A few new ideas

[Fidd]

146. Loose and suspended objects.

A nice feature of SH3 were all the hanging hams and what-not which were hung above in the control-room, and which swayed gently with the roll and pitch of the boat, and which did so more vigorously when DC'd. It would be nice to see some of these performing the same "roll" (or falling?) in WP. Additionally, there might be loose objects such as a pile of tins, belongings from lockers, locker doors etc, which could spill about in rough seas or when DC'd, with attendant sound effects.

This would help create more of a local-earth vertical reference in the boat, as well as provide scope for more immersive experience of being in rough weather or subject to DC's. Personally I find the few "flashes", almost inaudible DC explosion sounds, and lack of camera-shake, to be particularly underwhelming when hit by nearby DC's. Adding pitching movement to the boat would also add to this. (as far as I'm aware our boats only roll)

[Fidd]

147. Optional faster zig-rate.

It is my belief that convoy clocks were set to zig at a periodicity of circa 8 minutes, rather than (I gather) the 17 minutes we now have.

The difference is important. In the 17 minute scenario, there just is enough time to determine the convoy heading, speed and to fire and hit to a 15 minute TOI against a target which will maintain speed and heading.

Were the historical (8 min?) zig rate enabled (on an optional basis of course) then this attack profile would need to change completely, as now the mean-track and mean-speed would form the data for the TDC, making long range shots a bit more difficult, and a longer period of observations needed before firing. This in turn allows for more detection opportunities, especially if aircraft and/or radar arrive.

I suggest that zigs be limited to plus or minus 10-15 degrees of a base course, excepting after a hit on a merchantman or detection of a u-boat, whereafter the convoy can change by 30 degrees relative to the base course, with 15 degrees for the 2nd zig 8 minutes later, before reverting back to the original base course at a rate of 5, 10, 15 degrees per following 8 minute zig. Once back on the base course, the maximum zig would return to 15 degrees in either direction?

This optional change would greatly benefit navigators, as now they'd need to accurately plot the position of a boat at two recorded times, then derive the convoy speed from that. Similarly establishing the 1st and 2nd AOB's (and therefore headings) of the convoy, and the time they changed, to establish the mean-course.....

[derstosstrupp]

Where does the historical 8 minute figure come from? I was always of the understanding that large convoys zigged more to the tune of every half hour to an hour. Now, single ships on the other hand, yes, those zigzagged very aggressively. I would be extremely surprised at 8 minutes for a convoy, these are mostly merchant men, not trained in station keeping.

[Fidd]

I believe I read an account of this where there was a picture of the 8 markers around the periphery which were used to synchronise movements of individual ships. I cannot recall the precise source, but it's hard to think this isn't well documented?

[derstosstrupp]

Originally Posted by Fidd

I believe I read an account of this where there was a picture of the 8 markers around the periphery which were used to synchronise movements of individual ships. I cannot recall the precise source, but it's hard to think this isn't well documented?

I know radio room clocks used on some surface ships have markings like that to denote key times during the radio watch or between them, but eight minutes is far too short for zigs. I only have heard a half hour to an hour or so. It’s a recipe for disaster to expect merchant mariners to execute this every eight minutes. Even a crew trained in station keeping would be exhausted having to do this that frequently.

[Fidd]

I would suspect that it was only used when under fire, or when the "warnings of the numbers of u-boats in your area" warranted it. Once per half hour would provide little or no protection via ruining torpedo solutions, and would only serve to increase the track miles of the convoy.

[derstosstrupp]

Originally Posted by Fidd

I would suspect that it was only used when under fire, or when the "warnings of the numbers of u-boats in your area" warranted it. Once per half hour would provide little or no protection via ruining torpedo solutions, and would only serve to increase the track miles of the convoy.

The idea wasn’t to foil solutions, it was to make tracking the convoy by a shadowing U-boat difficult. If you recall, a U-boat (typically the first to sight it) was designated the “contact holder” and could not attack until BdU knew he had sufficient boats in contact. That took many many hours. It needed to provide contact reports at intervals and often they lost contact because they could not follow the convoy’s movements effectively or were driven off by roving escorts. The zigzag patterns would typically be very complex, making it difficult to predict the base course and assemble boats effectively. That was the whole idea. Again, you can’t expect a glorified gaggle of civilian ships to execute the precision needed at 8-minute intervals without collisions happening (they happened as it was even with infrequent zigs). Nor did it happen for that reason in danger areas of U-boats. A recipe for loss of coordination and scattering. And unlike in Wolfpack, in real life the scatter meant absolute failure of the convoy commander and easy pickings for U-boats.

[Fidd]

I don't doubt the veracity of what you're saying, but from what I've seen - an image of a merchantman clock with the periphery marked for when zigs should be made; it makes we wonder if we're both right, namely that there were short-interval zigs to make solutions more difficult when under fire, and longer interval ones designed to frustrate establishing the convoy's base course, as you describe.

In other words, we may both be right.

[Fidd]

148. DF-ing using civilian radio-stations/DFing u-boats

This was a common technique, especially on long-wave, to establish the bearing to and from civilian transmitters known location, and therefore with a cross-cut bearing, to determine position deep into the Atlantic. If one assumes that the location of the u-boat was unknown to the crew initially, this might make for some interesting navigational use of DF's to fix their position. The more lines established, the more accurate the fix, and therefore the more accurate subsequent navigation to the convoy becomes. (assuming some form of time-compression to keep "time to target" roughly comparable to now)

With the multi-national player-base, it ought to be possible to create plausible sounding radio transmissions of stations in the UK, Germany, France and the low-countries, to which a radio-officer can tune the DF equipment to start DFing.

The allied counter to this is the use of DFing locations - spread from Iceland to the Azores, to fix the area of u-boats whenever they transmit. On a strategic level this has little bearing (if you'll excuse the pun) on the game, however, it could be used the more radio-traffic is sent between boats in game, to send detached escorts down a bearing to search for a surfaced or thence submerged u-boat. By counting the characters, or duration of morse signals sent, from a particular u-boat during the course of a game, a tipping-point might be reached causing such a detachment of an escort. Or aircraft.

DFing therefore could be engineered in game to both assist u-boat crews in locating a convoy and establishing their own position - or the position of other u-boats, but ALSO via the brevity, or otherwise, of radio transmissions from it, to cause AI or PVP escorts to be able to detach from their usual positions.....

[Fidd]

149. Refinement of AI escorts in determining likely position of an attacking u-boat from torpedo wakes.

If the attacked merchantman is sunk within a short period of being hit, all the escorts should be aware of is the 180 degree arc "side" that the torpedo has come from, and therefore those escorts on that side should turn outwards from that side, and commence asdic and hydrophone searches. However, as the distance from which the torpedo is fired is unknown, the distance outwards they travel is fairly short.

If the merchantman is hit but does not sink quickly, it is assumed that the approximate track of a steam inbound torpedo is known to the crew, and this information is given to the escorts via short-wave radio or other signal, and the AI escort then proceeds along the reciprocal of that track, for a reasonable distance, likewise at asdic and hydrophone speed.

Similarly, if the track of a steam torpedo is seen passing an un-hit merchantman, the same reasonable distance is covered by the outbound pinging/listening escort, however, with a less certain bearing, so there should be a random error in bearing to course travelled.

If the u-boat is physically spotted, the AI escorts would travel directly at best speed to the area, for perhaps 90% of the distance, and only then conduct asdic and hydrophone searches, firing guns at the u-boat so long as it or the periscope is in view, possibly with star-shells.

So, firing electrics, will result in poor ability by the escorts to locate a u-boat, provided it remains quiet and achieves sinking hits. On the other hand, if it fires and misses with steams, or hits but does not outright sink, a merchantment, then the ability of the escorts to determine the location of the u-boat improves. Finally, if the u-boat is visually seen, then it's in for a world of hurt, possibly with several escorts coming for it at up to 36 knots....

[Fidd]

150. Fixing damage - personal expertise

Any damage that is fixable, should take x time to do so. This could be modified by the players expertise in the associated systems. So players total time in game - as known from Steam could be one variable, their role on the boat when fixing an associated system another. So, a long-standing player, who is a Dive-Officer, would fix a class 2 damage (see link below) of a depth gauge, faster than a new player who is a radio operator... The captain would have no ability to fix anything. His job being to put the right people attending to the right problem, and prioritising it.

The more players put on a single problem to fix, the quicker that problem is fixed. All fixable problems (classes 2 and 4) would automatically fix themselves, but very slowly, representing the efforts of the remainder of the crew. A crewman attempting to fix a class 1 or 3 problem, would be told (via a mechanism that informs him alone) after 150(?) seconds that the fault or damage is irreparable. He would then communicate that to the captain.

Whilst a player is fixing a problem, he is unable to move or operate any other control, nor is he able to interrupt the process. If he does, then whatever fixing he has achieved is zeroed unless another player is helping, where-after it continues at a slower rate. The point of this is to increase the need for players to run additional stations to their own when damage-control parties are at work.

Each time a player fixes a fault, their general expertise rises - and with it the diminishment of the time taken for future repairs.

https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/sho...&postcount=116

[Fidd]

151. Beards.

Each mission you survive, your avatar very gradually goes from clean-shaven, to fully bearded over 40 games or so. Every time you're killed during a game, back to being clean-shaven you go!

Amusingly, since posting this and mentioning this particular "silly" idea, this one really seems to have caught player's imagination, and I've had universally positive feedback on it!

[Fidd]

152. "Pencil" or ability to point finger at instruments/controls.

It would be useful, when teaching or watching a new player, if there was the ability for a player to point to a specific instrument using a pencil or a pointed-finger, in such a way that the person under instruction can clearly tell to which instrument you are directing his attention to. It's sort of doable with the torch, but that usually covers several instruments or controls. This comes I think into the category of "nice to have but not essential"?

In both cases, the finger or pencil should be directed to the centre screen white dot, and for a 3rd person viewer, be pointed directly at the same instrument.

[Fidd]

153. In order to add some realism to the re-charging process, and to replicate, to a point, the actual methods employed, as well as provide some much needed extra tasks for the engine room crew, I suggest:

That recharge rates be staggered:

0-6Kah half-speed 340 rpm, 700A parallel/parallel
6-8.5ka half-speed 340 rpm, 400A parallel/parallel
8-9.3kah half-speed 340 rpm, 200A parallel/parallel
9.3kah and above 0A

If the amperage is exceeded, the battery eventually begins to vent hydrogen, requiring ventilation of the boat. The hydrogen level is simply rendered as a % report in text. If a given value is reached, the boat is lost. ? The risk of this can be mitigated by using the appropriate charging regime, and ceasing recharging at 9.3kah; also keeping the air intake and exhaust hull-valves open, and of course the main-hatch.

This will add to the complexity of recharging, and to the need for careful management of recharge rates, as well of other techniques (such as using the e-motor in recharge to moderate shaft rpm when convoy speed matching).

By having a requirement for variable-rate recharging, and a severe penalty for allowing the batteries to vent hydrogen in excess, it will require more "thinking ahead" by both captain and engineers/machinists to ensure the boat is well recharged - and ventilated - for when it is needed. Additionally by having the main-hatch more routinely open, it allows for some extra complexity for the dive-officer and others.

I suggest that "hydrogen danger" be a configurable setting for the lobby. By making the % of hydrogen a simple text report, citing the value, minimal extra coding would be required, other than tying the recharge rate in amps to the rate at which hydrogen gassing occurs. The suggested figures are fairly arbitrary, the point is there should be a system whereby the charging regime has to change the nearer one gets to 9.3kah, and the rate of charge must diminish within certain limits, as the overall Kah rises?

[Fidd]

154. Double-ranked escorts

As the war progressed, circa 1942 onwards, the availability of corvettes. sloops and destroyers improved to the point where escorts could be placed in two concentric circles around the convoy. The inner one consisted of corvettes, and the outer one usually of destroyers and sloops (Tribals and Bitterns). The latter were preferentially sent out to attack located U-boats, either reported positions from aircraft, HFDF bearings or visually seen, or detected by radar. These ships would range out to about 25nm (circa 50 or so km), because they could recover to the convoy at a good speed.

During the day, the function of the outer screen was to frustrate the efforts of U-boats to accelerate past the convoy at a range where they could remain - just about - in visual range of the convoy, and so help prevent their being able to overtake and prosecute a night time attack later.

During the night, dependant on the ranges from the convoy, a U-boat would have to penetrate at least the outer screen, and possibly also the inner screen, in order to have a reasonable prospect of hitting targets. That suggests to me that the inner screen of corvettes was about 1200m distant from the nearest merchant, and the outer screen was circa 3.5km to 5km distant. (A 5km shot would be considered a pretty long low percentage shot at the time.) It was the advent of these double screens that impelled the development of the Lut I and Lut II torpedoes (for which we will need changes to our current TDC) and the acoustic "zaukoenig" (?) types. The latter were swiftly rendered useless to attack destroyers by the use of "Foxer", (essentially a towed clapper that attracted the acoustic torpedo) although I can imagine the latter were not popular with hydrophone operators!

As we move to the type VIIC/41, and from 1941 into later years, it is I think worthwhile considering having some, or most, or all, convoys protected by an inner and outer escort screen. This is I think crucial to being able to extend the difficulty level of play, and variety of game experience and outcome, for experienced players, so that over-repetition and burnout is avoided. Player retention being very nearly as important as acquiring new players?