Quote:
Originally Posted by Kazuaki Shimazaki II
So in all THREE scenarios the enemy actually has some reason to at least suspect you are there.
|
The point of an ambush is that the enemy does not know/suspect you are there.
What makes you assume they have valid reason -
all the time - to assume your presence?
That basically comes down to
"Let's ping 24/7" because
"They could be here!".
Again, what are the sources for this ongoing
"this was their doctrine!"?
Before we can't settle that this was or was not "the" Soviet doctrine at that time, we don't really need to debate it further, I think.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kazuaki Shimazaki II
I said the enemy suspected you are there, so they are doing active sonar searches. As you mention, active sonar searches aren't a panacea, so they don't always detect you, which is realistic.
|
See above, and they do always detect you.
Not with the first ping necessarily, but sooner or later they will, except distance is growing, then they may never detect you, but mostly I find the enemy approaching me/closing distance.
However, since sending a fish down the first active-intercept bearing is enough in CW in very most cases, it doesn't even matter.
It shows how lackluster this tactic is, though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kazuaki Shimazaki II
Besides, while it is possible to set ambushes if they nicely tell you the guys are sending Commando Teams to Trondheim, if you are told that they are going to a larger area say the "Norwegian Sea", it is harder to say exactly which patch of Norwegian Sea it'll be, so you'll have to move. And since you never know exactly when they'll decide to tell you your mission forecloses, there's always the time pressure.
|
Surface groups with AOR etc. go rather slow anyways, and your briefing always informs you they are leaving Murmansk, or an even further place, just now, or some hours ago, giving you more than enough time to flank-speed your way to the general area, cutting them off along the way.
It works very well for me. Not sure what else to tell you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kazuaki Shimazaki II
In other words, you don't really have a plan.
|
I'm saying how it is, not how I would like it to be.
Being in command of a Victor-I facing an LA class submarine is a garbage situation to be in anyways, no matter what you do.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kazuaki Shimazaki II
Seriously, if they don't do active sonar searches, the game is reduced to a relatively simple detection/counter-detection game, which you must win because you have the better sonar and quieter ship. All you have to do is keep the passive sonar value at below 0 which you usually have the acoustic advantage to do. It is that active sonar component, which often covers that part you'll prefer to close to get off better shots, that creates the uncertainty.
|
Where did I say enemy subs should
never use active sonar?
Right, I didn't - so why imply it?
Again, I argued that them doing it
all the time, is simply nonsensical, for reasons stated earlier - and so far not being challenged besides a broad and unsupported assumption that "they have reason to expect you" which I don't agree at all on considering the various tactical situations/encounters I had so far.
Also, why do other subsims don't do that and go for the silent apporach?
And why can fighting enemy submarines in these titles still be very challenging, even if you have the better boat?
Because these games require you to do more than just sending a fish down an active-intercept bearing, that's why, and because the enemy AI is, from what I witnessed, more effective.
Also, do we know the sensors in CW are authentic?
Maybe Russian submarines are under-modeled, or US subs over-modeled?
I'm not claiming either way, but -
how do we know?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kazuaki Shimazaki II
Frankly, I remember my enemies being a bit smarter than this, but anyway, if they did not ping, the result would have been the same. Sooner or later you will simply pick them up on the passive sonar, and your tactic seems to basically consist of firing Launch-on-Bearing snapshots and there's no reason to believe they would have been less accurate.
|
Exactly, because the AI is lacking - no matter if in active/passive encounters.
At least from my POV.