Question about SC mission for Dangerous Waters + RA

[FlyingTiger]

Hi folks,
So I am new to this whole game and I did read manuals and other guides to know my way around the sub. I am playing on severomorsk mission (dropping SEAL), with the FF pinging constantly and having to reach the destination at 2200 hours, I have to do at least 7 knots in the 688i. Upon reaching russian water, eventually, I got torpedoed, supposedly by surface ships. So, I deployed passive CM, because I think that torps from surface ships will be doing passive search first, then accelerated to around 10 knots, going sideway to escape torp's search cone. Then along the way, there were more TIW warnings (with my heading at 240, the torps bearings were on my aft, roughly 325- 340) so I dumped more CMs and accelerated to full speed. But in the end I got destroyed. Could anyone please tell me how do I deal with this situation? Thank you.

[FPSchazly]

This mission is not tuned very well for the 688(i). I tried it several times on my YouTube channel with no luck, and it actually spurred me to work on a full remastering of the 688(i) campaign, but no promises as to when that will be done.

[FlyingTiger]

So, playing as a seawolf is more feasible for this mission?
Is this FPSchazly on youtube? If so, I like your videos. Keep up the good work!.

P/s: there are 2 additional things I see in weapon loadout of US subs in RA, what are mystics? And is it possible to have the mk8 SDV attached and detached from ownship?

[FPSchazly]

Yes, that is me, thank you! I have not tried this mission in a Seawolf, but it should definitely be easier in a Seawolf.

The Mystic is one of the DSRVs, the other being the Avalon. I have never fiddled with the SDV, but I would expect it to detach (re: it should)

[FlyingTiger]

I tried loading them in a sub (688 AND seawolf), like wth other weapons but the number didn't change from 0 to 1 yet the total weapon count did change to full load. Did another with unloading, it got messy. So I wonder if that was how you do it with these mini subs or they are dependable on mission editor.

[FlyingTiger]

Feedback from playing Severomorsk with SW. I managed to dodge all the torps from russian patrol crafts and subs. Also managed to "sink" one kilo improved by friendly fire(it was a case of torp in the face, literally ). Arrived at drop off point at around 21:40, It takes approximately 5 minutes for SEAL prep so at 21:45, more or less, they were away. Yet I didn't get any message about SEAL inserted. My suspicion is the undetected non-crit goal. It seems to me, after reading the mission in editor (not yet familiar with it, I might interpret it wrongly) that the sub must be undetected to trigger the SEAL insertion success message. This would be a bit tricky if true, imo, even for SW as it proves to be a much better platform in this particular case.

[Heavy Rittles]

There's a trigger that should tell you when you've entered the dropoff point, like in the Akula campaign. That needs to fire before sending the seals can do anything. Problem is it doesn't for some reason.

Not sure if detection is the issue. I turned on truth after a while and all the track histories showed no reaction from enemy. I didn't see anything in the editor that would suggest it. In fact, there seems to be an ending with successful insertion and detection penalty.

The mission's very difficult in the first place because the kilos seem to always spot first. You do better by slipping around southeast at high speed than trying to be careful, but you would only know that by knowing where the kilos are, and you would only know that if you played it a dozen times or turned on truth...

[Wolfcat]

Hi, to my knowledge. Russian platforms and sensors have improved a lot in RA, especially modern ships such as Akula and Kilo. The missions you can get past by in vanilla version are no longer viable. Not sure if you have noticed this. In the first 2 missions of the SC campaign, if the Akula stays at anything below 3 knots, you will not be able to detect it, even in Seawolf or Virginia, until you can with in 4-3 nmi. I mean you can't even see the faint black line at the lowest frequency on narrow band (that's usually the first pace you can detect anything). Another advice I can give you is that you don't actually need arrive exactly on the insert point to launch SEAL. The range you can dump them is very far. I did a similar mission a while ago, where I simply ignore the circle on the map and launch the SEAL as far as I can. Remember they have their rubber boat and they can swim

Btw, I am in the process of converting the SC campaign by adding Virginia class subs as playable and adding a few twists of mine. I just finished the first 2 missions. I have tested a few times. They worked well. But some of the scripts are old and I have tons of questions to ask. Just wonder if any experts in the forum could help out. In addition, I need people help test out these missions.

[p7p8]

Wait for RA 1.46

SC campaign will be rebuilded.

I did some videos from testing Sub Command US campaign in RA 1.46. Some bugs on videos are fixed now.

[Wolfcat]

Would they fix those surface ships with VLS? Now VLS ships behave so badly. I have a scenario, where one Oscar II can single-handedly take out 2-3 Arleigh/Tincoder no sweat. Every time the sub launches a wave of 4-8 missiles, the ship would only halfheartedly launch 2-3 sm-2's and then just sit there watch doing nothing. After those 2-3 missiles missed or hit home, it would take it a while then launch another 2-3 sluggishly. Also, the SM-2's speed is only 960kts, that's barely mach1. I don't know how such a slow missile can intercept fast moving aircraft in real live.

Also, another stupid AI thing is whenever a CVNB is under attack, the escort ships would scatter and slow down. After the threats are gone, they won't go back to formation any more. While the carrier is surging ahead at 20kts, those escorts would just sit there at 10kts doing nothing.

[tAKticool47]

Wolfcat ,

I had just brought up your issue the other day. It's a major problem for me, but I understand, the game-makers are all Russian, they understandably bias the game and platforms to Russians.

One of the main issues I have with the American platforms is both lack of modernization (when the Russians all have the latest platforms AND latest equipment) and also the way they use it.

A good example to use is a Wasp-class LHD and maybe a FLT IIA DDG-51.

The Wasp has Evolved Sea Sparrow Missiles [ESSM] (a 25+ mile, superb, short-to-medium range SAM), Rolling Airframe Missiles (RAM, a 5-10 mile point-defense SAM that is considered the best point defense missile in the world) and Phalanx CIWS guns, 2 miles last-ditch. The FLT IIA DDG-51 has SM-2ER (in the game, in real life it would have SM-2s of various blocks and capabilities, SM-3s, SM-6s, etc.) ESSMs, and at least 1 Phalanx. So, let's consider an Oscar-II attack. Let's say they were launched at long-range but not maximum range. 100 miles or so. So as soon as the DDG-51's SPY radar picked up the launch, the AEGIS system would hook missiles to targets. As soon as the machine calculated the optimum launch times & points, SM-2s would start flying out of the canisters. (Note: There are some sources that say US Navy doctrine is to always, always assign at least 2 SM missiles per enemy missile. Let's just pretend it's a 1-to-1- for the game.) So 24 missiles are coming at the formation, 24 SM-2s would fly out. Now the system would know that any missiles that don't get shot down are going to be substantially closer by the time the intercept happens. At this point, the DDG-51 would then start launching ESSMs at the remaining enemy missiles. --- Simultaneously, the Wasp's "Ship Self-Defense System" computer would launch ESSMs as well. Now the SM-2s are extremely capable missiles, and would knock down at LEAST a bunch of the Shipwrecks (which are capable, but, very old technology. It's a big debate. Aegis was designed to defeat the SS-N-12 and SS-N-19 missiles, they were built to kill carriers and US DDGs/CGs.) The ESSMs would undoubtedly take out more. Then the DDG-51 would possibly launch another round of ESSMs if there was time, while the Wasp would launch RAMs -- and it's very possibly possible all of the Shipwreck missiles would get killed, and both of the ships would be backed up final-stand by their Phalanx cannons.

HOWEVER, in the game, what happens is this- The Oscar launches SS-N-19 Shipwreck missiles... the DDG-51 launches a salvo of SM-2s. Whatever the salvo limit in the INI file specifies. Once that group of missiles meets the Oscar's salvo, after all the missiles either hit or miss, the DDG-51 then will possibly launch another salvo of SM-2s. It keeps doing this until it's dead , or runs out of SM-2s. Once it runs out of SM-2s, and if it's both still alive and still seeing missiles shot at it, it will launch ESSMs. Again, it will keep trying until it dies or the missiles or shot down. The Wasp will launch ESSMs until it runs out, then RAMs until it runs out, etc.

The "logic" is flawed, and the missiles are MUCH less effective than Russian missiles. Russian offensive and defensive missiles are *superb* in the game, and American ones *suck* . Plus, they're 20 years or so outdated.


As I detailed in a prior post, I have built carrier strike groups of a Nimitz-class, ALL 3 FLIGHTS OF DDG-51s, (the best guided-missile destroyers in the world...) a Ticonderoga VLS (aged, perhaps, but upgraded and ONE OF the best Air Defense platforms in the world...) a Daring-class Type 45 destroyer of the UK (an amazing, if not smaller, Air Defense platform) AND a French FREMM (one of the best frigates in the world).... they regularly get smoked by any Russian crafts. I can make up old-style Soviet groups of Slavas, Karas, Udaloys, Sovremennys, Krivaks, etc. Smoked. Kirov is invincible. Kuznetsov is like the Starship Enterprise. And the new Russian corvettes and frigates are literally unsinkable by torpedo nor missile.


It's fun but it's not at the same time.

[p7p8]

the game-makers are all Russian, they understandably bias the game and platforms to Russians

I have little different opinion: current US ship weak anti missiles defence is not intended. Its just mix of some bugs like - shooting down own SAMs by own CIWS. Wrong simulated AEGIS system and SPY radars.

Besides - Russian warships have usualy more than 1 antimissile defence system but with small number of fire channels. Becasue not accurate AEGIS system simulation, US warships with usualy only 1 SAM antimissile systems (but with huge weapon channels number) act like typical system with small number of weapon channels.

So DW with RA mod currently prefer more systems on 1 ship (for example medium + short range) than 1 sophisticated system like AEGIS but with only 1 type of missiles. This causes that VLS works like typical rail launcher.


BTW in my opinion Russian playable platforms are NOT overpowered. Just compare IL-38 and P3. In my opinion Orion is OP - not IL-38


I have made new thread with Tiers proposition:

link