[REL] Trigger Maru Overhauled

[Ducimus]

I'm not gonna go into a long drawn out explanation, but the bottom line is fog settings in the scene.dat, fog factor in sensors.cfg, range factor in sensors.cfg, and some quirks in the world rendering in SH4.

Just FYI, loading an environmental mod over TMO will create some really myopic watchman.

[tater]

Originally Posted by Ducimus

Question to regular/avid users of this mod.

I'm contemplating taking the aircrafts ability to visually detect submerged objects, and making that as a separate visual sensor that will come into play later in the war (maybe late 44) to sort of represent the advent of Japanese MAD gear. If i did so, the threat aircraft are becomes greatly reduced, so i have to ask: would anyone miss the "evil airplanes" for most of the war?

I've been running RFB lately, but I might go back to TMO again soon for a while. That said, I like evil airplanes.

BTW, when I was thinking about modding in MAD planes, a visual node didn't seem like the best way to me for a couple reasons:

1. nighttime use.
2. changes in visual conditions that would not affect MAD.

My idea was to use an active sonar unit, but remove the ping sound from it since there is no real way to mitigate MAD signatures. The idea would be to make it so very short ranged (a couple hundred feet, perhaps) that the planes would have to be at minimum alt to detect your boat.\ at any depth. They'd then need to fly patterns. My idea there was to set them up in some sort of zig zag pattern over likely areas. Many ZZs, but very long legs per side.

So fly ENE for 20km, then WNW for 20km, then ENE, etc. At 100ft alt

[Ducimus]

I've already hashed out a bunch of changes. I haven't made a changelog yet, but i think it's gonna be a big one.

I may need a guinea pig or two to test some of it out, but nothing will be published until Captain America is done with his work. He's the whole reason i went back to work on TMO. This is all... preparatory work done in anticipation of his. So when he's done, i'll be ready to go. Naturally i've gone overboard with this prep work. Compulsive Tweaking Disorder got the better of me.

Originally Posted by Ducimus

Question to regular/avid users of this mod.

I'm contemplating taking the aircrafts ability to visually detect submerged objects, and making that as a separate visual sensor that will come into play later in the war (maybe late 44) to sort of represent the advent of Japanese MAD gear. If i did so, the threat aircraft are becomes greatly reduced, so i have to ask: would anyone miss the "evil airplanes" for most of the war?

Just $0.02 but I have no issues with the Imperial Japanese air arm's as portrayed in TMO; from a sub's point of view all aircraft are evil. But to ask a question - was MAD positively attributed to the loss of any US boats? I did some casual checking and couldn't find anything but won't take that as decisive.

[Ducimus]

Originally Posted by Randomizer

But to ask a question - was MAD positively attributed to the loss of any US boats? I did some casual checking and couldn't find anything but won't take that as decisive.

Only one documented incident where MAD almost did that i know of, or at least, the only incident where a sub is confirmed to encounter it.

If you read this book:
http://www.submarinebooks.com/TakeHerDeepNew.htm

Galantin goes into detail on the incident. The Halibut was nearly lossed. The conning tower was so badly "dished in" it had to be abandoned according to Galantin in his book. The damage to the boat was so great, that it was more economical to scrap the boat then fix it. (which they did.. . scrapped the boat) There was a detailed damage report online somewhere but i can't find it at the moment. So you'll have to suffice with this:
http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USN/...-I.html#SS-232

Originally Posted by Ducimus

Only one documented incident where MAD almost did that i know of, or at least, the only incident where a sub is confirmed to encounter it.

Thanks for the links. Evidence for MAD detection seems a bit thin in that account though, detected by aircraft while operating against a convoy at periscope depth, the boat may have been spotted visually or even had the shears broach (pure speculation but not impossible). Always a bit suspicious of the target's take on how they were detected in the absence of any corroborating evidence from the attackers. Detection by a 'secret weapon' makes a nice cover for a botched approach but I tend to be skeptical of first-person accounts of most things.

Anyway, TMO is outstanding as is (in my opinion) in case you can overcome your Compulsive Tweaking Disorder. Good luck with that.

Best Regards.

[Ducimus]

Originally Posted by Randomizer

Thanks for the links. Evidence for MAD detection seems a bit thin ...

Im getting the impression your skeptical of the Japs had MAD at all.

A couple links to post war interregation reports:
http://ibiblio.org/hyperwar/AAF/USSBS/IJO/IJO-48.html
http://ibiblio.org/hyperwar/AAF/USSBS/IJO/IJO-74.html


Root index for a bunch here:
United States Strategic Bombing Survey
[PACIFIC]
NAVAL ANALYSIS DIVISION
Interrogations of Japanese Officials
OPNAV-P-03-100
http://ibiblio.org/hyperwar/AAF/USSBS/IJO/index.html

Originally Posted by Ducimus

Im getting the impression your skeptical of the Japs had MAD at all.

Skeptical only as it applied to the Halibut narrative and without corroboration from the Japanese side..

They certainly had MAD, no doubt it worked and I understand that the Japanese version was superior to that of the USN in a number of respects. I am skeptical that a submerged submarine can be certain of how it was located without reference to the locator's account.

MAD, like imaging infrared in Nazi Germany, were technologies where the Axis was equal or better than that of the Allies. The numerous accounts of U-Boats believing that they had been located by some sort of infrared device disguised the existance of centimetric radar since it was assumed that Allied also had infrared technology. In this particular case knowing of MAD and knowing that the Japanese had it as well might affect impartial analysis of how initial detection was actually achieved.

Whether detected by MAD or visual the Japanese attack on Halibut was certainly accurate and devastating so attributing it to some technological advantage is not unreasonable from the target's point of view. The assumption that MAD was a factor in detecting Halibut may be accurate or not, I do not claim to know for sure but I doubt that a submerged submarine lacking the ability to detect low-flying aircraft would be in a position to know either.

[Sonic]

Originally Posted by ichso

This is my first TMO game. On the first patrol I didn't have SD radar and airplanes spotted me before I got to safe depths. But since I have SD I just dive as soon as I get the contact to 90-120ft. and never got spotted so far, anymore.

Maybe I didn't experience the usual TMO-evil in airplanes yet. Or it just won't too much of a difference if they cannot spot a submarine beneath the surface for now.

oh, there are evil airplanes. beware - above all - of these coming in pairs (fogive me, i just know they mean most certain death, not what their names are). even with SD radar and emergency dive, i get to 80 - 100 ft. max before they bomb me with deadly accuracy, for they show up in about 8k distance, and their course is most likely dead on my position
i get the feeling, thou, i encounter more of these ("angels of time compression") when i use the TC near (about up to 150 miles) to imperial bodies of land. try it - i wonder if this is just a coincidence.

[Mescator]

Posted this on the Ubi forums, but i realize these forums are significantly more active, so here goes;

Much love for the work you've put into TMO over the years, it's a fantastic mod. Just a query, how would i go about maintaining TMO Plane behavior and rarity (Can attack shallow depth subs, accurate with bombs) with RSRDC?

I finished a campaign with both and i'd like to restore planes to their TMO level of threat and rarity to make it a bit more diverse. I had a brief look at the game files, but not all of the planes have a .cfg with em and they vary from mod to mod, so if anyone could point me to the relevant files i'd be very appreciative!

[Jan Kyster]

You'll find some notes from the horses mouth here http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=124138

As far as I understand it, RSRD doesn't tinker with gamesettings. Meaning you'll be running stock SHIV if you "only" use RSRD. If you want TMO settings, enable RSRD after TMO... see first post in the RSRD thread.

[Mescator]

Originally Posted by Jan Kyster

You'll find some notes from the horses mouth here http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=124138

As far as I understand it, RSRD doesn't tinker with gamesettings. Meaning you'll be running stock SHIV if you "only" use RSRD. If you want TMO settings, enable RSRD after TMO... see first post in the RSRD thread.

Thanks for that link. I remember reading a while ago that RSRDC overwrites the plane's (And the mod manager confirms there's interaction with the plane files) although i could be wrong. Regardless, i'm using the TMO Compatible version. I even went periscope depth to try antagonize them in crystal clear water and nada.

Still, that thread was very helpful. I'll fire up the mod that was posted. Thanks for the help!

Edit: Bah, download link is dead. Any ideas?

[Ducimus]

Nothing fancy. Courtesy of copious amounts of miller light with a shot or two captain Morgan. Got a little captain in ya?








And yes, that ahead standard is 15 knots. Come to find out, the only reason why 10 knots is the most fuel effiecient is because that's what was commonly accepted since SH3, but it's not true. It's what you set it at, based on surface endurance. If you say 15000 NM @ 10 knots, then 10 knots is your most fuel effieient. If you say 150,000 NM at 15 knots.. then 15 knots becomes your new sweet spot. Granted you could get more range by going at 10 knots, but since fleet boats cruised faster then 10 knots, and the pacific is the worlds largest ocean, 10 knots sucks balls, quite frankly.

[sergei]

Originally Posted by Ducimus

Wow.
Just - Wow

[sergei]

Originally Posted by Ducimus

And yes, that ahead standard is 15 knots. Come to find out, the only reason why 10 knots is the most fuel efficient is because that's what was commonly accepted since SH3

Maybe that's not the only reason 10 knots has become the most commonly accepted figure for good fuel efficiency.
Every source I've seen (not just Wikipedia!) quotes a fleetboat range of 'something miles @ 10 knots'.
The mileage varies a little, depending on which source you are looking at, but they all consistently quote the 10 knots figure.
Maybe that's where we got the 10 knots magic number from?

Having said that, I am looking forward to cruising around the PTO with a bit more dash.
Out of interest, what sort of range are we going to be getting at 15 knots?