Manual TDC

[Muto]

I don't have any historical info for submerged subs. But the first 10,000/5,000 value I posted was for both subs and ships spotting SURFACED subs on clear moonlight and starlight nights respectively ... there apparently was no advantage to observing from either a sub's conning tower or from a surface vessel as far as being able to spot a surfaced sub in those conditions. I'm also assuming IJN Naval binoculars were 'standard' insofar as they were very probably British.

One thing to keep in mind though, is that many of those IJN subs were monstrosities ... absolutely huge ... so I'm not sure if the testimony I quoted in the previous post referred to visual testing the IJN did using their own subs, or whether that was actual experience in spotting American and British subs which yielded their data.

[Muto]

By the way, manual targeting WORKED! I couldn't believe it! Did my second and third patrols tonight with FrontFlotille, RUboat and 100% realism settings ... sank a C3 with two steam contact fish and a DD with an electric contact fish ... I fired at the C3 from about 1800 meters! Man was that a great feeling to see both torpedos hit right smack dab in the middle of that hull! The DD was a bit lucky ... I submerged when I first spotted him without getting a good bearing reading. Kept getting 'Target closing!' messages and started to sweat, especially after I jumped on the Hydrophone and heard those screws getting awfully loud. Took a peek, and there he was, 250 meters bearing 60 degrees to starboard and on course to pass right in front of my bow at a 90-degree AOB. I turned my boat 20 degrees port, all stop, and fired that fish right into his screws from 400 meters. Kaboom!

Great fun!

[Dominico Baggio]

The thing is, for uboats they are so low and so small, at distance they are very hard to see because of their tiny size and close up they are still very hard to see because you are looking for them against the sea.

From a Uboat you are looking at ships against the horizon, so its easier to pick them out, they would be a dark silouhette against the lighter horison, or opposite if it was a dark horison (As ships were grey usually)

This makes it easy in a uboat to see at over 6km at night, and virtually impossible to spot the uboats unless you are VERY vigilant. The game models this perfectly IMO because you can sail through convoys and not be seen, even at close range, but sometimes you are spotted, just as if one of the crew has become vigilant. This is why allies needed radar so desperatly and why radar changed the whole game, it switched the "visibility" advantage back to the British.

I dont think this aspect needs touching at all to be honest with you, doing so would make the game harder so if you are going for a hardcore game then change it, but that wouldnt be a realism mod, it would be a challenge mod or something.

[Shockwave74]

The real problem actually is not related to visibility in itself, but the fact you can spot in impossible visibility conditions with the WO.

That is the only thing that will be fixed as soon as we understand the formulas we have been supplied with and which we are already testing to these data u provided us with.

As of the visibility itself, it will be modelled as in real life, simple as that.

In the game in the pitchest night our WO mustn't see. That's all. If he can see, then so can we from the periscope. We are not going to model for the "challenge" we are going to model for the realism.

Current state of things is that WO calls a ship spotted at 7 km in the blackest night but when i go to periscope or to Uzo i can't see a damn thing.

Remember : removing crosshair means when you aim somewhere, that thing will not become RED. So you will *really* not see it at all.

Visibility factors take into account several different modifiers. This is why so far nobody was able to edit the WO capabilities. We are working on it but believe me, it is *very* hard thing to model.