about the real fleet boat mod...

[Crawlerz]

u know i installed it just for kicks. and what...
the deck gun reload time is what threw me into involintary projectile vomiting almost immideately. wtf is up with that?
i mean all the other thing... for example: does it include the True Ship Dimention fix? i didnt catch that...
tchaaa, u know wha.. t? i think i'll go back to the original SH4 teaming with mods of different styles. probably better.

[tater]

What was wrong with the reload time? You do realize ammo had to be passed up to the gun, right?

The ROF is reasonably historical for a submarine deck gun, and because the SH4 deck gun is a gyrostabilized wonder like the gun on an Abrams tank, anythign to reduce the absurd effectiveness is a good thing, IMO.

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by Crawlerz

the deck gun reload time is what threw me into involintary projectile vomiting almost immideately. wtf is up with that?

:rotfl:

Nothing like kicking the door open and looking for a fight.

The deck gun rate-of-fire has been an argument ever since Beery's Real U-Boat mod two years ago. The problems are many, and the overall rate of fire is accurate, whether you puke on yourself or not.

Go to this thread, start with post #403 and prepare for a LOT of reading.
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/show...111770&page=21

[SteamWake]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

Nothing like kicking the door open and looking for a fight.

In the wrong forum no less.

[heartc]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

:rotfl:

Nothing like kicking the door open and looking for a fight.

Exactly my thoughts, lol.
That was awesome...in a way. :rotfl:

[tater]

IMO too many people involved in simulations (programmers/game designers included) get overly attached to specific technical numbers, and not outcomes.

There is a camp of people in WW2OL, for example, who are not fond of a statistical approach to artillery fire. One of the active forum members actually models HE effects for the military. He simulates what they wish to see as his day job, and he can test his models with real guns. He uses a statistical approach. The gamers want to have every fragment tracked through the air—nevermind that the DM of the troops is so abysmal—you get the idea, missing the forest for the trees.

If the deck gun moved with the deck (like the TBT) so you had to pick when to fire on the roll and pitch, I'd be for an increase in ROF. But only a little faster unless the game could also adjust ROF for sea state. The skipper can fire the gun with the deck awash, and since the ammo was passed from below, every time the deck is awash the compartment below is getting seriusly drenched. In some of the seas I have used the deck gun messing around, there is no question that the boat should have been down at the stern after a few shots, even with all the pumps running just from the fact the hatch was underwater for so bloody long.

[shoot-kill-win]

Not trying to start an argument, but on some fleet boats wasn't the ammo stored in sealed containers on the outside of the bridge for the deck gun?

[tater]

Yeah, they kept some ready ammo there. But in game, it all gets reloaded at the same rate, plus you can fire in conditions where it would not have been done, plus the gun is gyro-stabilized, etc. The gun simulation isn't very complicated, so picking an average figure for ROF seems pretty reasonable to me.

[Nightmare]

Originally Posted by shoot-kill-win

Not trying to start an argument, but on some fleet boats wasn't the ammo stored in sealed containers on the outside of the bridge for the deck gun?

Yes, but only 10 or so rounds could be stored. Since SH4 only has one variable for ROF, you can't model the first 10 rounds with quick reload times then the 30-60 seconds reload times as the next round has to be passed up the hatch from below.

As far as damage (another source of gripe for some people using RFB, and I'm sure the topic will come up), I think Beery is spot on as well. Using "Wahoo" by O'Kane as a reference, on one occasion they pumped 90 rounds into a small freighter before it sank. On another, they shot 80 rounds into another freighter after it took the initial torpedo hit. Morton didn't feel the freighter was worth another torpedo.

Blasting the crap out of a convoy with the deck gun or sinking a medium freighter with 7 rounds below the waterline never seemed very realistic to me.

[nattydread]

Originally Posted by tater

IMO too many people involved in simulations (programmers/game designers included) get overly attached to specific technical numbers, and not outcomes.

There is a camp of people in WW2OL, for example, who are not fond of a statistical approach to artillery fire. One of the active forum members actually models HE effects for the military. He simulates what they wish to see as his day job, and he can test his models with real guns. He uses a statistical approach. The gamers want to have every fragment tracked through the air—nevermind that the DM of the troops is so abysmal—you get the idea, missing the forest for the trees.

If the deck gun moved with the deck (like the TBT) so you had to pick when to fire on the roll and pitch, I'd be for an increase in ROF. But only a little faster unless the game could also adjust ROF for sea state. The skipper can fire the gun with the deck awash, and since the ammo was passed from below, every time the deck is awash the compartment below is getting seriusly drenched. In some of the seas I have used the deck gun messing around, there is no question that the boat should have been down at the stern after a few shots, even with all the pumps running just from the fact the hatch was underwater for so bloody long.

When will that statiscal HE model be added in WWIIOnline? Is it just for frags, bombs, tanks rounds?

Sorry for the hijacking...Arrr!

[AVGWarhawk]

Originally Posted by Crawlerz

u know i installed it just for kicks. and what...
the deck gun reload time is what threw me into involintary projectile vomiting almost immideately. wtf is up with that?
i mean all the other thing... for example: does it include the True Ship Dimention fix? i didnt catch that...
tchaaa, u know wha.. t? i think i'll go back to the original SH4 teaming with mods of different styles. probably better.

The great part about this game is you can uninstall things you do not like. If for any particular reason you do not like something about a mod, take it to the creater of the mod and inquire. I'm certainly sorry you wretched on the floor and you do not care for Berry's interpretation of ROF/load times but when you come up with a better solution, let us know. Until then, lets give Beery a break here, any attempt to make a game better certainly does not deserve a flame of what crap it is. Go find another mod or play vanilla. BTW, you get a full refund for the mod.....oh, never mind it was free

[SteamWake]

Where can I get this Dimention fix ?

I could use a good dose of that.

[Nightmare]

Originally Posted by SteamWake

Where can I get this Dimention fix ?

I could use a good dose of that.

I believe RFB already has the fix in place. However if you aren't running RFB it can be downloaded from: http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=109953

[ming]

Last night I raided a Japanese harbor and tp'ed two boats but one did not go down. So I made sure it was safe and moved to within about 300 meters or so and opened a can on the survivor using the deck gun and the .50 cal. After about 60-70 rounds aimed at the water line she finally went down right there in the dock! Naturally it was about 0400 hrs so I could remain largely unseen. Oh yea, one more neat part of the encounter....Im running RFB 1.28! Nice work as always, Beery!

[Beery]

How could I have missed this thread?

Regarding the German propaganda film, they show a deck gun firing two rounds in succession in about 5 seconds. Sorry to disappoint but this proves nothing other than that a boat with two rounds at the gun could fire those rounds in 5 seconds. We already know that, but that doesn't refute RFB's deck gun rate of fire.

Sure there was a ready-use ammo container and sure, rounds could be fired at a fast pace from this store. BUT it only contained 5-10% of the boat's deck gun ammo. The other thing is, this is a propaganda film - they're going to show a high rate of fire because that is effective cinema, but showing a gun firing at a fast rate does not prove anything more than that a gun COULD be fired at a fast rate. We already know that. The film doesn't show that the gun was being aimed at anything - it only shows it being fired fast and the film is cut together to give the impression that there's a target out there and to give the impression that that high rate of fire could be sustained.

What we need to know is how fast the deck gun could be fired under combat conditions where the crew has to supply the gun beyond the limits of the ready-use ammo store and where the gun has to be aimed at something, where rangefinding and adjustments in aim have to take place while the boat is pitching and rolling. This propaganda film does what propaganda films are meant to do - convince us by trickery that the fantasy they're showing us is factual.

The only evidence we can rely on is evidence from logbooks that were written at the time which timed engagements and listed the number of shells expended. If anyone who disputes RFB's rate of fire has such evidence they should present it and further the debate. If not they should shut up.

Anyone can say RFB's rate of fire is wrong. Hell, they can say the moon is made of pink blancmange. But we need proof, not opinion. We need a timed engagement where 40+ shells were fired from a WW2 sub's single deck gun with a start and end time for the engagement. We need at least 40 shells because we need to counteract the effect of the ready-use ammo container - because SH4 doesn't permit two separate reload rates for the two ammo stores. Anything less than a timed engagement in which 40+ shells were fired is a waste of everyone's time.

The best info I have right now from a US sub is an engagement from USS Nautilus's logbook. It doesn't quite meet the criteria I've set (it involves too great a proportion of ready-use ammo) but I think it is useful:

"0703 M August 17, 1942, commenced firing on Ukiangong Point area on
Makin Island. Covered area by shifting sights in range and deflection.
0711 M Checked fire.
0716 M August 17, 1942, commenced firing on ship anchorage area of
Makin Island. Radio spotting circuit was jammed or ineffective. Covered
area as thoroughly as possible by shifting sights in range and deflection
as necessary.
0723 M Checked fire, a total of 65 rounds of ammunition
having been expended."

That's 65 rounds in 15 minutes from two guns. That's 28 seconds per round per gun where the gun was not being aimed properly and where rangefinding and proper adjustments in aim could not be done. Around 40 of those rounds (20 per gun and nearly 2/3rds of the ammo fired) would have come from the ready-use ammo stores by the guns, so a longer engagement would have resulted in a slower rate of fire. Also, the rate of fire stated here does not take into account preparing the gun to fire. Still, the rate of fire in this engagement confirms RFB's rate of fire. Nautilus' crewmen reload their guns three seconds slower than RFB crewmen reload their 5" gun. Far from showing that RFB's reload rate is too slow this indicates that RFB's reload rate is TOO FAST.

We need more info to get RFB even more accurate. I imagine that further data will result in reducing the RFB deck gun's rate of fire to about 40 seconds per round.