PDA

View Full Version : Realistic Sinking??? Yea right!!!!



mattk4ya
03-26-2005, 03:59 AM
O.K why is that every ship that gets destroyed sinks within 10 seconds? I know for a fact that ships do not sink that fast, even my tubed raft that I punctured in 5th grade in my neighbors pool lasted more than 10 min before sinking. Then to the other extreme why is it that a ship after taking 3 fishes with the deck on fire and practically on its side does not end up sinking after a while (meaning over 2 days)? Why? This just does not make sense!!!
And again why is it when there is clear skys, no rain, no fog and wave as high as a toilet flushing, I cant get any body to man the deck gun because of some storm... WHAT F**** STORM?????? there is none???
Somebody please help me before a take a big dose of whatever makes dogs sleep forever....

mattk4ya
03-26-2005, 03:59 AM
O.K why is that every ship that gets destroyed sinks within 10 seconds? I know for a fact that ships do not sink that fast, even my tubed raft that I punctured in 5th grade in my neighbors pool lasted more than 10 min before sinking. Then to the other extreme why is it that a ship after taking 3 fishes with the deck on fire and practically on its side does not end up sinking after a while (meaning over 2 days)? Why? This just does not make sense!!!
And again why is it when there is clear skys, no rain, no fog and wave as high as a toilet flushing, I cant get any body to man the deck gun because of some storm... WHAT F**** STORM?????? there is none???
Somebody please help me before a take a big dose of whatever makes dogs sleep forever....

Indianer.
03-26-2005, 04:14 AM
lol....join the queue mate http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

RommelsMind
03-26-2005, 04:36 AM
As far as sinking goes....its a video game...Its probably done this way to emphasize that the ship has sunk. Now tell me this, if it was realistic, and took how long a normal sinking ship takes, people would be complaining about that as well. They'd all be saying "sinking a ship takes too long, I want to see it hit the floor" and so on. Its all catch 22...you f'ed if you do, f'ed if ya dont.

As far as not being able to man the deck gun...I see it two ways. Yes it does suck when you are told you cant man the gun. But however, just because there may be no storm occuring, possibly it may e rough seas? I wonder if people notice that. If water is spraying over the deck, then Im sure it would be next to impossible to man the gun, unless you wanted to constantly turn around due to men overboard. Its realistic in my opinion, however I wish (and hope) it will be tuned down. There has been so many times I just wanted to hop in the seat of the deck gun and take out them pesky little pt boats but cant due to bad weather.

Capt.LoneRanger
03-26-2005, 04:46 AM
Incredible.... I saw a ship sink in more than 1 hour in this game, listening to the breaking bulkheads and all. Fantastic ambience.

But what do you expect, if you literally blast a ship out of the water, beak it's backbone and send another torpedoe out to kill it more quickly? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/354.gif

Capt.LoneRanger
03-26-2005, 04:53 AM
The manning of the deckgun is very generous. As you can read in most historical books the deckgun was removed from most (German) submarines, because it was not accessable most of the time. The Atlantic Ocean is too rough and washes over the deck.
Infact, I read comments like this a lot on these forums and my personal wish would be the ability to man the deckgun no matter how high the deck was washed. I'd LMAO for the posts like "Where did my crewmen go?"

If you look at it very closely, even the terminology is correct, because it IS called a storm, if it reaches windspeeds that don't allow the deckgun to be manned. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif

hobnail
03-26-2005, 05:31 AM
My crew isn't troubled by poor weather on deck once I gave them The Aquaman specialisation skill in crew management.

http://users.on.net/apoulos/SH3Img.JPG

RommelsMind
03-26-2005, 05:35 AM
Ha I can see it now. Deck officer " Heres a snorkel, some rope to secure yourself, and some flippers. Good luck, for the motherland, do your duty"

Dominicrigg
03-26-2005, 05:43 AM
Yeah lots of people get confused with realistic sinkings. Put 2 torps into most ships, they will sink fast.

If its damaged and you wait long enough it will sink. The realistic sinkings setting means when the ship is dead it sometimes will still float on for a few hours or minutes. Putting another torp into it will kill it.

As for warships they have crews who can keep them afloat in the worst circumstances. Someone posted the picture of a german ww1 ship from the big naval battle and it water was almost over the deck but they got it home. Also remember the mighty ark royal nearly sailing back to gibralter with a 30 degree roll on.

The games very good for a game!!

RedTerex
03-26-2005, 05:57 AM
Forget the full story its on the net somewhere, a ship was hit with torpedoes and it didnt sink but sailed to port albeit lop-sided as it listed badly.
It was carrying Timber !

Theres also a story of a dud torpedo that botched right through the side of a ship and stuck there, 60% of the torpedo went into the ship LOL damaging shelves and wrecking a cabinet.
The ship survived.

axeman3d
03-26-2005, 05:59 AM
I turned realistic sinkings on as part of my drive towards 100% realism, and it has made a difference. I have had ships go down like a giant hand grabbed them by the bow, and had them sink some time later as I was heading off anyway, safe in the knowledge that they were mortally wounded.

Last night I was returning to Brest after a helluva patrol in which I sank 11 ships but took so much damage I had only 1% hull integrity and couldn't submerge at all. After narrowly avoiding 2 destroyers on my way home I ran into a C2 Cargo off the south coaast of Ireland, and put my one remaining torpedo into it's bows from the stern tube. It was set to magnetic and worked beautifully,blowing just under the keel at the foremast. Within minutes the ship was almost awash at the bows, and fire broke out in front as well. I signalled all stop and waited for it's final moments. And waited. And waited. A wave put out the fire and then a little while later the bugger got going again, despite the high seas and the foredeck being awash, and began to limp off to Ireland. I could do nothing, out of torps and too 'stormy' to even use the flak gun, I had to watch as it limped off into the sunset. Well done to that crew if they made it home, but boo sucks for me!

TASKFORCE1x1
03-26-2005, 06:09 AM
They wouldnt have ships in WWII empty. The unlucky sailors to be on ships loaded with 5 ton ingots would sink in less than a minute! Thats a fact. Many of my books on the uboat war explain this and Ive read about it on both sides of the war. Timber and other boyant freight would take hours. Sneeky auxiliary ships have been known to load empty drums in every compartment of a ship as to serve England as a decoy against the uboats. It would take many torpedoes to sink one of these. SHII in matter of fact had missions against auxiliary ships.

Ravenspire1
03-26-2005, 06:52 AM
I dont think we can have fully realistic sinking in a game as it actually happend.

To many factors to take in account.

But as far as ive seen i think this game have somewhat realistic sinking.

A patrol i did yesterday can compare it.
I spoted a tanker ship, and 1 torp on him and he exploded in flames and went to bottom in no time.

later i found another tanker, same kind, but here it took 4 torps on it before it went down.

Reason for this i think is that some ship carry loads while some dont.

Only thing i really dont like is when the ships hit the bottom floor. It bounce up and down like a ball and roll and turn and twist for ever.
When a ship hits the bottom it burrie it self deep into the mud. Ive seen pictures and real movies about ships that recently have sank and most of them burrie them self deep down the mud.

It would be to much to ask i think that this realism would be in the game, but at least they shouldnt bounce up and down http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Another strange thing i saw was in the channel, i sank a destroyer, and when it hited the bottom it was standing right up whit the aft at the bottom.
Problem here was that it was shallow water so 2/3 of the ship was pointing above the sea right up in the sky like tower. Higley unrealistic and small thing like that reminds me that this is just a game http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Dominicrigg
03-26-2005, 06:57 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> Another strange thing i saw was in the channel, i sank a destroyer, and when it hited the bottom it was standing right up whit the aft at the bottom.
Problem here was that it was shallow water so 2/3 of the ship was pointing above the sea right up in the sky like tower. Higley unrealistic and small thing like that reminds me that this is just a game <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The boat still has air at trapped in the front, highly realistic.

FDNYFAN
03-26-2005, 07:01 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by mattk4ya:
O.K why is that every ship that gets destroyed sinks within 10 seconds? I know for a fact that ships do not sink that fast, even my tubed raft that I punctured in 5th grade in my neighbors pool lasted more than 10 min before sinking. Then to the other extreme why is it that a ship after taking 3 fishes with the deck on fire and practically on its side does not end up sinking after a while (meaning over 2 days)? Why? This just does not make sense!!!
And again why is it when there is clear skys, no rain, no fog and wave as high as a toilet flushing, I cant get any body to man the deck gun because of some storm... WHAT F**** STORM?????? there is none???
Somebody please help me before a take a big dose of whatever makes dogs sleep forever.... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Do you have realistic sinking on or off?

sav112
03-26-2005, 07:17 AM
I have it set to realistic and I have to emit they do go down too darn fast, I€ve sunk only about 5 ships but one was at night and I surfaced to watch it go down after one hit and by the time I surfaced it was gone, it would have been nice just sitting there watching it burn for a while at night€¦.

Therion_Prime
03-26-2005, 07:18 AM
I once hit a T3-Tanker with 4 (FOUR) Torpedos, and it didn't sink. So I placed a 5th in it's broadside, the game told me "Enemy ship sunk", but the ship did not sink! Probably I killd all of the crew. I waited for hours, but it was still there.

I also saw C2s and C3s sinking veeeery slowly (I used 32x time compression and still waited minutes).

Capt.LoneRanger
03-26-2005, 07:32 AM
Yes, IMHO sinking ships in SH3 are very nicely moddeled:

I landed a torp hit on a C3-Cargo-ship quite to it's stern. It stopped, sinking very slowly over stern. I stayed with the convoy to kill it later it was literally dead in the water.
After getting hits on 2 tankers I returned and the ship was moving again. Very slowly, about 2 kts, but it was trying to get to port.

Another time I hit a destroyer (C-Class) in the bow. It continued, just a bit slowed down and didn't ping anymore, but was unharmed beyond that - guess my torp took out it's sonar http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif

When I hit another destroyer with a torp set to 7m depth and magnetic fuse, the torp exploded under the forward turret. Only a millisecond after the torp exploded another heavy explosion literally ripped the ship apart. Didn't have enough time to turn the scope to watch it sink - it just vanished within a few seconds without a trace.

A nice Gun-Kill happened with a tanker. It cought fire with the second hit and I ceased fire and watched. Within minutes the whole ship burned. It lasted for 20min, then it exploded and turned over, breaking in two as the masts hit the sea. The oil burned for hours.

CRULL
03-26-2005, 07:45 AM
Even though this is a simulation, above all it has to be fun. There has to be adjustments made to the realism to keep it fun.

Capt.LoneRanger
03-26-2005, 07:49 AM
Why? Because you don't have fun? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/354.gif

Flagstaff72
03-26-2005, 08:07 AM
Well, I don't know about realism, but there is great variety in how a ship goes down. Sometimes a T3 tanker breaks in half after one torpedo. Once, I hit a C2 cargo ship with 5 torps, 3 of them under-the-keel magnetic detonations, most hits 2/5 from the bow. Bugger won't sink. I wait until it starts getting dark (3-4 hours) until I finally decide to waste that 6th torpedo to crack that nut.
I don't know, but other times as well I've had big trouble getting C2's to sink. Is this class particularly tough for everyone or is it just me?

Ravenspire1
03-26-2005, 08:22 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Dominicrigg:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> Another strange thing i saw was in the channel, i sank a destroyer, and when it hited the bottom it was standing right up whit the aft at the bottom.
Problem here was that it was shallow water so 2/3 of the ship was pointing above the sea right up in the sky like tower. Higley unrealistic and small thing like that reminds me that this is just a game <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The boat still has air at trapped in the front, highly realistic. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

yeah i know that and ive also seen realistc beahvoiur in this matter also. But in this case,,,
let say the boat is 100 meter in lenght and it is 20 meter depth. The boat sinks and stand on the bottom whit 80 meters of lenght above the sea pointing right up.

if it would be realistic whit all that air trapped the boat would float more level, and not point up like staute of liberty http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

To bad i didnt get a screen of it coz it looked silly.

horrido1962_
03-26-2005, 08:46 AM
Ships sink too fast. Keep everything the same, but increase the time to sink. Ships NEVER sink this fast in real life. Even the Hood took two minutes to go down, and it was considered incredably fast.

Yes its a game, thats why we have the option to turn of realistic ship sinking if we want.

Why do we always have to argue over these things? I love this sim - its the best sim out in years! But the cheerleading here is getting old.

RedTerex
03-26-2005, 11:06 AM
I have seen old Black and White footage of a ship getting torpedoed and the ship sank in like 5 seconds.

Remember when the Australians torpedoed that old decommissioned frigate about 4 years ago to make a barrier reef or something...the ship, all 1000 or so tons completely LIFTED out of the water when the torp struck it.
It broke in half..and sank in seconds.

Bud Gruner real WWII Sub Captain of Silent Hunter I fame also gave a statement of a ship sinking in a couple of seconds..."it went down straight away..couple of seconds..it was gone ! "
The torp will make a whole some 20 feet by 15 feet across in most cases.
The detonation is huge and violent as the sea acts as a buffer and magnifies the explosion 100 fold.
generaly speeakingonce a ships bouyancy has gone...it will sink like a brick..in seconds.

CaptainRadish
03-26-2005, 12:51 PM
As far as the C2s are concerned I personally think they are unusually tough. I have sunk just about every C3 I have come across with one torpedo but the C2s usually take three or more to sink.

Darnitz
03-26-2005, 01:02 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Dominicrigg:
Yeah lots of people get confused with realistic sinkings. Put 2 torps into most ships, they will sink fast.

If its damaged and you wait long enough it will sink. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not true, I've damaged ships so that the stern/bow was submerged, put time compression on and it just sat there bobbing for days!!

Never sank.

Frederf220
03-26-2005, 01:03 PM
I would venture a lot of us are getting ships into 30-minute-sink states. But being impatient that we are we send another fish in after it, making most of us keep firing until we get "seconds" sinkings.

NaKacu
03-26-2005, 01:07 PM
Well... most of my sinkings were realistic... Ships limped then sunk, slid down to the bottom, twisted, turned and did just about everything else...

However, it has been pointed out to me that when using deck guns and having particles set to 0, they tend to simply crack in half and go sink.

Eclypse_1593
03-26-2005, 03:27 PM
Regarding sinking ships, I think they are pretty realistic. I have had many cases were they went down fast, but again several cases were the ships took forever to sink or stayed afloat (barley).

Hit a tugboat with a torp once, and it went down bout a fast as a stone when it landed back in the water lol.

Last night I found 2 T3 tankers in a convoy, fired 2 fish at each. The first busted up with one fish (thankfully, the first was a dud). The second T3 got hit by both right in the middle. She was burning, listing, but would not sink. I finnaly took her out with deck guns many hours later after the rest of the convoy had left and it was alone and dead in the water.

horrido1962_
03-26-2005, 03:33 PM
I'll conced that some ships did go down in a few seconds. But most (80%+)of the ships in this game go down in less than a minute. Are you telling me thats realistic? We'll have to have a differnece of opinion.

HeibgesU999
03-26-2005, 03:54 PM
From "Ten Years and Twemty Days" by Karl Doenitz
isbn 0-306-80764-5
Chapter 8: the Battle of the Atlantic

Silent Otto's KTB
October 19, 1940
0015hrs-.....The destroyers are at their wits end, shooting off starshells the whole time to comfort themselves and each other.....
0138hrs- Bow shot on a large heavily laden freighter of some 6000t. Range 945yds. Hit below foremast. Ship sank at once.
0155hrs- Bow shot on the next ship, a large vessel of approx. 7000t. Range 975ys. Hit below foremast. Ship Sank in forty seconds.

horrido1962_
03-26-2005, 03:55 PM
Sorry for the double post, but I just found a great link that describes in some cases how long each indiviual ship took to go down...

http://uboat.net/allies/merchants/types.html

I just checked a few...

c2's 45 minutes
10 minutes
20 minutes
20 minutes

c3's 3 days
15 minutes
50 minutes

CLEARLY, the game sinks ships too fast. Once again, I like everything about the way thinks sink (maybe they break in half too much but who cares?), EXCEPT that they sink too fast. Lets ask em to fix it!

HeibgesU999
03-26-2005, 03:57 PM
So are you saying that Karl Doenitz or Otto Kretschmer is lying?

horrido1962_
03-26-2005, 04:08 PM
The data speaks for itself.

Teddy Bar
03-26-2005, 04:12 PM
Ships sank within seconds, some minutes and some also took days.

There are instances where 1/2 the ship has had to be sunk by escorts days afterwards so that it did not become a shipping hazard.

Yes there were instances of ships going down in seconds. These ere not the norm, they certainly were not the exception.

Most ships took time to sink, anywhere from 1/2 an hour to many hours to days.

SHIII does not model this, it is either sunk right this instance or not at all.

mattk4ya
03-26-2005, 04:31 PM
Ive read all replys and all of you have made very good points! I love this game and play all the time, but at the same time there is some things that still do not make sense, I know alot of you know about the history of WW2 more than others and there are some of you who don't know to much but still have alot of common sense in general but for me I look at some things in the game and it still does not make sense, granted I know this is a game and only a game, the best sub simulator to date but my question is back to the top of the page in my orginal statement is, if is says realistic... that should mean realsitic! I just find it and I know most would agree that 90% or more of all destroyed ships sink less than 10 sec! Thats like playing your favorite football game and 90% of all the tackles looked the same, that gets repetitive which then gets boring after a while. Why cant they make it where sinking is between 10sec to 20 mins CONSISTENTLY and when ships sinks they don't bounce when they hit the bottom or they sink like the Titanic which I always thought was cool (I know that the ships in this game break in two but it looks all the same and it breaks from explosions not from the presure of gravity which made the Titanic break in half, there should be more factors in why the ship breaks in half!). Another question is when you damage a boat with, lets say three fishes and it does not sink, why does the crew on the boat try not to put out any of the fires? Maybe one or two of you could say that you saw a fire put out but wouldn't that be the first thing that a crew on a ship would do? You would figure that the reason your sinking the ship is because of the cargo its caring and you would think that the crew would want to protect it then let it burn forever and ever?. Does anybody know what is the average crew size on any of the cargo or merchant ships? I just find stuff very few in between its either you shoot sink or shoot damge and it sails away, never or very, very rarely you see a ship sail away but the fire on deck is so bad or the flooding is so bad it ends up either killing the engine, sinking, more damge, comes to a complete stop, and Im talking about after is sails away or sails on for a long time. You just don't see that and I think that should happen more then not. I think a great add on or patch is where when you have the external camera on and you do a close up on the enemy ship you could hear the captain or crew members say "Fire on deck" "engine room damaged", "torpedo" and so much more so you get a better idea on what damaged you have done and just for "fun" value.

mattk4ya
03-26-2005, 04:43 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Frederf220:
I would venture a lot of us are getting ships into 30-minute-sink states. But being impatient that we are we send another fish in after it, making most of us keep firing until we get "seconds" sinkings. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Not true, your captain or crewman always lets you know if the enemy unit has been destroyed, so you know not to send another fish at it.

Dunbal
03-26-2005, 04:46 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by mattk4ya:
WHAT F**** STORM?????? there is none???
Somebody please help me before a take a big dose of whatever makes dogs sleep forever.... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Everything becomes easy once you realize the simple truth: There is no spoo- er storm...

mattk4ya
03-26-2005, 04:46 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Teddy Bar:
Ships sank within seconds, some minutes and some also took days.

There are instances where 1/2 the ship has had to be sunk by escorts days afterwards so that it did not become a shipping hazard.

Yes there were instances of ships going down in seconds. These ere not the norm, they certainly were not the exception.

Most ships took time to sink, anywhere from 1/2 an hour to many hours to days.

SHIII does not model this, it is either sunk right this instance or not at all. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I agree, but if it says realistic sinking than it should sink within secs, mins, hours, or days not always 10sec if not than they should not have put that option of realistic sinking.
wouldn't you agree?

mattk4ya
03-26-2005, 04:49 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by horrido1962_:
I'll conced that some ships did go down in a few seconds. But most (80%+)of the ships in this game go down in less than a minute. Are you telling me thats realistic? We'll have to have a differnece of opinion. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I disagree ..... they sink in less in a min at 90% of the time......lol

Frederf220
03-26-2005, 05:25 PM
Originally posted by Frederf220:
I would venture a lot of us are getting ships into 30-minute-sink states. But being impatient that we are we send another fish in after it, making most of us keep firing until we get "seconds" sinkings.

Not true, your captain or crewman always lets you know if the enemy unit has been destroyed, so you know not to send another fish at it.

Again, while they tell you that the unit's been destroyed they DON'T tell you if it's GOING to sink. So we keep firing at ships that are GOING to isnk, but since it doesn't say "Destroyed" we shoot again.

alanschu
03-26-2005, 05:44 PM
Must be a good game....if this is what ppl are complaining about http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

sskip
03-26-2005, 05:53 PM
All I can say with regards to this topic is that I have had ships go down in secs, mins, hours and possible days if I'd let nature do the work and not get impatient and make sure with another fish.

As far as iam concerned I dont have any probs with the time the ships are sinking.

However I do agree that the deckgun "storm" restraints should be tweaked.

JebUSMC
03-26-2005, 09:51 PM
I put four HE gun rounds into a coastie at her waterline and sat back to watch what would happen. After about a minute, she had a bit of a list. A couple minutes later, she had a rather severe list. 30 to 40 seconds after that, she rolled onto her side and sank. I didn't get the 'ship destroyed' message until the top of her funnel hit the water. I do find this realistic based on videos and what not. Some ships, even battleships, sank in seconds. Some ships took days. If you give a ship time, it might sink but if you hit it until it sinks, it'll be so full of holes it'll sink like a stone. Look how long it took the liner Andrea Doria to sink with a huge gaping hole in her side from well below her waterline all the way to her main deck. Think about it. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

quillan
03-26-2005, 10:04 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Not true, your captain or crewman always lets you know if the enemy unit has been destroyed, so you know not to send another fish at it. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Matt, you're wrong about this point. What I've found is the navigator tells me it's destroyed at the point where it's inevitable. I sank 4 C3 cargo ships on a patrol earlier today. All 4 went down the same way. I fired a single torpedo, 1 meter below the ships draft, targeted at the spot where the rear of the superstructure meets the hull. All torps went off where they were supposed to. The ship would start slowing down, and settling at the stern. The quickest went down in about 30 seconds. The slowest in this case took about 5 minutes. They would drift until they stopped, settle farther at the stern, and only when the stern went underwater and failed to come up again would the navigator inform me "Enemy unit destroyed". I could easily have put another fish or two into it.

Frederf220
03-26-2005, 10:07 PM
I got a torp hit under a C2 this night and it blew up a meter under the keel "torpedo missed sir" yeah right.

Anyway it settles back on the stern and keeps chuggin slow.

After 10 minutes I get bored and put another fish in it. Broken back sinks 1/2 out of the water.

So, in that case it might have taken hours to sink, but I got impatient.

hobnail
03-27-2005, 12:29 AM
The Cargo ships I encounter are all shipping cork, pumps and life preservers I think.

Just finished Patrol 9, sank 8 ships in convoy off the Horn of Africa. My last two torps were salvoed under a C2 with mag pistols. One detonated under the keel for'd and the other aft, did she break up and sink? No. I had to wait 1/2 an hour for her to fall out of formation with the convoy and finish her with the deck gun.

I can swallow a merchie surviving a single impact or keel detonation but two back-breaking keel shots in the space of 4 seconds? I'm sure the devs have heard enough of this to have another look at their DM.

Pr0metheus 1962
03-27-2005, 12:43 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by CRULL:
Even though this is a simulation, above all it has to be fun. There has to be adjustments made to the realism to keep it fun. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Why would ships taking longer to sink not be fun? I think one-minute sinkings (which is what we get in 99% of cases) is not fun.

Pr0metheus 1962
03-27-2005, 12:47 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Hobnail:
I'm sure the devs have heard enough of this to have another look at their DM. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Speaking of which, has anyone else here tried using the conning tower can opener? You race along at flank speed and at periscope depth, and all the destroyers line up behind you, ram your conning tower, and sink. Meanwhile you end up with a mildly damaged conning tower. I took three destroyers out using this method this afternoon while doing the Courageous single mission.

This needs to be fixed.

hobnail
03-27-2005, 12:59 AM
Beeyrus, that's what happened to me in the patrol I referred to above. I got spotlighted and rammed good by the escort. I didn't see what happened to him after that but he was gone....

smilee88
03-27-2005, 01:49 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by mattk4ya:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Frederf220:
I would venture a lot of us are getting ships into 30-minute-sink states. But being impatient that we are we send another fish in after it, making most of us keep firing until we get "seconds" sinkings. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Not true, your captain or crewman always lets you know if the enemy unit has been destroyed, so you know not to send another fish at it. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sorry, I torpedoed a C2 and it took about 3 hours to finally sink.... I sat there with time compression on, and waited as it slowly sunk into the water. Eventually it got low enough in the water that I got the "Unit destoyed" and then finally sank.

I've also seen this happen to other ships in high seas...

I think its about right. Play with the game editor, ships can either carry "freight" "ammo" "fuel" internally.

If they carry "fuel" or "ammo" they go down in one hit. If its freight, they usually take a while. I think the problem that we run into is historically, I'd guess that ships would carry a mix. Some ammo, some parts, etc. If you have ships that literally blow apart and break in half, I bet it was a ammo or fuel ship.

edit: I think the devs have said they are addressing the ramming bug...

I think the ship sinking times are spot on. I've had a pretty decent mix of ships which go down in seconds and other ships which take 3 torps.

Dominicrigg
03-27-2005, 05:20 AM
I think we can see from the posts here some people get the realistic sinking, some people dont.

When you choose the option it says something like "Ships will take longer to sink so you may end up using more torpedos" I think this is what you guys who think they sink in seconds are doing. Firing another torp with impatiance.

Trust me if you put 2 torps into most ships they will go down pretty **** fast. 10,000 tons of steel doesnt float once it has 2 massive holes in it.

Try it out, watch ships and see how they can take varying times to sink if you dont finish them off.

As to ships limping home half wrecked being unrealistic. Look up the famous fuel tanker sailing into Malta and giving vital fuel to the people after being bombed or torpedoed i forget which. It was a floating wreck but managed to get there.

Its not about how you think things happened, its about how they happened in real life. Thats realistic.

How do you think sub captains managed to know what they had sunk in convoy raids when they were darting in sinking and racing away? Did they sit for hours to make sure they had sunk? Nope they saw them sink seconds after they had hit in most cases. A torpedo does a hell of a lot of damage to an unarmoured 10,000 ton ship. Specially one with ammo on board.

horrido1962_
03-27-2005, 07:05 AM
I have tried it out (as far as waiting), and I agree - some ships will take longer. In very very rare cases they take longer than 2 minutes. The real issue is about what is the average time to sink. If it were realistic, ships would take much longer, and thus we would have to use our torps differently (ie you couldnt just put one in, wait a minute then fire another). These fast sinking times are UNREALISTIC. I challange any unbelievers to compile statistics from Uboat.net. I looked at about 20 sinkings, and not ONE was below 10 minutes. Not one out of 20. I'm not saying there were no fast sinkings, I'm saying they were not the norm. Not by a long shot.

As far as the target destroyed thing goes, most of the time you get it. Probably 90%+. This has to go as it is very unrealistic.

Pr0metheus 1962
03-27-2005, 08:14 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by smilee88:
Sorry, I torpedoed a C2 and it took about 3 hours to finally sink.... I sat there with time compression on, and waited as it slowly sunk into the water. Eventually it got low enough in the water that I got the "Unit destoyed" and then finally sank. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

But how often does that happen? It's NEVER happened to me, yet the fact is, most sinkings in real life took over half an hour. In the game, 99% take less than half a minute after the final torpedo goes in.

As for Dominicrigg's assertion that two torpedoes can make a ship sink that fast, it's misleading. Rarely, small ships sank in a minute or a few minutes, but large ships could and did - often - stay afloat for hours with multipole torpedo hits. The aircraft carrier Courageous sank in 20 minutes and that was considered a very short time indeed, yet if any ship lasts even that long in the game it's so unusual that it's almost miraculous.

The fact that some people think the game's fine as it is is irrelevant. This is supposed to be a simulation, and when we select 'realistic sinking times' that's what we should get. The unrealistic setting exists for those who don't want it. Why have a realistic sinking time option if it doesn't work?

This is a bug in the game that detracts from the simulation. It needs to be fixed.

Mjollnir111675
03-27-2005, 08:47 AM
I would like to ask:

How is anyone so sure when we effectively have only 25% of all accounts?
With a 75% fatality rate how many accounts were taken to the depths?
Now while this is a good debate/discussion alot is left open fer speculation.
25% of of all accounts is not even close to being able to derive a truth from.
So lets say that half of the 25% was longer than a half hour do you still think that that is enough to go off of?
I dont.
Yes I also agree that more variation in times fer sinking is welcomed but when you really start thinking bout it who really knows?
Yer gonna have accounts from other Merchant Marine vessels but we all know that they didn't hang round with a stopwatch to record how long it took.
So much left open fer speculation it is crazy.
I guess you could compile and then average the accounts we do have but is that a valid rep when its still only 25% of all accounts?
25% of anything isn't enough fer anything to be judged on.
@least not in my eyes.
So what is realistic when we have only 25% of the truth?
Please also consider that most M.M. vessels were packed to the gunwales with explosives and other highly volatile cargo. Moreso than even an escort of 3/4 the size.


Mjollnir

horrido1962_
03-27-2005, 12:06 PM
&gt;&gt; 25% of of all accounts is not even close to being able to derive a truth from


You are absolutely wrong. Study statistics.

Pr0metheus 1962
03-27-2005, 01:24 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by horrido1962_:
&gt;&gt; 25% of of all accounts is not even close to being able to derive a truth from


You are absolutely wrong. Study statistics. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Absolutely. 25% is more than enough. Even if nothing else, if 99% of that 25% of accounts says that quick sinkings were very rare, that means that close to 25% of sinkings were slow. This game generates nowhere near 25% slow sinkings. If it did, that would be more than enough for me. Besides, we have far more than 25% of the data. The reality is that we know how long nearly 100% of sinkings took place. We have survivors from the stricken ships, we have witnesses from ships close by, and we have witnesses from the attacking subs.

Pericon1
03-27-2005, 02:02 PM
I just keep in mind that this is just a game....a very fun game, but a game nonetheless. They did a darn good job with what they have. As far as getting more realism, go join the navy. My only beef with realism is that the flags keep fluttering while the ship sits on the bottom. Kinda funny lookin....

soviet_warlord
03-27-2005, 02:05 PM
As I understand it, to fix all the problems, would be to make the officer in charge declare a ship "destroyed", even if it is unclear. Then, we won't use more shots and torpedoes on it, and we can sit back, and watch it slowly sink, like it should.

Mjollnir111675
03-27-2005, 02:06 PM
Ok so where does one draw the line on fear at the moment which distorts ones perception? Or perhaps the fact that after days in a lifeboat in most difficult situations and amongst fellow shipmates all with different takes on the situation.
Sure you may have one person who was tryin his darndest to try and get outta said ship.Thats where a few seconds/minutes are percieved as a lifetime. Same as just sitting in a life raft watching ship sink. Then minutes would be percieved as hours.
Then you would have the ones who fer propaganda purposes would fudge the records. We all know that any sailor is at the moment loyal to a particular vessel design usually being the one he is serving on at the time.
Then you would have what kinda timing to judge this by? ya think most men had wrist watches on?
comin straight outta depression I wont buy that either. If the fact that any would work after a splash in the water and oil and whatever else. Were not talkin divers watches here folks.
Or were they counting mississippi's,alligators or Haro freestyles until it vanished?
You have minimal accounts at best. That is fer merchant ships.
Now fer warships I will agree as we all know they had/have D.C. men who were trained in just that specialty: keepin the ship afloat.
Do you really think that Merchant Marines were trained as well as Navy sailors?
Buhsheeot!
Then comes the boot crewmen which is the percentage of records I mentioned earler comes from. Who knows better?
A boot captain who is NOT in jeopardy and who has a watch or a crewman on a sinking M.M. vessel who you really think is counting alligators or Haro Freestyles and in mortal danger?
I can tell you if they weren't mindful of setting or looking at their watch when it got hit and the watch kept functioning how do they even know?
Who ya gonna trust?
I dont believe we have even near enough info as most of you would imply. Thats all.
Remember I too would also like more variation in sinking times. I did say that above. I am just tryin to throw out some ideas thats all.
You ask a police man what he thinks of having witnesses and report back what he tells ya.
Ya think anything has changed o'er the years?


Mjollnir
Wow: w a t c h e s is a bad word on this forum? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

uncle_newt
03-27-2005, 03:26 PM
Experiment

Load up the torpedo school and then get set up on the C2 cargo ship. Get close, but be careful that you don't "spook" it, because then it will start to zig zag. It's moving very slow so it's easy to target specific areas. Play with it a little bit. Put a torpedo or two right under the screws and watch what happens. Reload the misson and try a torp in the engine room. Then try one or two in the bow. Aso try setting your impact torps to different depths . Very interesting huh? Let us know what you find out.

smilee88
03-27-2005, 03:43 PM
Exactly... The C2s and C3s almost always take multiple torps if there internal load is freight.

Even when using a magnetic detonation, its not always a success. I made a "shooting" range map with the editor with a C2 loaded with freight, a C3 loaded with freight and a C2 loaded with ammo.

Unless I can break the keel first shot, the two freight ships will stay aloft for quite awhile. Adding rough seas really helps make the boat go under.

The smaller ships in the 2000 ton range are almost always deep sixed with one torp shot.

This I feel is realistic. The bigger ships will take a long time to sink. Its not a problem that you can't find any ships that take a long time to sink..... The fact that it works perfectly fine for some of us shows that its not a "bug". You're just running into the easy ships http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Don't believe me? Go make a map with friendly or neutral C2s, C3s, liberty ships, and have at em. Some of those boats can survive 1, 2 , 3 torps and still stay afloat for a bit before they finally roll over or slip into the water.

Dominicrigg
03-27-2005, 04:00 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Pericon1:
My only beef with realism is that the flags keep fluttering while the ship sits on the bottom. Kinda funny lookin.... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thats actually realistic too. Thats what they look like underwater when being dragged or in a current.

A.K.Davis
03-27-2005, 05:33 PM
I passed by a Dutch fishing boat on the way back from my first patrol in '39. The sea was really, so much so that the bridge was totally awash at times. Well, this little fishing boat was really being tossed about also. I gave him a wave and passed on by, plowing my way East through the waves. I looked back several minutes later and the fishing boat was gone. Go to the map and, sure enough, there is a neutral ship sunk icon where the fishing boat last was. Poor bastard.

A.K.Davis
03-27-2005, 05:34 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Dominicrigg:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Pericon1:
My only beef with realism is that the flags keep fluttering while the ship sits on the bottom. Kinda funny lookin.... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thats actually realistic too. Thats what they look like underwater when being dragged or in a current. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

True, but the flutter animation should slow down. 20-30 knot currents are not very likely.

Phantom_Flyer
03-27-2005, 06:40 PM
The game gratifys all my expectations in the sinking dept.

I fired 3 fish into a light cruiser and it was listing to around 25 degrees, slowely listing more and more, it took around 1 hour to finaly roll over and sink, had the same sort of stuff with fleet AC carriers aswel, heavy listing and then a final roll + sink.

With regards to the C2's being tough ive had no problems really, in general a couple of fish at most seems to down them pretty well, if your lucky a well placed shot to the middle section seems to work well.

As to whether its realistic or not I dont know, im not a submariner or expert on aquatics or WW2 stuff, all I care about is that this game rocks and gives me much pleasure when im playing it, sure its got some gripes and small problems but sadly all people around here seem to do is ***** about X Y and Z, then add the trolls and its turned into the usual flame SH3 thread.

One word of warning - regardless of what you people believe the constant negativity amoungst people around here DOES have a negative impact on a dev team, and usualy at YOUR cost, I work in this industry and I know that the willingness to put in extra hours and make things extra special soon starts to dissappear once you get to these stages of moaning and constant *****ing, give the guys some Kudos here and show a level of appreciation for what they have acheived so far and im sure they would bend over that little bit extra to satisfy and rectify any demands, its about time people grew up around these support forums and that doesnt just apply to SH3, its prevalent around all the simulation forums no matter whether its racing, flight or naval.

Mark.

ncsavoj
03-27-2005, 07:52 PM
I didnt read whole thread but the reason usually is the ship is actually sinking but you dont know it, so u put another torp in it and boom, splits in 2. At least thats why all mine were splitting in 2 untill i realized sometimes it takes 30min to 2hr for them to go down.

Pr0metheus 1962
03-27-2005, 09:40 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Pericon1:
I just keep in mind that this is just a game....a very fun game, but a game nonetheless. They did a darn good job with what they have. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This is a simulation. It's not just a game, and it's supposed to have realistic sinking times - it's a feature of the game - that's why the option exists.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>As far as getting more realism, go join the navy. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Realism and reality are two completely different things. Look up the words in a dictionary. You can't get realism in the navy. The navy deals in reality.

Pr0metheus 1962
03-27-2005, 09:45 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Phantom_Flyer:
One word of warning - regardless of what you people believe the constant negativity amoungst people around here... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

What negativity? Reporting bugs and suggesting improvemnents is not 'negativity'. On the contrary, it's the single most positive thing we can do for the game, because it serves progress. If all we were to do was praise the game, we wouldn't be doing much to improve it.

Dominicrigg
03-27-2005, 10:32 PM
Ok to put this thread to bed once and for all. For those too lazy/gun happy ect to notice realistic ship sinking time, here is proof!

5 mins
http://img66.exs.cx/img66/5171/5minsafter2sh.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)

50 mins
http://img66.exs.cx/img66/7669/50minsafter3jl.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)

60 mins
http://img66.exs.cx/img66/879/60minsafter3so.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)

Now i go to map since i dont want to sit for an hour or longer watching

opp i get a message neutral sunk
http://img66.exs.cx/img66/1838/7hourslater5ei.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)

Same view as originals
http://img66.exs.cx/img66/6763/7hourslater29zs.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)


7 hour sinking Voila, touche, QED.
Now some people owe some other people an apology!

Now all we need is someone to call me a lier. lol

TooFastForLove.
03-27-2005, 10:49 PM
What really gets me however is when I ship leans or sags one way and seems to stay like that never going down. Also in multiplayer you don't get a kill credit unless you actually see it go down. I learned that the hard was after hitting at least 4 ships and not getting one credit.

Pr0metheus 1962
03-27-2005, 11:06 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Dominicrigg:
Ok to put this thread to bed once and for all. For those too lazy/gun happy ect to notice realistic ship sinking time, here is proof! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's beside the point. It's not that realistic sinking times aren't possible. We've all seen them happen - occasionally. It's that realistic sinking times are extremely rare when they should be common. 90+% of ships go down within seconds of the first torpedo hitting them. The whole point of this thread is to discuss the fact that the game doesn't have anywhere near enough ships going down after a realistic period of time.

blue_76
03-27-2005, 11:09 PM
most of the time, i've had ship sink in less than 1 minute.

Mashiki_a
03-27-2005, 11:16 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Beeryus:
That's beside the point. It's not that realistic sinking times aren't possible. We've all seen them happen - occasionally. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Funny I got sunk tonight with my first uboat...3 destroyers nailed me after I finished picking a part a juicy convoy. First lets get the destroyer, got sunk by a single torp went up like a ball of flames. Next in the convoy of 20 ships 4 sunk in a period of more then 2hrs by use of the deck gun, 5 sunk directly after getting hit by torps. The rest were neutrals. Then...I got sunk by 16 depth charges...after re-enforcements arrived.

I started a new uboat off a few mins ago and just finished my first patrol. 2 small merchants both sunk it took more then two hours on both accounts, both got hit near the bow of the ship in rough seas.

Just my experience.

CaptainRadish
03-27-2005, 11:24 PM
In my experiences it depends on two major factors: just where the torpedo hit the ship and at what angle.

If you smack a fishstick into the engine room, you will very quickly fill the biggest compartment of the ship with water, which will sink the biggest ships easily.

If you hit the ship at a bad angle, if the torpedo goes off at all, it will probably direct the blast away from the hull rather than into it. Haven't you ever read Hunt for Red October? The October got hit by a torpedo (up around its torpedo room, which would have sunk it if it had flooded) but because the torpedo hit at such a bad angle, the blast was directed away from the hull and didn't really do much damage.

I have noticed, the closer I get to hitting the ship at a solid 90 degrees the better my chances of drowning it.

CaptainRadish
03-27-2005, 11:29 PM
And btw, as far as comparing peacetime sinkings of major ocean liners (Andrea Dorea), one cannot really compare them. Liners are very compartmentalised. Peacetime disasters are normally the result of non-aggrivated damage. The Doria was not hit by an explosive device, she was hit by another ship.

Also, has anyone here ever seen the inside of a big cargo ship? It is an enormous box with absolutely no comparmentalization at all. One hit in the cargo bay will very rapidly fill about 70% of the ship with water. That'll drag any ship down in seconds.

Dominicrigg
03-27-2005, 11:38 PM
Uhh they are sinking because you are putting too many torps in!! Any ship will sink fast with enough torps. I dont get anywhere near 90% of ships sinking in a minute, except when i finish them off because i cant be bothered to sit around. Small cargo ships yes. Thats because a 50 foot hole does that to cargo ships.

The fact is people who think they sink too fast are firing more torps then is needed. Its not a game issue.

The only way round it is to have a message saying "ship is now sinking realistically! Please stop firing torps if you want to see your 2 hour sinking!!!"

blue_76
03-27-2005, 11:45 PM
perhaps you're right.. usually i fire one torpedoe at a ship, if that doesn't do it, i don't wait around till it sinks even if it looks like it might eventually sink.. i fire another one or use my deck gun depending on the circumstances.. but i have never waited around for very long..

MeGrand
03-27-2005, 11:46 PM
I please to see everyone mostly finds the ship sinking times acurate

lots of varability - this is good!

Oh and on the note people are having trouble with oil tankers - good!, they are histrically a pain to sink

Their either tend to blow up easiley or take bloody ages.

Oil floats m'kay tanks full of oil = slow sinking (if you don't catch fire)

the ohio being the clasic example - decks awash and still (technically) afloat - though once they started to take the fuel out it sank

CaptainRadish
03-28-2005, 12:05 AM
Hmm, normally when I attack tankers they light up like a roman candle.

Which is the way I like them, of course http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

StellarRat
03-28-2005, 12:34 AM
It is quite possible for a large ship to go down very quickly. A great deal depends on where you hit and what kind of cargo it carries. Sailors on ships carrying ore and cement used to sleep with their cabins doors propped open and doors to the outside propped open because they figured they had less 30 secs to escape if they were hit. Lumber carrying ships were very difficult to sink. Sailors on ammo ships slept with the doors closed because if they got hit, well...you get the idea...

CRULL
03-28-2005, 12:50 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Beeryus:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by CRULL:
Even though this is a simulation, above all it has to be fun. There has to be adjustments made to the realism to keep it fun. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Why would ships taking longer to sink not be fun? I think one-minute sinkings (which is what we get in 99% of cases) is not fun. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Because sitting at computer waiting a couple of hours or more to see ship sink is not fun for the majority of users.
Some have already claimed ships don't all sink within a short time so I think some of you are just really nitpicking.
If this was a realistic Naval simulation, do you honestly think they would make them sit at the screen waiting a couple of hours to make sure a ship has actually sunk?
Some of you have nothing to do but complain about the smallest things. If it was something that actually kept you from being able to play that's one thing, but to complain about sinking times. Give me a break.
The main purpose of this game is to make money, and it has to be fun to do so. I certainly wouldn't want to wait a day to see a ship sink even if it is realistic.
So either stop playing it or stop complaining about stupid little things.

CaptainRadish
03-28-2005, 02:13 AM
Peace out http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

hauitsme
03-28-2005, 04:21 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>CRULL:
The main purpose of this game is to make money <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
This is NOT Sub Tycoon!

Pr0metheus 1962
03-28-2005, 05:55 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Mashiki_a:
I started a new uboat off a few mins ago and just finished my first patrol. 2 small merchants both sunk it took more then two hours on both accounts, both got hit near the bow of the ship in rough seas. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

How many of all your sinkings went down less than a minute after getting hit by the killing blow? How many took considerably longer? As I said, it's not that long-term sinkings don't happen, it's that they don't happen anywhere near enough. 90% of sinkings should take more than 20 minutes.

Pr0metheus 1962
03-28-2005, 05:57 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by CaptainRadish:
Haven't you ever read Hunt for Red October? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hunt for Red October was fiction. Any real sub hit by a torpedo will sink.

Pr0metheus 1962
03-28-2005, 05:58 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Dominicrigg:
Uhh they are sinking because you are putting too many torps in!! Any ship will sink fast with enough torps. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'm not sure how I can sink a ship with less than one torpedo. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Pr0metheus 1962
03-28-2005, 06:03 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by StellarRat:
It is quite possible for a large ship to go down very quickly.... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

'Possible' is not what we're talking about. Lots of things are possible. The question is, what is likely? It is very unlikely that 95%+ of all ships sunk will go down in less than 2 minutes. In fact I'd say that was impossible, yet it happens in this game all the time. 'Realistic sinking times' doesn't mean 'sinking times within the outside range of what's possible'. It means 'sinking times that appear to match a range of what happens in reality'.

Pr0metheus 1962
03-28-2005, 06:04 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by CRULL:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Beeryus:
Why would ships taking longer to sink not be fun? I think one-minute sinkings (which is what we get in 99% of cases) is not fun. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Because sitting at computer waiting a couple of hours or more to see ship sink is not fun for the majority of users. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Then those players have the option of selecting 'unrealistic sinking times'. It's not like the option doesn't exist. The problem is, the option to HAVE realistic sinking times doesn't exist.

horrido1962_
03-28-2005, 06:41 AM
This thread is not about negativeity. If youve worked in software dev. you know you have a lot on your plate.

All this anticdotal eveidence means nothing. We have a great reference at Uboat.net, and of you believe this game is realistic, prove it by showing some hard data from that site. I've shown you with a sample set of 20 that the game is unrealistic in sink times.

I think this is just a matter of people WANTING to believe in the accuracy because they like the game. Prove me wrong.

Pr0metheus 1962
03-28-2005, 06:55 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by horrido1962_:
I think this is just a matter of people WANTING to believe in the accuracy because they like the game. Prove me wrong. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'm with him. If having over 90% of ships sinking within a minute is realistic, show us the evidence for it. Prove that 90% of real ships sank in under a minute after the final torpedo hit. The evidence is at Uboat.net.

Dominicrigg
03-28-2005, 07:20 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Beeryus:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by StellarRat:
It is quite possible for a large ship to go down very quickly.... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

'Possible' is not what we're talking about. Lots of things are possible. The question is, what is likely? It is very unlikely that 95%+ of all ships sunk will go down in less than 2 minutes. In fact I'd say that was impossible, yet it happens in this game all the time. 'Realistic sinking times' doesn't mean 'sinking times within the outside range of what's possible'. It means 'sinking times that appear to match a range of what happens in reality'. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I agree with your wish for realism, im just not sure i agree with your stats. If you read the histories of sinkings, it seems to me to be this way.

A lot seem to sink almost immediatly in most accounts you hear of. The long sinkings you see on U-boat net, seem to be this style of sinking.

10am Hit by one torpedo stern. Sub chased off.
11.15am sub returns and fires another two torpedos.
11.20 ship sinks

Ect. I get sinkings like this all the time. I get sinkings which last days. If you count from hitting first to sinking (As they are doing)

I would never say its 95% beeryus. I Havent studied lots of accounts at uboat net though, but it would be interesting. Now if i remember i will start making stats of my sinkings and have a look at Uboat net and compare.

Well i have just had a quick look through the first 50 going down the list in order. And i have to say i read them differently. The majority are not listed with times. A few, about 7 had slow sinkings i described or 5 minutes.

Most were not listed with times. Also this is a tiny tiny cross section of ships. One thing i see is that all those with high sinking times have high survival rates! Notice that, then take the survival rate for merchant navy overall and its not as good.

I would guess that you dont see listings of the ships sinking in a minute because most, if not all of the crew died.

It would be cool if someone who believes the game is wrong (burdon of proof is on the accuser in england lol) could collate all the u-boat net stats. It wouldnt prove much either way since its so few ships, and will no doubt be from slower sinkings due to survivals. But i dont think your stats would be as high as you think.

One thing i did notice which suprised me, and obviously doesnt happen in the game is a couple of ships with brocken back sinking in 30 minutes. I would have thought they would sink immediatly!

CRULL
03-28-2005, 07:58 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by hauitsme:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>CRULL:
The main purpose of this game is to make money <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
This is NOT Sub Tycoon! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

In a way it is The only reason we even have SH3 is because SH2 made some money.
Whether you want to believe it or not.

Pr0metheus 1962
03-28-2005, 08:25 AM
I just did an examination of the merchant ship losses listed at Uboat.net. Here are the results of 40 torpedo (torpedo only - no gunfire) sinkings that listed a sinking time period after the last torpedo hit the ship:

Fastest sinking time: under 1 minute
Average (median) sinking time: 10 minutes
Average (mean) sinking time: 78 minutes
Longest sinking time: 37 hours
75% of ships sank in less than one hour
25% of ships sank in a minute or less

In this case, the proper average is the median, since the mean average is skewed by one ship in the sample which took 37 hours to sink. The second longest took only 2 hours and 11 minutes.

So it can be seen from these statistics that ships often sank fast, but the median shows us that the majority of ships should not be sinking anywhere near as fast as the ships in the game. If sinking times are to be realistic, half of the ships we sink should take more than ten minutes to sink, and the range should include immediate sinkings and sinkings that take over 2 hours. That just isn't happening. Currently I would estimate the median average sinking time in the game to be under a minute. The range is correct, but the average is heavily skewed.

One interesting thing I noted, was that one ship, the Anne Hutchinson, was split in half after being torpedoed. Even so, the front half was towed into port. It just goes to show that even the largest holes don't necessarily mean a ship will sink. Here's a photo:

http://uboat.net/allies/ships/photos/am/anne_hutchinson.jpg

HeibgesU999
03-28-2005, 09:00 AM
The 2 Merchants that Otto Kretschmer sank which I described earlier as having sunk instantly and in 40 seconds. Here is the description of the 2 merchants sunk before that.

October 18, 1940
2330hrs
Bow shot at large freighter. The vessel zig-zagged, with the result that the torpedo passed in front of her, and instead hit her even bigger neighbor after a run of about 1740yds. The ship about 7000t, was hit below the foremast, and sank quickly by the bows with, I presume, 2 holds flooded.
2358hrs
Bow shot at a large freighter approx 6000t. Range 750yds. Hit below foremast. The explosion of the torpedo was immediately followed by a high sheet of flame, and and explosin which ripped the ship opened, and left a cloud of smoke 600ft high.

So the 4 ships that Silent Otto sank consecutively on October 18-19, 1940
Merchant 1 7000t Sank Quickly
Merchant 2 6000t Disintegrated
Merchat 3 6000t Sank Immediately
Merchant 4 7000t Sank 40 seconds

Pr0metheus 1962
03-28-2005, 09:13 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by HeibgesU999:
So the 4 ships that Silent Otto sank consecutively on October 18-19, 1940
Merchant 1 7000t Sank Quickly
Merchant 2 6000t Disintegrated
Merchat 3 6000t Sank Immediately
Merchant 4 7000t Sank 40 seconds <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Firstly, those two examples don't give precise times for the sinkings. Anyway, a few examples don't really prove anything. We already know that sinkings in under a minute were possible - that's not in question. What we need to know is whether they were as routine as the game suggests they were. The fact is, such sinking times were not routine: my research shows that they only occurred in about 25% of cases. Kretschmer was just lucky (if you can say such a thing was lucky) in getting four such sinkings in a row.

DRB_Hookech0
03-28-2005, 09:19 AM
I'm reading "Convoy" by Martin Middlebrooke right now. It depicts the laregest Unterseeboot operation of the war, March 1943. 3 convoys, SC122 (slow) HX229 and HX229A (fast and fast/expensive) run into 42 Uboots in the Air Gap in the north atlantic.

After shadowing the convoy for over 24 hours, the night attacks began on Convoy HX229 (38 merchants), escourted by 5 escourts, once darkness fell. The 1st attack by U603 used 2 FAT and 2 Ge7's. One connected with Elin K, a Norwigean ship that was at the head of the second Starboard (inside) column. The ship went down in 4 minutes. By the time the 3rd ship in the column past it, she was standing on her tail with the bow in the air. She sank so fast that the escourt CO could not get to the bridge fast enough to even see the flares or red mast head (both signals of a ship being torpedoed).

Over that night several ships went down in similar fasion. But others, like a Norwegin filled with Cotton, went low in the water but stayed afloat. The crew, in life boats stayed close to it, if it was afloat in the morning, the master thought to board and see if it could be saved.

3 Liberty ships got hit, 2 went down, well one could have been saved, but the crew bailed out (their 1st convoy as a rookie crew) and the 3rd half the crew bailed (rookie crew) and the other half worked to save the boat but lost steerage and the ship started these large circles in the water, almost hiting many lifeboats in the water. Meanwhile a large converted whaling processing boat converted to tanker, was hit...erupted in flame but stayed afloat for a long time, all but 3 of her crew made it off.

Now in tis game, I have seen all everyone else has seen, and for the most part I likehow it is now. 80% of the boats I hit, I break their keels and they go down fast. Others require a 2nd torp, but they go down as well.

Pr0metheus 1962
03-28-2005, 09:33 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by DRB_Hookech0:
I'm reading "Convoy" by Martin Middlebrooke right now. It depicts the laregest Unterseeboot operation of the war, March 1943. 3 convoys, SC122 (slow) HX229 and HX229A (fast and fast/expensive) run into 42 Uboots in the Air Gap in the north atlantic... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'm not sure why people are quoting anecdotal information as if it's compelling evidence. Small amounts of information can be very misleading. That's why we have to use the biggest sample possible to find a true average and a range. Single actions don't show us anything except what is possible. They don't give us a range of probability. If I say that 6 astronauts have landed on the moon, it doesn't mean that most astronauts land on the moon. Similarly, one convoy action doesn't necessarily give results that hold true for all torpedo sinkings.

You might 'like' how the game is, but if it doesn't fit within a range of what's likely (not just what's possible) it isn't realistic. What you or I 'like' has nothing to do with realism, and when we choose 'realistic sinking times' that selection should give us realistic sinking times, not sinking times that we 'like'. The unrealistic setting exists for those who don't like realistic sinking times.

HeibgesU999
03-28-2005, 09:39 AM
If you are a historian, a KTB is considered a very strong Primary Source. Probably the best source for information on uboat operations.

That and reports from Convoy Commanders.

Hopefully, Uboat.net bases its findings on Primary and not Seconday Sources.

In fact these are probably just about the only Primary Sources available for this information.

I fully agree that the mix of ship sinking is weighted heavily towards the fast sinking, but this is probably a design issue to get stuff out of the way.

If you use the Uboat Commanders Handbook for SH3, you are following SOP and finishing the merchants off quickly with Fan Shooting.

"Better to Destroy Little than Damage Much."

If you act like a real uboat commander, and put multiple shots into targets, and deal the "deathblow" (I loaned my friend my U.Kdt.Hdb so I can't look up the word the Unterseebootswaffe used) ASAP, this is actually a very minor issue, and only affects ships that might have sunk after you lost sight of the convoy.

So really the only effect of this would be to raise tonnage.

Can something that raises tonnage in a subsim, where tonnages are always crazy, be said to make it more realistic.

So by increasing the "realism" of the deviation of merchant sinking times, you decrease the "realism" of the whole campaign.

A.K.Davis
03-28-2005, 09:56 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Beeryus:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by DRB_Hookech0:
I'm reading "Convoy" by Martin Middlebrooke right now. It depicts the laregest Unterseeboot operation of the war, March 1943. 3 convoys, SC122 (slow) HX229 and HX229A (fast and fast/expensive) run into 42 Uboots in the Air Gap in the north atlantic... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'm not sure why people are quoting anecdotal information as if it's compelling evidence. Small amounts of information can be very misleading. That's why we have to use the biggest sample possible to find a true average and a range. Single actions don't show us anything except what is possible. They don't give us a range of probability. If I say that 6 astronauts have landed on the moon, it doesn't mean that most astronauts land on the moon. Similarly, one convoy action doesn't necessarily give results that hold true for all torpedo sinkings.

You might 'like' how the game is, but if it doesn't fit within a range of what's likely (not just what's possible) it isn't realistic. What you or I 'like' has nothing to do with realism, and when we choose 'realistic sinking times' that selection should give us realistic sinking times, not sinking times that we 'like'. The unrealistic setting exists for those who don't like realistic sinking times. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think you misunderstand the term anecdotal. Even though you have a larger range at uboat.net, I believe those times are mostly based on anecdotal evidence (someone who witnessed the sinking). The example form "Convoy" gives you 5 anecdotes of sinking times. Uboat.net gives you 40. Neither would allow you to calculate scientifically the actual mean or median sinking time for ships hit by torpedos. There are too many unrecorded variables.

However, if the game wishes to aim for an average time, 10 minutes would be great for the "realistic sinking times" option. If not selected, make the average 30-60 seconds.

Pr0metheus 1962
03-28-2005, 09:56 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by HeibgesU999:
If you are a historian, a KTB is considered a very strong Primary Source. Probably the best source for information on uboat operations.

That and reports form Convoy Commanders. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'm not saying that they aren't good sources. What I'm saying is that you're using them to try to show something that they cannot show. However good a source or an individual report is, it can't do what you're trying to do with it. A single report only shows facts from that single experience. It doesn't say anything about what's average, what the range of experiences are, or what's usual. For that, you need a good sample. You have to bring statistics together from a large number of anecdotes. If you don't do that, you're liable to extrapolate based on data that is unusual, and that will lead you to think that the unusual was commonplace when it wasn't.

I don't know how to explain this to you better than that. If you don't understand what I'm saying you should get hold of some books on how to use statistics. Good ones are "Why do Buses Come in Threes" by Rob Eastaway and "How to Lie With Statistics" (which actually tells us how to recognise real stats from bogus ones) by Darrell Huff.

Pr0metheus 1962
03-28-2005, 10:08 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by A.K.Davis:
The example form "Convoy" gives you 5 anecdotes of sinking times. Uboat.net gives you 40. Neither would allow you to calculate scientifically the actual mean or median sinking time for ships hit by torpedos. There are too many unrecorded variables. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I agree. What's really needed are statistics from every single sinking, gathered by impartial observers. However, that's not available. What we have are a few anecdotes from people who noticed the time it took to sink a ship they were witness to, and this might very well be skewed by the fact that people tend to over-report the unusual and under-report the expected. However, my point is that 40 anecdotes taken as a sample are vastly more likely to give a reliable figure than 5.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>However, if the game wishes to aim for an average time, 10 minutes would be great for the "realistic sinking times" option. If not selected, make the average 30-60 seconds. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I agree.

CaptainRadish
03-28-2005, 11:32 AM
Let me ask you people one question: does it really matter?

If for no other reason, it seems as though you get no credit for the kill if you're not in the area when it sinks. So having truely realistic sinkings (whether they actually are or not) would actually be rather counterproductive.

Think about it this way: would you rather have ships sink in 24hours normally and force you to wait around to watch, or have ships that sink rather quickly and give you the tonnage so you can concentrate on other things, like finding the next convoy.

I don't even bother to watch the sinkings anymore, really. I personally think watching the ships sink is rather fun, but I don't really get into a tiffy if the ships don't linger on the surface for hours and hours.

The debate over whether these times are realistic is (as we can see from the debate) open to a great degree of speculation. There are a milliad of variables which dictate how quickly a ship would sink -- not all of which are modeled in the game or really can be. You have to take into account weather, cargo, amount of damage, type, location, etc, etc, etc, ad infinitum. It very well may be possible that 95% of ships torpedoed during WW2 may have sunk in under a minute. It is quite possible the opposite is true. Unless one of us was acutally there, there is no real way to tell.

p.s. as far as Hunt for Red October is concerned, I realise it's fiction. However, any naval architect could tell you, if the torpedo struck a real life Russian boomer (which are built incredibly rugged) the same way it struck the October, it probably would not sink either. It's pretty clear you didn't read the book as Clancy gives a very good explaination for why the sub didn't sink. I highly recommend it, though, for any subsimmer.

CaptainRadish
03-28-2005, 11:34 AM
Rather than be negative about an aspect of the game that seems to be completely open to speculation, go hunt some convoys! I know that's what I'm gonna do http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Pr0metheus 1962
03-28-2005, 11:49 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by CaptainRadish:
Let me ask you people one question: does it really matter?... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sure it does. The developers thought it mattered enough that they put in a realism option for it. If they put it in it should work properly. It certainly matters to me and all the others who have posted requesting that it be fixed. If it didn't matter we wouldn't have a thread about it. One of the big things I was looking forward to with this game was just taking in the atmosphere as a ship slowly sank. You can't do that if each ship takes 5 to 10 seconds.

The fact is, if it doesn't matter to you, that's fine by me - you don't have to have realistic sinking times if you don't want them - you have that option. The thing is, the option I would prefer to use is broken.

Pr0metheus 1962
03-28-2005, 11:53 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by CaptainRadish:
Rather than be negative about an aspect of the game that seems to be completely open to speculation, go hunt some convoys! I know that's what I'm gonna do http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

It's not open to speculation. The sinking times are wrong. The fact that some people don't accept the facts doesn't mean that they have a point. Opinions are only valid if they relate to fact. If someone says the moon is made of cheese it doesn't mean that the subject is open to debate. All it means is that the person making such a statement is either monumentally ignorant or off his rocker.

Also, talking about improving the game experience is not 'being negative'. In fact it's the single most positive thing a person can do. If you think seeking to improve a game is 'negative' perhaps you'd prefer to play AoD. After all, doesn't the existence of SH3 come out of criticism of earlier sub sims? Without constructive criticism this game wouldn't exist.

CaptainRadish
03-28-2005, 11:55 AM
And again, as I said earlier, it is impossible to determine whether this feature is broken or not. I have never unchecked "Realistic sinking times," so I can't say what the game considers unrealistic.

But you can't say definitively what is a realistic sinking time and what is not. Common sense rarely factors in to warfare.

I'm not belittling this debate. In fact, I'm enjoying it. I'm just saying that it is impossible to determine to any real degree whether the sinkings in the game are unrealistic or not.

Pr0metheus 1962
03-28-2005, 12:00 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by CaptainRadish:
...you can't say definitively what is a realistic sinking time and what is not... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sure you can. If a ship sinks in half a second, throwing itself to the depths at a speed of 600mph, that isn't realistic because it doesn't measure up to reality. Similarly, if 90% of ships in the game sink within a minute, that's not realistic because in reality most ships took over 10 minutes to sink. I'm not sure how you could possibly think otherwise, given the evidence I've already shown. The reality is quite clear, as is the fact that the game isn't realistic in this regard. Some people are refusing to accept the facts, but that doesn't mean they have a point.

CaptainRadish
03-28-2005, 12:02 PM
You can't really state that it's a fact that the sinking times are wrong. You are basing this fact off of statistics that may very well be wrong.

What would be more proper to say, and a statement I would be perfectly willing to accept and not refute, is: "Based upon statistics I found, common sense, and my experiences the sinking times are wrong. However, I am open to the possibility that they are correct and that I'm wrong myself."

Saying the sinking times are wrong is like saying all cars are convertibles because 90% of the 25% of the statistics of the cars in Miami are convertibles. You have to take statistics with a grain of salt.

Pr0metheus 1962
03-28-2005, 01:12 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by CaptainRadish:
You can't really state that it's a fact that the sinking times are wrong. You are basing this fact off of statistics that may very well be wrong. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You can't say that the statistics may be wrong unless you have reason for thinking that to be the case. If you think they're wrong, show me. Otherwise you're just searching for any excuse to ignore the facts.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Saying the sinking times are wrong is like saying all cars are convertibles because 90% of the 25% of the statistics of the cars in Miami are convertibles. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's precisely what my opponents in this argument are doing. How can you take their side in this when you must be able to see that their statistics have exactly the same problem as your example? I mean, given the example you posted, how can you possibly not see how their argument is flawed?

Anyway, I think this discussion has run its course. I've done all I can to explain why the game's 'realistic' sinking times are unrealistic. Some people choose to believe they aren't, no matter what evidence is shown to them: that's the nature of faith, but it doesn't make it convincing.

CaptainRadish
03-28-2005, 01:52 PM
I'm not saying you're wrong and I'm right. I'm simply trying to state that there is no definitive answer to this question.

That you chose to be bull-headed about this topic is fine -- I mean bull-headedness runs in my family -- but you can't ignore the fact that there is no valid way of proving this point one way or the other. Statistics only go so far.

uncle_newt
03-28-2005, 02:13 PM
You know Beeryus if it bothers you that much, don't play the game. Sheesh. I guess you could also say it's not realistic because there's no little guys on fire waving their arms around and jumping overboard into a sea filled with burning oil.

The ships go down in a myriad of interesting and exciting ways. It looks right, it sounds right and it feels right.

CaptainRadish
03-28-2005, 02:16 PM
Thank you, uncle_newt. I agree with you fully. It really is not a big deal, I think. There haven't been truely 100% realistic sinkings ever in all the sub games I've played (and I've played a lot). To question this is moot. One cannot prove this one way or the other. Just go play the game and have fun! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

A.K.Davis
03-28-2005, 03:24 PM
The important point here is that there is a realism option to turn off and on "realistic sinking times." Obviously the developers considered it important, otherwise they would not have added the option. However...

Step 1: determine what, if any, difference there is between "realistic sinking times" on and "realistic sinking times" off.

Step 2: Compare these results to the best historical data available.

Mashiki_a
03-28-2005, 03:28 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Beeryus:
How many of all your sinkings went down less than a minute after getting hit by the killing blow? How many took considerably longer? As I said, it's not that long-term sinkings don't happen, it's that they don't happen anywhere near enough. 90% of sinkings should take more than 20 minutes. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Let me think. Over my total carreer for my first Uboat I had 217k tones(39-Aug 1940), with a wide range of ships, tankers, cargo and destroyers being the most. I'd say around 45-50% took more then 20mins. I figure that's fair enough since on average the rest were direct kills or less then 15mins(about 20%), figure the rest went down hard and fast in less then 5mins.

I get your point however, perhaps I'm not as lucky or perhaps I'm more sparing on my ammo. If I put 20 HE rounts into a ship under the waterline I'll sink it in 5 mins. If I put 5 or 10 in and take out the prop, it'll go down in a few hours. Not counting the sea conditions.

edit: If I hit the bow with a torp it'll take hours to sink, if it'll sink at all with a C3. Hit the drives or prop you can sometimes do enough damage and it'll go down in hours, not always. Hit the ballast with a single torp and it's almost always a gonner. Same with the engine room or fuel tanks. Get too high in rough seas and it'll hit mid-way on and that's no good. Anywhere along the hull, it's 50/50 if you've done enough damage and the angle.

horrido1962_
03-28-2005, 04:38 PM
The problem with anecdotal evidence is that the increbile things get talked about - not the average. Simple as that.

Thanks Beeyus, your analysis should put this to bed.

blue_76
03-28-2005, 04:44 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Beeryus:
I just did an examination of the merchant ship losses listed at Uboat.net. Here are the results of 40 torpedo (torpedo only - no gunfire) sinkings that listed a sinking time period after the last torpedo hit the ship:

Fastest sinking time: under 1 minute
Average (median) sinking time: 10 minutes
Average (mean) sinking time: 78 minutes
Longest sinking time: 37 hours
75% of ships sank in less than one hour
25% of ships sank in a minute or less

In this case, the proper average is the median, since the mean average is skewed by one ship in the sample which took 37 hours to sink. The second longest took only 2 hours and 11 minutes.

So it can be seen from these statistics that ships often sank fast, but the median shows us that the majority of ships should not be sinking anywhere near as fast as the ships in the game. If sinking times are to be realistic, half of the ships we sink should take more than ten minutes to sink, and the range should include immediate sinkings and sinkings that take over 2 hours. That just isn't happening. Currently I would estimate the median average sinking time in the game to be under a minute. The range is correct, but the average is heavily skewed.

One interesting thing I noted, was that one ship, the Anne Hutchinson, was split in half after being torpedoed. Even so, the front half was towed into port. It just goes to show that even the largest holes don't necessarily mean a ship will sink. Here's a photo:

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

good job! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif I took a course in probability and statistics in college and it looks like you did your homework and from my own experience in the game, most ships sank less than the median 10 mins. if we take a larger sample, this would slightly deviate, but i don't expect it to do so by very much.. 40 torpedoes seems like a good representative sample.

horrido1962_
03-28-2005, 04:47 PM
Oh - and by the way - the people who want this chaged the most are probably the people that love this game the most. We want it realistic. Why is it that some people can not think objectively. Rose colored glasses? People wake up! We all love this sim - some of us just want it to be more realistic, becuase not only we we love it more, it will sell more copies! Do you really think we would spend this much time debateing if we thought the sim was THAT flawed? The balance is WAY in favor of the sim. But this torp thing would be so easy to fix, and unless it is recognised, it might not be fixed. Look at the data - its right there in front of you. Go to Uboat.net. You'll love the read - all kinds of interesting things.


Lets not get into the debate of how few torps it takes to sink most ships LOL 'Cause thats another problem.

mattk4ya
03-29-2005, 11:58 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Phantom_Flyer:
The game gratifys all my expectations in the sinking dept.

I fired 3 fish into a light cruiser and it was listing to around 25 degrees, slowely listing more and more, it took around 1 hour to finaly roll over and sink, had the same sort of stuff with fleet AC carriers aswel, heavy listing and then a final roll + sink.

With regards to the C2's being tough ive had no problems really, in general a couple of fish at most seems to down them pretty well, if your lucky a well placed shot to the middle section seems to work well.

As to whether its realistic or not I dont know, im not a submariner or expert on aquatics or WW2 stuff, all I care about is that this game rocks and gives me much pleasure when im playing it, sure its got some gripes and small problems but sadly all people around here seem to do is ***** about X Y and Z, then add the trolls and its turned into the usual flame SH3 thread.

One word of warning - regardless of what you people believe the constant negativity amoungst people around here DOES have a negative impact on a dev team, and usualy at YOUR cost, I work in this industry and I know that the willingness to put in extra hours and make things extra special soon starts to dissappear once you get to these stages of moaning and constant *****ing, give the guys some Kudos here and show a level of appreciation for what they have acheived so far and im sure they would bend over that little bit extra to satisfy and rectify any demands, its about time people grew up around these support forums and that doesnt just apply to SH3, its prevalent around all the simulation forums no matter whether its racing, flight or naval.

For the last paragraph you wrote;
My appreciation is the $50 I spent for this game!

Mark. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

mattk4ya
03-30-2005, 12:11 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Dominicrigg:
Ok to put this thread to bed once and for all. For those too lazy/gun happy ect to notice realistic ship sinking time, here is proof!

5 mins
http://www.imageshack.us

50 mins
http://www.imageshack.us

60 mins
http://www.imageshack.us

Now i go to map since i dont want to sit for an hour or longer watching

opp i get a message neutral sunk
http://www.imageshack.us

Same view as originals
http://www.imageshack.us


7 hour sinking Voila, touche, QED.
Now some people owe some other people an apology!

Now all we need is someone to call me a lier. lol <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


nobody's going to call you a liar but what you had there was 1 in a 1000! Yes we all agree that there are ships that do sink in a couple of hours but it is soooooooooooo very darn few! that is not realistic! And of course there are some of you that give me real life examples of how a ship sunk in seconds, and I agree to that but what nobody gets it that ships that did sink in a few seconds was also sooooooooo very darn few(in real life). I just think that the DEV switched what was realistic. Bottom line;
If it says realistic sinking, make it realistic then their would be no complaints. And if their would be no complaints, there would be no improvment. I'm not flaming, I'm complaining so you, myself and others can enjoy it more.

mattk4ya
03-30-2005, 12:35 AM
Oh, BTW Props to Beerus