map contacts ON/OFF

[Stoerte]

I think this is the single most deceiding factor when it comes to difficulty. With map contacts on manual targeting is pretty easy and you will hit almost every shoot if you're not completly new to sub games. I think this should influence the difficulty setting much more than 4%, more like 40%. It's a total different game with or without map contatcs. For me it's much more difficult (and not for relaxing gameplay), but also much more intense.

[er.tz]

Originally posted by Colonel Sanders Lite:

I'm more talking about tactical maneuvering problems than I am strategic movement. What I'm saying is - there's very rarely any tactical reason to know the exact location of your boat. You only need to know relative distance and bearing. There are exceptions, but they are very rare.

I doubt they didnt care about their exact position, BDU was clear about the assessment of the speed, course, and position of the enemy, and you cant do that if you dont know your own position.

Accurate positioning was vital for navigating the often treacherous waters of the Atlantic. U-boats operated in vast areas where familiar landmarks were absent, making precise navigation essential to avoid hazards and ensure safe travel.

U-boats often operated far from home ports and needed to understand their location relative to enemy shipping lanes, naval bases, and their own bases. This information helped them plan ambushes on merchant ships and avoid detection by Allied forces.

Positions were often necessary for assessing weather and sea conditions accurately, as these could significantly impact their operations.

Being aware of their position also helped U-boat crews gauge the distance to target ships, calculate attack runs, and decide when to dive to avoid depth charges.

U-boats often operated independently or in small packs, so knowing their position relative to other U-boats helped coordinate group attacks.

In sum, precise positioning was vital for the overall effectiveness and survival of U-boats during the war.

[[XIII]Opsec]

Originally posted by er.tz:

Being aware of their position also helped U-boat crews gauge the distance to target ships, calculate attack runs, and decide when to dive to avoid depth charges.

None of that requires knowing where you are on a map... It's all relative to your Uboat.

[Tikigod]

Originally posted by Stoerte:

I think this is the single most deceiding factor when it comes to difficulty. With map contacts on manual targeting is pretty easy and you will hit almost every shoot if you're not completly new to sub games. I think this should influence the difficulty setting much more than 4%, more like 40%. It's a total different game with or without map contatcs. For me it's much more difficult (and not for relaxing gameplay), but also much more intense.

So gave it a shot and started a new campaign with no map markers, also threw in a few mods that adjusted boat fresh air capacity, slightly increased crew capacity and made crew discipline harder to manage.

First patrol out in a IIA, tracking targets to work out a accurate intercept approach was certainly quite a bit more inaccurate with me making a few errors in estimated speed and distance (Really wasn't expecting a Hydrophone contact estimated to be going medium speed to actually be going something like 16-18km/h lol)

Also used this campaign as a motivator to take my first proper crack at entirely manual fire solution calculations via the attack periscope, and whilst my first 1.6km distance attack missed (I think my AOB calculation was incorrect), the 2nd launch was spot on.

Then intercepted and sunk a 2nd freighter with 1 launch.


So far I'd say the main thing I've found that has changed the most is getting a accurate heading on more distant contacts to work out a intercept point.

Actually closing in and killing the target once I have visual confirmation of their target feels pretty much the same. Although I do feel more incentive to perform my own target calculations now.


Edit:
Oh and also on my first attack firing at my target 1.6km away, just as the torpedo was 10 seconds from impact the attack periscope UI reported that the target was starting to perform torpedo evasive manoeuvres.

As I was 1.6km away, stationary and down at periscope depth, I'd take that as pretty solid confirmation that targets can and will in rare situations detect torpedoes in transit. Albeit probably too late to really do anything about it.

[er.tz]

Originally posted by XIIIOpsec:

Originally posted by er.tz:

Being aware of their position also helped U-boat crews gauge the distance to target ships, calculate attack runs, and decide when to dive to avoid depth charges.

None of that requires knowing where you are on a map... It's all relative to your Uboat.

Of course but i have said help, so, while much of the operational aspect can be relative, having an understanding of where you are in a broader geographic context can still play a significant role in effective submarine operations.

[Colonel Sanders Lite]

Originally posted by er.tz:

In sum, precise positioning was vital for the overall effectiveness and survival of U-boats during the war.

Nah. I mean sort of, but not in the "we must maintain our exact position on the map accurate to within 100m at all times" sort of sense.

Something like knowing were you are within like 10 miles for navigational purposes exceeds all those requirements 99% of the time. That's basically just updating your position hourly.


It is *possible* to maintain a super granular plot of your own position, but at a certain point, it's a whole lot of work for no benefit whatsoever.

Maneuvering boards are a *fast* and accurate way to solve tactical navigational problems and they were used by literally every navy in both world wars.


Edit - Well... maybe not the Japanese. Their historically insular nature lead to a whole lot of oddities and they may or may not have had some bizarre unique way of doing things. I haven't looked into it tbh.

[Colonel Sanders Lite]

Originally posted by er.tz:

Originally posted by XIIIOpsec:

Originally posted by er.tz:

Being aware of their position also helped U-boat crews gauge the distance to target ships, calculate attack runs, and decide when to dive to avoid depth charges.

None of that requires knowing where you are on a map... It's all relative to your Uboat.

Of course but i have said help,

It doesn't help with that. It makes a whole lot of workload for the guys working the charts for no accuracy benefit.

[[XIII]Opsec]

Originally posted by Colonel Sanders Lite:

Originally posted by er.tz:

Of course but i have said help,

It doesn't help with that. It makes a whole lot of workload for the guys working the charts for no accuracy benefit.

Once you found a Target you could work out the entire targeting solution on a scratch sheet of paper. Marking your U-boat and their relative position from your U-Boat and then updating your U-boats position on the paper based on your speed and time elapsed while updating their position based on statimeter and bearing checks... Your actual position is of no consequence.

[er.tz]

Originally posted by XIIIOpsec:

Originally posted by Colonel Sanders Lite:

It doesn't help with that. It makes a whole lot of workload for the guys working the charts for no accuracy benefit.

Once you found a Target you could work out the entire targeting solution on a scratch sheet of paper. Marking your U-boat and their relative position from your U-Boat and then updating your U-boats position on the paper based on your speed and time elapsed while updating their position based on statimeter and bearing checks... Your actual position is of no consequence.

You are updating your U-boats position on the paper, so yes it has consequence if you move and you dont update. In the end that is precise positioning just in a relative context.

[Colonel Sanders Lite]

Originally posted by XIIIOpsec:

then updating your U-boats position on the paper based on your speed and time elapsed

You don't need to do this part. Assuming you didn't change course, you can keep yourself at the origin point heading on bearing 0. It's just pretty basic geometry.

[Colonel Sanders Lite]

Originally posted by er.tz:

Originally posted by XIIIOpsec:

Once you found a Target you could work out the entire targeting solution on a scratch sheet of paper. Marking your U-boat and their relative position from your U-Boat and then updating your U-boats position on the paper based on your speed and time elapsed while updating their position based on statimeter and bearing checks... Your actual position is of no consequence.

You are updating your U-boats position on the paper, so yes it has consequence if you move and you dont update.

And he is incorrect. See my previous comment.

[Stoerte]

Originally posted by er.tz:

Originally posted by Stoerte:

1) How can I tell from the hydrophone if a contact is moving away or towards me? For the range I use the H L M settings and guess the range based on the setting and the level of the noise, but I think that I miss something.

The hydrophone guy tells you if they are incoming or moving away if you put the mouse over the contacts in the left list you can see it. But you can do that yourself by marking positions every some minutes or by running fast to the markings.

Yes he did this with map contacts on, but now he just tells me the bearing not the distance.

[er.tz]

Originally posted by Stoerte:

Originally posted by er.tz:

The hydrophone guy tells you if they are incoming or moving away if you put the mouse over the contacts in the left list you can see it. But you can do that yourself by marking positions every some minutes or by running fast to the markings.

Yes he did this with map contacts on, but now he just tells me the bearing not the distance.

The aproximate distance of all contacts can be viewed on the left list of the hydrophone guy

[Mouse Rat]

there are two tools that will make no map contacts slightly easier.
one is the last option in the new control tool. it lets you get information about the target ship course. since you will have the same course .. so all you have to do is figure out ..your course.

after than is the ..distance. of which you can measure with the periscope.

so what you know is the ..bearing , distance and course.
so you can literally plot on map the enemy target location presently.

example: it's 010 , 6750m
put the point on that. then set up the course that you figured out earlier for the ship.

the main problem here is the distance calculation.

obviously closer it will become more accurate.. but still give you a rough idea of where the enemy target is located..
so you can set up an ambush.

after that is the exact same as you would do a drive by periscope only kill.
speed, aob , distance.

you can use the enemy ship structures and their angles to understand when the AOB is close to 90
then make sure you get the speed and understand also which side is left or right.

then kill.

[Stoerte]

Originally posted by er.tz:

Originally posted by Stoerte:

2) Even without map contacts I do a lot of painting on the map based on my observations. I try to measure the distance with the stadimeter and use this data together with the bearing to mark the point on the map. Then I do a 3:15 and repeat the process. Now I have two points and can draw a course and measure the enemies speed. If there is enough time I repeat the process. I measure the AOB at a given bearing on the map as well and check the speed again with the "normal" procedure. Then I send the data to the TDC and wait for the ship to pass the bearing I've measured and shoot.
It's pretty tedious and hs a margin of errors, mostly from not getting the distance right, resulting in false course and maybe false speed. Especially with higher waves I don't know where to exaclty put the stadimeter, because I can't see the waterline clearly. All in all I can hit targets which are not to far away ~1200m because, the miscalculations don't throw my aim off to far at this distance, but long shoots aren't working.
I know that many people guess the AOB and hit ships without the map painting and have pretty good results with this. I would really like to do this myself. Any tips?

You shouldnt do long shots, the recommended distance for all shots is 500- 1000m around. More distance is only advisable if the short distance shot is not posible because they would detect you (destroyers...). But they would detect you because your aproximation and positioning was bad.


The only visual shot that is not very hard to guest is the 90º shot (and it has the more margin of error for your benefit ) when you see the enemy ship completely horizontal to you and not too many grades away from your 0 position of periscope. Anyways i would never change a well plotted shot for a visual one. In the game manual (pages 121- 122) you have an explanation graphic to visually guest the AOB

Yes, I avoid long shots. I know something about the AOB guessing, i.e. you can check how far the masts that stand in a line are off and how the bridge can be seen. But I'm really not very good at this. I think in SH 3 or SH4 there were pictures in the recognition manual that showed the ships in 90°, 45° and 135° angles and I remeber reading that in the Pacific O'Kane was a master at this and was only 1° off by guessing.

[Tikigod]

Originally posted by Stoerte:

Originally posted by er.tz:

You shouldnt do long shots, the recommended distance for all shots is 500- 1000m around. More distance is only advisable if the short distance shot is not posible because they would detect you (destroyers...). But they would detect you because your aproximation and positioning was bad.


The only visual shot that is not very hard to guest is the 90º shot (and it has the more margin of error for your benefit ) when you see the enemy ship completely horizontal to you and not too many grades away from your 0 position of periscope. Anyways i would never change a well plotted shot for a visual one. In the game manual (pages 121- 122) you have an explanation graphic to visually guest the AOB

Yes, I avoid long shots. I know something about the AOB guessing, i.e. you can check how far the masts that stand in a line are off and how the bridge can be seen. But I'm really not very good at this. I think in SH 3 or SH4 there were pictures in the recognition manual that showed the ships in 90°, 45° and 135° angles and I remeber reading that in the Pacific O'Kane was a master at this and was only 1° off by guessing.

Calculating AOB is my main hurdle shifting to calculating target information manually as well. Personally I found the relative mode toggle included in the in-game calculation tool where you set AOB based on the observed bearing of the target from your own perspective a huge help.

It's what I ended up using when scoring my mid-ship impact from 1.6km away on my 2nd torp launch after my original AOB calculation seemed to be way off.