Simulating radar detection of masts?

[MarkShot]

Recently we were discussing how in SC/DW radar detection of sub masts are not implemented.

However, I just thought of a way it could probably be simulated in SC missions. You could place an approach goal on surface vessels of say whatever their sensor is to the horizon. Then, attach a doctrine statement to check for user action such that any masts were range while in the bounds of that approach goal. If so, you could automatically fail the player for being detected.

Would that work? (Only in SC, since there is not useraction check in DW.)

If that does work in SC, it would be cool to vector an enemy surface ship or flight towards the player's sub. But I don't see anyway to force or pass a contact to the AI. I suppose in DW, you might have script alter the course of the approached ship to bare down on the player's sub. (but no way to check if masts were raised)

I just realized a problem with this for SC ... if the user has the mast raised before entering the approach range, nothing will be triggered. Oh, well ...

[FERdeBOER]

Great point. :hmm:

I've been thinking about it long time. It's long since the last time I've played with SC, but in DW... well, the only solution I've found is similar as the one you said but, as there is no "user action" doctrine , maybe is possible to simulate this when the player detects something with visual/photo or ESM.

Of course the player can "cheat", but is better than nothing...

But, now there comes another problem... the AI air units are too good in my opinion, so, if we also give them the possibility of detecting us with the masts...

Also I think LwAmi mod make (or will make, don't remember) something about this improving the visual detection at preiscope depth or something similar... am I wrong?

[OneShot]

One of the latest versions of the LwAmi Mod introduced sort of a walkaround for this. Meaning a sub will depending on weather and seastate be visually detected (by the AI and thus automatically) if at PD or shallower (or so, for details see the readme). Coupled with the modified Mavericks on the P3 and Hellfires on the Helo this feature should urge all sub skippers to seriously reconsider if lying in wait at PD with all masts up and waiting is such a good idea.

[feld]

Originally Posted by FERdeBOER

Great point. :hmm:

I've been thinking about it long time. It's long since the last time I've played with SC, but in DW... well, the only solution I've found is similar as the one you said but, as there is no "user action" doctrine , maybe is possible to simulate this when the player detects something with visual/photo or ESM.

BLUF: I think that FERdeBOER's idea (in bold above) works pretty well for Dangerous Waters as long as you assume that any submarine at periscope depth is there to stick things out of the water. This post describes my implementation, the results, the problems, ideas for future use, and ends with questions for more experienced DW mission designers and modders.

INTRO: Please forgive the post length and also any possible repetition. I only posted after finding nothing in the search engine indicating how well FERdeBOER's idea worked. I assumed that no one had tried and so I did.

Credit for his good idea, of course, goes to him. My primitive, possibly flawed, implementation of his good idea, of course, is all my fault.

METHOD: I made a scenario with one surface unit (hereafter "skimmer"), one player controlled 688I (hereafter "boat") , and two goal-type approach triggers attached to the skimmer. There were two triggers because I wanted to simulate two detection mechanisms: visual and radar counterdetection of masts. The object of the triggers was set to the boat's side, country, classification, and hull number. I used a combination of trigger settings and doctrine language (DL) to test for the following conditions:
1. The player controlled boat must be at or above periscope depth ("Max Depth" trigger setting pg 2).
2. The boat must be within a given radius of the skimmer. ("Trigger Location-Radius" trigger setting pg 3).
3. The boat must have detected the skimmer on Visual or Periscope ESM. (DL "Ownship Detect" command).
4. The boat must currently hold contact on the skimmer (DL"Is Detection Held Now" command).
5. All of these conditions must be met for a given duration ("Duration" trigger setting pg 3).

The triggers were set to send a radio message to the boat when met. Please note that the way that they were set up was sorta backwards: the goals were "accomplished" if the player was detected. So I gave them negative point award values.

RESULTS/CONCLUSIONS:
A. The visual trigger worked ok. But it only fired when the player "marked" the target from the periscope. Just having the scope for the requisite amount of time while within the perimeter would not suffice. I think this is because the "Ownship Detect" command only traps a detection when the player creates a contact (by marking the object). This is a potential exploit.

B. The "RADAR Counterdetection" trigger NEVER fired. I used:
Ownship Detect (DDG with PeriESM)
I think, based on my argument in A above, that the PeriESM never actually gets credit for a detection from the "Ownship Detect" command because it does not create contacts on the players Navmap. For the curious, I did also try using the ESM mast to mark the contact. No luck there: the trigger still did not fire.

C. This method returned one bizarre result. You can get visually counterdetected under some circumstances without a mast out of the water. If the player goes to PD outside the range set in "2" above, visually marks the target, puts the scope down, drives within the trigger range, and stays within range for the duration time, the trigger fires. I think this is because the "Ownship Detect" command will always return true when the player's ship has ever detected the subject platform. This is borne out by the descriptions of the Detect and Ownship Detect commands on pages 66 and 67 of the Mission Editor manual.

D. This method is laborious. It requires the designer to attach a trigger to each potential counterdetecting platform in the mission. I thought and tested one useful alternative. You make a destination type trigger attached to the submarine and place the trigger in an area. You then use the DL "Range" command to test for distance between the submarine and any platform that you're interested in from a counterdetection standpoint. This is still laborious because you now have a long list of DL commands to enter for each potential counterdetector, but at least you only have one trigger. It occurs to me that you could attach an "approach" trigger to the submarine, make the object of the trigger:
side: whichever the bad guys are
Country: Any
Platform: Any

This would save DL command entry by taking care of the "Range" command in trigger settings.

E. The "Is Detection Held Now" command is probably unnecessary here. I originally put it in there because I hoped that it would help guarantee that the player was close enough to be visually counteredetected but the trigger's range check does that.

FUTURE WORK/IDEAS

a. I *think* that a "Relative Position" trigger might be useful for any situation where it would be harder to see a mast in a certain direction. I'm thinking in particular by placing the trigger location to the East or West when the Sun is low on the horizon.

b. One good use in a scenario might be to turn this into an "Event" trigger and use another event trigger to tally the number of times that the player is counterdetected by a platform or a whole side. If the player gets seen often enough then a dynamic ASW group is created to go hunt them down or another goal type trigger fires with a negative point award saying that they were counterdetected or (in my ideal little world) changing the next mission of a campaign to make it a "get the he@@ out of dodge!" mission vice whatever it was going to be. I've not worked on a campaign yet, but I expect that the editor cannot do that...

QUESTIONS:

i. Can anyone verifiy my supposition on the Ownship Detect Boolean logic? Specifically that a sensor must produce a contact on the Navmap before the logic traps the event.

ii. If I am right, do any modders know a way to make the PeriESM system generate contacts, preferrably automatically ? That would make the player vulnerable to counterdetection every time the scope at least was out of the water. It would also clutter the navmap something fierce, but I think it would be worth it.

-feld

[Molon Labe]

I'm not 100% positive on this, but I think "Detection is held now" applies only to sonar, because a tracker continuously monitors those signals. Detections which are singular instantaneous events (marking contacts manually) doesn't fit with the same logic.

[feld]

ML,

Thanks! Yes, I'd concluded something similar. That's why I said that the "Is Detection Held Now" command was probably uneccessary. It just doesn't add anything that the range setting on the trigger doesn't already do. I would be happy to send you the mission if you or anyone else would like to play with it.

-feld

edit: reworded due to failed send button-to-brain interlock.

[MR. Wood]

What about slightly broaching your sail just slightly wouldn't that work maybe?

[feld]

Originally Posted by MR. Wood

What about slightly broaching your sail just slightly wouldn't that work maybe?

Well...yes...that would work.
...but then the CO would award the Dive his water wings and promptly shoot him out the TDU

...which reminds me of a story I read, I think it was U-1206, that was forced to the surface during a run on a British convoy due to flooding...
...from the head.
Seems like someone was not qualified on the new high pressure toilet. An improper valve lineup caused a substantial amount of seawater intake and ... you guessed it...they salted the battery. That means chlorine gas and lots of it. Needless to say, a good time was had by all. It must have sucked to explain that to their British captors. Especially since the 'someone' was the CO.

-feld