Grey Wolves Frustration Fest-Resolved-Plus a Question

Seminole · Joined: 14 Sep 2002 Posts: 644

LIke I mentioned in a couple of threads I have had to be away from SHIII for some months. I was able to get back into play finally and over the last week I have been trying all the latest mods to see which ones appealled to me before I got deep into a career.

So yesterday , since GW 1.1 was released I decided would try Grey Wolves without the NYGM and Unified. mods. I uninstalled SHIII ,cleaned up the drive and reinstalled. I installed the JSMGE and tried to install GW 1.0 but much to my surprize it would not run. Surprized because over the past week I had installed it at least 3 times in conjunction with other mods...without a hitch. The problem it seemed to me was that instead of overwriting the Original SHIII files the GW files were instead creating new folders and subfolders within the SHIII files. I had not changed any settings in my WinRar program...or I would have blamed that....nor can I suspect that the JSMGE was to blame. No idea what was causing that. :shifty:

To make a long story short I ended up re- downloading GW super mod parts 1-6 plus uninstalling SHIII and reinstalling it at least 6 times yesterday. I even resorted to going file by file and copying the contents of each and every folder/subfolder/file from GW directly into the corresponding SHIII folder/sub folder. Tried the deleting SHIII folder in Documents before starting up trick. Nothing but nothing would make GW work! I was about pulling out my hair. :nope:

I got up at 5 am today and started all over from scratch....and finally GW installed and ran fine. Damn...go figure. I know for absolute certain that what I did today was exactly what I was attempting to do yesterday.. Yep

...and hed been for the past week.

Once I got GW 1.0 up and running I installed GW 1.1 and it too works fine...so I guess I am good to go.

I do have one question though.....I noticed there is a Armed Trawler fix linked in the originail GW mod sticky thread....so then ... is this fix still needed?....or did this fix get incorporated into either version 1.0 or 1.1.

gouldjg · Joined: 17 Mar 2005 Posts: 959 Location: Manchester UK

I believe it is in the 1.1. readme and has been installed so no need for seperate fix.

I know how you feel though, things tend to get a little messy with the rush.

vois2 · Joined: 06 Apr 2005 Posts: 313

Seminole,

You might remember that you and I are in the exact same place, having come back to SH3 after some months and needing to learn about GW, GWNYGMEUC, etc etc.

I'm pretty puzzled by all the trouble you had to go the GW 1.0 --> 1.1 route.

I do wonder, though, if after uninstalling all the previous stuff (strip out using JSGME) if it would have helped to just blank out your SH3 install folder ... and copy a fresh SH3 version in there. This of course would depend on having a blank, fresh copy of SH3 v1.0 (before the 1.4b patch).

I keep a copy of the virgin SH3 1.0 from the day I first installed it, and even before I ever ran the program. This has saved me a number of occasions. I just blank out my SH3 installation folder, and then copy back in those First Day files, and I have been fortunate to have zero frustrations.

i'm keeping an eye on GW1.1 and am thinking like you, to try JUST GW1.1 . I want to give them a month or so though to work out kinks.

Of course, now you have me wondering whether there is some sort of armed trawler flaw with my GW1.0 + NYGM + EUC install?

Seminole · Joined: 14 Sep 2002 Posts: 644

Seminole · Joined: 14 Sep 2002 Posts: 644

sober · Joined: 07 Jan 2006 Posts: 184 Location: australia

After reinstalling SH3 i forgot to apply the 1.4b patch and couldnt figure out what the hell was going on .

Seminole · Joined: 14 Sep 2002 Posts: 644

El-Fish · Joined: 13 Mar 2004 Posts: 36

[quote="Seminole"]

U-Bones · Joined: 23 Mar 2005 Posts: 56 Location: Ground Zero

[quote="El-Fish"]

vois2 · Joined: 06 Apr 2005 Posts: 313

I'm still using the GW1.0 + NYGM + EUC package. So far, I just love this package. I just ran out of torps on my second patrol (Nov '39) and so far with GW/NYGM/EUC I have not encountered a convoy yet, so I can't respond with regard to the 'visual sinking distance' parameter.

One thing I do notice is that I am receiving credit on captain's log (hotkey: K) as soon as it is determined that the ship will sink. (Even if the visual shows that the ship is 80% above water still.)

So I am inclined to think that this credit will be given in the same manner even if the target was in a convoy. We shall see.

I'm interested in GW 1.1 but going to wait a couple of weeks before moving to it. I like the dust to settle on new large mods before jumping in on them.

Seminole · Joined: 14 Sep 2002 Posts: 644

Never has worked that way with any sinkings I've done. Unless the targeted ship receives sufficient damage to trip the "ship destroyed" message you won't get credit for a sinking....and you won't get the ship destroyed message unless you are within a certain range.

Of course this is not peculiar to the NYGM mod but the slow sinking times(some times it is days) of NYMG makes it difficult to hang around in any convoy area, post attack, long enough to get the necessary message.....though with loners you can pull away a bit , submerge to periscope depth,cut your engines, and accelerate time until the ship goes down...even if it is days. You simply can't do that when attacking convoys with escorts.....and I never recall seeing an unescorted one.

Course it may be different if you play with realistic sinking times option off.... but I wouldn't know about that. Wink

vois2 · Joined: 06 Apr 2005 Posts: 313

I'm sure you're right about the NYGM convoy visual sinking thing, but it's just that I haven't hit any convoys yet during my young career in GW/NYGM/EUC.

The one thing which did surprise me (for loner attacks) was how quickly the 'K' log showed a kill during my six (so far) successful loner attacks. The ships were not close to sinking when I checked my 'K' log, so it might just be luck that they happened to flood quickly and their fate was sealed.

When I do come up on a convoy, I'll get to confirm the information you've conveyed. I am assuming of course that this means I can make my attack, and then follow the target from underneath using the hydrophone. The sound of a dying ship is easily distinguishable from other ship screws. One tactic which has worked well in the past is to position yourself vertically below the crippled target. This is easy to do if the target's forward motion has been reduced to zero. (Not so easy to do if the injured ship still has some power and steering...)

In this way, I could keep myself within visual range (probably 6km?) of the dying target.

On the other hand, if this tactic proves to be impossible due to surface destroyers, then it will completely change my long term tactics for convoys. Whereas I used to always sneak into the lanes and fire on the juicy middle targets right up close, I would need to start firing from a much larger distance away from outside of the lanes. (Again, this paragraph is necessary only if the visual sinking distance of NYGM proves to undo my earlier lane tactics.)