Underwater fireing

[CapnScurvy]

Originally Posted by Loudspeaker

The sonar only attack is becoming my favourite method, because I think it's easier to determine range by sonar than by stadimeter, once you get the hang of it.

The funny thing is, it shouldn't be like this. The real skippers avoided it, although at the academy they were instructed to attack by sonar only. Raising the periscope endangered your crew and boat each time you did it, just like it does nowadays.

Get to know the sonar-thingy provided to you by the glorious US navy. It's quite addictive

The one reason the sonar in-game is better than the stadimeter is it gives exact data to the TDC/Position Keeper when "sent". In reality, the sonar target data gleaned was only as good as the operator who used it. But, in-game by zero'ing in on a target bearing, you'll get an accurate range down to the exact yard. Reality was never that good.

On the other hand, the in-game stadimeter is dependant on several factors to get an accurate "estimate" of range. The Recognition Manual has to have a fairly accurate "height" figure to produce a found range that's close. I took a look at the TMO 2.5 height figures and I see the Hiryu CV still has the mast height at 20 meters. This height figure was in the stock 1.0 version for the Hiryu. At 1200 yards true distance the stadimeter is going to report a range of only 600 yards. Good luck in hitting the Hiryu unless you're so close you'll see the whites of their eye's! Another problem is the way the stadimeter "marks" a height figure. When you draw down the second images waterline to the height reference point, if you strike the mouse just one pixel line adjacent to the exact measured point, the found range can be about 10 yards off (depending on how far away you are from the target). 10 yards off if the target is at a true 1000 yards distance, much more at longer distances (up to 30/40 yards off at 2400 yards or so). Move the waterline off the reference points pixel line more, and you'll increase the error more. Just how wide is a pixel line on the scope screen? There are three pixel lines on each stock Telemeter Division marks. Three lines make up the dark hash marks, from the top side, to the bottom side of the line.

Speaking of the Telemeter Division lines, the ability to have the Telemeter Divisions accurately measure a target was not possible before the Optical Targeting Correction mod. With the scopes providing an accurate field-of-view, and the telemeter divisions scaled to read that FoV, the gamer can use the scope to find range as they did in real life. Just another way to figure manual targeting solutions as the real life Captain's did. Actually I've noticed when using the Telemeter Divisions as a measuring tool and calculating the range through the Omnimeter, the range solution is more accurate than the stadimeter (even with a fairly reasonable height dimension). Mainly due to the short comings of the stadimeter as the game has it.

[CapnScurvy]

Oh, and another problem with the in-game stadimeter is its not "centered" on the periscope view. Depending on which direction you're looking, the stadimeter will produce a range figure error (up to a 20 yards @ 1000 yard true distance, much more when further away). This error is produced between the forward bearing positions and the rear facing bearings.

The stadimeter centering point is placed forward of the actual position from which the camera view originates. Since the camera view is what provides the double image of the target, the error is calculated into the range figure. You won't know it exists unless you have a mission made up with the Mission Editor of 2 of the same targets, at the same distance. One target is positioned to the front of the sub, the other at the rear. The found range will be different between the two. At greater true distances, this error becomes quite large in the difference between the front and rear facing targets.

Add up the other stadimeter short comings (and wrong height dimensions), its easy to see why there are players that say the manual targeting stinks with the game (except for using the sonar system, its dead on accurate). I for one play only with manual targeting. I know the problems with the systems, and will strive to provide the best fixes for them. Sure, you can simply get so close to the target that you can't miss, even with a wrong firing solution. But in real life, no Captain worth the scrambled eggs on his cap would risk is life and crew knowing his targeting system was so screwed up you would use blind luck for accuracy.

[Loudspeaker]

Thanks for your replies, cpnscurvy. Is there anything you don't know?

I have experienced some of the difficulties connected with manual targeting myself, but it doesn't ruin my game experience at all. Many factors made it hard to set up a precise firing solution in real life, and I therefore accept the in-game difficulties as well. After a little playing you somehow get a feeling if your solution is good or not. If I got a bad feeling about my solution, I just launch a torpedo salvo with wider spread angles than I normally would, like 3-4 degrees between each torpedo. Most of the time I get atleast one hit this way (unless the "lucky" torpedo turns out to be a dud, in which case you can hardly blame my firing solution).

[CapnScurvy]

Originally Posted by Loudspeaker

Thanks for your replies, cpnscurvy. Is there anything you don't know?

Lot's of stuff!!

Like how to move the stadimeter to match the view, rather than moving the view (along with the whole conning tower) to match the stadimeter. I don't know where to find the stadimeter node at all. I know there is one, but like trying to figure where the game calculates the meter units of measurements into feet and yards? They both seemed to be buried in the hard coded files somewhere.

I have experienced some of the difficulties connected with manual targeting myself, but it doesn't ruin my game experience at all. Many factors made it hard to set up a precise firing solution in real life, and I therefore accept the in-game difficulties as well. After a little playing you somehow get a feeling if your solution is good or not. If I got a bad feeling about my solution, I just launch a torpedo salvo with wider spread angles than I normally would, like 3-4 degrees between each torpedo.

That's not too bad of an idea considering a game patrol may take a few hours to complete. But in real life, a few hours of time would have you still seeing the island of Hawaii behind you. Expending torpedo's weren't taken lightly. They were your best offensive weapon and defensive option next to the subs ability to submerge. After taking weeks to get to your patrol area, shooting off torpedo's as if they were signal flares just wasn't going to be the thing to do. Unless you want to return home to a desk job due to unsatisfactorily completed patrols. I know, it's hard to imagine what a war patrol really felt like. Long hours/days of tedium duties, then heart racing action when something was finally detected.

Sitting at a desk, looking into a monitor screen for just a few hours, can't relate what the boredom and shear adrenaline rush the whole boat would have while on patrol. You made every contact "count" for something, even if it was a torpedo dud that sealed your fate to having nothing to show for your efforts.

Your right Loudspeaker, you will get a good sense of when a firing solution is fairly accurate. After playing for awhile, you'll get a good feel for what the Position Keeper dials are displaying, or what a map plot may show when you don't have the option of displaying the map targets enabled. I think this may be the closest time a gamer may get to feeling what the firing party felt when they too had a good solution. Plenty of other things that could go wrong will change the outcome. But, I'm thinking for that one brief moment when the "Fire Torpedo" call is made, there's a sense of anticipation the real life crew and gamer both can share. It's just that they couldn't hit the "save game" button for a do-over.