a Pacific sim from a faulty base. Sure, the graphics are nice, for the most part (although the subs seemed to move far more realistically in SH3 - the SH4 subs seem to move like lifeless bricks). The crew management is a vast improvement over SH3 stock. But, after that, what? SD radar, for example....it was NEVER anything OTHER than a-scope....it gave RANGE but not bearing. How hard should that have been to do????

I have yet to take any damage of note from escorts at all. I've been hit by fire from MERCHANTS at 2500yds, and that did more damage than I've ever suffered from escorts.

This sim is simply junk when you consider what was done by the modders with SH3....I find it a complete yawn, what challenges there are seem to be completely unrealistic, and the challenges that SHOULD be there aren't. It's all arse-about-face, as we say around here.....

Sorry - couldn't help myself!

[tater]

Periscopes getting spoted happened, but in the game if the AI can see a scope, they can see your sub. A simple change might be to increase the effect of night on mitigating the visual detection. Strikes me that in a slightly choppy sea, you should have the ability to get pretty close on the surface at night, in a dead calm, less likely.

The other issue seems to be that there is no accounting for the different sized crews of the merchants. Smaller crew means fewer lookouts. Ideally, we'd have 2 visual sensors, one for warships, and a less capable version (representing poor training, and fewer eyeballs) for merchants.

[cpt_idaho]

Tater - how advanced are you in preparing your mod?
It seems very promising...

[tater]

version 0.71, lol.

It's really in testing since I keep learnign how to make it work by breaking things, lol.

For 1941/1942 it's quite fun right now, however. I need to update it since I blew up 1943 by adding Beery's better start dates (I edited something and made a typo, my problem, not his). Fixed it though.

tater

[Peto]

Originally Posted by Steeltrap

1. Now, who has managed a surface attack in SH4, and when? If you're like me, the answer is "never"! Why? Because the problem existed in SH3....I remember reading a lot about what was required to make it possible to overcome the majority of problems. So, no surface attacks.

3. Spotting periscopes has become absurd. It doesn't seem to matter what the sea state.....even MERCHANTS spot it. The allies didn't develop ship-based radar reliably detecting periscopes until early 1944, I think.....or at least that was when it was widely deployed. The IJN didn't HAVE radar on the majority of its destroyers, PERIOD! As for escorts? Forget it! Read Clear the Bridge - many of Tang's attacks were on the surface, and we're talking through 1944!

4. The behaviour of AI is still retarded. I have yet to take any damage of note from escorts at all. I've been hit by fire from MERCHANTS at 2500yds, and that did more damage than I've ever suffered from escorts.

5. Sorry - couldn't help myself!

Well--beings I'm fairly new here--I'll tread gently. But I can't resist a couple comments .

Answering #1: I frequently make surface attacks both in SH3 & 4. Patience is the key, picking your moment. I agree that it seems too easy to be picked up in bad weather though. I think the biggest problem is that computers don't simulate human error or laziness well. O'Kane in the Tang ran in on the surface between 2 escorts with no more than 800 yards disatnce from each. Chalk that one up to sleepy lookouts. Lookouts in computer programs don't sleep and it actually is hard to program that "extra layer" of code withou screwing the pooch (or frame-rate) in the process. Again though--surface attacks are doable. Flood Down!!!

3. I seldom have my scope spotted in any condition. But I don't put it up for more than about 6 seconds during my close in approach. Identify from long range what I plan to shoot. Creep in at 2 or 3 knots and take another look when the escort is well past. Confirm where I am, finish the approach and raise scope only when time to shoot.

4. With the 1.3 patch the AI has improved a great deal. It sometimes makes me think of AOD where an escort would lay back and wait for me come up (I've had this happen with 1.3). But I agree in general. I've been sunk by escorts once because of shallow water. Once I can get deep they never seem to be able to hang on to me. I'd like to try it without the layer (which wasn't always available) just to see what difference it would make.

5. Sorry! I couldn't help myself either. No offense intended!

Peto

[NefariousKoel]

It seems the AI's visual spotting ability has been beefed up a little too much in 1.3. I've been on the surface and got spotted before my crew or myself could actually see the enemy. wtf?

The sonar seems to be blah but that's easily modded.

[Peto]

OK--I need to add a note that when I get into 44 it seems like all the Japanese DD's have radar. I haven't checked into the equipment files--haven't done any modding for a while. But--if they all do and it's that good....well....that'll be something I will mod. Japanese radar was not good and most of the operators were poor as the position was considered 3rd rate at best. Cooks were considered more honorable than radar techs.

So--I may have spoken a little too soon about night surface attacks in regards to 1.3 patch. I have done it in 42 and 43 but not 44. I'll be watching this and maybe eating some tasty humble pie for my earlier post .

Cheers!

Peto

[Suicide Charlie]

Steeltrap is pretty on point with the behaviour of escorts. Granted, I'm only playing in 1941-early 1942 so far, but I've made approaches on two different task forces. The destroyers picked me up pretty easily. Both cases I was able to slip past them. The second time I lost my approach because I just couldn't make the head way on a task force moving at least 9-11 knts and I'm not in a position to fall back and box intercept.

It seems that destroyers can easily initially pick you up and close. Once they get there they have a lot of trouble figuring out where you are. I've even run higher than your standard 1-3knt. I think once I didn't even rig for silent running for a duration. I don't know how well they're working together either. It may seem that one or two is listening while another pings are makes a depth charge run, but they get tangled up and cause traffic jams with each other pretty often. I've had two on up to five destroyers get in each other's way. Or they do this weird thing where they cut their engines and just sit (they'll keep throwing their engines in reverse and the forward) behind you and not do anything. Sometimes they'll stay, other times they'll seem to stay 500 yrds off of you. I've seen them do this many times, often with they're bow to me.

I definitely see what Tater's getting at as far as fleet destroyer dispersal, concentration, and assignment. They're EVERYWHERE and in huge numbers! One of the task forces I encountered was a carrier force containing two Shokaku's, one Taiyo escort carrier, two Chitose Seaplane Tenders, Maya and Takao heavy cruisers, Kuma light cruiser, 2-3 tankers, and a destroyer screen at least eight-ten deep. Now considering the assembled power and importance of that fleet I wasn't too bothered by the large destroyer escort. The second one was much smaller and was mostly an older "traditional" style task force. Made up of two Kongos, a Mogami, a Kuma, a Haruna Maru. But, the destroyer screen was just as big if not bigger than the carrier fleet.

That second instance I had four destroyers on me because once I figured that there was no way I was going to be able to disengage and move to intercept the fleet again I saved and tried an experitment. I surfaced and engaged a lone destroyer with my deck gun. He had a lot of trouble even splashing my decks. I took out his bow turret (Shiratsuyu class) and then dove. That brougt back three more destroyers with a forth joining them sometime later. They milled about looking for me, made a couple of DC runs, got tangled, then finally dispersed. The damaged destroyer stuck around, waited til the other DD's were out of visual range (this is at night don't remember there beign a moon), and surfaced and engaged again. It only managed to hit me once with minor damage. I sunk it with short barrage. It did however cause two destroyers to fall back on me pretty quickly.

[-Pv-]

Using Battle Stations apparently increases your detection if the escorts are very close.

"...is there a way to weaken or get rid of the layer? I'm a masochist.."

Well you could just stay above the layer. Have fun.

"...then they turned around to where they had originally seen me and started a new search pattern - even though they had received a new updated location of my sub, they went to the previous position..."

Maybe you only guessed that they spotted your scope. A sudden increase of speed in your direction is not a reliable indicator. Escorts may do this for other reasons.

"... Anyway, I know people think they are harder now, but I think they are easier..."

Keep playing. You'll eventually get the escorts from hell who drop endless DC and won't give up for anything pinging you from three directions every time you take a breath.
-Pv-

[tater]

Peto, you can try my campaign mod, but it only goes to early 1943 (after which it is stock, plus zig-zags, but I'm working on it).

I dump many escorts and replace them with SCs and MSs both set to be "corvettes" so the MS will escort. In many ways they are tougher than the DDs since even if you want to torpedo them they are so shallow, lol.

My actual play observations are almost all in my mod, so I might have different expectations. My convoys are almost always zig-zagging (not constant helming, a turn off base every 15-120 minutes depending on the group with some speed and ZZ changes on different legs to mix it up). My Tfs are ZZing AND they are never below 15 knots, with 17 probably being average. I have some legs with 20+ knot dashes.

As a result, even if I make it through, I frequently don't get a second attack. If they hold me down for even an hour I have no hope to end around on a TF.

tater

[tater]

As for the layer, it is not hard to mod, it's set as a pretty "hard" layer by default (ducimus posted about it in another thread---I need to quote it in a sticky so I can always find it, lol). Anyway, the hydrophones and sonars can be tweaked, I honestly think a lot of the reaction has much to do with how and if they have contact.

tater

[Peto]

Thanks Tater! Your Campaign mod sounds infuriating enough to be just what I'm looking for :rotfl: . I was planning on doing something along those lines but I just haven't had (or made) the time to do it.

I'll look for it and if I can't find it I'll PM you.

Thanks Again!

Peto

[FAdmiral]

400 feet ?? That would be crush depth for all US subs except for the latest
and most recent ones. Most of the subs I have used in 42 & 43 are marked
more shollow than that....

JIM