A few new ideas

[derstosstrupp]

Hotel load is a deep subject. Very difficult to quantify. All periscope operation was hydraulic, so no worries there. The ventilators were hardly run at sea except during charging and briefly to ventilate the boat after surfacing, so no worries there. Battery heating is hard to quantify, because the automatic regulator only kicked on when the electrolyte dropped below 30°C. But heating drew about 20 A. Eto Battery charging initially was 30 A, which tapered down to 22 as the torpedo battery cells approached gassing voltage. Hard to quantify. U-boat heating can be considered a non-issue as the electric heaters typically weren’t used on war patrol to save battery. Then there is all the other ancillary equipment on the regulated and unregulated circuits. At one point, back of the envelope, I calculated a hotel load on a typical day of about 200 A. That is also high as it assumes careless all-day use of the ventilators. So maybe cut that in half.

I do really like the idea of equipment drawing current. We have data on pretty much every piece of electrical equipment, so this could be modeled.

[Fidd]

There is already a net loss of battery charge with prolonged running on diesels, (obviously without recharging!), but it's a tiny rate, in the rough order of 100Ah, and the rate doesn't seem to vary, except by reducing the brightness of the lighting.

As regards the hydraulics, the safest (least awful!) system would be an electrically-powered hydraulic pump, hydraulic accumulator and hydraulic motor in one place near the driven service, to minimise the length of pressurised hydraulic piping, and thus minimise the risk of a cloud of highly flammable hydraulic fluid in the boat during depth charging.

So it'd expect the hydraulic services to involve an electrical load every time they're used, simply to replenish the hydraulic accumulator.

I'd be interested to know how Jerry did mitigate the risks of using hydraulics.

[derstosstrupp]

You are absolutely right. One of two hydraulic pumps could be selected, and, when the oil in the collecting tank got high enough, the pressure in the tank caused an automatic switch to close, which kicked on the pump to pump oil back up into the accumulators. Generally though, the pressure wasn’t allowed to drop to the minimum 48 kg/cm², but was normally pumped up by hand by switching the pump on at 60 to pump it back up to 80.so that the commander always had good hydraulic pressure to operate the scope efficiently. I would be all for implementing some form of the hydraulic system.

[Fidd]

115. Thoughts on escort radar implementation.......

There are a number of players who are somewhat nervous at the prospect of the gameplay ramifications of escorts receiving radar. As I see it, this is something not appropriate for use by AI, but rather one better suited to human interpretation, and the full range of deficiencies early radar possessed.

Early radar was tempramental, and when it did work, suffered problems in rougher sea-states where the escort was pitching and rolling, as any time the radar-head was tilted down, it caused back-scatter from the surface - effectively false returns, and viewed over a period of time, it meant a considerable skill was needed on the part of the operator, to spot an actual consistent return on a given bearing amongst the false returns, if the escort was in rougher water. It is forecastable that AI interpreting such returns is either going to be far too capable and recognising a return as a u-boat, or, will be hopeless at it. A happy medium in AI's ability in almost any situation is usually not realised in game. So, conclusion one is that escorts should be playable before radar is implemented, and it be usable only by human players.

Early radar had an oscilloscope presentation, rather than the PPI (Plan position indicator) we know today. In other words as the radar-head rotated through a bearing, assuming the radar head was not pointing at the sky or the sea surface around the escort, then an intermittent return of the u-boat would occurr, usually with some amount of clutter from the sea surface. The amplitude of the spike in the return would be a function of the strength of the return, with no range indication, other than that amplitude. So, a surfaced u-boat side-on to the radar-head, close to the escort would be a large amplitude, but one at AOB zero would be less in amplitude, and a distant one still less. That of a schnorkel viewed on the radar at range would be very difficult to make out amongst all the other spurious returns by a player.

Conclusion 2 is that player-skill on the escort should be a major factor as to whether - or not - a correct interpretation is made from an early iteration of radar.

Later on in the time-line the PPI should replace the oscilloscope presentation, but according to the pitch and roll of the escort, the ability to spot a contact amongst other spurious returns from the radar-head being tilted too far down, fairly difficult, especially at range. Similarly. as the radar head faces the the convoy, many strong returns are caused, however a ship or u-boat BEHIND a ship generating a return nearest the escort, will create a blank area behind that return, in which a u-boat can remain undetectable by radar, assuming it is surfaced. This would make spotting a u-boat's return the other side of the convoy, very difficult indeed.

As the date becomes later war, more and more escorts should have radar. Radar was preferentially fitted to destroyers, then sloops, then eventually corvettes. The height of the radar-head raising the range considerably. Similarly, as the date becomes later, sets with PPI should become the norm. Failure rates - or periods where the radar has to be turned off, should reduce as the timeline continues. Counter-measures such as Metox should likewise alert the radio-operator that the u-boat is being struck by radar.

My estimate is that AI escorts should not be able to "spot" u-boats on radar unless the u-boat is both surfaced an close - under circa 6km for an extended period. If AI is able to use radar at all! A trail of returns caused by life-boats, carly-floats and suchlike would further complicate use.

[Fidd]

116. Password request interface for locked lobbies.

There is, I think, a balance to be struck between the ability of a lobby to be locked, and the ability of a fairly new player to find a game. The other day I logged on to find all 6 lobbies locked, with no unlocked ones, and with in game comms being used, no means of contacting the players to ascertain the password. Plainly, players in a locked-lobby do not wish to be spammed by a player wishing to join, however, I think we may need a means for newer players, who are yet to form the network of friends to play regularly, to join a game.

Suggestion: A player can click on a locked lobby, and instead of entering the password, can "contact captain" ONCE per game, provided that there are 6 crew or less on the boat. If it's full, then that captain cannot be contacted. If there are several boats, the player attempting to gain entry may make a single text-contact to each captain with an unfilled boat, and any captain may then click on a "send password" if he wishes to admit that person, or, decline. Whereupon the player attempting entry has the password automatically entered, but he does not actually see the plain-text of the password (to prevent them distributing it more widely). They can then join the lobby in the normal way, but are restricted to joining the boat of the captain that accepted their request only.

This would aid newer players being able to join locked lobbies without materially causing a problem for that lobby, or adding any burdensome communication to the captain. Players who are banned by any individual in the lobby would be unable to send a password request to any captain within that lobby. This would help preclude trolls and the disruptive to employ the password-request as a nuisance mechanism.

[Fidd]

117. Improvement to alerting?

Currently, when any u-boat is sighted, or there's a torpedo trail spotted, or an impact, or an escort in asdic contact with a u-boat, the convoy "alerts" and it's subsequent behaviour makes it difficult to hit targets within. This creates an opposing tension between the game experience of the located u-boat, and the rest of the u-boats in a multi-boat game. Specifically, the located u-boat only suffers (usually) a single DC attack, in what would otherwise be the period of most excitement and drama, namely evading repeated asdic searches and dc attacks, dealing with damage and so forth; and the gameplay of the other u-boats who are left twiddling their thumbs waiting for the convoy to "settle" so they can derive their fun by attacking it.

Something needs to change here? I'd like to see the fact that a u-boat is recently held on ASDIC, as no longer being grounds for the convoy as a whole to remain alerted, and much longer periods of asdic searches by escorts to regain a lost contact. Escorts would nonetheless seek asdic contacts in their areas. Coupled with no safety from asdic contact being made at any depth, (but with DC's dropped to depths of 150-200m being of general low accuracy) the preconditions are then in place for damage-models, crew damage-control, and the stress and anxiety of being under prolonged DC/ASDIC attack/searches; crucially, without inconveniencing other players, in other u-boats seeking to attack the convoy in the interim.

I would suggest that "alerts" be of shorter duration than currently, or that length be configurable, so that an alert is constituted of a heading change, but no speed change. A boat detected that caused the alert however remaining under active asdic search and dc attack for a much longer period than currently with no limit to the depth at which it may be attacked with either hedge-hogs (when fitted) or DC's. I'd also like to see maximum ping-rate increased to circa 3/4 of a second, overheard escorts (or other ships) being plainly audible in the boat, and the noise of DC's going off MUCH louder. 3rd party DC water-plumes would be good too. An alert so caused would last perhaps 6 minutes only, however with a gap opened up in the escort screen as the escort conducting asdic searches/dc attacks falls astern.

I'd also like to see a very severe vertical or lateral "camera shake" - as was the case in "Das Boot" ideally with crew being knocked to the floor, being injured etc. Why the game doesn't already mine the rich vein of content that the experience of being depth-charged confers is something that mystifies me to this day.

[Fidd]

118. "typed" potential crew-list of players in game, but not in lobby.

Imagine you could get in game, and add your name and desired roles, and preferred language, to a list visible to all captains in all locked lobbies. Possibilities would be "new player", and/or the usual roles. More than one would be settable. If any of the captains, playing any of the locked games wish for (say) a helmsman, they can bring up their list, and see all the helmsman, or, they can keep the list unspecified and invite any they wish to play with. Or, they might see a player from their own country, and invite him. etc. Players who have attracted numerous bans would be unable to access this feature? Players would also be able to flag themselves as "unavailable" to suppress invitations, were they, for example, waiting to play an organised game.

In the boat, the captain would view this list of currently available players on the C menu. Quite how he should be made aware of players being available in such a system, if at all, I remain uncertain of.

On further thought, if the list of "waiting" players was visible to all in the list itself, and a means of communicating existed, this might also prompt someone to start a lobby. The problem currently is that way we used to assemble as players, pre-game, was discord, however, with the advent of the (better) in game voice, we've lost that....

[Fidd]

119. Volumetric clouds and line-squalls.

A "line squall" (LSQ hereafter) is simply a linear series of Towering-cumulus or Cumulo-nimbus clouds, (going up to 60'000 feet or more) associated with a low cloud-base and very heavy rain, making observation of events within the line squall very difficult for surface vessels, and all but impossible for aircraft to penetrate (for reasons I'll not go into). LSQ's can occur over distances from 5 miles to 500 miles, and usually of 5-100 miles width! LSQ's not infrequently occur over the sea, and are a hazard to shipping owing to the very strong winds and rough seas associated with them, as well as very confused seas as they often occur in conflict with, or in combination with more widespread wave action. They feature heavily in reports of naval actions, as for the last hundred years or so they've been used as a means of sheltering from observation and therefore also gun-fire or aerial attack. "Volumetric cloud" simply means modelling these essentially as a 3d object, and likewise the heavy-rain periodically associated with them, rather than simple as a visibility distance or 2d representation.

Why do this? At some point there may be radar-equipped, or radar-directed, anti-submarine aircraft. The LSQ's provide a strong refuge from such aircraft, as no pilot in his right-mind would fly under one, even under orders. The reduced visibilty in one, as well as very heavy rain on the plexiglass of the aircraft would make visual acquisition of a surfaced u-boat all bar impossible at any range. They would also confer a good axis of attack seeking to close submerged, as the escort's hydrophones would be swamped by the noise of millions of gallons of rain striking the surface of the sea. So, the existence of the LSQ allows for variation in the visibility/detection-ranges for aircraft and escorts, subject to where the LSQ is, where the convoy is, where the escorts and aircraft are, and where the u-boats are thus presenting a more interesting "battle-field" where sometimes the weather can be exploited tactically - or where it sometimes acts as an obstacle.

For example, seeing the convoy to take observations would be all but impossible if the LSQ cover the u-boat, or, intervenes between convoy and u-boat. This potentially has other interesting implications, such as 1 u-boat being unable to take observations despite being what would normally be in easy visual range, and having to gain observations from other u-boats to be able to plot an optimal course so as to intercept the convoy the other side of the LSQ...

LSQ's are just as likely in darkness, as daylight, but can usually be readily spotted, as the clouds are internally-lit periodically by lightening within during the hours of darkness. As the energy driving them is caused by cold-air over a relatively warmer sea, rather than the usual solar-heating of land in the case of thunderstorms we're used to, they remain energetic even in the hours of darkness.

Anyway, as they could provide advantages and difficulties for both sides, and the convoy may be routed at any angle relative the LSQ, they could well serve to provide some interesting tactical situations, visually arresting sights, opportunities and dangers, I think they're well worth being an occasional and random treat! (rather than a lobby configurable setting). They also become more interesting when one thinks about a radar-equipped escort suddenly appearing out of the heavy-rain, or, in the years before radar, a u-boat employing one as cover, to get much closer in (daylight?) than it could ordinarily get before being spotted (from within the LSQ)... Then there's implications of the locally heavy seas on whether or not PD can be easily maintained, and whether or not a Schnorkel can be employed....

So, whilst a linear - but a little irregular - set of such clouds, and the weather they engender, is at first sight, not very promising as a thing to add to the game, as one thinks about in relation to directions the game may go, in regard to aircraft, radar and later years weapons etc, then I think it's well worth some examination?

Line Squalls: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Squall_line

[Fidd]

120. A wish-list of general improvements.

Please make the diesel-engine room, and possibly the e-motor room have sound-sliders for each of all sounds generated within that area, that is separate to the global sound-settings; allowing specified sounds to be louder or softer than the global sound level for those sounds. These should include, diesel engine sounds, EOT "bells", telephone ringer and volume of voices on the telephone.

Please add alarm bell repeaters to all compartments except lavatories, as was the case on a Mk VII.

Please GREATLY increase the sound of DC detonations, and add camera-shake of a directionality consistent with the angles at which the near-miss occurs.

Please GREATLY increase the sound of ships engines and screws when passing overhead or close nearby, relative to a submerged u-boat.

[Fidd]

121. Flags for player languages.

It would be helpful for players to be able to "set" the languages they speak, and those they do not speak, using flags of those countries languages.

So, someone able to speak English would use an American, Canadian, British, New Zealand or Australian flag, as would anyone who can speak it. A player whose first language was Polish, second English, but who cannot speak any other language would be shew a Polish flag, then a suitable English-speaking flag.

Indications of a language NOT spoken by a player could be given by a diagonal black field, obscuring half of a flag. So, a Dutch player who cannot speak English might be represented by a Dutch flag, then an English one with the black field obscuring half the flag.

These flags would be visible when a player attempts to join a lobby or boat, allowing both the lobby owner and the captain to ensure that a common language can be spoken by all onboard, or, that he can be understood by all onboard, even if not all of them can understand all of the other players.

Consideration could be given to allow the lobby host to set languages, one of which he'd prefer all onboard can speak. So, a Russian player whose second language is English, might associate a Russian and British or English flag with the lobby. A UN flag could serve as an "any language" indicator?

[Fidd]

122. Yells, bells and smells. (somewhat "tongue in cheek")

I'd like to see more atmospheric noise in the boat. For example the noise of sleeping crew in berths, very very occasional German snatches of laughter/banter, especially from the forward torpedo room. Sounds of torpedoes being reloaded. (Stronger sounding EOT bells). Sounds from the galley? This would be a first step towards having the full crew represented by butt-scratching avatars scattered about the boat?

If the e-motor is engaged, at dead-slow, such sounds are suppressed, excepting the torpedo reload noise.

The "smells" can be modelled with an empty shoe-polish tin, filled with the mankiest minging piece of jock-strap (or very unwashed sock!) and a few drops of diesel oil. When playing, simply open and place in front of your monitor, or on something warm so as to infuse the air with "eau-de-uboat", remembering to close it after use to forestall being "pinged" by the escorting wife! For those wishing the full experience, mouldy-bread might be added to the tin!

[Fidd]

123. "standing orders".

It would be a useful, and "cool" feature if each player could write a document for the captain role, and that of the chief-engineer, which would automatically be uploaded when that player fulfils either role on a boat. The document would then go on a notice-board in the control room (for captain) and Diesel-engine room, (from Chief Engineer). Clicking on that document would bring it up full-screen, with a "typed" font. it would lay out the responsibilities of all crewmen (in the case of the captain's document, or all machinists, in the case of the Chief Engineer. The uploaded file would be a simple "rich text" file.

Example:

Standing orders by Captain Fidd

Helmsman
Helm is to readback all verbal orders. To operate the TDC as directed, reading back all values as set.
Navigator
Navigator is to keep a running plot of position, to operate the OP, taking continuous bearings of ships to establish their ID, range and bearing, and to establish the convoy course and speed, and to plot same. He is to advise the captain of escorts range and bearing at all times when they become a threat.
(etc etc.)

(End of example)
This would allow captains to write down in formal fashion what they expect of each role, and for players to read same so they know what's expected of them particularly when they play under a new captain.

Likewise, the roles of machinist of port and/or starboard engines could be laid out by the chief engineer, for example what temp he wishes maintained in the full ahead setting, or who will operate which hull valves.

There should probably be a "report" button, so that a player abusing it to cause offence or otherwise not for a suitable purpose, can be prevented from it being uploaded. Get 10 reports - lose the privilege?

[Fidd]

124. Two-crew deck-gun?

It might be an improvement if there was a requirement for two crewmembers being present on deck for the deck-gun to be capable of being fired. Perhaps the 2nd could be a loader? The aim here to prevent any given player from being able to unilaterally decide to fire the deck-gun?

[THE_MASK]

THE_MASK aka sober .
I am a bit lost with the future of this game . Is it going to have a campaign mode like silent hunter games ?

[Fidd]

There has been talk of that, on and off. My hope is that a convoy defended by AI and human players in escorts (changing from one to the other and back as required) will be implemented before a campaign system is introduced. This has huge potential benefits for making gameplay more varied, more difficult, with longer DC attacks, and no "safety net" of dive to 185m and you're safe. If the alert system were changed to de-alert the convoy once a u-boat is actively being pinged and DC'd, then an individual u-boat could be DC'd many more times (allowing for damage control and a better damage-model) to follow; crucially without preventing other uboats from being unable to attack. Finally it would cause a very personal battle-of-wits between the captains of both human operated escort, and the u-boat below....

My concern with the campaign mode, is that there are a raft of problems to solve to make this viable in WP: SH3 had time-compression, the ability to save and reload a play session, and was unreliant on the TZ vagaries of manning the uboat with an adequate or full crew. Those are 3 massive problems SH3 did NOT have to contend with. So whilst I'm not saying "it can't be done", there are some formidable obstacles to overcome. IMHO of course.

For now, I'm merely making suggestions within moderate-reach in development terms, or, simpler ones that can solve extant problems. Once we have a better understanding of the devs intentions, it may be possible to base ideas on their plans - whatever they may be!