Quote:
Originally Posted by LeopardDriver
I tried to make it as realistic as possible and did a lot of testing. You can still detect the 212A with active sonar, as can be seen in the duels. The sub is kind of balanced out in the campaign with the low ammo count (only 13 torps) and the low speed (20 knots is official, but I would say 23 at least is realistic, maybe even 25).
At long range of the Seehecht just achived the world record for a torpedo with about 140 km acutually! So 75 km for the normal variant is ok. Also the sub needs to be played like that: hide and attack from pretty long range, and the Seehecht is good for that (but it is slower than the Mk 48 for sure).
 |
Don't get me wrong, I'm not really complaining about the stats.
In the end, it's all speculation anyway. If about half of what is said about the 212 A is true, I guess it would be pretty much undetectable in 1984. The problem is it's not very engaging to play it as it is; some enemy subs weren't able to detect me on active at under 2 KYD distance. I have never been in danger in this submarine. Just fire your 13 torpedoes at enemies who never see them coming, go back to base to rearm, rinse, repeat.
Quote:
|
Dialed back the stats of the 212A, it was really overpowered. (SelfNoise changed from 25 to 70, ActiveSonarReflection changed from 4 to 15)
|
Considering the stats of the other newer subs like the Seawolf, I think 70 and 15 are too high - that makes it easier to detect than the Seawolf, which sits at 56 and 15. Considering the difference in size alone, the 212 A should be harder to detect on active and I think it should be harder on passive as well. I'll play around a bit on 30/35 and 10, I think