Destroyers Discussion (getting rid of pin point drops)

[gouldjg]

Ok Ok
:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

I guess we are going to need to test these things in campaign mode from now on. (what a bummer cos I am lazy.)

CB can you give any clues as to what year to start at and where best to go in both base and patrol grids.

I kind of aggree with the consensus here about random behaviour regardless of crew ratings.

Like I just noticed before, I think hydro is also being affected by aspect. Either that is just something to do with my direction as opposed to where the propeller aims at or it has something to do with something.

Man, I thought this was starting to get easier not harder .

I will leave my settings as they are for a few missions in campaign mode and then start to report back results.

I have to admit, I tried my first campaign and headed staraight to scapa and indeed, unless I did something completely stupid, the DD can be as blind as bats even though I had set sensors.dat.

This is all very frustrating but I am not for giving in yet.

Remember some posts back, I mentioned I had seen a lot of jargon about random this and that. I forgot where it was and I spent all day flicking in every file that day (Very boring).

Good work CB, Col7777 and ducimus.

It looks like we have to delve into a massive can of worms here.

[Redwine]

Originally Posted by Ducimus

-Thoughts on crew rating and DC's as a whole.
I noticed crew rating 3 is nowhere near as accurate as 4, but a marked improvement over 1 and 2. After watching a crew 3 most of the DCs were not even close. Ive come to the conclusion that the devs adjust DC's with an accuracy of 5 and radius of 40 to accomidate for crew rating inaccuracies. Adusting from the stock values i think neuters their effectiveness. The side effect however is crew4's are deadly.

mmhh.... :hmm: i tested dozen of times that mission with blast radius of 10 and depth precision 25 in depth charges, stock sim.cfg and AI_sensors.dat ..........and they still incredible precise and deadly.

I reduce their lethability, up to become into dummy DDs , reducing their hydrophones and sonar beams.

[Redwine]

Originally Posted by gouldjg

I kind of aggree with the consensus here about random behaviour regardless of crew ratings.

Did you ensure to remove all renamed back up files as marhkimov suggested ? :hmm:

My infernal random behavior finish after do that .......

I know, i know..... i have not a logic explanation for it.

[Redwine]

Originally Posted by Redwine

Did you ensure to remove all renamed back up files as Marhkimov suggested ? :hmm:

My infernal random behavior finish after do that .......

I know, i know..... i have not a logic explanation for it.

[gouldjg]

oops

Forgot that one Red :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

Thanks

p.s. maybe it is time to use the satalite nave map mod here

[Ducimus]

Originally Posted by Redwine

mmhh.... :hmm: i tested dozen of times that mission with blast radius of 10 and depth precision 25 in depth charges, stock sim.cfg and AI_sensors.dat ..........and they still incredible precise and deadly.

I reduce their lethability, up to become into dummy DDs , reducing their hydrophones and sonar beams.

acutally this wasnt the U505 mission. It was the single DDsonar test i was runniing. I was bored an decided tojust let him DC me to see how hed do as compared to a crew 4. I didnt dive much deeper then 150 meters. Most of the DC's went off above, or around me. I found it a we bit more forgiving. What i was hoping for was system damage on the boat and none was received. Made me think about expanding the radius from 20 to 25 or so.

Now, with crew 4's, them buggers are good. But how good depends on your depth, the DC drop time, and explosion radius. 4 or 5 elites are surviable at 300 meters with no evasive manuvering.

Sorry if im getting a bit off topic.

[gouldjg]

Originally Posted by Ducimus

acutally this wasnt the U505 mission. It was the single DDsonar test i was runniing. I was bored an decided tojust let him DC me to see how hed do as compared to a crew 4. I didnt dive much deeper then 150 meters. Most of the DC's went off above, or around me. I found it a we bit more forgiving. What i was hoping for was system damage on the boat and none was received. Made me think about expanding the radius from 20 to 25 or so.

Now, with crew 4's, them buggers are good. But how good depends on your depth, the DC drop time, and explosion radius. 4 or 5 elites are surviable at 300 meters with no evasive manuvering.

Sorry if im getting a bit off topic.

Ducimus

Please do not be sorry for going off topic.

Because I am using crew=4 I am very interested in your reports about the level 3's especially if their DC's land close but not dead on all the time.

I can easily whip up damage model etc to compensate your wanting damage, but lets see if we can get the best crew to use.

I think you may have had a good find here but as usual we need to prove and dispell our work :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

[Ducimus]

Personnaly i dont consdier Crew 4 DD accuracy an issue.

Seriously if i want to throw them off, instead of making myself dive to 300 meters, all i have to do is increase the drop time of DC's and lower the explosion radius, the effect would be the same im guessing..

DC's falling astern (although sometimes they're ahead of the bow), close, but no cigar.

With crew 3's im inclined to do the opposite, however, more testing is required there. Its probably a far better choice to use crew4's (who are more consistant) and adusting from there.

[Ducimus]

I should add that what im afraid of, with the adjustments im making in the sim.cfg is convoys becoming near unapproachable by using crewrating 4.

This is why i want to run a patrol on crew rating 3 with the same adjustments. If their still idiots, then ill kick it up a notch to crew 4.

If their not idiots, then im going to start tweaking depth charges to account for their accuracy.

[Marhkimov]

So are you guys saying that it is better to use crew 3 or crew 4 as a base to improve upon?

EDIT: oh, ok.

[Ducimus]

I think crew 4 are more consistant, therego easier to adjust to.

Im being the lonewolf and experimenting with crew 3's first to see if their workable.

[gouldjg]

Just a quickie update.

I have now installed the spy nav map mod and just set all crew back to rate 4.

I also deleted my copies in the libary,

I started a quick campaign as all the above took some time to do, man that find and replace takes it's time for me.

Anyway,

I started off from base and at least I can see all the convoys in campaign.

I tried to intercept but a lone DD is spotted by my crew.

Ahh I say to mysel, time to test hydro settings from before.

SO I crash dive and guess what,

My threat indicator turns red, it does not yet say detected. Ship is about 7000 mtres away closing on my beam side.

I turn down speed and it goes back to green but as i time compress, as this was really just to test the spoy nav map mod rather than the sensors,

Guess what,

The DD detected me from a good distance. I am in 1941 war time so expected it to have better range plus the fact it was calm water and I had already nerfed by sensors.dat to around 12000 - 18000 depending on what sensor.

So I am calling it a night tonight but my hopes have re-gained.

I am definetly sticking to the campaighn to do test but it is so much easier with the spy mod.

My fears

1.We nerf too much that convoys are too hard to approach, same as ducimus fears. We may have to compromise some reality here but as long as I get better gameplay then I personally am going towards gameplay rather than ultra realism.

2. This was just some form of game conspiricy to screw with my head like CB says :rotfl: :rotfl: Next time I try, the DD will probably just ride over me.

3. I have to test this by going to each time period in the war and then get individual results per sensor (noooooooo, I am lazy arghhhhh)

4. After we do all this we then start to look at visual sitings etc etc (arghhhh this is hell)

My furture actions

1. Abondon single missions and only do testing in campaign now. I think CB and Col7777 have very good points to keep steering us this way.

2. I am still going to try and adjust the sensor.dat to see if I can infact get any results without really touching the cfg and report as I go. If this fails, I am falling into line like a good boy and wiping the egg of my face.


Good night guys

[CB..]

Originally Posted by gouldjg

CB can you give any clues as to what year to start at and where best to go in both base and patrol grids.

.

hi sorry about the delay - a neighbour popped in and we got talking--so i wasn't able to get much done---

here's what suggest to make testing in the campaign slightly less insane--
(this one DOES work )

edit your Campaign_LND file for say Lorient to this

[Unit 39]
Name=Lorient
Class=NavalBase
Type=407
Origin=German
Side=2
Commander=0
CargoExt=-1
CargoInt=-1
CfgDate=19380101
DeleteOnLastWaypoint=true
DockedShip=false
GameEntryDate=19400713
GameEntryTime=0
GameExitDate=19440909
GameExitTime=0
EvolveFromEntryDate=false
Long=-1440830.000000
Lat=6862770.000000
;Long=-399046.000000
;Lat=5729702.000000
Height=-17.000000
Heading=135.000000
Speed=0.000000
CrewRating=3
DelayMin=0
ReportPosMin=-1
ReportPosProbability=100
RandStartRadius=0.000000
NextWP=0

ive left the stock start location commented out for safe keeping--

this will if the theory holds out -( it works just tested it)-have you starting in a fairly good position to intercept most of the regular convoys just north west of ireland grid AM01( edit the contacts cfg to give your self unlimited range for the radio contacts--)

then just crank up the time excell and wait for the contact reports to come in --- they allways do pretty quickly usually i can get into attack range of a convoy within 15 minutes somtimes less---

1942 for a good period mid war (tho it's bit quiet early on)

(it's only a extreme version of moving the start location for the subs to the subpen --the game doesn't care where you begin )

starting from port each time is too much

if you are more interested in the american DD's then set the start location of the coast of New york and ambush the US escorted convoys as they leave port lol!

wonder what's going on and why things are so different --? nightmare really

if you want to move quickly thru the war testing as you go edit your basic.cfg time section to this

[TIME]
TransferFlotilla=1
NbDaysInBase=48
NbPatrolsInFlotilla=3
NbMonthsInFlotilla=6

daysinbase entry

this gives you about 4 patrols a year average so you can progress quite quickly---or make it less if you want to stay in the same time period for longer --for testing

[caspofungin]

interesting...

i'm not sure if this is what you guys have done already... if it is, then i apologize for telling you what you already know.

took sim.cfg, deleted the hydrophone and sonar entry, and replaced them w/ specific named sensors eg

[Type147A]
Detection time=0 ;[s]
Sensitivity=0.01 ;(0..1)
Waves factor=0.5 ;[>=0]
Speed factor=20 ;[kt]
Enemy surface factor=200 ;[m2]
Lose time=30 ;[s]

or

[Type123P]
Detection time=0 ;[s]
Sensitivity=0.01 ;(0..1)
Height factor=0 ;[m]
Waves factor=0.5 ;[>=0]
Speed factor=15 ;[kt]
Noise factor=1.0 ;[>=0]

w/ this, i get long range hydrophone detection. i get a sonar dead zone at varying depths (using my historical beam geometry ai_sensor file). i get active sonar pinging beyond 90 degrees off the escort's beam. i also get a dead zone to both hydrophones and sonar in the escort's baffles, set at >150 degrees in the ai_sensor file. all this without changing noise factor or waves factor, so hopefully weather should still have an effect.

will try it a few more times in single missions and in campaign. sensitivity may have to be reduced. let me know what you guys think. again, apologies if its old news -- been of the thread for a while, may have missed some posts/points.

[Ducimus]

Intresting. :hmm:

you also reminded me to look at the sensitivity rating. im still using default 0.3.

Thanks :P