SUBSIM Radio Room Forums



SUBSIM: The Web's #1 resource for all submarine & naval simulations since 1997

Go Back   SUBSIM Radio Room Forums > Current crop of subsims & naval games > COLD WATERS
Forget password? Reset here

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-11-17, 12:03 PM   #1
PL_Harpoon
Engineer
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 210
Downloads: 21
Uploads: 4


Default Realism mod (discussion)

I think, with all the available exposed parameters it's more up to us, than developers to find the most realistic parameters for various systems in the game.

The reason for this thread is that we can discuss ideas to make the game more realistic within the boundaries of what's currently possible. I don't want this thread to turn into "what could have been done if the devs do xxx" so that we can focus on the actual improvements. Then we could put everything together and release as a realism mod.

For starters, here are a couple of ideas from me:

1. The towed array should be more sensitive in comparison to spherical one.
While playing DW I noticed that towed array usually can detect targets at almost twice the range of sphere sonar. I could be wrong with the numbers here but I think there's enough people here with enough knowledge to find the proper values. In any case I think we should either improve the towed array or nerf passive sonar.

2. Mark 48:
- sensor range should be 1600 instead of current 4000 (according to this site: https://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ship/weaps/mk-48.htm)
- sensor angle should be smaller (currently it's 80 which I think is a little too large)

3. MAD sensor range should be around 200-400 yards, not 1000.
(according to this paper: http://calhoun.nps.edu/bitstream/han...pdf?sequence=1)

4. Sonobuoys should be less effective than dipping sonar - that's just my impressions with my limited time with DW.

What do you think about those ideas?
PL_Harpoon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-17, 04:52 PM   #2
Delgard
Skipper
 
Delgard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: AZ & DC
Posts: 487
Downloads: 48
Uploads: 0
Default

What file are these adjusted in? I am thinking a config-type file.
Delgard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-17, 05:29 PM   #3
PL_Harpoon
Engineer
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 210
Downloads: 21
Uploads: 4


Default

MAD range is in config.txt

Sonar/sonobuoys is in sensors.txt

MK48 is in weapons.txt

All in Cold Waters\ColdWaters_Data\StreamingAssets\default
PL_Harpoon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-17, 05:32 PM   #4
Delgard
Skipper
 
Delgard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: AZ & DC
Posts: 487
Downloads: 48
Uploads: 0
Default

Thanks PL_Harpoon
Delgard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-17, 06:49 PM   #5
PL_Harpoon
Engineer
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 210
Downloads: 21
Uploads: 4


Default

Did some research on Russian torpedoes and found some interesting data:

TEST-71
real range should be about 22000 instead of 27300 yards
sensor range: 1500 vs current 800

UGMT-1
The sources I found show that it should have a small warhead of 60 Kg. Currently it has 185.
PL_Harpoon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-17, 07:10 PM   #6
The Bandit
Sonar Guy
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Canada
Posts: 395
Downloads: 39
Uploads: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PL_Harpoon View Post
I think, with all the available exposed parameters it's more up to us, than developers to find the most realistic parameters for various systems in the game.

The reason for this thread is that we can discuss ideas to make the game more realistic within the boundaries of what's currently possible. I don't want this thread to turn into "what could have been done if the devs do xxx" so that we can focus on the actual improvements. Then we could put everything together and release as a realism mod.

For starters, here are a couple of ideas from me:

1. The towed array should be more sensitive in comparison to spherical one.
While playing DW I noticed that towed array usually can detect targets at almost twice the range of sphere sonar. I could be wrong with the numbers here but I think there's enough people here with enough knowledge to find the proper values. In any case I think we should either improve the towed array or nerf passive sonar.

2. Mark 48:
- sensor range should be 1600 instead of current 4000 (according to this site: https://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ship/weaps/mk-48.htm)
- sensor angle should be smaller (currently it's 80 which I think is a little too large)

3. MAD sensor range should be around 200-400 yards, not 1000.
(according to this paper: http://calhoun.nps.edu/bitstream/han...pdf?sequence=1)

4. Sonobuoys should be less effective than dipping sonar - that's just my impressions with my limited time with DW.

What do you think about those ideas?
I think this is a good idea, and you're generally right in what you are saying, however there are always exceptions.

Early 80s for towed array is a little iffy for me, I think the 688s just had the TB-16 starting out (so did some of the Sturgeons) but many of the others had earlier "clip-on" types BQR-15 and -23 if I'm not mistaken, which were a step or two behind the TB-16 and came with speed restrictions (would be very interesting if the clip-on Towed array could be an inventoried item like the sonobuoys, so if you ripped it off you could choose to fit another when you enter port).

As far as the sonobouys, I'm in agreement, typically I wouldn't think that the batteries would be as strong as what a helo could put out through a dipping sonar, however what I'm most interested in when it comes to buoys is if they act like they "should" specifically if they are alternated over / under the layer and if the AI will use / has to use patterns to correctly localize a contact. My understanding is that until the electronics got a bit more sophisticated, the passive buoys were very general with little to no bearing information, so typically patterns would be dropped and signal strengths compared to localize the contact (or you could risk just dropping an active buoy if you think that the passive contact is strong enough). The point I'm trying to get across is that I don't feel that dropping one buoy which is then followed by a rain of depth charges and torpedoes really fits with realism.
__________________
The Bandit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-17, 07:30 PM   #7
Delgard
Skipper
 
Delgard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: AZ & DC
Posts: 487
Downloads: 48
Uploads: 0
Default

The MAD Sensor Range setting, where is it located? I looked in Aircraft and Sensors.
Delgard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-17, 07:52 PM   #8
Onkel Neal
Born to Run Silent
 
Onkel Neal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 1997
Location: Cougar Trap, Texas
Posts: 21,276
Downloads: 534
Uploads: 224


Default

The one thing I would like in a realism mod is an option to turn off real time torpedoes on the map, and replace with bearing lines and sonar pings that get louder and faster.
__________________
SUBSIM - 26 Years on the Web
Onkel Neal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-17, 07:56 PM   #9
Delgard
Skipper
 
Delgard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: AZ & DC
Posts: 487
Downloads: 48
Uploads: 0
Default

Hmm, I would think the Sonar operator would have that and be calling out distance, even general depth as in above or below a layer.

Jonesy did it on the Hunt for Red October...
Delgard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-17, 10:48 PM   #10
Stardog765
Seaman
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 31
Downloads: 19
Uploads: 0
Default

Very excited to see this thread. I can't wait to see what this community comes up with.
Stardog765 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-17, 10:54 PM   #11
ScreamingElectron
Watch
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 26
Downloads: 106
Uploads: 1
Default

You all are spot on as far as the torps being OP.
Working on correct detection ranges and active countermeasure mod right now. Keep your eyes peeled
__________________
-- SnakeShi*
ScreamingElectron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-17, 02:12 AM   #12
ScreamingElectron
Watch
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 26
Downloads: 106
Uploads: 1
Default

It's up!

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/show...69#post2490569
__________________
-- SnakeShi*
ScreamingElectron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-17, 06:42 AM   #13
PL_Harpoon
Engineer
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 210
Downloads: 21
Uploads: 4


Default

Nice. I'll be trying it today.

On another note, I'm also thinking about increasing hull strength on Soviet nuclear subs.
Unfortunately hull strength values are not exposed for individual ships so we'll have to use those from difficulty settings (perhaps they're based on displacement?).
PL_Harpoon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-17, 07:45 AM   #14
schurem
Loader
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 90
Downloads: 42
Uploads: 0
radar

Well, since the 1.01b patch, the soviet subs take a lot of killing, that's for sure. In 1.0 one Mk-48 would usually end a Victor's active career. In 1.01b it takes at least two to shut them up.

They also keep firing even after blowing emergency ballast or sinking to the bottom. I once steered my Mk-48 into the nose section of a Victor-I in order to disable its tubes, but to no avail. It just kept on spitting fish at me.

On another occasion, I managed to put three Mk-48s in a Typhoon and it sat on the bottom but still launched two fish at me. I took one hit and managed to lure the other into the hissing wreck of the Typhoon. That did him in in the end
schurem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-17, 08:56 AM   #15
PL_Harpoon
Engineer
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 210
Downloads: 21
Uploads: 4


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by schurem View Post
Well, since the 1.01b patch, the soviet subs take a lot of killing, that's for sure. In 1.0 one Mk-48 would usually end a Victor's active career. In 1.01b it takes at least two to shut them up.

They also keep firing even after blowing emergency ballast or sinking to the bottom. I once steered my Mk-48 into the nose section of a Victor-I in order to disable its tubes, but to no avail. It just kept on spitting fish at me.

On another occasion, I managed to put three Mk-48s in a Typhoon and it sat on the bottom but still launched two fish at me. I took one hit and managed to lure the other into the hissing wreck of the Typhoon. That did him in in the end
True. That's why I'm thinking about reducing US hull strength instead of buffing theirs.
PL_Harpoon is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:13 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 1995- 2024 Subsim®
"Subsim" is a registered trademark, all rights reserved.