![]() |
SUBSIM: The Web's #1 resource for all submarine & naval simulations since 1997 |
![]() |
#1 |
Captain
![]() Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 546
Downloads: 17
Uploads: 0
|
![]()
Helo, im playing triggir maru's and while i love it i think the depthcharges are way to week could someone please make a mod to fix this?
![]()
__________________
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Navy Seal
![]() Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: New Mexico, USA
Posts: 9,023
Downloads: 8
Uploads: 2
|
![]()
LOL, and I just made a mod to make them mostly weaker.
I did decrease the depth error, so they'll get closer. If you play in late 43 or beyond, they will be somewhat stronger, actually. You might also try adding my TM Kaibokan mod, it adds some escorts with rather a lot of DCs aboard, and decent sensors into the bargain. Also late war. BTW, even though the current mod I just released lowers the strength of the smaller DCs, I am actually very open to increasing the strength of the smaller ones, perhaps to stock level, and having the later war 162kg DCs be very much more lethal. From my reading, the USN considered similar weight (300lbs) DCs to be 100% kills if they detonated within ~6m (20 feet). Actually, if there is some interest, I will make a test version of the recently released mod that does just that. Instead of saying that the stock DC = 162kg, I might say the stock SH4 DC = 110kg. The 162kg would then become very much more dangerous. tater |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Navy Seal
![]() Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: New Mexico, USA
Posts: 9,023
Downloads: 8
Uploads: 2
|
![]()
http://mpgtext.net/subshare/567IJN%2...d%20damage.rar
There is a version of my new mod with the stock DCs increased in damage, and the smaller early war versions increased to around the current stock level. This means that early in the war, the DCs will be about what you experience in TM now, but later in the war, a hit inside 6m on an early fleet boat (sargo, salmon, porpoise) will be almost a 100% kill. tater |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Navy Seal
![]() Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: New Mexico, USA
Posts: 9,023
Downloads: 8
Uploads: 2
|
![]()
Interesting, a quick test with a 33% increased DC hit vs a tambor a couple meters from the hull, and I was very much still in the game. I think for a 6m sure kill to be realistic, heck, even a 3m sure kill, the DCs might need to be very very much more powerful.
tater |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 | |
Eternal Patrol
![]() Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Waterbury, CT. USA
Posts: 2,336
Downloads: 0
Uploads: 0
|
![]() Quote:
Love your devotion but see what he was looking for. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
Navy Seal
![]() Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: New Mexico, USA
Posts: 9,023
Downloads: 8
Uploads: 2
|
![]()
Heheh. He brushed on something that I was already thinking about, and even chatting about in another conversation with lurker.
I just did a bunch of testing. The stock DC has a min damage of 170 and a max of 240. I just tested one with a min of 340, and a max of 500. I had them blow next to my sub, and while I took a lot of damage, it was not fatal! Something is indeed screwy. tater |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 | |
Grey Wolf
![]() Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 921
Downloads: 75
Uploads: 0
|
![]() Quote:
from http://www.submarine-history.com/NOVAthree.htm by Cpt Brayton Harris USN (ret) 1940 U. S. Navy ran depth-charge tests against an operational submarine (for most of the test, moored underwater without crew). They found that 300 pounds of TNT was not very effective; the explosive charge was doubled to 600 pounds. (later dropped to 400, when they added a lead weight for faster sinking) I do think you are correct in the navy thinking along those lines prior to 1940 and that line of thinking may have been derived from the DC tests on the USS G-1 in 1921.
__________________
"There are only two types of ships- submarines...... and targets" Unknown "you wouldn't catch me on a ship that deliberately sinks itself"- comment to me from a surface sailor. ![]() System: AMD 6300 3.5 GHz | 32GB DDR3 | SATA 300 320GB HD, SATA III 1TB HD, SATA III 1.TB HD | ASUS Sonar DS sound card NVIDIA 1660 Super OC | Windows 10 |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 | |||
Navy Seal
![]() Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: New Mexico, USA
Posts: 9,023
Downloads: 8
Uploads: 2
|
![]() Quote:
The above quote says the DC may be lethal at ~20' (6.1m). It also says moderate damage on a much bigger warhead (600lbs) out to 80' (24m). The stock 40m is clearly too far, but it's not as far off as I had imagined. Of course I bet the damage as a function of distance is non-linear in RL. No idea if the game treats it as a linear gradient. At the min SH4 explosion radius, 100% damage is applied, and to hitpoints as well I believe. So the stock setting of ~4m is not too bad, really. Setting the max radius too low (as I have been testing) is probably too far in the other directions. Looks like the TM value is pretty reasonable. A quote about British air dropped depth bombs: Quote:
Another: Quote:
|
|||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|