Dangerous Waters Patch v1.04 / Steam 1.04 patch available

[Onkel Neal]

Click here to upgrade S.C.S. Dangerous Waters V1.04 Patch (http://www.sonalystscombatsims.com/downloads/download_games.html)

[LoBlo]

Yey!!!!!!

Question: I'm assuming the patch should be updated from the stock DW copy version or does it matter?

[CptSimFreak]

What's going on with Steam patch?

[goldorak]

Yey!!!!!!

Question: I'm assuming the patch should be updated from the stock DW copy version or does it matter?

I installed on top of the 1.03 patch without any problems. :D

[Linton]

Is this patch compatable with any Lwami mod or have I got to start with a clean dw copy?

[goldorak]

Is this patch compatable with any Lwami mod or have I got to start with a clean dw copy?

No, you have to install the patch over a non modded dw (1.03-1.02 or 1.0).
I installed it over 1.03 without any problems.

For the lwami mod, we have to wait for luftwolf and amizaur to make it compatible with the new database structure of the 1.04 version.

[moose1am]

Thanks Jamie and the others at Sonarlyst.

[Captain Nemo]

Is this patch compatable with any Lwami mod or have I got to start with a clean dw copy?

No, you have to install the patch over a non modded dw (1.03-1.02 or 1.0).
I installed it over 1.03 without any problems.

For the lwami mod, we have to wait for luftwolf and amizaur to make it compatible with the new database structure of the 1.04 version.

Presumably though if you have installed LWAMI with JSGME you can just uninstall the mod so DW reverts back to stock then install patch 1.04?

Nemo

[goldorak]

Presumably though if you have installed LWAMI with JSGME you can just uninstall the mod so DW reverts back to stock then install patch 1.04?

Nemo


Sure :D but afterwards don't reinstall the lwami mod.

[Linton]

Is uninstalling as simple as just deleting it or is it more involved?(Iam looking for the Dw discs at the moment!)

[FERdeBOER]

Great news!!! :up:

Only one question, correct me if I'm wrong but I couldn't see nothing in the readme about masts detected by surface radars... is still not possible?

Despite that... thank you for the patch! :yep:

[BigBadVuk]

Sure :D but afterwards don't reinstall the lwami mod.

In short : IF you have LWAMI x.xx remove LWAMI (put backup database or reinstall DW) then apply 1.04 and DO NOT put LWAMI back until LuftWolf says so! :rotfl:
IF you have vanila 1.03 (or 1.00) DW just install 1.04 and DO NOT put LWAMI on it until LuftWolf says so! :up: :know:

P.S. THX Sonalysts ..I already tought this game is forgotten..:damn:

[Jamie]

What's going on with Steam patch?

Hope to have it up for this weekend... The Test "Steam Content Server" that we have running on our LAN is showing some strange behaviors with the way it is differencing the v1.03 and v1.04 versions. We're trying to work it out with the Valve folks, and I don't expect that it will be a big deal to work out (i.e. a day or two at most, I hope).

Thanks!

[Captain Nemo]

I assume the North American version of the patch is compatible with the version of DW I bought from Battlefront?

Nemo

[GakunGak]

Just tested it and must say I'm very happy with this, 688i now rocks and diving/surfacing look more realistic now....:rock:
You guys did fine work!:up:
@Jamie: If it's not secret, is Dangerous Waters 2 planned for developing or it's gonna be just DW1 and if it is, what other playable units do we get to see in the future, or something extra? Just courious...:ping: :|\\

[Dr.Sid]

Great news!!! :up:
Only one question, correct me if I'm wrong but I couldn't see nothing in the readme about masts detected by surface radars... is still not possible?


Nobody said it will be possible.

[GakunGak]

Also one question: when i played 688i and the KILO was on the surface, i did not see any masts/antenas extended and when I picked him out on the radar, he did nothing, just floated in the water... I installed 1.04 patch. Is it possible to see AI kilo or other sub extend his equipment on the surface?:hmm:

[Molon Labe]

Also one question: when i played 688i and the KILO was on the surface, i did not see any masts/antenas extended and when I picked him out on the radar, he did nothing, just floated in the water... I installed 1.04 patch. Is it possible to see AI kilo or other sub extend his equipment on the surface?:hmm:
It's a pretty safe bet that if the Readme doesn't say it's been added, that it hasn't been added. (So, no.)

[Qppralke]

I've been through the readme . . . and it tastes sweet :yep: :up:

[IotaSigma]

:rock: Thank you Sonalysts!! I can't wait to get home and install the patch!

[Captain Sub]

great now CMs have 50% chance to be hit by torps....and seawolfs an even lesser chance to survive the first wave of ASWs

[GakunGak]

@Captain Sub: I could swear i never saw the torpedo second from the left on your sig... What's his classification and tech specs?:hmm:

[Molon Labe]

Rocky: The change to the CM's is that there is a host-controlled option to set the rate that CM's cause torpedoes to detonate. It is not fixed at 50% and it does not reduce the chance that a torpedo will acquire and "hit" a decoy. So don't get excited unless you're hosting, and even if you are, don't get too excited...the decoys will still work even at the 0% detonation setting.

GG: That's the SS-N-27 ASM/LAM.

[GakunGak]

Got it! http://www.subguru.com/DW_missions/DW_ref_info.xls
THNX for the info!:yep:

[Officerpuppy]

Too bad the save game files won't work, I was still trying to complete the campaign, oh well, I don't mind starting over with a new patch :up:

[Dr.Sid]

Too bad the save game files won't work, I was still trying to complete the campaign, oh well, I don't mind starting over with a new patch :up:

Campaign progress should work I guess. Only in-mission saves would not work. Try it .. I don't have old campaign saves.

[Pirate]

Finally :arrgh!: This is great news...
Almost didn't believe it when I saw it on the subsim frontpage news!!!

[Bellman]

:D Thanks to Jamie and all the crew at SCS - you delivered ! :|\\

[Captain Nemo]

I haven't had an opportunity to fire up DW with the new patch yet. I know the readme said "Added variable in "dangerouswaters.ini" which controls the likelihood of all weapons acquiring dead/sinking platforms" which presumably means that torps etc can aquire a target that is 100% dead, which they didn't before. However, has the bug been fixed that made dead ships/subs disappear after they had hit bottom?

Nemo

[Molon Labe]

I haven't had an opportunity to fire up DW with the new patch yet. I know the readme said "Added variable in "dangerouswaters.ini" which controls the likelihood of all weapons acquiring dead/sinking platforms" which presumably means that torps etc can aquire a target that is 100% dead, which they didn't before. However, has the bug been fixed that made dead ships/subs disappear after they had hit bottom?

Nemo

I don't think that's a bug, but an intended "feature." Why they wanted that, I don't know. But anyways, no, it hasn't been removed, which is a bit annoying in shallow environments. It's still a big improvement, though.

[XabbaRus]

That was never a bug. SCS did that deliberately as having them stick around would cause problems with the physics engine, you'd have to force them to stay on the bottom.

[Dr.Sid]

With all respect .. that is nonsense .. making them stay on the bottom ? This is software man .. it does what YOU want .. there is no 'hey bill, it still floats, how are we going to fix it ?'. Buildings does not move too .. so why dead ships would ?

Even if it is intended it was a bad decision.

[Captain Nemo]

I agree Dr Sid. In SC they stay on the bottom so why isn't it possible in DW? Also, I remember quite sometime ago, Jamie mentioned they were going to look into this, but obviously it has been overlooked or perhaps my memory is beginning to fail me and its not a bug. In deep water its not really an issue but in shallower water dead ships/subs can cause your torps or the enemys torps to aquire wrecks on the bottom which I have used on occassion to evade incoming torps.

Nemo

[Molon Labe]

Is that really anything negative buoyancy can't handle? Maybe add a little friction with the bottom to hold it in place on not-so-steep slopes?

[Captain Sub]

@Captain Sub: I could swear i never saw the torpedo second from the left on your sig... What's his classification and tech specs?:hmm:

lol...but it's always been there!

Just a list for my recent weapons i am using, and the 2nd weapon is just the ASM missile, it looks like that underwater, when starting in the air it gets wings :)

[Captain Sub]

Rocky: The change to the CM's is that there is a host-controlled option to set the rate that CM's cause torpedoes to detonate. It is not fixed at 50% and it does not reduce the chance that a torpedo will acquire and "hit" a decoy. So don't get excited unless you're hosting, and even if you are, don't get too excited...the decoys will still work even at the 0% detonation setting.

GG: That's the SS-N-27 ASM/LAM.

it's just bull****.

it's good they added the function it's crap they didn't leave it at 100% as it was 1.03ed.

[Dr.Sid]

Is that really anything negative buoyancy can't handle? Maybe add a little friction with the bottom to hold it in place on not-so-steep slopes?

You can just detect the collision and from that moment fix the wreck position and let it fixed (as building) .. no more position update. Tetris does it .. while DW can't ? I too think this was just overlooked.

[FERdeBOER]

I don't know nothing about programming but I think that if it were so easy, it would have been done yet.

There should be another reason :hmm:

[Molon Labe]

Rocky: The change to the CM's is that there is a host-controlled option to set the rate that CM's cause torpedoes to detonate. It is not fixed at 50% and it does not reduce the chance that a torpedo will acquire and "hit" a decoy. So don't get excited unless you're hosting, and even if you are, don't get too excited...the decoys will still work even at the 0% detonation setting.

GG: That's the SS-N-27 ASM/LAM.
it's just bull****.

it's good they added the function it's crap they didn't leave it at 100% as it was 1.03ed.

You can turn it up to 100% if you choose to. What's bull**** about having a choice?

[Dr.Sid]

I don't know nothing about programming but I think that if it were so easy, it would have been done yet.
There should be another reason :hmm:

The reason is that SCS does not want to develop DW anymore. Or not very much. It is company with hundreds of programmer (as I've heard in the video with Jamie). I say one programmer is working on DW now, and most probably not even fulltime.
While 1.04 has some new models (which already existed before it seems), it has just minor changes in code itself. It only confirms my theories.

Believe me .. I'm programmer for 20 years, I even made some 3d gaming stuff, I'm interested in simulation from programming point of view. Things like dead platforms should be fixed in hours, beta tested in week.

In DW there is many really obvious unexplainable shortcomings (let's not call them bugs). Like 16 bit graphics. And many many like this.
DW is nice game and I like it a lot. I'm thankfull for 1.04. But it is way under the standards. Especially patch reaction is worse than most freeware products.

Hell ! Compare 1.04 to what Luftwolf has done. And it is one man, not specialist, not fulltime, for free, with no official support. I say he made like 10 times more changes and fixes than all patches together. You can really see his work growing. With SCS you just wait .. wait .. wait .. ah .. the bug introduced in last patch is fixed .. cool.

I don't want to blame anybody .. SCS has full right to manage their people. DW is best sub game anyway.

I just can't understand these post like 'they did not include that because it's too complicated' .. only reason we don't have something is SCS does not want us to have it .. they just have other priorities, and it is OK all-around, just a little shame for us, sub nuts :|\\

[DivingWind]

Oh happy day! :sunny:

[Molon Labe]

I don't know nothing about programming but I think that if it were so easy, it would have been done yet.
There should be another reason :hmm:
The reason is that SCS does not want to develop DW anymore. Or not very much. It is company with hundreds of programmer (as I've heard in the video with Jamie). I say one programmer is working on DW now, and most probably not even fulltime.
While 1.04 has some new models (which already existed before it seems), it has just minor changes in code itself. It only confirms my theories.

Hey now, let's be fair.

1.04 fixed a very serious pitch control problem that was having a profound effect on gameplay in 1.03. As the first patch after the European releases, it addressed several bugs and compatibility issues related to those releases. It fixed an error in the active sonar model and fixed glitches in AI aircraft sensors and behavior.

And it wasn't just damage control. We now have the options of whether torps explode on decoys or home on dead platforms. We have an enhanced torpedo range formula that accounts for the rate of fuel consumption and efficiency for different speed settings. The new eye candy isn't bad either.

That's a lot to be happy about in my book.

[Dr.Sid]

With this speed it would take like 10 years to make the whole game .. only thing I say is that SCS pays too few people to work on DW. Two more options in ini file, controlling variables which already had to be in the game .. talking about it and deciding if we want it takes more time that making it.

It's allright with me .. but look at the suggestion thread:

- Virginia please !
- We want nukes !
- missions free of bugs (ie tons of testing)
- improvement of framerates (most probably full simulation redesign)
- and many more funky features

These are simple beyond what we may expect. Even some minor things seems to be out of possibilites ..
- total rework of noise/speed curve
- array depth indicated in subs
- and more ..

And there is even many really minor tweaks, which does not require interface changes, which we don't have, like 32 bit screenmodes.

I don't blame anybody .. but DW is dead .. SCS just pretends it is not (maybe only Jamie pretends it by working on DW in his freetime, nice guy).

[goldorak]

With this speed it would take like 10 years to make the whole game .. only thing I say is that SCS pays too few people to work on DW.


How about the fact that people don't buy DW ?
If the game were much more succesful we would see more patches, and in more timely maner.
In any case, as far as I'm concerned the game is as complete as it ever is going to be.
The only issues remaining are the 16 bit graphics, the absence of AA and AF and non detectability of masts.
We now have a very great mod in the workings (superior in my book to the SCX mod of SC) and a new graphical update.
Barring those minor issues (the first 3 of which cannot be resolved without basically rewriting the whole graphics engine) the game is great. :p :up:

[Dr.Sid]

Yeah .. I agree.

That's what I mean by saying that SCS has full right to do this. It's just ok.
Just don't call for big updates. It's not going to happen. Not from SCS, I mean.

I'm looking forward any mods :rock:

[XabbaRus]

So Dr Sid you seem to know an awful lot about SCS based on the video interview.

If SCS weren't interested in developing DW I doubt there would have been any patches.

Oh and the 688i model is completely new as is the freighter, 688i was made for this patch and the freighter was done for the demo vid.

I know DW isn't perfect and there are some things that could have been done better, but this bitch and moan thing really doesn't help.

Sid why don't your write your own simulation. I'm not being flippant I'm serious. I'm pretty sure that there would be people here willing to help. I can't program but I can model. Seriously that would put subsim on the map. A community developed naval sim.

[Molon Labe]

I don't blame anybody .. but DW is dead .. SCS just pretends it is not (maybe only Jamie pretends it by working on DW in his freetime, nice guy).

Where's Fish when you need him?
After a brief browing through of this http://globalnavalstrikeforce.com/scripts/view_report.php, I think it's safe to say DW is still being played. Lots of team dives too.

[Dr.Sid]

God knows I did not mean dead for players .. I meant dead for SCS.

[jrcole]

This new patch includes all previous patches? How then can it be 6 megs smaller than the 1.03 patch?
thanks

[Dr.Sid]

This new patch includes all previous patches? How then can it be 6 megs smaller than the 1.03 patch?
thanks

It contains all previsou patches. But it seems it uses some differential method of patching, so only the changes are included. Later patches contained whole modified files, as far as I remember.

[Molon Labe]

God knows I did not mean dead for players .. I meant dead for SCS.

I hate being reminded that I'm not God, but there you go. :lol: Sorry for the misunderstanding...

But considering we just got a patch, it doesn't seem dead to them either. But it would be foolish to get our hopes up about getting a ton of upgrades in a short amount of time... it's just not worth their investment right now.

Fortunately for us, we have some talented modders that have some great new ideas that should be able to keep building on the DW project.:rock:

[Dr.Sid]

So Dr Sid you seem to know an awful lot about SCS based on the video interview.

If SCS weren't interested in developing DW I doubt there would have been any patches.

Oh and the 688i model is completely new as is the freighter, 688i was made for this patch and the freighter was done for the demo vid.

I know DW isn't perfect and there are some things that could have been done better, but this bitch and moan thing really doesn't help.

Sid why don't your write your own simulation. I'm not being flippant I'm serious. I'm pretty sure that there would be people here willing to help. I can't program but I can model. Seriously that would put subsim on the map. A community developed naval sim.
Hell I don't wanna bitch. I'm just saying that SCS gives little support, compared to other companies (and some freeware projects). It's ok .. but don't say they give great support. They don't. Great support would mean 3 new playable platforms, even if it was not for free. Anyway I agree there really is SOME support and there are games which simply cuts any support right after the release.

Demo video is there for pretty long time .. so the freighter was not really made for this patch. And new 688 .. how much time would it take you to make it ? Day ? Well let's say two with all database setup.

As for my own simulation .. geez that would be great .. time is a problem, but community is strong, I can see that. I can program pretty everything .. I have experience with 3D, AI, I know enough math for sound simulation and other stuff. I have little experience with sounds (I mean playing samples). I can do models too, but that realy is full time job by itself. I think subsim really is doable in small team. I can even imagine first versions without 3D at all.
But we would seriously need not only beta-testers, but also experts. Experts willing to talk I mean. I can program some pretty complicated sound propagation model .. but somebody must say how much realistic it is. What is possible IRL and what's not. While there is lot's of people here who knows, there is quite little who can talk.
I must grant to SCS that they have the knowledge and experience. It would need all the community to collect this.
But back to earth .. time is THE problem. Anyway .. I take your word as a modeler .. I'm going to see what you can make in the mods right ? :up: Ehm .. and it seems I have to prove myself somehow .. maybe I'll polish my sound propagation demo I wrote some time ago to demonstrate layer and deep channel. It works nicely but it has no user interface to speak off.

[LoBlo]

Does anyone know what this issue was referring to?

- Torpedo speed vs. fuel issue was corrected.

Torpedoe speed versus range maybe? Doesn't seem like the doctrine file is changed though...:hmm:

[sonar732]

- total rework of noise/speed curve
It was reworked. As you've said in an earlier post...take into consideration of just how much we can talk and compair with RL.

- array depth indicated in subs
We didn't have one on my boat, but I was on an Ohio...all I'll say.

[Captain Sub]

Rocky: The change to the CM's is that there is a host-controlled option to set the rate that CM's cause torpedoes to detonate. It is not fixed at 50% and it does not reduce the chance that a torpedo will acquire and "hit" a decoy. So don't get excited unless you're hosting, and even if you are, don't get too excited...the decoys will still work even at the 0% detonation setting.

GG: That's the SS-N-27 ASM/LAM.
it's just bull****.

it's good they added the function it's crap they didn't leave it at 100% as it was 1.03ed.

You can turn it up to 100% if you choose to. What's bull**** about having a choice?

READ READ and then post something that makes sense...

[Molon Labe]

Rocky: The change to the CM's is that there is a host-controlled option to set the rate that CM's cause torpedoes to detonate. It is not fixed at 50% and it does not reduce the chance that a torpedo will acquire and "hit" a decoy. So don't get excited unless you're hosting, and even if you are, don't get too excited...the decoys will still work even at the 0% detonation setting.

GG: That's the SS-N-27 ASM/LAM.
it's just bull****.

it's good they added the function it's crap they didn't leave it at 100% as it was 1.03ed.
You can turn it up to 100% if you choose to. What's bull**** about having a choice?
READ READ and then post something that makes sense...
I was giving you the benefit of the doubt. Because you know, I wouldn't expect anyone on this board to start yelling bull**** over a default setting that they can change anyways, especially when they set the default right in the frakin' middle! Imagine, that someone would have a problem with the designers compromising with the people that wanted detonations with the people who didn't! Now that would be a post that didn't make any sense!:roll:

[Jamie]

This new patch includes all previous patches? How then can it be 6 megs smaller than the 1.03 patch?
thanks
It contains all previsou patches. But it seems it uses some differential method of patching, so only the changes are included. Later patches contained whole modified files, as far as I remember.

What Dr. Sid said. :)

We are actually patching the 3D.grp and other graphics groups instead of replacing them. It was previously very tricky to do in Installshield but we figured it out for v1.04 patches... Hence the smaller file sizes for the patches. :know:

[Fish]

I don't blame anybody .. but DW is dead .. SCS just pretends it is not (maybe only Jamie pretends it by working on DW in his freetime, nice guy).

Where's Fish when you need him?
After a brief browing through of this http://globalnavalstrikeforce.com/scripts/view_report.php, I think it's safe to say DW is still being played. Lots of team dives too.

I am here. :cool:

Yeah, people are still playing the game.

I counted 52 dive reports in januari from just one diver. (newt-icop TF73)

[moosenoodles]

Hi all,

Fresh install of DW and patched with latest 1.04, would like to ask anyone if they have noticed a change in sound level with the crew responses when giving orders.. They have gone so quiet i cant hear them well enough.. not that u need to but its a change lol...

I have checked the settings ingame and out of game, nothing changed since re-installing sim..

Most odd to say the least....

So anyone noticed this ?

J.

[GakunGak]

Hi all,

Fresh install of DW and patched with latest 1.04, would like to ask anyone if they have noticed a change in sound level with the crew responses when giving orders.. They have gone so quiet i cant hear them well enough.. not that u need to but its a change lol...

I have checked the settings ingame and out of game, nothing changed since re-installing sim..

Most odd to say the least....

So anyone noticed this ?

J.
Yeah, I noticed it too. I was runing ultra quiet when my sonar picked up a russian boomer. The only noise that was making on my sub was a bee that i was trying to kill in the first place... Then my cook farted so loud that the enemy thought I was a boomer too and was launching ICBM on their motherland. So we torpedoed each other and then i had a power outage...:arrgh!:
Just kidding...
Go to SOUND in options and set everything to max.... Other thing that were changed visually are:
1. 688i new skin which rocks!
2. Seahawk with dipping sonar.
3. freightrer [uncomfirmed, rumors on members]
4. surfacing/diving acceleration...
Changes are included in the readme...
I wish somebody model 688I in Sub Command....:|\\

[moosenoodles]

LOL you nutcase ,,, yes unfortunatley i put all 3 sliders to max sound and its no different... top one is off as its the music, dont really listen to that no more...

So if anyone has any other ideas?

Thanks in advance..

J.

[GakunGak]

LOL you nutcase ,,, yes unfortunatley i put all 3 sliders to max sound and its no different... top one is off as its the music, dont really listen to that no more...

So if anyone has any other ideas?

Thanks in advance..

J.
Go to volume control in Control Panel and pump the volume sliders to the max! Check the advanced options for additional controls...:|\\
And yeah, I am a nutcase...:rotfl:

[moosenoodles]

Its great feels like im talking to a tech :P (im a ex branch sys administrator/tech guy btw). TeeHee..

No on a serious not I have done all the normal problem solving stuff, alas nothing doing im afraid.. Most odd but no biggie... Using an Xfi card works well on everything else so far thrown at it,, its just since the update of 1.04 on a fresh DW.

Ill keep nosing about and see what I can come up with but Im not holding my breath on this one..

Cheers.

J.

[Molon Labe]

The freighter's not a rumor. It's been changed from "the ship with the world's largest funnel" (one of the worst models, if not the worst, in the game) to the old rustbucket that appeared in the most recent trailer.

[GakunGak]

The freighter's not a rumor. It's been changed from "the ship with the world's largest funnel" (one of the worst models, if not the worst, in the game) to the old rustbucket that appeared in the most recent trailer.
I personally thought that The Typhoon was the worst modeled sub unit, nevermond the freighter...:ping:
First question: Is it possible to lose sonar contact if a sub is below a tanker/freighter, meaning if i want to stay undercover, can I use a ship with heavy cavitation as a hat and to avoin incoming torps?
Second question: I saw depth charge in the game modeled, but is it used in mission somewhere?:hmm:

[sonar732]

First question: Is it possible to lose sonar contact if a sub is below a tanker/freighter, meaning if i want to stay undercover, can I use a ship with heavy cavitation as a hat and to avoin incoming torps?

If you attempt to utilize this tactic, which has been discussed multiple times...a good OPFOR will see that your sub will have different tonals than the freighter. Granted, they won't be able to hear you over the sound of the freighter, but that's what narrowband is for. Then all they have to do is set the ceiling of his torps say to 60-100 feet to get you and not the freighter.

[Molon Labe]

First question: Is it possible to lose sonar contact if a sub is below a tanker/freighter, meaning if i want to stay undercover, can I use a ship with heavy cavitation as a hat and to avoin incoming torps?

If you attempt to utilize this tactic, which has been discussed multiple times...a good OPFOR will see that your sub will have different tonals than the freighter. Granted, they won't be able to hear you over the sound of the freighter, but that's what narrowband is for. Then all they have to do is set the ceiling of his torps say to 60-100 feet to get you and not the freighter.

It's also worth mentioning that the MAD will pick up both platforms independently of each other, putting 2 contacts on the map instead of 1, so you can't hide your magnetic signature with this tactic either. :shifty:

[Dr.Sid]

But if you surface .. then the torpedoes will have really hard time deciding between you and the tanker, same as missiles. AI will simply blast you both .. humans too I gues. :|\\

[GakunGak]

Is it possible then to deep dive to the bottom and be a hole in the water, so the torp could target surface shipping because they are making more noise than me at 0kts deep below?:dead:

[sonar732]

Is it possible then to deep dive to the bottom and be a hole in the water, so the torp could target surface shipping because they are making more noise than me at 0kts deep below?:dead:

Depends on whether the torpedo is an active or passive torp. Also, if the OPFOR captain knows he is firing a torpedo against a submarine via the narrowband, he'll set the presets to ignore the surface craft and focus on the sub as stated earlier.

[goldorak]

Is it possible then to deep dive to the bottom and be a hole in the water, so the torp could target surface shipping because they are making more noise than me at 0kts deep below?:dead:

Not if the Opfor knows what he is doing. :D
Selectiong torpedo presets are as important as knowing your position.
Your best solution is not to be discovered, else all bets are off and you'll have a very rough ride from there on. :rotfl:

[GakunGak]

Then i suppose that when i spot a helo through my periscope, I'm minutes away from destruction.... I was never able to pickup a helo with sonar [saw that on The Hunt for Red October:damn: ] So, my best chance is to dive, run without cavitation and launch a spread of CM's both active and passive and prior to deploying CM's, turn a sharp 90*?

[goldorak]

Then i suppose that when i spot a helo through my periscope, I'm minutes away from destruction.... I was never able to pickup a helo with sonar [saw that on The Hunt for Red October:damn: ] So, my best chance is to dive, run without cavitation and launch a spread of CM's both active and passive and prior to deploying CM's, turn a sharp 90*?

It depends, if the helo is quite near you could have the time to breach the surface and fire some sams in his direction.
It is quite an effective tactic.
If he is far away, just dive deep without cavitating, go to 500m and you should be safe from mad/sad sensors.

[GakunGak]

Just as I thought, but sometimes when he is near, as soon as i surface, he launches a torp at me... I was able to shoot down 2 helos deployed from Oliver Hazard Perry and i was the akula, it's that mission when i have to breakout to open sea... A good tactioc i found was that if i stay as shallow as possible, every torpedo they drop would bury into the ocean floor...:arrgh!: So i surface & boom...
However, taking down Perry was a tricky thing with missiles as he shots down most of them...:|\\

[Linton]

Do the toned down stars work if I install them and have the updates sorted out some of the logic problems with stock missions that existed in the early days.Do the missions on subguru still work?

[Dr.Sid]

Stars are pretty stand-alone. Their modifications does not collide with anything.

[kage]

First question: Is it possible to lose sonar contact if a sub is below a tanker/freighter, meaning if i want to stay undercover, can I use a ship with heavy cavitation as a hat and to avoin incoming torps?

If you attempt to utilize this tactic, which has been discussed multiple times...a good OPFOR will see that your sub will have different tonals than the freighter. Granted, they won't be able to hear you over the sound of the freighter, but that's what narrowband is for. Then all they have to do is set the ceiling of his torps say to 60-100 feet to get you and not the freighter.

For real life, there is some uncertainty involved in this. First of all, the 'sub class X always emit tonals at n, n, n, n and n frequencies' we're having in DW is bulls^!& - the tonals generated will depend on the exact hull, plus an indeterminate number of internal conditions which may change from one moment to another - the cargo load of a freighter or other ship may affect what it sounds like. (This is part of why the periscope is as important as it is, RL) - what aspect you're at may also affect what sounds are sent in your direction.

In the face of that, a ship getting a "new" tonal may not be worth all that much attention.

(Or at least, this is my understanding of it)

But in DW, it's almost like calling attention to yourself.

[sonar732]

For real life, there is some uncertainty involved in this. First of all, the 'sub class X always emit tonals at n, n, n, n and n frequencies' we're having in DW is bulls^!& - the tonals generated will depend on the exact hull, plus an indeterminate number of internal conditions which may change from one moment to another - the cargo load of a freighter or other ship may affect what it sounds like. (This is part of why the periscope is as important as it is, RL) - what aspect you're at may also affect what sounds are sent in your direction.

In the face of that, a ship getting a "new" tonal may not be worth all that much attention.

(Or at least, this is my understanding of it)

But in DW, it's almost like calling attention to yourself.

Well...the issue with this is that the DoD will never release the exact tonals given by particular boats. What matters here is the concept of FRAZ display and the 'general' utilization of nb.

[Bellman]

Top screening is ineffective, however masking is nicely implemented by SCS and can be used in shallow waters. Depending on own depth, the SA may not pick up target sub running at or near peri depth on the opposite side of a surf. However if you can dive and/or deploy enough TA those faint tonals manifest.

Masking is difficult to pull off and would I'm sure only be used by a diver in extremis and in most cases would not inhibit a skillful opponent.

[Bera]

Still no news about the STEAM patch? Jamie said it would be avaliable due to the last weekend, but so far, nothing...

[Pirate]

Is this the last patch sonalysts will deploy to DW or in the future will come the 1.05?

[ASWnut101]

And what about that depth charge that someone esle asked about? is it even used?:hmm:

[LuftWolf]

Helicopters equipped with depth charges will use them, and they are generally pretty effective.

Cheers,
David

[GakunGak]

Helicopters equipped with depth charges will use them, and they are generally pretty effective.

Cheers,
David
AI, Player or Both Controlable?:hmm:

[hachiman]

Thanx for this and love the new 688I model.
Those VLS tubes are sweet. :D

[Frying Tiger]

Valve has updated Steam for Dangerous Waters.

Link to the Steam News article: http://www.steampowered.com/v/index.php?area=news&id=952&cc=US

There ya go!

[Molon Labe]

Be advised: The SCS download site to which these patch links point has been moved.

The new site is: http://www.sonalystscombatsims.com/dangerous_waters/patch.html

Those of you who have links to the old site should update.

[Palindromeria]

what the heck page not found i missed 1.04 grrr

:damn: :nope: :doh: :down:





:lurk:




Thank you very much for the correct link, Molon Labe
:rock: :up: :sunny:

:()1:

[osteo]

:D:D:salute::salute::salute:

[Nippelspanner]

@Neal
Please edit the first post with the new link. The one you posted is dead unfortunately.:wah:

[Wakko]

Where can I DL 1.04?

[Theta Sigma]

http://www.sonalystscombatsims.com/game_downloads/game_downloads.html
http://www.gamefront.com/files/listing/pub2/Dangerous_Waters/Official_Patches

[SnipersHunter]

I want to buy it. Is it its money worth?

[Fincuan]

DW is now on sale at Steam, for 3.74€ :rock:

Sale lasts until Monday the 18th.

[Shawn & Heat]

Hi folks,
FNG here, trying to apply patch (D/L'd v101 103 & 104) to DW and message pops up that DW is not installed?!?!? Check HD and yes it's there. How do I get around this?
My copmuter is an HP w/XP SP3 (bought in '07)

Thanks