Surface ships cruising half underwater in scopes

Romb · 11-13-10, 01:43 PM

Thanks will do.

Just ran game without any mods and still have weird semi-sub ships through scopes so guess something got fishy and need fresh install.

On sidenote; pretty weird game design : in Main Menu you can customize gameplay settings to your personal prefences (a.o. map settings) but when actually starting a campaign you can only select one of 4 predefined game settings; medium, hard etc. which overwrites the Main Menu settings.

So you can not have a fully realistic game with external cam enabled. For external cam you can only select 'hard' (or lower) setting when starting campaign but this automatically also enables map updates.
In short, the custom settings in Main Menu are useless as any user specific settings will be overwritten anyways.

By the way; what is difference between tactical and nav map ? Look pretty similar to me ...

An diff between Obs and Attack scope ? Also look pretty smilar to me.

Newbie here

Romb · 11-13-10, 02:05 PM

Nevermind Obs versus Att scope question :

Wiki:
"The observation scope, used to scan the sea surface and sky, typically had a wide field of view and no magnification or low-power magnification. The targeting or "attack" periscope, by comparison, had a narrower field of view and higher magnification."

So diff is magnification and field of view (guess in SH5 magnification of the two is equal though).

TheDarkWraith · 11-13-10, 02:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Romb

Nevermind Obs versus Att scope question :

Wiki:
"The observation scope, used to scan the sea surface and sky, typically had a wide field of view and no magnification or low-power magnification. The targeting or "attack" periscope, by comparison, had a narrower field of view and higher magnification."

So diff is magnification and field of view (guess in SH5 magnification of the two is equal though).

obs scope doesn't stick out of water as high as attack scope either

Romb · 11-13-10, 02:56 PM

Yeah, also noticed that difference but that is a diff that imo doesnt justify adding a whole 2nd scope to a boat (less is more).

I mean the longest scope does not necessarily needs to be extended to its max. So in that respect only one scope would have sufficed.

Also diff of magnification does not seem to justify the extra engineering efforts of adding a whole extra scope; I mean, again, the scope does not need to be necessarily magnified to its max (also a lower magn could be chosen I guess).

Only diff that seems somewhat substantial seems the field of view. But I don't really see why a more narrow view would be more beneficial than a more broad field of view. Especially considering that via magnification levels the view field can be narrowed down.

But anyways, that's just me newbie lay-man first impression on the matter. Of course there must be a good reason for placing two scopes (maybe it is also not too much extra effort in terms of cost, weight, space etc) otherwise they would not be there, so I am of course wrong, but on firts sight I do not immediatley see the extra benefits of the Attack scope above the Obs scope.

Maybe the diameter of the scope itself is also a factor where the attack scope is thinner resulting in less wake resulting in less chance of detection.

TheDarkWraith · 11-13-10, 03:24 PM

being an engineer type myself I see a perfect reason for two scopes: redundancy. In any mission critical 'environment' it is necessary to have backups and failsafes.

Romb · 11-13-10, 03:38 PM

Good point ! Totally oversaw that one

. Indeed that alone would justify matters.

ps. answering my own above question on costs; an extra scope does bring costs to the table (monetary, safety and engineering costs), as can be derived from following wiki passage on photonic masts, a 21st century alternative to traditional scopes:

"While the cables carrying the signal must penetrate the submarine's hull, they use a much smaller and more easily sealed—and therefore less expensive and safer—hull opening than those required by periscopes. Eliminating the telescoping tube running through the conning tower also allows greater freedom in designing the pressure hull and in placing internal equipment."

THE_MASK · 11-13-10, 03:49 PM

I do recall the issue with the half floating ships was fixed in a patch for SH4 but returned for SH5 .

11-13-10, 01:43 PM	#1
Romb Swabbie Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 10 Downloads: 43 Uploads: 0	Thanks will do. Just ran game without any mods and still have weird semi-sub ships through scopes so guess something got fishy and need fresh install. On sidenote; pretty weird game design : in Main Menu you can customize gameplay settings to your personal prefences (a.o. map settings) but when actually starting a campaign you can only select one of 4 predefined game settings; medium, hard etc. which overwrites the Main Menu settings. So you can not have a fully realistic game with external cam enabled. For external cam you can only select 'hard' (or lower) setting when starting campaign but this automatically also enables map updates. In short, the custom settings in Main Menu are useless as any user specific settings will be overwritten anyways. By the way; what is difference between tactical and nav map ? Look pretty similar to me ... An diff between Obs and Attack scope ? Also look pretty smilar to me. Newbie here

11-13-10, 02:05 PM	#2
Romb Swabbie Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 10 Downloads: 43 Uploads: 0	Nevermind Obs versus Att scope question : Wiki: "The observation scope, used to scan the sea surface and sky, typically had a wide field of view and no magnification or low-power magnification. The targeting or "attack" periscope, by comparison, had a narrower field of view and higher magnification." So diff is magnification and field of view (guess in SH5 magnification of the two is equal though).

11-13-10, 02:56 PM	#4
Romb Swabbie Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 10 Downloads: 43 Uploads: 0	Yeah, also noticed that difference but that is a diff that imo doesnt justify adding a whole 2nd scope to a boat (less is more). I mean the longest scope does not necessarily needs to be extended to its max. So in that respect only one scope would have sufficed. Also diff of magnification does not seem to justify the extra engineering efforts of adding a whole extra scope; I mean, again, the scope does not need to be necessarily magnified to its max (also a lower magn could be chosen I guess). Only diff that seems somewhat substantial seems the field of view. But I don't really see why a more narrow view would be more beneficial than a more broad field of view. Especially considering that via magnification levels the view field can be narrowed down. But anyways, that's just me newbie lay-man first impression on the matter. Of course there must be a good reason for placing two scopes (maybe it is also not too much extra effort in terms of cost, weight, space etc) otherwise they would not be there, so I am of course wrong, but on firts sight I do not immediatley see the extra benefits of the Attack scope above the Obs scope. Maybe the diameter of the scope itself is also a factor where the attack scope is thinner resulting in less wake resulting in less chance of detection.

11-13-10, 03:24 PM	#5
TheDarkWraith Black Magic Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 11,962 Downloads: 147 Uploads: 5	being an engineer type myself I see a perfect reason for two scopes: redundancy. In any mission critical 'environment' it is necessary to have backups and failsafes.

11-13-10, 03:38 PM	#6
Romb Swabbie Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 10 Downloads: 43 Uploads: 0	Good point ! Totally oversaw that one . Indeed that alone would justify matters. ps. answering my own above question on costs; an extra scope does bring costs to the table (monetary, safety and engineering costs), as can be derived from following wiki passage on photonic masts, a 21st century alternative to traditional scopes: "While the cables carrying the signal must penetrate the submarine's hull, they use a much smaller and more easily sealed—and therefore less expensive and safer—hull opening than those required by periscopes. Eliminating the telescoping tube running through the conning tower also allows greater freedom in designing the pressure hull and in placing internal equipment."

11-13-10, 03:49 PM	#7
THE_MASK Ace of the deep . Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 9,226 Downloads: 901 Uploads: 73	I do recall the issue with the half floating ships was fixed in a patch for SH4 but returned for SH5 .