AI sub finally got me TMO 2.5 Update

[Bubblehead1980]

Well, for first time ever in TMO, a submerged enemy AI sub got me with torpedoes. In development and testing, I had some close calls over 14 patrols in Drum 1942-1945 and other careers, but contact with them is still rare overall but this time. Usually was warned by sound man even if on surface, but with new sub sensors in next release , the hydrophones are not quite so effective on surface (they were a bit too effective , sub running at 20 knots and picking up sound contacts at long range lol)


Departed Pearl Harbor on Dec 9, 1941 at 1300 course 255 10 knots in USS Nautilus SS-168 (Subsim Donation Narwhal).

December 10, 1941

0000 Navigator reported position at 20-49 N 159-38 W 110 NM SW of Pearl Harbor.

Cruising on the surface at 10 knots course 255 in clear conditions with quarter moon astern, no fog, I was on the bridge, preparing to go below for the evening what BOOM! Large explosions rocked the boat, screen turned white momentarily due to splash of water. Reports of casualties and severe damage poured in.


Engine noises ceased, hull damage reported at 75 percent (lol should be higher, one of thus SH 4 things though) All diesel engines destroyed or severely damaged, large fuel leak. three bridge lookouts dead, one KIA. All engine rooms crew dead or severely injured. Heavy flooding in engines and control room. Sub going low in water.

(to have boat sink ordered a dive, working on a damage model where boat will sink from surface in such situation)

Listened on hydrophones and heard a submerged sub bearing 100 closing, also heard other torpedoes in water.

Unfortunately, I had the external cam off as usually do, so no screenshots.

[iambecomelife]

Sounds exciting! I remember that IRL only one US sub was sunk by an enemy submarine; can't remember her name though. Regardless it's always nice to have the risk of an encounter like that.

[Bubblehead1980]

Originally Posted by iambecomelife

Sounds exciting! I remember that IRL only one US sub was sunk by an enemy submarine; can't remember her name though. Regardless it's always nice to have the risk of an encounter like that.

Yes, that was the Gato Class USS Corvina SS-226, sunk of her first patrol south of Truk by I-176. I-176 also noteworthy for severel damaged heavy cruise Chest.

Actually, according to Japanese records was a fairly dramatic showdown on the surface, at night, sub v sub.Appears Corvina detected the I-176 and made a turn at last minute or perhaps routine turn, but was too late,

From Combinedfleet.org I-176 Tabular Record of Movement.

16 November 1943:
Cdr Roderick S. Rooney's USS CORVINA (SS-226), on her first war patrol, DRUM (SS-228) and BLACKFISH (SS-221) receive an ULTRA message about the arrival of I-176 and are sent to intercept her.

300 miles S of Truk. At 2312 (K), when heading N at 16 knots, the lookouts on partially flooded I-176 sight a dark object in northeasterly direction, 8,800 yards away, illuminated by the bright moonlight. LtCdr Yamaguchi orders to prepare for diving and turns toward the target. Four minutes later it is identified as a "PERCH-class" submarine, evidently in the process of recharging her batteries.

17 November 1943:
I-176 crash-dives, goes to silent running and by 0057 reaches the position on CORVINA's starboard quarter, distance 2,700 yards. LtCdr Yamaguchi considers the firing angle excessive and orders to battle-surface in 15 minutes.

At 0112, CORVINA suddenly turns towards I-176. Yamaguchi orders to belay the order to surface and makes a turn himself, keeping the target on his port beam. At 0120 Yamaguchi fires three torpedoes from bow tubes. Twenty-five seconds later two heavy explosions are heard and the boat is shaken considerably. CORVINA blows up and sinks with all 82 hands at 05-50N, 151-10E. [5]

At 0130, after making a periscope search, I-176 surfaces and heads for the site of attack. An oil slick and various debris are sighted. .
18 November 1943:

At 1300, I-176 arrives at Truk. Her crew receives a heroes' welcome and C-in-C, Sixth Fleet invites all officers and enlisted ranks to a banquet at his HQ."


I agree, it is element of risk not present without them. They are (as should be) rare to encounter but a risk one has to be aware of.

Will AI subs in your WW I mod fire torpedoes?

[iambecomelife]

Originally Posted by Bubblehead1980

Yes, that was the Gato Class USS Corvina SS-226, sunk of her first patrol south of Truk by I-176. I-176 also noteworthy for severel damaged heavy cruise Chest.

Actually, according to Japanese records was a fairly dramatic showdown on the surface, at night, sub v sub.Appears Corvina detected the I-176 and made a turn at last minute or perhaps routine turn, but was too late,

From Combinedfleet.org I-176 Tabular Record of Movement.

16 November 1943:
Cdr Roderick S. Rooney's USS CORVINA (SS-226), on her first war patrol, DRUM (SS-228) and BLACKFISH (SS-221) receive an ULTRA message about the arrival of I-176 and are sent to intercept her.

300 miles S of Truk. At 2312 (K), when heading N at 16 knots, the lookouts on partially flooded I-176 sight a dark object in northeasterly direction, 8,800 yards away, illuminated by the bright moonlight. LtCdr Yamaguchi orders to prepare for diving and turns toward the target. Four minutes later it is identified as a "PERCH-class" submarine, evidently in the process of recharging her batteries.

17 November 1943:
I-176 crash-dives, goes to silent running and by 0057 reaches the position on CORVINA's starboard quarter, distance 2,700 yards. LtCdr Yamaguchi considers the firing angle excessive and orders to battle-surface in 15 minutes.

At 0112, CORVINA suddenly turns towards I-176. Yamaguchi orders to belay the order to surface and makes a turn himself, keeping the target on his port beam. At 0120 Yamaguchi fires three torpedoes from bow tubes. Twenty-five seconds later two heavy explosions are heard and the boat is shaken considerably. CORVINA blows up and sinks with all 82 hands at 05-50N, 151-10E. [5]

At 0130, after making a periscope search, I-176 surfaces and heads for the site of attack. An oil slick and various debris are sighted. .
18 November 1943:

At 1300, I-176 arrives at Truk. Her crew receives a heroes' welcome and C-in-C, Sixth Fleet invites all officers and enlisted ranks to a banquet at his HQ."


I agree, it is element of risk not present without them. They are (as should be) rare to encounter but a risk one has to be aware of.

Will AI subs in your WW I mod fire torpedoes?

That's the plan! Although I haven't had time to model them yet. Fortunately some British boats look like the S class, so maybe I can use the S class hull to design them.

Thanks for reminding me of the US Sub! I remember reading about Corvina in a book by Edwin P. Hoyt. Sad story; he mentioned (as you did) that there were no survivors. Not that surprising ... it only took two Japanese torpedoes to sink USS Indianapolis, a big armored ship, so the impact of just one "Long Lance" on a small, unarmored target like a US submarine must have been terrible.

[propbeanie]

lol - the subs in SH4 are like the US M1A2 Abrams tank with TUSK armour protection on them... lol

[Bubblehead1980]

Originally Posted by propbeanie

lol - the subs in SH4 are like the US M1A2 Abrams tank with TUSK armour protection on them... lol

lol I know, always bothered me. I believe I found the balance in TMO, they are not tanks, but not the delicate little machines either. I mean US subs were well built as you know, came home beat to hell many times. Rugged, reminds me of the way naval aircraft like the F4F, F6F, TBF were constructed. Basically seems the devs figured since they didn't give AI torpedoes, player was only likely to be hit by their own in a circular run which is rare, so they just did not bother to rectify the damage model so player sub takes proper damage from torpedo hits.

I've toyed with it some, but if increase torpedo power , they are way too effective against other targets, then if increase/decrease payer sub armor, either like even more of a tank. This is first time I've managed to get hit by AI sub torpedo, in testing etc so now I know. I mean, it was pretty effective, it wrecked my boat, I considered myself as sunk and started another career.

I may look at the torpedoes subs use and increase their power slightly, so one hit will sink the sub, send hull damage to 100, because I know some will be tempted to limp back home lol. I wish the player sub model included a large explosion when a torpedo hits.

Still, pretty cool to finally see it happen (so I know they can in fact hit something lol) as had only had close calls before, glad its rare though, as should be. I was careful when I placed the submerged subs, the number of them etc.

Something I'd like to get added to the nav tools bar, if possible, is alter the Search Pattern Function, to see a zig zag pattern, for the long transits. This would simulate a device subs had, a mechanism with a motor attached to helm (believe came into service in 1943.1944) which powered the ships wheel, as constant helming/zigging over long period would not be practical for a human for more than few minutes would be exhausted in short time.

Believe this is needed now since submerged AI subs can torpedo you. I am waiting for the angry or shocked message one day when someone loses their excellent career because they were torpedoed by enemy sub lol. Level of challenge and immersion it brings to the sim, love it.

[Mad Mardigan]

Originally Posted by Bubblehead1980

lol I know, always bothered me. I believe I found the balance in TMO, they are not tanks, but not the delicate little machines either. I mean US subs were well built as you know, came home beat to hell many times. Rugged, reminds me of the way naval aircraft like the F4F, F6F, TBF were constructed. Basically seems the devs figured since they didn't give AI torpedoes, player was only likely to be hit by their own in a circular run which is rare, so they just did not bother to rectify the damage model so player sub takes proper damage from torpedo hits.

I've toyed with it some, but if increase torpedo power , they are way too effective against other targets, then if increase/decrease payer sub armor, either like even more of a tank. This is first time I've managed to get hit by AI sub torpedo, in testing etc so now I know. I mean, it was pretty effective, it wrecked my boat, I considered myself as sunk and started another career.

I may look at the torpedoes subs use and increase their power slightly, so one hit will sink the sub, send hull damage to 100, because I know some will be tempted to limp back home lol. I wish the player sub model included a large explosion when a torpedo hits.

Still, pretty cool to finally see it happen (so I know they can in fact hit something lol) as had only had close calls before, glad its rare though, as should be. I was careful when I placed the submerged subs, the number of them etc.

Something I'd like to get added to the nav tools bar, if possible, is alter the Search Pattern Function, to see a zig zag pattern, for the long transits. This would simulate a device subs had, a mechanism with a motor attached to helm (believe came into service in 1943.1944) which powered the ships wheel, as constant helming/zigging over long period would not be practical for a human for more than few minutes would be exhausted in short time.

Believe this is needed now since submerged AI subs can torpedo you. I am waiting for the angry or shocked message one day when someone loses their excellent career because they were torpedoed by enemy sub lol. Level of challenge and immersion it brings to the sim, love it.

Know that with (not sure if it was with stock... or a particular mod set, 1 or the other, at any rate... ) that there was like... 4 preset options for search patterns.

1 that went upwards in a back & forth laddered search, the 2nd was like.. a downwards version of the 1st... a starting at dead center & working outwards in a circular pattern, & the 4th was a x marks the spot type search pattern. As I can recall of...

It'd be nice to have those options for search patterns back... rather than just 1... or having to see of taking time, to set up a search pattern by hand.

Only problem, was... in their haste, in setting it up... that dual laddered search pattern, was BIIIIGGG... in its spacing, & would often, if near an island, or a main land area... of having a leg (or 2 legs... sometimes... ) of it, trying to run you across land.

Another issue with, using that ladder pattern, would be... not knowing if it would still keep to going the same but flipped positioning... or if it would decide to double back on itself, but in a flip side set up.

right, up, left, up, right, then the next would end up right, down, left, down, left (or right, up, left, up, right) that was the only downside on that pattern.

That, craziness of how the next pattern would be positioned... or should I say, the... uncertainty of, how it'd be laid down.



M. M.

[propbeanie]

Traveler's Mod had multiple choices (3??) for the searches, and I think Fred did it also... (??) but the use of multiple buttons takes other buttons away for use elsewhere. As it stands, the way the search works on its direction of laying-out the course, is based on the general direction you are headed in at your last waypoint, when invoking the short-cut. So even just a slight movement to the north, and the search will set-up going "up", or south to north. Have just a pinch to the south movement when invoking it, and it will lay it out from north to south. Both are based upon your current last waypoint, of course. A second use of the short-cut generally will result in another set of waypoints in the same general direction, while a 3rd use will turn it around in the other direction.

[iambecomelife]

Originally Posted by propbeanie

lol - the subs in SH4 are like the US M1A2 Abrams tank with TUSK armour protection on them... lol

I agree, propbeanie - in this way SH4 was a step backward from Silent Hunter 2.

I remember in Pacific Aces I was sunk by a deck-gun armed tanker with about 2 shots, which is accurate; just a couple 4-5" gun rounds would have destroyed a submarine's pressure hull.

Maybe the developers at Ubisoft were trying to appeal to casual players, who wanted to fight warships on the surface (which I did for fun when SH3/4 first came out). Although I never did it in my "serious" career mode gaming - when I play career I like using realistic tactics.

Yet another thing to work on in my WWI mod! I want enemy big guns of 3-4 inches and more in game to pretty much always one-shot mission kill your sub + force return to base, and sink it completely with about 4-5 hits. Torpedoes and mines should be one shot kill about 90% of the time. I know of 2 WW1 submarines that survived mine hits, but they were exceptions.

Machine guns and Pom-Poms of up to maybe 37mm and 40mm shouldn't destroy the pressure hull quickly, but cause lots of crew casualties in my opinion. Any thoughts?

[Bubblehead1980]

Originally Posted by iambecomelife

I agree, propbeanie - in this way SH4 was a step backward from Silent Hunter 2.

I remember in Pacific Aces I was sunk by a deck-gun armed tanker with about 2 shots, which is accurate; just a couple 4-5" gun rounds would have destroyed a submarine's pressure hull.

Maybe the developers at Ubisoft were trying to appeal to casual players, who wanted to fight warships on the surface (which I did for fun when SH3/4 first came out). Although I never did it in my "serious" career mode gaming - when I play career I like using realistic tactics.

Yet another thing to work on in my WWI mod! I want enemy big guns of 3-4 inches and more in game to pretty much always one-shot mission kill your sub + force return to base, and sink it completely with about 4-5 hits. Torpedoes and mines should be one shot kill about 90% of the time. I know of 2 WW1 submarines that survived mine hits, but they were exceptions.

Machine guns and Pom-Poms of up to maybe 37mm and 40mm shouldn't destroy the pressure hull quickly, but cause lots of crew casualties in my opinion. Any thoughts?

That would be ideal, to have hits from large guns be as deadly to subs as they actually were in most cases. I remember in a career with a Balao in 1944, while trying to pull ahead of a heacy cruiser, they detected me and opened fire, At 11000 yards or so I caught a direct hit amidships from their 8 inch guns. Left a massive hull amidships but my sub only had 30 percent hull damage and did not flood lol. Obviously, I ended the game, counted myself as sunk. I have toyed with the flooding, where sub will sink from surface due to flooding, largely based on travelers mod but seem unable to get the balance right. Ends up making depth control difficult even when not flooded. I did slow the flood rate though, it was a bit ridiculous by default.

However, some US subs survived larger caliber gun hits. USS Bergall in Dec 1944 comes to mind, took a lucky hit forward, while on surfaced at night from long range, breached the hull, could not dive, sailed over 2000 miles back to Fremantle. Quite the ordeal. Lucky hit from a DD's five inch gun at night after attacking cruiser Myoko off Indochina.

The default damage model for US player subs is outright lazy. I've spent many hours tweaking the damage model to try and get the balance, more realism etc. To some degree, I achieved it in TMO. Now i have it where subs are usually lost when damage accumulates to overwhelm the subs systems and crew ability to maintain depth control etc. vs the "magic killing hit". Provides much more realistic situations instead of random catastrophic damage from one charge, and then no damage from a charge at same distance. Conflict often comes where what works for depth charges, does not work so well for gun hits etc. Make the sub too delicate trying to make it vulnerable to gunfire, seems to collapse under depth charge, set it up properly for depth charges, kind of a tank to gunfire. US subs were pretty rugged, well constructed boats. that could take a lot of punishment though but were not tanks. I made the decision to worry more about damage mode under depth charge/bomb attack.

Far as the lighter gun...20 MM, 25 MM, 40 MM, ran into another issue. Since, the guns seem to often share shells, if reduce them, then players shells become ineffective as well. Be default in TMO, the lighter guns are far too effective against the subs hull. The design decision was made by ducimus way back to discourage people from getting into unrealistic gunfights as some players seem prone to do, racking up unrealistic tonnage.

Problem is with realistic night surface attacks now a option, likely to take gunfire. Crew WIA or KIA by gunfire, topside equipment being damage is expected but take some hits and knocks hull integrity down, bit too much. Problem was mostly solved by increasing the error angle sim.cfg, so while will fire, not always sniper like as before. Of course, depends on range, skill of crew etc as well.


For mines, I just increased the hit points on mines, they were only about 200 by default. I increased them to 400. Most player subs can take 325-375, depending on the class, so one hit , player sub is finished. I have mines set as threats to surfaced vessels now, including player subs. I've came close, but yet to hit one in campaign mode. I did watch a pursuing DD hit one, was interesting. Smaller vessels like DD and escorts or smaller merchants, one mine hit will sink them, larger merchants and warships, it depends on where the mine hits if ultimately sinks.