ISP 2.0 is READY!

[pdiddy]

Originally Posted by TorpX

I have stuck to my house rules regarding TC, length of patrol, etc.

Would you share your house rules please?

[merc4ulfate]

The disappearing button issue is most likely caused by unloading mods then loading other mods and then saving a game over a save from a past mod list. The best rule for running these mods in my book is that if you want to change mods :

Remove them all
Remove the game
Reboot
Reinstall the game
Reboot
Install 1.5
Reboot
Install JSGME and populate it with your mods
Reboot

Play game

I have never had a corrupt save doing this.

Torpx ... I understand what your saying about ISP and OM. You should give the other side a try sometime it is nice starting the war in 1939 with a boat that only has three tubes. A good challenge. I would love to see some major North Atlantic storms. The fog in the mods I am running for OM is tricky. You think you can not be seen but they do see you and chase your hiney down but in some areas your only talking 215 feet in the North sea so it is much more of a challenge than dipping down to 450 in the great depth of the Pacific and hiding from the Japanese.

I find those english buggars can be much more persistent than the Japanese at ASW.

[Captain Dave]

Merc4ulfate, try this. I'm running TMO with RSRDC. I've downloaded and am running Dynamic Enviroment v2.9 for SH5. Also SH5 water for SH4. I'm only using the Main Mod of DynEnv 2.9, but there's 27 Options. I had to cut out the Scene.dat file because the underwater was too murky for me. Also got rid of SEA folder since it was U-Boats only. So far no problems with mod soup. May be worth your while to look into that Mod.

[TorpX]

Originally Posted by pdiddy

Would you share your house rules please?

Sure.

First, I have all the realism options enabled, except the external cam, and I never use it to cheat. For me, it's more of a boredom combating device. Much of sub patrols are a waiting game.

1. Dead is Dead.

2. Orders are orders. When I get a mission to patrol area X, I go there and stay for at least a week, and maybe two. If historically, it was a tactical deployment (i.e. the defense of the Philippine Is.), I consider one week enough, if it is in the nature of a strategic deployment (i.e. commerce raiding), I'll consider it to be a 2 week order. Some discretion is needed here, as the game missions may not always make sense in your situation. For example, if I were to get orders that were suicidal (recon of major enemy base), or just plain stupid (go far away, where you won't have enough fuel to do squat), I ignore/modify them.

3. I limit myself to TC of 32x on surface, 64x submerged. The reason I keep to a lower value of 32x on the surface is that the wave mechanics are mostly negated above 32x, so speeds change a lot between 32x and 64x+, when waves are large. Because the weather was "stuck" for so long on this patrol, I was going to 64x for part of the nightly recharge; otherwise I couldn't get anywhere. I hated to do that, but I had 16 consecutive days of wind speed 15, and it was far worse than anything I had in tests of ISP.


4. I don't use the TDC in an S-boat. That is apart from using it to set a fixed gyro-angle. Manual calculation substitutes for mechanical wizardry here. On this patrol it didn't really matter, as I have yet to see a single contact.

5. I am using a mechanical reliability rule scheme, sort of like the Ted Healy system, but somewhat more detailed and elaborate. It is still a work in progress, though. The only issue I rolled up in this, so far, is a potential gun jam, but again, since I haven't fired a single shell, it doesn't really matter on this patrol.

6. The patrol is limited to a reasonable time. I figured I loaded 45 days of food at the start. I had planned to go back to Manila to top off my tanks, and replenish, but as events transpired, the storms prevented my from getting back before the Navy destroyed the fuel stocks. Bad for me!

[nionios]

Since the installation of ISP 2.4,i notice that the diving time has been reduced.Is this intentional?
I know that this mechanism has been reworked.

[TorpX]

Reduced compared to what?

ISP versions 2.15, 2.4, and 2.6 should give identical diving performance. The versions before v 2.15 were developed on a different theory. I briefly "tested" TMO alone, but I don't recall diving times or such.

The whole diving performance business is more complicated that just increasing or decreasing diving times.

[nionios]

Originally Posted by TorpX

Reduced compared to what?

Compared to diving time in TMO 2.5 without ISP.

[TorpX]

Originally Posted by nionios

Compared to diving time in TMO 2.5 without ISP.
[/INDENT]

I set aside arbitrary time guidelines and focused on making the dive angle realistic. You should have tabulated figures for the Tambor class, and other info, in the readme.

So the answer is yes; it is intended.

Unless the times you get are at wide variance with those I tabulated, I wouldn't be concerned.

***

The mechanical reliability scheme - a future available mod? I'm not familiar with the Ted Healy system.

Not a mod, really, but a system of charts and dice rolls.

For example, I make checks every 3 days on patrol, and I might roll a result indicating an engine breakdown, a gun jam, or a crew member becomes injured/ill. Basically, it makes the boat and crew less perfect. The longer you stay out, the more likely something important will go *klunk*.

Rust never sleeps, as they say.

Of course, it is not as good as having the game do this internally, but AFAIK, no one has the ability to accomplish this.

[HertogJan]

Hi TorpX,


I have a question bout the max surface range and submerged range for the Porpoise class you set ISP 2 (TMO) too.
_TMO =13358m at 13.5Knts
_ISP 2.4 =8114m at 10knts
(13358m at 10knts sounds about right to mee).

I've been looking at different sites for references and keep getting the aprox same surface range which are between 12.000Nm and 13.000Nm for te Porpoise class but when I look at your settings (s3d) they show 8114 miles which is
7050.8 Nm.
I know the game doesn't render the distances correctly compared to real-life but this is really low. Is there a reason you set it that low and does it affect the range in game?



PS_ I read you're tweaking the weather some and am wondering how that's going, I would like to try out your mod in combination with OTC.
(That's why I started looking into the changes you made and see how much your mod changes OTC's as sort of a prep. work prior to installation).

As I can see your Data/submarine/ *.sim file (which is a important file) it changes everything from top to bottom in '11: Unit Submarine' compared to OTC how that effects it, I don't know, but seeing some ppl are using both and its working for them I'm wondering. I remember from a mail from CapnScurvy OTC does not like the changes to draft heights.

Quote from mail:
"The question of whether changing the draft figure in the ships .cfg file would change the correction of the height figure (which does effect the stadimeter/visual telemeter readings)....no, it will not. The .cfg "Draft=" figure (which is in meters....all figures are in meters) only shows up in the Recognition Manual. It doesn't effect the ship model at all.

It's not this figure that changes how the ship sits in the water. To change how a ship sit's in the water, you'll need to open the Data/Sea/shipname.sim (using S3D) file and find the "Mass:" figure. The heaver the Mass:, the deeper in the water it will sit. This type of change WILL effect the Height= (the "Mast=") figure in the .cfg file.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding it but to me it sounds like: do not mess with draft height if you want OTC's visuals to work properly.

Maybe CapnScurvy can shed some more light on to this (again).


what started out as a simple inquiry turned into a big question

[pdiddy]

Originally Posted by TorpX

5. I am using a mechanical reliability rule scheme, sort of like the Ted Healy system, but somewhat more detailed and elaborate. It is still a work in progress, though.

Thanks!

The mechanical reliability scheme - a future available mod? I'm not familiar with the Ted Healy system.