My review

[tommo8993]

Overall I love this game. I'm still getting used to it seen as I normally play the "light" sims (NWAC, Fleet Command) but the controls are easy enough to grasp, theirs some tutorial videos on youtube that nailed it. I feel after about 4-5 hours of playtime i know what i'm doing. Ive mainly stuck to the smaller scenarios but i'm going to try some of the older scenarios, a 1964 invasion of kuwait (iraq vs kuwait/UK) looks good. This actually happened, the UK sent carriers, iraq backed down. This alternate scenario changes that. Overall the performance is good the only thing I miss is sound, their no sound in the game at all. Even if it was a few beeps and buzzes every time something happens it would be ok, but no. Complete silence. That been the only negative I can think of and that soon community scenarios are going to be appearing, plus patches, the future looks good.

Overall its a great game. Takes a few hours of patience to master it but once your their its great.

8/10

[Sunburn]

Thanks!

Sound effects are disabled by default (most beta folks tended to disable them after a while so it stuck), but you can easily enable them: From the main manu, Game -> Game Options -> Use Game Sounds.

[biosthetique]

I only played the tutorial submarine mission.

The sounds effect actually startled me, as irregular as they are. I did not hear any other sound in that mission except the launch of a torpedo or the explosion on the target. No other sounds were heard.

The comments on the left on the screen are not read.

Very little sound feet back of any information.

Then again, NO COMMAND DETONATE of torpedoes, and that is unrealistic.

I will keep playing other submarine missions, but I am 1/2 as enthusiastic now that I was before I bought the game.

[Richard G]

Are you saying the game has command detonate torpedoes, or does not?

There is no such thing as a command detonated torpedo, at least in the US Navy there isn't.

[mapuc]

Are you saying the game has command detonate torpedoes, or does not?

There is no such thing as a command detonated torpedo, at least in the US Navy there isn't.


When I read it, my first thought was Hunt For Red October, where James Earl Jones press a botton and a torpedo explode before it hit it's target(Red October) I'm not really into how torpedoes work in the real world, so I don't know if it's possible.

Markus

[biosthetique]

Due to the numerous accidents (incident) or close call, or near miss to the usage of Acoustic homing torpedoes, as the tech. allowed it, a wire was added to control torpedoes during the first leg of their courses.

That was at first a safety measure.

As the technology evolved, other functions were added to the control of torpedoes.

Today, the safety measures remains as shutting them down when recovery was possible or exploding them as the technology could be recovered by other country. Torpedoes tech is top secret for their homing system in ANY countries in the world.

Exploding a torpedo as a tactical defensive maneuver is also used, as long as it is still wired.

see Advanced Defensive Tactics post in Subsim.com

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom//showthread.php?t=207398

[Sunburn]

The comments on the left on the screen are not read.


If you have trouble reading the message log, you can have it be printed on a separate window instead of using the left side of the main map.

From the main menu, Game -> Game Options -> "Message Log in separate window".

[Sunburn]

Exploding a torpedo as a tactical defensive maneuver is also used, as long as it is still wired.

see Advanced Defensive Tactics post in Subsim.com

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom//showthread.php?t=207398

Is this a usable real-life tactic? We've had several people on the beta group with sub ops experience and nobody has brought this up.

[biosthetique]

ha! ha! ha! If you are in the US Navy (or any DOD department from many countries), in the reserve, or retired, you have a duty to not reveal details for XX years.

Having a Navy Officer on board will guaranty you to be blinded on certain issues, and/or to be told that they never heard of that, never seen it, don't know, or finally, have no comment (which is what I like most as you are told not to ask again, in a honest way). As they are just doing their job protecting their country. There is nothing wrong with that.

Deception is part of the Arsenal!

I.e. Tom Clancy never served in the US navy, but he knew many people that did serve in the US Navy and the Royal Navy!...

You are better off getting your info from Jane's and you won't be breaking any laws!

http://www.ihs.com/products/janes/defence/det-products/Naval.aspx

[Richard G]

I didn't know that. I was limited to handling Mk46 and Mk50s though. Rendering the torp unrecoverable makes perfect sense.

One of my ASW instructors yelled out "Bull Ship!", when we saw that part of the movie in the theater (James Earl Jones), then slapped his hand over his mouth for fear of losing his clearance :haha:

[biosthetique]

You got it!

And it is not reproduced in DW as they are US Navy contractors.

Tom Clancy is a US civilian, hence more freedom!...Yet that part of the movie is not completely accurate, as only the launcher can destroy it and as long as it is still wired. I am not venturing any further than that!

[Sunburn]

I'm not thinking so much about security clearances as much as the basic laws of physics.

Sonar, unless we're talking about the mine-hunting sets who are capable of imaging, is an imprecise sensor at the best of times. The only operational anti-torpedo systems known, the US Mk46 Mod 7 and the Russian UDAV-1, are designed to create barrage explosions near the threatened ship as a last-ditch effort to stop the incoming torpedo, exactly because they are not precise enough to impact near it otherwise.

What you and that game describe is more akin to long-range ABM-like interception. I'd like to see some hard figures indicating that even the best US sonars are capable of generating precise enough targeting data for such a feat.

[Zander]

What biosthetique is saying makes perfect sense to me. I guarded Pershing 2 nuke missiles for a while, and when I PCSed I signed a secrecy document with "NO" expiration date. I will be 61 this year for some perspective.
I just want Sonalysts to give us their best shot at a modern DWS, and I'll die happy. And yes, this game is a keeper. Thank you Warfaresims.

[Sunburn]

Let's review the evidence:

Tome after tome of Jane's: No mention of this capability AFAIK.
Conways: Nothing.
USNI: Nothing.
Other printed sources: Nothing.
Russian sources (you can often find stuff there that nobody in the US will dare talk about): Nothing.
Sonalyst sims, widely regarded as the best unclassified source: Nothing.
Clancy's non-fiction books (e.g. "Submarine"), mass-oriented but fairly useful: Nothing.
Non-fiction books by other authors: Nothing.
Sub guys in our beta group: Nothing.

Sources supporting this:
- Clancy's "SSN", generally regarded as a low-fidelity sim bordering on arcade.
- You (biosthetique).

You can probably appreciate my skepticism.

I can only see two possible explanations:

1) This capability does not exist, which is why nobody out there is talking about it. You have been misinformed, either by error or on purpose (lots of COINTEL pros out there).

2) The capability does exist, and the US defence establishment has been wildly successful in keeping it under wraps and has actively silenced anyone attempting to reveal it (incl foreign entities - I'm sure the Russians would talk about it if they knew and were able to). Which in turn means that about half an hour after we provide an update for Command that models this capability, I will be abducted by the local direct-action outfit in Athens and shipped off to a suitable facility for further interrogation.

In either case, I don't see much of an incentive for including this capability in Command :)

[Sunburn]

BTW If I am wrong and this capability is described anywhere out there (outside the SSN game), please do correct me. I would be interested in learning more about it. Thanks!

[Sunburn]

I just want Sonalysts to give us their best shot at a modern DWS, and I'll die happy. And yes, this game is a keeper. Thank you Warfaresims.

Thanks for the confidence!

[biosthetique]

BTW If I am wrong and this capability is described anywhere out there (outside the SSN game), please do correct me. I would be interested in learning more about it. Thanks!

LOL!...That is cute!...SSN does not explain you how to do that, it is not in the SSN manual. The physics of that "low-fidelity sim bordering on arcade" allows you to do it as the physics of DW would allow you to do it if the Detonate option was offered. Clancy was not a US Government contractor, but Sonalyst is.

It is advanced defensive tactic!...It is not basic evasive maneuvers medium range dump a noise maker and turn 90 degrees to exit the torpedo cone of vision, and force it to reacquire you.

Now, if you doubt the physics of a torpedo exploding, creating a shock wave within 200 yards of an incoming torpedo, which shock wave explodes the incoming torpedo, then it is ok.

The exploding torpedo is still wired, active and also guided by the sonar system of the sub launcher, as the torpedo alone can not do it. It will get you close, but it is not as accurate as to collide with incoming torpedo. It needs the help of the Sub launcher sonar to place it in the course of the incoming torpedo, and when within xxx yards, kaboum!

Jane's won't tell you how to use a weapon, it is not a field manual, but it will tell you the capabilities of a weapon system, and if it can be destroyed at will while still wired. Remember, torpedoes explode anyway when they run out of gas and the wire long gone, to protect the technology.

Now if you don't believe it because it defies your perceptions or for any other reasons, it is ok. Moreover, I don't think that anyone in their right mind would deliberately prove your point or sustain my description, by producing a page of a manual explaining how things get done in a combat environment.

And I am done talking about that, as right or wrong, accurate or not, what I know does not define me, and I'd rather be experiencing some games/sims/"low-fidelity sim bordering on arcade" (real classy), than talking about them.

Your game is good and there is many room available for improvements!

BTW, don't take yourself too seriously, Tom Clancy was not abducted for illustrating "Command detonate" in Tom Clancy SSN, and he certainly knows more about Submarines weapon systems than you and I together.

Now throw me another one, so you will have the last word:up:

[Sunburn]

Now throw me another one, so you will have the last word:up:

Come now, we're both adults. First! and last! posts are for kids & trolls.

I understand what you're saying, and your description sounds plausible. I'm just wondering how come it (not the detonation command, but the practicality of using it to disrupt other torpedoes) has never been mentioned anywhere else.

I'll have another round with our sub folks to discuss this. If it's feasible, we can look into implementing this on a future update.

Thanks!

[DAB]

Due to the numerous accidents (incident) or close call, or near miss to the usage of Acoustic homing torpedoes, as the tech. allowed it, a wire was added to control torpedoes during the first leg of their courses.

That was at first a safety measure.

As the technology evolved, other functions were added to the control of torpedoes.

Today, the safety measures remains as shutting them down when recovery was possible or exploding them as the technology could be recovered by other country. Torpedoes tech is top secret for their homing system in ANY countries in the world.

Exploding a torpedo as a tactical defensive maneuver is also used, as long as it is still wired.

see Advanced Defensive Tactics post in Subsim.com

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom//showthread.php?t=207398

Whilst I'm sure could be possible to remote detonate a wire guided torpedo, either through design or some random property of the software used, I can't imagine it being used as a tactical capability. As a method of destroying a missed torpedo to prevent it falling into the hands of a rival power - quite possibly. But then again, why would this be a property unique to wire guided torpedo's when you could simply write a programme for any torpedo to self destruct after say 3, 6 or 12 hours.

My umbridge with it as a secret, unacknowledged tactical capability is what tactical advantage could the capability actually have. As Sunburn says, passive Sonar and Target Motion Analysis isn't known for its precision accuracy. And if you are close enough to the target that you're prosecuting it with Active Sonar... why not just close the range and allow the torpedo to make the kill?

The thread you link to suggests that you could use this capability to torpedo incoming torpedo's. Again. Maybe, if the torpedo could get close enough. But no submarine would stick around long enough surely to guide a torpedo in that close. Presuming this is a classic SSN duel (say 688I vs Akula) of the kind we play in 688I and Dangerous Waters. The 688 gets into a good firing position, closes the range and fires two torpedo's at the Akula. A few minutes later, the Akula detects the torpedo's and snapshots back two torpedo's of its own. The next defensive move for the 688 is to turn tail, put the Akula's torpedo's 30 degrees off the stern, increase speed to open up the range and change depth to get below / above a thermal layer. At that point, the wire controlling the torpedo shots has been broken: the original torpedo's can not be guided in.

You could fire another torpedo (I suppose) at the torpedo's, but given those torpedo's are behind you coming towards you in a straight line; TMA is going to be very inaccurate. And anyway, traveling at 20+ knots in the opposite direction in which you want the torpedo to go is not conducive to keeping the wire intact ( and god help you if the torpedo tangled in your propeller.

The only reference I've ever seen to torpedo's self destructing before hitting the target and people torpedoing torpedo's is in the Michael DiMicurio novels I read as an adolescent. And they were near future science fiction.

And even if that function does exist in Submarine Warfare: is it really such an immersion killer that it hasn't been modelled. I'm sure that their are aspects of targeting for sidewinder missiles that haven't been modelled on the F18's. if it was a survey sim like Dangerous Waters, I might be missed. But the point of command is that you are the strategist and tactician, and that you leave the method of carrying out your decisions to the AI.

[biosthetique]

DAB, get TOM CLANCY SSN and experiment with your scenario then film it. The game is ARCADISH enough to be understood by anyone!

[Richard G]

Can a wire guided torp be shut down? (in the game)

Can a wire guided torp track the launching sub? (kill yourself?). I read on the other forum torps are not homing on own ship properly when they somehow get in the way.

[Sunburn]

Hello,

1) No.

2) We currently do not model cutting the guidance wire so the torpedo always views its launching sub as friendly and thus never attacks it. We intend to add this feature in a future update.

Thanks!

[mapuc]

This game and other sim games for that matter, will never be 100 % realistic.

And it's a good reason to why.

Markus

[Ardaeshir]

ha! ha! ha! If you are in the US Navy (or any DOD department from many countries), in the reserve, or retired, you have a duty to not reveal details for XX years.
Yep, that is very true. Not only are there very serious legal penalties for revealing information, but most military people will simply decline because of patriotism and professional sense of duty.

That's why its usually much more enlighting and pleasant to discuss "old" stuff (Ancient, WW2 or at best Cold war era) with military people so as not to get into these sort of convoluted "I know but can't tell" situations.

I know one (now retired) Russian and ex-soviet staff analyst. We came round togeatehr once and we had to evade all subjects related to our countries or modern doctrinal issues. (On the other hand we did have a blast talking about the 1980s Angola border war).


So yeah... modern warfare and doctrine issues can be problematic. That's just how things are in the gaming industry - don't expect to make a relaistic game about SWAT if you plan on asking actual SWAT to tell you how they run things ;)

[DAB]

DAB, get TOM CLANCY SSN and experiment with your scenario then film it. The game is ARCADISH enough to be understood by anyone!

I've owned SSN and read the book someone wrote on Tom Clancy's behalf to go alongside that game. I'm sure that if I downloaded the game, I could do what you are suggesting with the torpedo's

What I'm questioning is the assertion that because something can be done in an arcade(ish) like game, it must be proof positive that this capability exists. Likewise, an inability to do the same in another game (let's say Dangerous Waters) doesn't prove that the capability doesn't exist. The second half of my post then questions under what senario in real life a naval commander would stay put and make use of this ultra-secret niche capability when the prudent thing to do is turn tale and open up the range.

In research, journalism, intelligence and academia; something is not proven until there are (at least) two independent sources to colloberate it. A mass market computer game, whether it be SSN, 688I or Command:MANW is not a reliable source. If you want to to prove that this capability exists: then you will need to provide alternative, rigourous sources. Until then, saying that something is technically possible and could be done is no reason to insist that it "must" be added into a simulation.

[biosthetique]

I've owned SSN and read the book someone wrote on Tom Clancy's behalf to go alongside that game. I'm sure that if I downloaded the game, I could do what you are suggesting with the torpedo's

What I'm questioning is the assertion that because something can be done in an arcade(ish) like game, it must be proof positive that this capability exists. Likewise, an inability to do the same in another game (let's say Dangerous Waters) doesn't prove that the capability doesn't exist. The second half of my post then questions under what senario in real life a naval commander would stay put and make use of this ultra-secret niche capability when the prudent thing to do is turn tale and open up the range.

In research, journalism, intelligence and academia; something is not proven until there are (at least) two independent sources to colloberate it. A mass market computer game, whether it be SSN, 688I or Command:MANW is not a reliable source. If you want to to prove that this capability exists: then you will need to provide alternative, rigourous sources. Until then, saying that something is technically possible and could be done is no reason to insist that it "must" be added into a simulation.

1- I did not say it "MUST BE ADDED", I said: "Then again, NO COMMAND DETONATE of torpedoes, and that is unrealistic". I don't distribute directives around here.

2- True, because showed in SSN, technically possible, and presenting a certain edge in combat, those facts mean that it is done or not done in reality. It does not mean anything, it is neutral!

3- As I said earlier "Moreover, I don't think that anyone in their right mind would deliberately prove your point or sustain my description, by producing a page of a manual explaining how things get done in a combat environment." If it is classified and technically possible or probable (as you would not classified something impossible except for counter-intel. purpose), the info will be denied or ignored. Now, it can also be ignored or laughed at, when totally impossible or irrelevant without discarding a counter-intel angle.

4- I am not into proving something right or wrong, especially about Sonars or Torpedo technology.

5- In intelligence work, theories are developed based on possible moves to reach a goal based on a possible motive as much as there are moves on a check board for a given piece. Sometimes to get a theory started then checked, a single iota of info is enough. Corroboration is always open to interpretations. Finally, intel theories are often proved after the facts, yet it comes with the territory.

6- In research papers in the Academia environment, you list the source and reference of info. But your interpretation is not cited as it is your perception based on interpretation of existing information. To make a point, you use your materials as stepping stones to cross a river, and a leap of faith is necessary to step from one stone to the next. Eisnstein started his theory of time relativity by wondering how it would be to travel on a beam of light. Vision and imagination are almighty.

Now you take a book like "Anti-Submarine Warfare" from David Owen published by Naval Institute Press Annapolis Maryland in 2007, ISBN1-59114-014-5, and you will find interesting stepping stones on page 214.
You can also take the "United States Submarines" from David Randall Hinkle, Harry H Caldwell, Arne C Johnson, the Naval Submarine League, and Sonalysts Inc., published by Barnes & Noble books in 2004 ISBN 0-7607-6219-8.Then read the chapter called "The Future". More stepping stones and also probable info that became reality, since. Then on page 342 a description of a future submarine combat system to provide operators with detailed knowledge of their environment and the tactical scene in 3D, which reminds me of a "low-fidelity sim bordering on arcade". Which 3D system alike is available for ordinary people to admire in a documentary presented by Boeing called "Fighter Pilot, Operation Red Flag" ID4879K28D by Stephen Low, originally an IMAX movie. There are also, Jane's "Underwater Warfare System, XXXX-XXXX" and Jane's "Fighting Ships, XXXX-XXXX". I haven't looked into Jane's "Unconventional Weapons" and Jane's "Pocket Book of Naval Armament".

7- True, I agree. Turning tail and opening up the distance to fight another day is also within the range of possible behaviors to attack the same sub later in its baffle. You can do that, when a torpedo has been launched at you from a long range to outrun it, if you know the torpedo range, speed and bearing. i.e. A stealth/long range torpedo is fired at you 5 miles away at 000. That Torpedo has a top speed of 36kts and a range on average (following the game you are playing) of 10 miles. You will outrun that missile by turning away at 1/2 speed(LA class depending of the game), as the torpedo will run out of fuel approximately when it closes to one mile away from you. Or you can unload some noise makers, fire a MOSS, reach the next Thermocline, shoot down/up that incoming torpedo, scare the hell out of the enemy skipper, and give him a finger!...You are the "Pasha", you can do whatever you want.

[clive bradbury]

Let's not over-complicate things. What this boils down to is that you have assumed a capability for a weapon based on a computer game, with no corroborative evidence from anywhere else, then criticised the designers of CMNAO for not including this alleged 'feature', claiming that this omission makes their software 'unrealistic'.

I know whose side I'm on...

[biosthetique]

Let's not over-complicate things. What this boils down to is that you have assumed a capability for a weapon based on a computer game, with no corroborative evidence from anywhere else, then criticised the designers of CMNAO for not including this alleged 'feature', claiming that this omission makes their software 'unrealistic'.

I know whose side I'm on...

And I know that you ignore what you are talking about, siding with an individual which integrity hence anything he would talk about, is doubtful the least!...

Agreed, let's not complicate CMNAO, it is already complicated as it is, let's keep it simple stupid!

But thank you for participating, you now feel you contributed to a problem. Your parents must be proud of you!:rock:

[clive bradbury]

And I know that you ignore what you are talking about, siding with an individual which integrity hence anything he would talk about, is doubtful the least!...

I'm sorry, but I am unable to respond to this until it is translated into grammatically correct English...

[biosthetique]

Don't be sorry!...I am confident that opinion will dissipate as soon as you will spend some quality time into you favorite local pub!

[clive bradbury]

Well, at least you are consistent - the sentence quoted above makes about as much sense as your entire argument on this thread. There seems to be no point in continuing the discussion -

'there is no use attempting to reason someone out of a position that they did not reason themselves into...'

[Sunburn]

Don't feed the troll, guys. Let's stay focused on the game.

[clive bradbury]

You are right, Sunburn, I really don't know why I bother. Great work with the game, by the way - well on the way to being a masterpiece. I have not been so enthused by a new piece of work for years.

[Sunburn]

Thank you. It's a massive undertaking and we try to make it as good as possible.

Don't miss the newly released scenarios (yesterday) and the new public build coming soon!

[clive bradbury]

I look forward to it. I only hope that this build includes the worst omission from the first release - no light sabres as infantry small arms. I've seen them at the cinema - so I know they exist...

[HuskerBubble]

BTW If I am wrong and this capability is described anywhere out there (outside the SSN game), please do correct me. I would be interested in learning more about it. Thanks!

I was a sonar tech on a LA class sub, and NEVER once did i hear about this being used as a tactic. For one, explosions in the water make sonar useless. The "defensive tactic" was to pop a noisemaker and turn and burn. I have never once heard about or seen anything that suggested an early det on a fish being used as an defensive tactic.

[Lewis Wingerter]

Hi sunburn I want to change gears here . I just downloaded the Image files and installed it per direction. I thought when you check on description of the ship it would now show a picture of the ship. It did not. I dont know if I did something wrong; or what are the image files use for .:timeout: Thanks LW

[Sunburn]

Hi LW,

Just make sure that the image files are in the correct DB folder, in this case \DB\Images\DB3000. They should then show up correctly when you select an entry that has a picture (not all entries do ATM).

There also other image packs available for the CWDB database.

Thanks!

[biosthetique]

I was a sonar tech on a LA class sub, and NEVER once did i hear about this being used as a tactic. For one, explosions in the water make sonar useless. The "defensive tactic" was to pop a noisemaker and turn and burn. I have never once heard about or seen anything that suggested an early det on a fish being used as an defensive tactic.

hahaha!...If explosions make today's sonar useless, then you just answered the side effect of detonating a torpedo to kill an enemy torpedo.

I guess, you were on a need to know basis, and you did not need to know more, or were you really a sonar tech on a LA class?...Underwater "Patriot Missile" concept was beyond your pay grade!...Or are you just an active devoted fan enamored with CMANO?

[Lewis Wingerter]

thanks Sunburn I had it right i just had not click on one that had a picture:up:

[Sunburn]

Glad to help!

We'll have a much bigger pack uploaded today, I'll post the link once it's up. Stay tuned!

[Lewis Wingerter]

Great:up: LW

[Zander]

Great:up: LW
This game is a keeper Lewis. Now I am going to get those downloads that Sunburn just mentioned. Thanks Sunburn.


PS Just got the updated pack.

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3440647

[Lewis Wingerter]

You are right Zander the game is a keeper.:up: I have quit playing Silent Hunter since Command came out. Regard Lw

[Lewis Wingerter]

Hi Sunburn I don't know if is the right forum or not but I an playing the chocking Halifax scenario and the side briefing said the the spec op team would launch automatically at depart 01- 02 I been there and the team hasnt launch any help would be greatly appreciative. fantastic game:up:

[Zander]

Hi Sunburn I don't know if is the right forum or not but I an playing the chocking Halifax scenario and the side briefing said the the spec op team would launch automatically at depart 01- 02 I been there and the team hasnt launch any help would be greatly appreciative. fantastic game:up:


Hi Lewis,
here is a link to a you tube video on using ground troops. It is done by Baloogan.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=10RWMB-bvJs&list=PLgRuKky0mojaJHd2wM4jcTox_jSkmFJil&index=13

And his you tube channel http://www.youtube.com/baloogan.

Check at 1:40 where he "spawns" the marines.

[Zander]

In any event, select the Sub, then "CTRL + right click" the map, then select add unit, left click the sub, then you will have to make sure in the "pop up" that side is set to soviet, or russia... then under "Facility" on the pop up start typing "spe..." and you will get a choice of spetsnaz..., then just continue from there with goal\wapoints etc. You do not have to select the sub before , you ctrl+right click to add the unit, then left click the sub.

Lewis I went back and looked at that mission, and if you look far to the north east the spetsnaz are there and moving at 5 knots to the designated area. That mission takes over a day, so you would have to "change time" to finish it today. Once you see the spetsnaz on the map, zoom way out, left click on them and you will see their plotted course.
I play from the editor, and had not played that scenario before, so sorry if i may have confused you.
If you still don't see them go to game. order of battle, then left click on the "inf sec (Spetsnaz..., and the map will shift to their location.

[Lewis Wingerter]

Thanks Zander I did see spe force toward the top of the map. But the spec force I need is supposed to be on the sub( i think i read it right).

[Zander]

Hi Lewis, somebody just asked about this at matrix.

[Zander]

Thanks Zander I did see spe force toward the top of the map. But the spec force I need is supposed to be on the sub( i think i read it right).

I have got the spetsnaz to deploy, but only when I have played from the editor, but playing outside the editor I can create the mission but I think that in order for the spetsnaz to get there on time, you would have to have them on the sub. Where they are right now, would require a HALO mission.

Let's see if that poster gets an answer and soon.

[biosthetique]

Well, at least you are consistent - the sentence quoted above makes about as much sense as your entire argument on this thread. There seems to be no point in continuing the discussion -

'there is no use attempting to reason someone out of a position that they did not reason themselves into...'



As I said some time ago, that ADVANCED Defensive Action is not mentioned in Tom Clancy SSN as I also said, that I used it in SSN because the physics of the game allowed it. Besides, if you have taken the time to read my illustrated post pertaining to that Advanced Defensive tactics, you would know exactly the dynamic of that action.

When one is too busy taking sides and building a case, one loses objectivity and narrows the scope of one's understanding, in other words becomes an exquisite moron. I don't make misleading statements that glows in the dark.

There is an older game which mentioned clearly the use of torpedoes as an ADVANCED Defensive Action. So maybe you weren't born yet when that game came out, could not read, or under intense observation for a schizophreniform disorder, to play or remember the game.

Since I am not in charge of your, or your boyfriend education I will deliberately not mention its name. However, I will simply hint that Neal Steven wrote a review about that game and underlined discretely the tactics employed.

Now, if you or your boyfriend want to know, you will have to spend some quality time reading "American/English" prose which appears so offensive to your delicate English Literature acquired taste and abused senses.

Hony soit qui mal y pense!

[Sunburn]

Hi LW,

In order for the Spetsnaz team to deploy, the sub must reach the designated area by a certain time (specified on the briefing). So you must balance the need for stealth with the deadline you have. Likewise for the deployment fo the mines.

That little scen is IMHO more difficult than it looks at first sight.

[Lewis Wingerter]

Thank sunburn I will restart the mission

[biosthetique]

It sure looks like one guy with multiple accounts talking to himself!...Split personality disorder!:hmmm:

[Lewis Wingerter]

Thanks Sunburn I restarted the mission and didnt change a thing on the sub and the troop were deployed.:up: Regard LW

[Zander]

Thanks Sunburn I restarted the mission and didnt change a thing on the sub and the troop were deployed.:up: Regard LW

Hi Lewis,

Glad Sunburn helped you to get going again, this game is too much fun.
I've been following a thread over at matrix, and it seems that a couple of people had the same problem. Sunburn posted saying to also be aware of the time limits. I can get it run sometimes, but only if I do what one guy suggested to play it out of one folder. I will create a screenshot and post next.

Sunburn was right, it is the time that matters for this event to occur. Great.

[Onkel Neal]

Guys, let's stay on good terms, take it easy.

thanks
Neal

[Lewis Wingerter]

Thanks Neal it was getting a little wild:rock: