What to You does not suffice in game?

[GrayOwl]

That You have not enough in game DW - new controlled units, other weapons loadout for existing units, Your expectations for new interest to this game...


Or You are overcome by the "bugs". Give here all posts to the item of information. But I do not speak that this thread will be as FAQ.
It is simple that we should know about our disappointment In the current condition of game ( That it is not pleasant to us and we do not want it to have)

I am especially addressed to the veterans (Old Guardia) HK\688-SC-DW...

Also it not the message of the agent-provocateur :lol:

These questions should be set for our community by other people, but time they are silent :x , I think that we can them set.

:sunny:

[DAB]

This thread could easily turn into a flame match, or be interpreted as bitching about Sonalysts - none of which would be fair.

But at the same time, this is a fair question

I adored 688i Hunter Killer, the game very nearly cost me my School Leaving certificate. I remember nostalgically one time I managed to get off a decoy at the last moment. Torpedo detonated leaving my propulsion down and flooding in the torpedo room. Through careful nursing of the emergency blow ballest and flooding of the ballest tanks, I managed to hover in shallow water long enough for propulsion to be restored so I could slip out of the combat zone.

Ah the days.

Anyway, back to your point. Whilst 688i has dated somewhat, it has some features in it which were overlooked in future versions. With the replay, for example, you got a written log of events in the game you had played which could be copied and pasted into word. This log basically informed you whether you had been detected by a platform, what actions platforms took at what time. Basicly, you could examine and analyse your performance over the course of a game.

Then Sub Command. For one I could never keep the game from crashing. But I played it enough to get a feel for it. Having various platforms was fantastic fun. In 688i, Multiplayer matches were affectionally known as "Training Exercises". The idea of a playable Akula was fantastic fun Evolutionarily though, it was more derrived from Fleet Command then 688i HK, and I always felt the game put you in the navigation screen for far longer then you should.

Then DW. Where can I start, playable SSK's - how did I cope without them. The diversity of platforms mean that we can have multiplayer matches in a way that the "I want Destroyer Command II" people on the SHIII forum can only dream of. But whilst I adore the game, a few things do frustrate me.

The database for one. I'm British, which means that when I'm creating my own missions, I tend to focus on postcolonial conflict senarios, or other sitatuations where it would be stretching the realms of reality to have a US / Russian Carrier group siting off the coast. Yet the database for the UK and France is seriously out of date. Intrepid and Fearless were out of commision half a decade ago. It was an anacranism to see them in Fleet Command, let alone DW. Yet, someone has kept them in the database and deleted the Type 22 Frigates, which often operate as UK Taskforce Flagships when a Carrier is not around. I'm sure other people can offer similar examples from their respective countries.

On Playables, I won't bother to argue the case for a playable Traflagar, Sonalysts are probably sick of hearing that one by now. But a diversity of platforms from the European Powers, Canada, Australlia and beyond is surely slowly becoming a must.

Finally Graphics. I have no problem with the fact that the graphics engine has not been the first priority of the developers. Indeed, I would be disturbed if they sacrificed the level of detail that has been put into the game simply to animate people on the decks of merchants. However, I think that DW is the last outing for the Fleet Command graphics engine.

[SeaQueen]

That You have not enough in game DW - new controlled units, other weapons loadout for existing units, Your expectations for new interest to this game...


I'm actually pretty content with the game. I have a list of stuff that makes me grumpy, but I'm not sure that there's much to be done about most of it. A lot of my gripes have to do with aircraft. I have some slight issues with the way it represents sound speed profiles. I thought there were some glaring omissions of platforms in the database. There's no flight II Arleigh Burkes, for example. There's also no American LPDs. I'd really like to see an LPD-17 in there. All in all, though, my gripes are pretty minimal.

As long as the scenarios are good, the game is fun and you can learn an impressive amount from it.

[Sea Demon]

I don't have any real gripes either. I get total satisfaction running DW. And I don't see this thread as being derogatory. In fact, it might be a good way to express what we think could bring improvements to Sonalysts games in general (future???). Anyway, I am of the same mind that I would like to see the DB updated. There are so many new platforms in naval service in various nations that we don't see in DW. I would like to see Arleigh Burke Flight IIA, Chinese Type 052B, 051C, and 054A frigates. Also Chinese Yuan SSK's for use in many scenarios around the Taiwan Straits is a must. We need the UK's DB totally upgraded, including the Type 045 and Astute. Germany needs to add the Type 212. etc. etc.

[Molon Labe]

I've got a bunch of gripes, but I don't see any constructive purpose to a thread asking for a laundry list of them. It's one thing for complaints to come up when they're relevant to another issue being discussed, but to solicit them for their own sake? :down:

[LoBlo]

I'ld still like to see the noise modeling taken up a notch. A purely linear sound vs speed relationship could be upgraded to the next level with a nonlinear one (stepwise)

[Kazuaki Shimazaki II]

That You have not enough in game DW - new controlled units, other weapons loadout for existing units, Your expectations for new interest to this game...
Well, honestly, I had been kind of hoping they'd update the old interfaces a bit. The FFG-7 in particular introduced many things to the sonar interfaces. It is not only more realistic, but provides a lot more options. I find it disappointing that updates were not done to the Akula/688/SW and maybe the Kilo to get it to match.

Or You are overcome by the "bugs". Give here all posts to the item of information. But I do not speak that this thread will be as FAQ.
The DB is basically (polite words fail to describe it). Weapon effectiveness is all over the place. All the planes basically have one radar SL. All missiles have one radar SL. The radars are grouped into several very broad categories and then each category has the exact same values... basically it feels like a tack-on job that was done 6 hours (12 would be too generous) before the game had to go out the door.

Sorry, but that's the way it is. Admittedly, you don't feel it so bad - what effort was made was concentrated in the "important" areas like sound SL so it doesn't immediately feel absurd. However...

The difference between professional and amateur produced "girl games" is that in the professional game, the boys should at least look human, while in amateur produced games they may be drawn as stick figures (seeing few really care about them anyway) and of course the girls aren't expected to reach the same quality as pro (though the good ones overlap with at least the lower-middling of professional IMO). The DW database is analogous to the amateur game... but this is a professional production, no?

Which is a shame, because the entire series of games have some of the best sonar models available at their time. But a good model doesn't produce good results without good assumptions, and all the assumptions are from the database.

Still, the DB is not my major gripe. At least it is repairable by our own hands.

Like anyone else I want more platforms, but we all knew what we were gonna get there...

End of gripe list here...

I am especially addressed to the veterans (Old Guardia) HK\688-SC-DW...
Well, missing the old 688 commodore screaming at you took some of the fun, as well as it being a "professional created campaign". The continuity in weapons loadout was also nice.

Also, it was nice that the active sonar WORKED in 688. You can get nice clear blips out to at least 20000! Now, I have to squint at the screen with any platform. And w/ the Akula unless I go change the Sensititivity to about -15 I might as well never use it, which I doubt is right.

[SeaQueen]

Also Chinese Yuan SSK's for use in many scenarios around the Taiwan Straits is a must.

Type 093s are absent as well. I just use Victor IIIs in their place, but I still thought it was strange. The Chinese navy, admittedly, though must be hard to keep up with. They're essentially in spiral development at this point.

[goldorak]

My biggest gripe about Dw ?

Good missions which take into account the 3d-dimensional battlespace are hard to come by.

Unfortunately good mission designers are rare as diamonds. :ping:

[SeaQueen]

Good missions which take into account the 3d-dimensional battlespace are hard to come by.

The thing is, since DW is a tactical simulation, my experience has been that these sorts of massive scenarios with air, land and sea forces all doing things simultaneously frequently don't turn out to play well or be very realistic. That sort of language applies more to operational level simulations like Harpoon than to tactical sims.

[XabbaRus]

I'm happy with the sim. I have several new modesl but am waiting for Luft to take his dbase to the next level and pursuade him to add them.

Also I have half and idea why this thread was started in the first place but hopefully patch 1.04 will be out soon.

LPD-17 I could make one. Type 93, well if I had pics I could make one too. Thing is looks like the Chinese are going to go straight to the Type 95.

[SeaQueen]

LPD-17 I could make one. Type 93, well if I had pics I could make one too. Thing is looks like the Chinese are going to go straight to the Type 95.

So far the only thing they've shown of the type 093 is the sail.

The Chinese are in spiral development. That means they build a few of a class, take what they've learned, and then build a new class based on the lessons they learned from constructing and experimenting with the previous ship. I wouldn't expect them to build a whole lot of any single ship or submarine class, the way they knocked off Romeos for so long. They're trying to learn as much as they can so they can modernize their fleet.

LPD-17 would be nice, or even n LPD-4, SOMETHING. I mean, geez.. if we put a bunch of US Marines on a British LPD, we'd have a mutiny on our hands when they got back to the US ships because they'd have to switch back from good beer to coolaid. We can't have that. :D

[XabbaRus]

You got any pics of even the Type 093 Sail?

[Sea Demon]

You got any pics of even the Type 093 Sail?

Yes. Please post the pic. I'm curious as to how they designed the sail. :yep:

[SeaQueen]

You got any pics of even the Type 093 Sail?

I got this off a Chinese web site:

The Shang/Type 093 entry has a picture of the sail.

http://mil.jschina.com.cn/huitong/han_xia_kilo_song.htm

[DivingWind]

Bring back the alert when diving... ;) Actually I think game could have more simple sounds to make it more immerse.

[Sub Sailor]

I like and play DW, but I am partial to SC and 688i. I have never been happy with the Auto Crew Sonar in DW, but I believe that the bow sonars in both DW and SC are not accurate as I remember. I know we were able to pick up contacts at greater ranges than either of these sims allow. I am not griping because there may well be a reason behind this. I will not comment on the aircraft as I don't play them, I have crashed a few times, in fact I am rather good at that; I do not play the Kilo as it does not interest me. I just don't enjoy the FFG, I might like an AB or a Spurance better.
Since NCP, I have went back to SC, which in my opinion, is a great sim and I play SCXIIc, I hope there is a d in the future. Now that the flashing has been cured I really enjoy playing it again. I still play DW and watch for new scenarios all the time, please everyone understand I am a huge fan of the 688s and the Seawolf, but do occasional play the Akula, I like the sonar.
Again, and this is a major hint, I would love to see some on Bill's DW scenarios and campaigns adapted to SC.

To all of our community it is post like this one that started this thread that improves our community. BZ everyone!

Ron Banks MMCM(SS), USN(Ret):up:

[Kazuaki Shimazaki II]

I like and play DW, but I am partial to SC and 688i. I have never been happy with the Auto Crew Sonar in DW, but I believe that the bow sonars in both DW and SC are not accurate as I remember. I know we were able to pick up contacts at greater ranges than either of these sims allow. I am not griping because there may well be a reason behind this.

And you shouldn't be griping. That's a fixable problem - just dig your head into the database and tweak the sensitivities up until they match your experiences better - and then publish the database when you are done so we can learn :D

[Sub Sailor]

I don't have a clue on how to do what you said. "Tweak the Data Base", I will freely admit my knowledge of computers is limited.
I know a lot about real subs, engine rooms, and the Navy in general.

Sub Sailor.

[Kazuaki Shimazaki II]

I don't have a clue on how to do what you said. "Tweak the Data Base", I will freely admit my knowledge of computers is limited.
I know a lot about real subs, engine rooms, and the Navy in general.

Sub Sailor.

Here's the procedure:
0) Warning: When you edit the database, all the save files you have become unusable. Your campaign data would be OK. For example, if you are on Mission 7 out of 14, you can still go on from Mission 7 but your Mission 7 Save File would be useless.
1) Click on this (http://www.subguru.com/DW_missions/DWEdit-1-1-22-1.zip) to download yourself a database editor called DWEdit. Technically you can do it by hand w/ Notepad, but that's a pain when editors that would put all the numbers in the correct places are available.
2) Unzip DWEdit. Start it up and open Objects.eod.
3) Click on View->Sensor Dialog.
4) Locate and click on the array you want to edit. The 688 passive sphere is 0005, so it is very easy to find.
5) Change the "Nrd [-127...128]" value. Lower numbers are better (-14 is more sensitive than -12).
6a) Experiment by changing the value and then making some experiment missions in DW's mission editor until it feels about right to you.
6b) You can also finetune the "detection curve" by fiddling with the noise SLs of targets. For example, if you feel that subs are detected too far away while merchants don't show up until it is too late, you should go to View->Object Dialog and change the Passive SLs of the Merchants up and the Subs' Passive SLs down.
7) There are really many things to change, so experiment until it feels all right to you. When you have a really good solution, come back and share it with us.

[Dr.Sid]

I miss good replay. With full 3D, free camera controls, forward, backward, fast, slow .. everything.

Also quick mission could be better. Selection of enemies, conditions, dintace of enemies (for example enemy subs are very often about 1nm from you now).

Better controls, more keyboard shortcuts. Marking & zooming with scope for example.

[Kazuaki Shimazaki II]

Also quick mission could be better. Selection of enemies, conditions, dintace of enemies (for example enemy subs are very often about 1nm from you now).

Yeah. I know about those. But nothing can be compared to the fact that I realized quickly that even AT THAT RANGE, the Akula cannot get a good sodding blip (I was using LWAMI to be fair, but the original isn't an improvement from my memory).

As far as I can tell, my LCD laptop monitor does not respond to the Gamma setting. There is a brightness setting in Control Panel somewhere but there's no improvement in the visibility of the blips.

I actually copied the screen out with Print Screen and amplified the contrast with GIMP trying to find the sodding blip. I tried to use the Hue-Saturation controls to change the Red into Green on the theory that humans can distinguish shades of Green better than shades of Red. I tried to use the Color Picker to examine various points on the display in the hopes that the target will show as brighter on the picker even if I can't see it - no reliable diffference in H, S, V or R, G, B values were detected, just some natural variations that had no relation to the target.

I blurred the screen so all the noise dots became a mush and tried it again - again no rise in the level. The BLIP JUST ISN'T THERE even though the target was at Point Blank Range.

Even with Seawolf ... well ... the blips are visible, but only just. You have to really squint and know where the target is to pick it out.

That's when I decided to bump up the sensitivity. HARD! Now, with the Akula jacked up to -15, I can just see the blips. Ugh. How I miss 688I. Whatever flaws it had, at least the active sonar WORKED.

[sonar732]

This is a common question for active sonar...what was the aspect and the range of your contact. Active isn't the science that y'all think it is...and once again, the question of Sonalysts defense customers more than likely don't want to see exactly how it works.

[Kazuaki Shimazaki II]

This is a common question for active sonar...what was the aspect and the range of your contact. Active isn't the science that y'all think it is...and once again, the question of Sonalysts defense customers more than likely don't want to see exactly how it works.
I'd tell you how bad it is. I made a custom scenario. I'm moving north, depth 91m, speed 5 knots.

The close target was an Akula-1, co-depth at 300 feet range 5NM or about 9000m. It is bearing 090, moving north at 5 knots. In other words, I'm pinging his broadside. Sea state 1 (as good as it gets), Bottom Limited (so no layer). Deep water too, I used a random patch of ocean. I hear the beep, so it hit something, but absolutely zero contact, and I already know where it is so I'm staring at that little patch of screen where it should appear. Nothing. I took a screenshot and threw it into GIMP under the theory that it is really there somewhere just that I can't see it. I did all the stuff to the picture that you just read about in desperate efforts to improve the contrast...

And all this was after I jacked up the sensitivity assumption from LWAMI's -9 to -12. FYI, Min Freq was 100Hz, max freq was 4000Hz in the database - I tried bumping Min Freq up to 1000Hz already but then I lost the aural signal as well.

I've just changed the Ak-1 into a Typhoon. Now the sonar designates it, so at least the programming is working. But UGH. I also know that the 688 barely designates the A1 (Nrd=-12, Min Freq 100 Max Freq 2500), but only barely...

[Dr.Sid]

There is a bug with active sonar (on all platforms) .. you always hear the return at max volume. It should correspond with intensity of the reuturn (as brightness of the 'dot' should).

Brightness works nicely on US subs (and FFG) but on Russian subs it is pretty useless.

[GrayOwl]

The DB is basically (polite words fail to describe it). Weapon effectiveness is all over the place. All the planes basically have one radar SL. All missiles have one radar SL. The radars are grouped into several very broad categories and then each category has the exact same values... basically it feels like a tack-on job that was done 6 hours (12 would be too generous) before the game had to go out the door.

The radars on controlled platforms work completely other image rather than platforms controlled AI.
The extraordinary wide areas of detection deform true real things.
It looks for example so:
Al controlled O.H/ Perry has to find out an incoming missile in 45 nautical miles.
When you use on controlled O.H.Perry a radar he can show you this missile on distance in 2-2.5 times smaller than on AI to a platform : 12-18 nautical miles.
The completely different principles of job of radars simply put "cross" on an opportunity of their adjustment through the editor of a database.

[Kazuaki Shimazaki II]

Brightness works nicely on US subs (and FFG) but on Russian subs it is pretty useless.
I'd say. When I pinged the Typhoon, the brightest return (I threw that picture into GIMP) had a Value of 64% (Hue is about 9-11 degrees for those who are interested). That's not enough when the screen's background Value is 19% and even a dim noise dot having a value of 38% (and there were plenty of BRIGHT noise dots)...

The Russian sonar is modeled with sparse dots, while 688s and Seawolf tend to have a denser dot pattern. This helps the contact form into an easy to see line. I think I'd have to jack sensitivity up to -18 or maybe -20 to get equivalent EFFECTIVENESS from the Russian set... at a value of -9 it doesnt' exist.

EDIT: I finally set the sonar to -17. At this setting, it would seem that I can get some useful performance (I can see a broadside Victor 3 at 10NM without having to squint) out of the set. I ain't too worried about differential performance, because AI subs rarely use active sonar anyway.