Normal Tonnage

U-boot V · 11-14-10, 10:11 AM

Hi
I recently started playing GWX (84% realism) and I'm now in may 1940. Just came back with 56,000 tons, so I wondered is that too much? What would an average Kaleun (or yourself) rack up?

KptLtHansDampf · 11-14-10, 10:31 AM

My average tonnage is about 14838 BRT in 58 patrols (using VIIb, VIIc and XXI-Class) during the entire war, only loosing 1 Uboat during my first campaign. Including some zero ton-patrols due to little accidents in harbours or just bad luck.

I started a second campaign, and now my average is 20125 BRT with VIIb and IX-Class, 8 patrols until now. Highest tonnage about 61000 BRT during patrol 6 with a IX.

frau kaleun · 11-14-10, 10:42 AM

In real life, the average tonnage per patrol for an "average" commander was a lot lower. According to uboat.net, Otto Kretschmer is credited with 46 sinkings for 273043 GRT in 16 patrols (224 days at sea). That comes out to just a little over 17000 tons per patrol. And he was the most successful commander of the war, and operated only from Sept 1939 to March 1941 when Allied defenses were relatively weak.

The game is a whole different kettle of fish, since so much depends on the realism options selected and on whether or not you choose to play with additional "realistic" restrictions that the game doesn't enforce. Some mods no doubt also have an affect on how easy it will be to locate, catch, and successfully attack targets and still get home alive.

In my current career I've got about the same total tonnage as Herr Kretschmer finished up with after 313 days at sea since the war started. But even if I played at 100% realism (I don't - more like 65-70% ATM), it could never approach the 100% realism he had to deal with, lol.

Schöneboom · 11-14-10, 12:56 PM

To add to what Frau Kaleun said, I've read that in real life U-boat skippers had difficulty just finding the enemy. In the early war, when there were too few U-boats at sea to cover the North Atlantic, good intel, the sort you could act upon, was less frequent than in SH3/GWX. Some of us compensate by ignoring some contact reports; imagine the effect if you had to find ships & convoys with no help, or only half as much as you're now given.

Also, another way to make one's score more realistic is to use manual targeting, at least for submerged attacks. For sure it makes the hits feel like real accomplishments.

Gute Jagd,
Wayne

Yoriyn · 11-14-10, 02:01 PM

And don't forget about using magnetic ppistols (detonators) only at the begining of the war. No one know the pistols and deep keeping device are faulty.

Jimbuna · 11-14-10, 02:29 PM

In RL the majority of U-boats sent out on patrol sank very little if anything at all and that got progressively worse as the war went on.

If I'm to be totally honest, it is a lot easier to rack up tonnage ingame than it was in RL.

The best way to be as realistic as possible is to play at 100% realism and use manual targetting...at least that way you are approaching as realistic a gameing level as is currently possible.

Welcome aboard U-boot V

kk20 · 11-15-10, 04:46 AM

i'm on 84% too (not clever enough for manual targetting). I get between 10k and 20k with the odd big haul. I have yet to engage a task force or anything larger than a small 30k warship

desirableroasted · 11-15-10, 05:44 AM

I play at 84% realism, GWX 3.0 and am averaging 59K tons per patrol in my current career (5 patrols), Sept 39 - Apr 40.

However, I have had extraordinary luck with this career. My usual take is around 25-30K per patrol. But even that is getting a bit too arcade-like, so I am learning manual targeting in another career path. That should bring me back down to 10K a patrol!

Heibges · 11-15-10, 10:35 AM

The #1 determing factor for tonnage in SH3 is how much you use your hydrophones to locate targets.

For whatever reason, it is much easier to find targets in game with the hydrophones than it was in real life.

U-boot V · 11-15-10, 12:24 PM

Thank you very much for the information,

. I I'll attempt to use manual targeting, luckily there are plenty of resources on here!

Yoriyn, I thought the faulty magnetic pistols were on the T II only?

desirableroasted · 11-15-10, 03:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by U-boot V

Thank you very much for the information,

. I I'll attempt to use manual targeting, luckily there are plenty of resources on here!

Yoriyn, I thought the faulty magnetic pistols were on the T II only?

I think it was all magnetic pistols (modeled to some extent in GWX).

And the TII's had depthkeeping problems (apparently not modeled anywhere).

Matador.es · 11-25-10, 10:28 AM

I have heard quite some good remarks. I think that the "auto spotting" of ships is a big helper ingame. But i would not be supprised if the spotting by the Watch Crew is beyond normal.

An other thing what supprises me is the number of patrols you can make in just one year, or as long as you play. Thats far from realistic. Patrols tend to last much shorter before you RTB. This helps in stagering number as 14 patrol in 1940, which in RL never happend.

Not much know, but a good commander as Heinrich Lehmann-Willenbrock sailed 9 patrols in the entire war, sinking 24 ships totaling 170KGRT.

That does make 18K GRT per patrol, but just 9 WAR patrols in about 6 years

I think an avarage U-Boat sailed only 4 patrols.

frau kaleun · 11-25-10, 11:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matador.es

That does make 18K GRT per patrol, but just 9 WAR patrols in about 6 years

Not really, HLW began his first combat patrol as a commander in Dec 1939 in U-5 and was transferred ashore after completing his 8th patrol with U-96 on April 1 1942. He commanded one additional patrol in late 1944, taking a u-boat from France to Norway to escape the Allied occupation of Brest. Even counting the 6-7 weeks of that last patrol, he was only active as a frontboot commander for a total of about 2 1/2 years.

Whatever the discrepancies that exist between average patrol length in the game vs. real life, looking at # of patrols made by a particular real commander vs. the full timespan of the war doesn't give an accurate comparison. Most of them (and more likely all of them) were only in command of a frontboot for a portion of the war, not the entire duration of hostilities. The rest of the time they made no patrols because they were no longer serving in that capacity.

Matador.es · 11-25-10, 02:44 PM

I must admid this is not the best example. I did kind of missed he did not sail from april '42 untill september '44... which is quite a time.

Spoken about that last patrol, quite an extreme route for a delivery!

http://uboat.net/boats/patrols/patrol_4436.html

frau kaleun · 11-25-10, 09:28 PM

I'm guessing they took the long way 'round in order to limit their exposure to Allied ASW contacts as much as possible... I could be wrong, but IIRC U-256 was in pretty bad shape and if she hadn't been the only way out of Brest short of being captured by the Allies, she wouldn't have been taken out to sea at all. I think I remember reading somewhere that just getting her relatively seaworthy enough to attempt the voyage was quite an accomplishment.

Or I could be confusing actual history with something from Buchheim's novelization of the fall of France to the Allies.

11-14-10, 10:31 AM	#2
KptLtHansDampf Watch Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: Aachen, Germany Posts: 20 Downloads: 35 Uploads: 0	My average tonnage is about 14838 BRT in 58 patrols (using VIIb, VIIc and XXI-Class) during the entire war, only loosing 1 Uboat during my first campaign. Including some zero ton-patrols due to little accidents in harbours or just bad luck. I started a second campaign, and now my average is 20125 BRT with VIIb and IX-Class, 8 patrols until now. Highest tonnage about 61000 BRT during patrol 6 with a IX. __________________ ______ KptLt Hans Dampf - Jack of all trades, master of none

11-14-10, 12:56 PM	#4
Schöneboom Seasoned Skipper Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: San Francisco, CA Posts: 651 Downloads: 36 Uploads: 0	To add to what Frau Kaleun said, I've read that in real life U-boat skippers had difficulty just finding the enemy. In the early war, when there were too few U-boats at sea to cover the North Atlantic, good intel, the sort you could act upon, was less frequent than in SH3/GWX. Some of us compensate by ignoring some contact reports; imagine the effect if you had to find ships & convoys with no help, or only half as much as you're now given. Also, another way to make one's score more realistic is to use manual targeting, at least for submerged attacks. For sure it makes the hits feel like real accomplishments. Gute Jagd, Wayne __________________ Dietrich Schöneboom, U-431 "Es wird klappen, Herr Kaleun. Ganz sicher."

11-14-10, 02:01 PM	#5
Yoriyn Planesman Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Control room Posts: 181 Downloads: 154 Uploads: 0	And don't forget about using magnetic ppistols (detonators) only at the begining of the war. No one know the pistols and deep keeping device are faulty. __________________ Oblt.zS. Kurt Hanke, commander of U-83 (Type VIIB) in WaW 5. Patrol 1 - at sea : 5 ships - 10095 BRT My filefront mods link To Battle Station order mod for SH3 and more

11-14-10, 02:29 PM	#6
Jimbuna Chief of the Boat Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: 250 metres below the surface Posts: 181,265 Downloads: 63 Uploads: 13	In RL the majority of U-boats sent out on patrol sank very little if anything at all and that got progressively worse as the war went on. If I'm to be totally honest, it is a lot easier to rack up tonnage ingame than it was in RL. The best way to be as realistic as possible is to play at 100% realism and use manual targetting...at least that way you are approaching as realistic a gameing level as is currently possible. Welcome aboard U-boot V __________________ Wise men speak because they have something to say; Fools because they have to say something. Oh my God, not again!! GWX3.0 Download Page - Donation/instant access to GWX (Help SubSim)

11-15-10, 05:44 AM	#8
desirableroasted Grey Wolf Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: In the mountains, now. On the edge of the sea before. Posts: 933 Downloads: 47 Uploads: 0	I play at 84% realism, GWX 3.0 and am averaging 59K tons per patrol in my current career (5 patrols), Sept 39 - Apr 40. However, I have had extraordinary luck with this career. My usual take is around 25-30K per patrol. But even that is getting a bit too arcade-like, so I am learning manual targeting in another career path. That should bring me back down to 10K a patrol! __________________ "Well, now, that's true... the IXC is a bit of a chick magnet..but you really can't beat the VIIB for off-road fun." Last edited by desirableroasted; 11-15-10 at 09:13 AM.

11-14-10, 10:11 AM	#1
U-boot V Nub Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 2 Downloads: 57 Uploads: 0	Normal Tonnage Hi I recently started playing GWX (84% realism) and I'm now in may 1940. Just came back with 56,000 tons, so I wondered is that too much? What would an average Kaleun (or yourself) rack up?

11-14-10, 10:42 AM	#3
frau kaleun Rear Admiral Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Skyri--oh who are we kidding, I'm probably at Lowe's. Again. Posts: 12,706 Downloads: 168 Uploads: 0	In real life, the average tonnage per patrol for an "average" commander was a lot lower. According to uboat.net, Otto Kretschmer is credited with 46 sinkings for 273043 GRT in 16 patrols (224 days at sea). That comes out to just a little over 17000 tons per patrol. And he was the most successful commander of the war, and operated only from Sept 1939 to March 1941 when Allied defenses were relatively weak. The game is a whole different kettle of fish, since so much depends on the realism options selected and on whether or not you choose to play with additional "realistic" restrictions that the game doesn't enforce. Some mods no doubt also have an affect on how easy it will be to locate, catch, and successfully attack targets and still get home alive. In my current career I've got about the same total tonnage as Herr Kretschmer finished up with after 313 days at sea since the war started. But even if I played at 100% realism (I don't - more like 65-70% ATM), it could never approach the 100% realism he had to deal with, lol.

11-15-10, 04:46 AM	#7
kk20 Watch Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 23 Downloads: 2 Uploads: 0	i'm on 84% too (not clever enough for manual targetting). I get between 10k and 20k with the odd big haul. I have yet to engage a task force or anything larger than a small 30k warship

11-15-10, 10:35 AM	#9
Heibges Sea Lord Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: San Francisco, California Posts: 1,633 Downloads: 1 Uploads: 0	The #1 determing factor for tonnage in SH3 is how much you use your hydrophones to locate targets. For whatever reason, it is much easier to find targets in game with the hydrophones than it was in real life. __________________ U.Kdt.Hdb B. I. 28) This possibility of using the hydrophone to help in detecting surface ships should, however, be restricted to those cases where the submarine is unavoidably compelled to stay below the surface. http://www.hackworth.com/

11-15-10, 12:24 PM	#10
U-boot V Nub Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 2 Downloads: 57 Uploads: 0	Thank you very much for the information, . I I'll attempt to use manual targeting, luckily there are plenty of resources on here! Yoriyn, I thought the faulty magnetic pistols were on the T II only?

11-25-10, 10:28 AM	#12
Matador.es Chief Join Date: Feb 2010 Posts: 327 Downloads: 30 Uploads: 0	I have heard quite some good remarks. I think that the "auto spotting" of ships is a big helper ingame. But i would not be supprised if the spotting by the Watch Crew is beyond normal. An other thing what supprises me is the number of patrols you can make in just one year, or as long as you play. Thats far from realistic. Patrols tend to last much shorter before you RTB. This helps in stagering number as 14 patrol in 1940, which in RL never happend. Not much know, but a good commander as Heinrich Lehmann-Willenbrock sailed 9 patrols in the entire war, sinking 24 ships totaling 170KGRT. That does make 18K GRT per patrol, but just 9 WAR patrols in about 6 years I think an avarage U-Boat sailed only 4 patrols.

11-25-10, 02:44 PM	#14
Matador.es Chief Join Date: Feb 2010 Posts: 327 Downloads: 30 Uploads: 0	I must admid this is not the best example. I did kind of missed he did not sail from april '42 untill september '44... which is quite a time. Spoken about that last patrol, quite an extreme route for a delivery! http://uboat.net/boats/patrols/patrol_4436.html

11-25-10, 09:28 PM	#15
frau kaleun Rear Admiral Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Skyri--oh who are we kidding, I'm probably at Lowe's. Again. Posts: 12,706 Downloads: 168 Uploads: 0	I'm guessing they took the long way 'round in order to limit their exposure to Allied ASW contacts as much as possible... I could be wrong, but IIRC U-256 was in pretty bad shape and if she hadn't been the only way out of Brest short of being captured by the Allies, she wouldn't have been taken out to sea at all. I think I remember reading somewhere that just getting her relatively seaworthy enough to attempt the voyage was quite an accomplishment. Or I could be confusing actual history with something from Buchheim's novelization of the fall of France to the Allies.