Version 1.08 Beta Now Available

[Killerfish Games]

Steam thread on this topic available here:
http://steamcommunity.com/app/541210/discussions/0/3223871682619294944/

Version 1.08 is now available. Contains what should be the final fix for broken Action Reports in Land Strike missions. Land Strike missions no longer have a circle to fire TLAMs into, simply fire and they are counted as a success once the weapon is away. Also contains shortcuts and filters to aid in searching through ship lists as well as new aircraft, weapons and a re-balance of the sensors and submarine noise levels.

To Opt Into Beta:
Right click the Cold Waters in Steam library, go to properties and you should have new "BETAS" tab added, then use the pulldown to select the beta you would like to opt into -leave the early access code empty- and the new update should download. When you run the game the version number should read version 1.08.

Version 1.08
In Beta

General
Kommunist Class merchant added
Mil Mi-14 (Haze) Anti-Submarine Warfare (ASW) helicopter added
Haze helicopters added to land-based missions (Land Strike and Insertion)
Beriev Be-12 Chayka (Mail) Anti-Submarine Warfare (ASW) amphibious aircraft added
MK45, AT-1, AT-2, SET-40 torpedoes added
Vessel, aircraft, weapon references to textures and audio now check external folders (override/default)
TLAM cruise altitude set to 500 to aid with terrain avoidance
Unit Reference now has filters for global/nations as well as shortcuts to submarines, warships, biologic, aircraft and weapons
Rebalanced noise levels across all submarines
Rebalanced sonar performance to be in line with performance quoted by USNI reference
Aircraft and Helos now have their historical loadouts
Tweaked the Mk48 sensor to be less overpowered
dictionary_interface.txt Noisemaker renamed to DECOY
Number of noisemakers on board displayed again in weapons rearm panel

Combat
Weapons tab now displays number of wires used/available for your submarine
Recognition manual now displays submarine test depths
Recognition manual now has shortcuts to sub, warship and merchant classes
Recognition manual now has shortcut to own sub to allow viewing of own sub statistics along with weapons data
Signature panel now has shortcuts to sub, warship and merchant classes
Different HUDs now load correctly without the need to return to main menu
Sonarman now calls out correct contact number when detecting transient from a known contact

Campaign
Land Strike missions no longer display or require a "target zone", just fire anywhere and the TLAM counts as away
Broken After Action Reports for Land Strike missions fixed
Noisemaker rearm at port uses the correct value in vessel txt file instead of 20

dictionary_interface.txt added new values for in game recognition manual:
FrequencyAbbreviatedVeryLow=VL
FrequencyAbbreviatedLow=L
FrequencyAbbreviatedMedium=M
FrequencyAbbreviatedHigh=H
ReferenceTestDepth=Test Depth
WIRES=WIRES

[Bungo_Pete]

mmm nice.

[GeneralGamer]

Great changes...THANKS!!!!!!:Kaleun_Applaud:

[EnjoyableSTIG]

Once again there are some excellent new features. This game just keeps getting better! The new aircraft annihilated me too. :oops:

Two Questions:
Is it possible to modify the Signature tab to make the ship class screen a toggle button instead of a "skip to" button? In this way clicking on "submarines" will only show submarines in the signature screen. As it stands, it's much more useful.

Also, how exactly is the MK45 supposed to function? I used a few and they seem to get to their enable points and then immediately dive to the bottom where they detonate. One got pretty close to a ship but didn't seem to want to follow it...

And a sort of bug report (seems minor):

When you see the MK45 (or don't lol)
https://i.imgur.com/WCVWG5Zl.jpg

Similar
https://i.imgur.com/UAnxT3Gl.jpg

[nesbit]

Anyone else having trouble with the Rearm and Repair Button and XO status report button? I click them, they flash green, but nothing is pulled up. Occasionally I can get XO status report to work but not consistently. I am able to pull-up the weapons panels (F7,F8) during play.

I have performed a "verify local files" from Steam (and as expected it replace my 10 modified files). I also tried using a default LA instead of my usual seawolf. Same behavior.

I do have additional files located in my default folder and do not have an override folder. So it's possible the problem comes from them...

[Killerfish Games]

The 68 campaign seems broken in this beta.

Here's the fix:
Open default/campaign002/campaign_data.txt
Replace every instance of AircraftType=wp_tu-142_bear with AircraftType=wp_il-38_may_68 which are under the various locations.
Save and play 68 campaig.

[Killerfish Games]

Missing MK45 graphic fixed for next build.
Will need more info/testing on the strange Mk45 behaviour mentioned above.

"Is it possible to modify the Signature tab to make the ship class screen a toggle button instead of a "skip to" button? In this way clicking on "submarines" will only show submarines in the signature screen."
Yes. But we then have to display/hide the various icons based on what vessels are in the list as well as highlight the current selection. So we decided to keep it flexible, simple and consistent with the behaviour in the Unit Reference where the icons act as shortcuts rather than filters.

[Killerfish Games]

Anyone else having trouble with the Rearm and Repair Button and XO status report button? I click them, they flash green, but nothing is pulled up. Occasionally I can get XO status report to work but not consistently. I am able to pull-up the weapons panels (F7,F8) during play.

I have performed a "verify local files" from Steam (and as expected it replace my 10 modified files). I also tried using a default LA instead of my usual seawolf. Same behavior.

I do have additional files located in my default folder and do not have an override folder. So it's possible the problem comes from them...
Let us know if this issue persists with a vanilla (no mods) install of Cold Waters.

[Capt Jack Harkness]

My first Mk 45 had similar results. Did the convoy intercept quick mission, fired one in their general direction with an enable point close by and once their it nose dived into the sea floor. Can't tell if this happened exactly at the enable point because ambient noise was 112 dB and sonar lost track of it shortly after launch.

[Halcyon]

The toolbars won't show up in 1.08. They are turned on in the default.txt file, but fail to show in either the 1984 campaign or a single mission (I tried the Duel).
Pressing the key commands to make them appear won't work either. They're just missing completely.

Also, the image for the Kommunist MS ship is just a white box.


[HUD LAYOUT]
//All positions in screen pixels
//From element's default anchored screen corner/position
BottomLeftPanelPos=0,0

//Toolbar position 0,0, (1 to anchor to minimap or 0 for no anchor)
//Default toolbars overlap and enabled via tabs/keys
//ToolbarsPos=0,0,1
//ForceAllToolbarsOn=FALSE
//HelmToolbarOffset=0,0
//DiveToolbarOffset=0,0
//SensorToolbarOffset=0,0

//Force all toolbars on in bottom horizontal row
ToolbarsPos=0,0,0
ForceAllToolbarsOn=TRUE
HelmToolbarOffset=331,-346
DiveToolbarOffset=640,-346
SensorToolbarOffset=953,-346

//Force all toolbars on in right vertical stack, anchored to mini-map
//ToolbarsPos=0,0,1
//ForceAllToolbarsOn=TRUE
//HelmToolbarOffset=0,0
//DiveToolbarOffset=0,71
//SensorToolbarOffset=0,142

BottomRightPanelPos=0,0
UpperRightStatusIcons=0,-3
UpperCentreBearingTapePos=0,-2
BottomCentreWaypointInfoPos=0,153
UpperRightTacMapZoomReadoutPos=0,-45
UpperRightPeriscopeZoomReadoutPos=0,-45
UpperRightRecognitionManual=0,0
UpperLeftPeriscopeESMPos=0,0
MainCameraFieldOfView=30


https://s26.postimg.org/na7tbzi89/bug.jpg

[Berserker]

Something did not click..Installed 108 and all I have is training missions and only one mission...Basic torpedoes...Nothing else...

[SiegDerMaus]

Can also confirm the weird Mk 45 behaviour. Diving for the sea floor on activation.

[Stuart666]

Its because the command logic, ie snake, straight, and the depth control fields have not been put in. If you paste the ones in from the M48 it works fine.

Also, the texture for the loading screen of the Mk45 doesnt work. Again, if you change the sprite name from 45 to 48, you get a Mk48 in the loading screen, but it works fine.

Off to mod mine with a 20 Kiloton warhead, just for giggles...

[Captain Haddock]

I've got the same problem as nesbit, verified files and the rearm toolbar is firmly anchored(no pun intended)at the bottom right hand corner of the screen. All the other toolbars once out of Holy Loch are fully functional.

[Delgard]

I got a

Error:system.collections.generic.dictionary'2[system.string.system.string]Does not contain value for wires

where the first world in the text is covered by a picture of a submarine.

It stopped everything. :wah:

(Slobbers over a beer at the Pier Pub)

[GeneralGamer]

Wow 1.08 threw a fly in the soup lol

No huds at all..

[GeneralGamer]

The toolbars won't show up in 1.08. They are turned on in the default.txt file, but fail to show in either the 1984 campaign or a single mission (I tried the Duel).
Pressing the key commands to make them appear won't work either. They're just missing completely.

Also, the image for the Kommunist MS ship is just a white box.


[HUD LAYOUT]
//All positions in screen pixels
//From element's default anchored screen corner/position
BottomLeftPanelPos=0,0

//Toolbar position 0,0, (1 to anchor to minimap or 0 for no anchor)
//Default toolbars overlap and enabled via tabs/keys
//ToolbarsPos=0,0,1
//ForceAllToolbarsOn=FALSE
//HelmToolbarOffset=0,0
//DiveToolbarOffset=0,0
//SensorToolbarOffset=0,0

//Force all toolbars on in bottom horizontal row
ToolbarsPos=0,0,0
ForceAllToolbarsOn=TRUE
HelmToolbarOffset=331,-346
DiveToolbarOffset=640,-346
SensorToolbarOffset=953,-346

//Force all toolbars on in right vertical stack, anchored to mini-map
//ToolbarsPos=0,0,1
//ForceAllToolbarsOn=TRUE
//HelmToolbarOffset=0,0
//DiveToolbarOffset=0,71
//SensorToolbarOffset=0,142

BottomRightPanelPos=0,0
UpperRightStatusIcons=0,-3
UpperCentreBearingTapePos=0,-2
BottomCentreWaypointInfoPos=0,153
UpperRightTacMapZoomReadoutPos=0,-45
UpperRightPeriscopeZoomReadoutPos=0,-45
UpperRightRecognitionManual=0,0
UpperLeftPeriscopeESMPos=0,0
MainCameraFieldOfView=30
https://s26.postimg.org/na7tbzi89/bug.jpg

I can confirm this in a stock update, no override folder.

Also the torpedo reload tim is sooooo slow now!! It takes about 5min real time for a torpedo to load?

WORKS

//Toolbar position 0,0, (1 to anchor to minimap or 0 for no anchor)
//Default toolbars overlap and enabled via tabs/keys
ToolbarsPos=0,0,0
ForceAllToolbarsOn=FALSE
HelmToolbarOffset=0,0
DiveToolbarOffset=0,0
SensorToolbarOffset=0,0


"NOTHING WORKS"
//Force all toolbars on in bottom horizontal row
//ToolbarsPos=0,0,0
//ForceAllToolbarsOn=TRUE
//HelmToolbarOffset=331,-346
//DiveToolbarOffset=640,-346
//SensorToolbarOffset=953,-346

"NOTHING WORKS"

//Force all toolbars on in right vertical stack, anchored to mini-map
//ToolbarsPos=0,0,1
//ForceAllToolbarsOn=TRUE
//HelmToolbarOffset=0,0
//DiveToolbarOffset=0,71
//SensorToolbarOffset=0,142

[Julhelm]

Actually it takes about 10-15 minutes to reload a torpedo, but that's not fun. It's probably faster to reload an unguided weapon.

[EnjoyableSTIG]

Actually it takes about 10-15 minutes to reload a torpedo, but that's not fun. It's probably faster to reload an unguided weapon.

I'm actually okay with slightly longer reloads.

I did notice, for the first time, the AI shooting a torpedo at me. FROM A SURFACE SHIP. For whatever reason this hadn't happened before. It was exciting. :D

[Ramius]

Also, the image for the Kommunist MS ship is just a white box.



Easy fix, goto

C:\Program Files (x86)\Steam\steamapps\common\Cold Waters\ColdWaters_Data\StreamingAssets\default\ves sels\profile

and rename wp_ms_kommunist.png to wp_ms_kommunist_profile.png

[SiegDerMaus]

Actually it takes about 10-15 minutes to reload a torpedo, but that's not fun. It's probably faster to reload an unguided weapon.

Maybe someday we can get options for it in the menu? Like the Silent Hunter series gives us. Faster reloads for quicker action, or realistic reloads for the hard core guys.

[-Pv-]

First we need to know what the real reload times are OR, if the increased time is intended by the developers since I do not recall that item in the changelist and this particular update had many problems which also need addressing.

It may be the real world times are not known in which case these are being set to what the dev thinks is playable.

In subs with only 4 tubes, only being able to launch 4 weapons every 15 minutes while the enemy is slinging dozens at you could be a problem.

If the longer time IS intended, then yes, a fast/slow option seems reasonable.
-Pv-

[Berserker]

How do I go back to 107b seeing as 108 is a flop???
:hmmm:

[-Pv-]

"How do I go back to 107b seeing as 108 is a flop???"

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=233439

-Pv-

[nesbit]

I can confirm this in a stock update, no override folder.

Also the torpedo reload tim is sooooo slow now!! It takes about 5min real time for a torpedo to load?

WORKS

//Toolbar position 0,0, (1 to anchor to minimap or 0 for no anchor)
//Default toolbars overlap and enabled via tabs/keys
ToolbarsPos=0,0,0
ForceAllToolbarsOn=FALSE
HelmToolbarOffset=0,0
DiveToolbarOffset=0,0
SensorToolbarOffset=0,0


"NOTHING WORKS"
//Force all toolbars on in bottom horizontal row
//ToolbarsPos=0,0,0
//ForceAllToolbarsOn=TRUE
//HelmToolbarOffset=331,-346
//DiveToolbarOffset=640,-346
//SensorToolbarOffset=953,-346

"NOTHING WORKS"

//Force all toolbars on in right vertical stack, anchored to mini-map
//ToolbarsPos=0,0,1
//ForceAllToolbarsOn=TRUE
//HelmToolbarOffset=0,0
//DiveToolbarOffset=0,71
//SensorToolbarOffset=0,142


I was able to get my toolbars working. Here is what I have:

[HUD LAYOUT]
//All positions in screen pixels
//From element's default anchored screen corner/position
BottomLeftPanelPos=0,0

//Toolbar position 0,0, (1 to anchor to minimap or 0 for no anchor)
//Default toolbars overlap and enabled via tabs/keys
ToolbarsPos=0,0,0
ForceAllToolbarsOn=TRUE
HelmToolbarOffset=0,0
DiveToolbarOffset=0,25
SensorToolbarOffset=0,50

//Force all toolbars on in bottom horizontal row
//ToolbarsPos=0,0,0
//ForceAllToolbarsOn=TRUE
//HelmToolbarOffset=331,-346
//DiveToolbarOffset=640,-346
//SensorToolbarOffset=953,-346

//Force all toolbars on in right vertical stack, anchored to mini-map
//ToolbarsPos=0,0,0
//ForceAllToolbarsOn=TRUE
//HelmToolbarOffset=0,0
//DiveToolbarOffset=0,0
//SensorToolbarOffset=0,0

[nesbit]

I've got the same problem as nesbit, verified files and the rearm toolbar is firmly anchored(no pun intended)at the bottom right hand corner of the screen. All the other toolbars once out of Holy Loch are fully functional.

Not sure this was the exact error I had. When I encounter an enemy I still cannot do XO status report most of the time.

[Halcyon]

First we need to know what the real reload times are OR, if the increased time is intended by the developers since I do not recall that item in the changelist and this particular update had many problems which also need addressing.

It may be the real world times are not known in which case these are being set to what the dev thinks is playable.

In subs with only 4 tubes, only being able to launch 4 weapons every 15 minutes while the enemy is slinging dozens at you could be a problem.

If the longer time IS intended, then yes, a fast/slow option seems reasonable.
-Pv-

Already a long discussion on this topic, with a definitive answer from the devs.

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=232141


Research from first hand sources indicated about 1:30 to 2 minutes to be a reasonable figure for loading a torpedo into the tube on a 637 sub. The 45 seconds comes from the game originally being compressed into a half-scale environment where the flow of time becomes about 2x realtime.

We know that the Novembers could reload the entire nest of 8 tubes in about 15 minutes, which works out to slightly under 2 minutes per tube. Type XXI could reload its 6 tubes in 10 minutes, which is comparable performance using power-loading equipment. This performance is also in line with every other sim, from Fast Attack through DW.


The original value in the files was 30, and this new beta put it at 300....probably an extra 0 that wasn't intended.

[-Pv-]

Based on this post, I would say 15 minute loads are not intended.
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=2502254&postcount=67

-Pv-

[Julhelm]

The reloads are set to 5 minutes for US subs on elite difficulty, and 4 minutes for russian subs. The times are reduced based on difficulty so on easy should be about 45 seconds, on casual about a minute and a half, on realistic 2½ and 5 on elite.

[thereddaikon]

Sadly this patch is unplayable for me. Only one of the single missions show up, and it will not play and only the 1968 campaign is listed. It is the same, unplayable. When starting it will go to the strategic map bypassing the intro graphics. The map is frozen and the game does not respond to commands. I have to kill it with task manager. I have completely cleared out local files including mods and have done a fresh install. non-beta release works fine.

[GeneralGamer]

Sadly this patch is unplayable for me. Only one of the single missions show up, and it will not play and only the 1968 campaign is listed. It is the same, unplayable. When starting it will go to the strategic map bypassing the intro graphics. The map is frozen and the game does not respond to commands. I have to kill it with task manager. I have completely cleared out local files including mods and have done a fresh install. non-beta release works fine.


You can go to Steam and in properties, temporarily opt out of the Beta program and Steam will re-install 1.07e for you.

Another option is to copy your Cold waters working folder to a backup spot. If you get some bad beta just delete the beta and copy the working Cold Waters back.

[thereddaikon]

That's what I've done at this point. I guess I'll have to wait for the next patch.

[LTJGBeam]

I got a

Error:system.collections.generic.dictionary'2[system.string.system.string]Does not contain value for wires

where the first world in the text is covered by a picture of a submarine.

It stopped everything. :wah:

(Slobbers over a beer at the Pier Pub)

Delgard, I know you use the 2004 Campaign extensively. I had to upgrade/sync the 2004 campaign yesterday, at 4:45 pm AZ and then again at 6:45 PM for the exact error you are reporting. It was working for me after that. You may need to download the 2004 Campaign again to pick up the fix.

Let me know if it is working for you. If it's the vanilla campaigns then I am not sure what is happening. A clean install may be needed.

[wilky210]

I noticed in the patch too that all the US subs got their decibels increased. Which i'm fine with. But now the Sierra is quieter by 5 DB over the LA class. Is that even realistic?

[-Pv-]

I know someone here who will not be happy the US subs are getting noisier.

I've not had the impression myself the game is too easy at the higher difficulty settings, but I expect my game play style is different from the extreme players.

As far as realism? No one knows the actual values of active submarine noise. This is all theoretical and game play balancing act.
Supposedly titanium hulls are quieter, but how much? Compared to what? It's all game design stuff.
-Pv-

[SiegDerMaus]

Either way, it's a known fact that pretty much all US boats were quieter than all Soviet boats made around the same time. The US spent the entire Cold War ahead of the Soviets in acoustic stealth. The Sierra being quieter than the LA is not realistic at all.

[wilky210]

Agreed SiegDerMaus. I assume the change was based strictly on gameplay which is why i'm fine with it overall. But on a personal level i'd rather still see the US boats have an advantage even if it's a small one.

That's why i'm hoping to get a DLC with later boats such as the Akula improved/Seawolf (and other boats), while the US still has an advantage, the Russian boats were much, much closer in terms of being close to as quiet as the US boats in modern boats compared to their earlier counterparts during the Cold War.

And yeah, i know about the mods. The deal breaker (for me) is the lack of 3d models on the newer boats in the mods. Hopefully we can get a change that allows modding to change the actual 3d modelling or some DLC to fix that problem! It's hard to play the game when your Seawolf looks like a black 688.

[Kiwi Red One]

Been playing a lot of Cold Waters lately, but the latest Beta download tonight has made it totally unplayable.

I followed the steps outlined higher up the thread and opted out of any betas and was dialed back to 1.07 - now works perfectly OK and only took about 5 minutes to do :yeah:

Don't give up on this game on the strength of one bad experience - personally I've been finding it quite tough playing NATO diesel boats but love the challenge.

Back to somewhere in the Norwegian Sea - trying to find a SSGN group.

[Delgard]

LTJg Beam,
I did reload NA2004. All is fine. While pier side, I had the crew do a wash and wax and then it was a free pint each at the Pier Pub for the crew. :)

Thank-you,
Del

[Julhelm]

Either way, it's a known fact that pretty much all US boats were quieter than all Soviet boats made around the same time. The US spent the entire Cold War ahead of the Soviets in acoustic stealth. The Sierra being quieter than the LA is not realistic at all.
Victor 3 was on par with 637 class, and Sierra and Akula are known to have been on par with the Flight 1 688s. The entire reason the Seawolf exists is because the Soviets made a quantum leap in silencing once they started taking it seriously, and their boats became very competitive.

And you should be working hard when you face the latest and best the Soviets can field, not have a 10db advantage like before.

[GravityWave]

I got that system error too referring to wires. I removed override (2004RN), but may have some
files in the default fldr. If so I'll get rid of those as well if they are mods. I did a uninstall/re-install and still got the error. I'll hold off on the 2004 mod for awhile. I realize that its being updated as well. Its getting tough to keep up. Good work all around though.

[-Pv-]

This is the history of game modding that while the game is still being rapidly updated by the developers and the mod capability is both new and in development, the paper chase is challenging to both the modders and their users.

Players should not be too impatient, insistent and dependent on the mod community at this time and keep in mind the experimenting and learning which dominates this environment until the game becomes mature.

Unforeseen errors in beta releases should be expected because that is why they are betas, to give the many, widely variable community members a chance to try the changes before they are accepted as permanent changes to the game. Temporary beta test changes will have impacts on the mod community which cannot be avoided.

Those who do not wish to be impacted in their game play should opt out of the beta program and use the state of the mods which worked with the stable release, giving the modders a chance to catch up to the next official tested release rather than place unfair demands and pressure on their valuable time.
-Pv-

[golfvictorwhiskey]

PV,
Very well articulated, Sir:Kaleun_Salute:
GVW

[Stuart666]

I think it was the Victor II that was as quiet as the 637 boats, or at least so Norman Polmar says in his cold war submarines book. They subsequently made the 637 quieter through the 1970s if wikipedia was any truth by having an electrical rectification bus fitted. So if anything, they modeled the Victor II noiser than it probably was. I can buy that about the Sierra. For one thing there is data online that suggests the Akula was a good 15 decibels quieter than the Sierra, which being larger is plausible. http://www.armscontrol.ru/subs/snf/snf03221.htm http://gentleseas.blogspot.co.uk/2016/10/submarine-noise.html

Bear in mind the 688 as modelled is pretty much the 1976 model. I would expect the Flight II and Flight III to be quieter, particularly with anechoic covering. Maybe this would be worthy of another thread, but there are some details on here on the noise level of Soviet boats. http://www.dtic.mil/docs/citations/ADC010105

My own view, and its just a personal view looking at that report, and some declassified CIA reports. The sea state noise could do with being upped, perhaps to 78 decibels, in line with what that report says about sea state in the Norwegian sea. And there is a CIA report on the CIA FOIA website that suggests that up to the early 1970s, Soviet sonar systems were for the most part about half as effective as comparable US sonar systems, which suggests to me they are overmodelled. The following estimates there were fewer than 20 ships in the Soviet navy in 1971 with comparable sonar systems to the US, and most of those were compromised by having poor signal processing capabilities. https://www.cia.gov/library/readingroom/document/0005512850

I do think the devs are heading in the right direction I might add. But Id like to see nuclear weapons as an option, ie you use a Mk45 nuclear torpedo, you unlock the reds using them too. Also, be nice to be able to configure availability of torpedos at Holy loch, just to make some nice, juicy weapons particularly scarce. Incidentally, did anyone look at the Moscow class from 1968, the cryptic reference to having not 'yet' added SAM systems?

[Aktungbby]

Stuart666!:Kaleun_Salute:EXCELLENT NAME!:yeah: CAPTAIN HADDOCK: WELCOME BACK AFTER A NINE YEAR SILENT RUN!:Kaleun_Salute:

[Julhelm]

In the 68 campaign, the majority of Soviet ships use the outdated Buck Toe and Wolf Paw sonars, with only the Kresta 1 and Moskva having advanced sets.

In the 1980s, Bull Nose is the most common Soviet MF set and comparable to SQS-23 performance. The larger LF sets like Moose Jaw and Horse Jaw are comparable to SQS-26 and modelled as such in the game. Self-noise inhibits sensor performance, so the Soviets are at a major disadvantage here until the advent of quiet boats like the Victor 3 and Sierra.

[SaltmineMinion]

I fiddled around a bit with the toolbar code:

This forces the toolbars on in a stack in 1.08:

//Force all toolbars on in vertical stack to the right of the mini-map
ToolbarsPos=1,1,1
ForceAllToolbarsOn=TRUE
HelmToolbarOffset=331,-200
DiveToolbarOffset=331,-270
SensorToolbarOffset=331,-340


Appears that "ToolbarsPos=1,1,1" makes the toolbars come on again. :Kaleun_Salute:

[Stuart666]

Early surface ship sonars I found fairly believable, at least after I edited the detection threshold. As soon as you got in the merge of a convoy they were unable to find me, which suggests the core code at being lost in the noise of a surface ship seems to be working. I got close to a Riga and he got a torpedo off, but he couldnt pick me up at more than about 4000 yards. I can buy that.

I do think the submarines seem to be a little too easy for them to pick up say, a 1980s sturgeon. I mean, I had a Juliet pick up my Sturgeon coming in off a sprint and got a torpedo off first. Maybe that is my modding the detection threshold as being responsible, or maybe it isnt. I would expect if the CIA document to be accurate (and there is questionable data in there certainly) you would expect sonar systems of the late 1960s to be about half what US submarines have in detection range. At present, you can see the Trout cheek of the November is nearly the same as the sonar system on the Skipjack. In reality, the November was mainly created for surface attack in mind. Its sonar system was not really up to detecting nuclear submarines, again if polmar is right.

I think envisaging Soviet sonars as first, second or third generation might be the way forward here, in much the same way as the report splits them up.

Again just my view.

[Aktungbby]

SaltmineMinion!:Kaleun_Salute:

[Julhelm]

All of the sonar data is from Friedman's World Naval Weapon Systems, and cross-checked with a Russian reference work on sonar systems.

Bull Nose MGK-335 is credited with 4-6km range in direct path and 25-30km in convergence zone operation.

Buck Toe was credited with 5000 yard active range and holding passive contact on cavitating submarine out to 120000 yards.

Trout Cheek which equips several Soviet subs is credited with detecting a destroyer making 15-18 knots at 7km at an ownship speed of 15 knots.

Pike Jaw which is the active set of the November was credited with 4000 yard range.

Shark Teeth that equips the Charlies and Victors was considered comparable to the US BQQ-2 in performance.

My conclusion with this data is that the supposed limited effectiveness of Soviet ASW is not due to them having worse sonars sets but mainly attributable to superior silencing on the US boats, up until the 80's when they caught up.

[SaltmineMinion]

I fiddled around a bit with the toolbar code:

This forces the toolbars on in a stack in 1.08:

//Force all toolbars on in vertical stack to the right of the mini-map
ToolbarsPos=1,1,1
ForceAllToolbarsOn=TRUE
HelmToolbarOffset=331,-200
DiveToolbarOffset=331,-270
SensorToolbarOffset=331,-340


Appears that "ToolbarsPos=1,1,1" makes the toolbars come on again. :Kaleun_Salute:

Until you go into the tactical map.... Can still make out the edge of the button box in the bottom....

Offsets seem different for different (custom) subs too

Following values make the Toolbars usable on the first stock sub (the LA class Flight I)

//Force all toolbars on in vertical stack to the right of the mini-map
ToolbarsPos=1,1,1
ForceAllToolbarsOn=TRUE
HelmToolbarOffset=331,-100
DiveToolbarOffset=331,-170
SensorToolbarOffset=331,-240

Edit again:

ToolbarsPos=0,0,0 also works for my custom Walrus, keep fiddling around with those numbers till you find something that works.

Offset=x,y where x is deviation to left (negative number) or right (positive) and y is deviation up(+) and down(-).

Hope this helps you folks out a bit.

Edit No.4:

It only worked in single missions.... in campains the bars are all over the place again....

Edit No.5:

Version 1.08b is supposed to fix the HUD issues: http://steamcommunity.com/app/541210/discussions/0/3223871682619294944/?ctp=3#c3223871682628418352

[alves.sobrinho]

I'm having this problem when I'm trying to rearm or repair at port

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/picture.php?albumid=1129&pictureid=9591

Is there any way to fix it?

[Halcyon]

I'm having this problem when I'm trying to rearm or repair at port

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/picture.php?albumid=1129&pictureid=9591

Is there any way to fix it?

Yes, uninstall the beta.

[alves.sobrinho]

Yes, uninstall the beta.

Problem Solve!

Just go to options and in video reduce Hud Size to 1

[Wiz33]

Looks like another update just got pushed out on steam.

[Aktungbby]

alves.sobrinho!:Kaleun_Salute:

[Killerfish Games]

Beta Version 1.08b Now Available
This should fix the issues that came up with 1.08.

Fixes
HUD layout only applied once to prevent the toolbars and other panels "wandering" off screen
Noisemaker reload times fixed
Fixed the issue causing the 68 campaign to not load properly
Fixed the Kommunist missing profile graphic

Fixed the Mk45 diving once going active (added weapon settings as per the MK37 sensor suite)
Fixed the MK45 missing weapon graphic
Removed MK45 from the game, commented out weapon reference still in weapons.txt for modders who wish to reactivate it

[Stuart666]

All of the sonar data is from Friedman's World Naval Weapon Systems, and cross-checked with a Russian reference work on sonar systems.

Bull Nose MGK-335 is credited with 4-6km range in direct path and 25-30km in convergence zone operation.

Buck Toe was credited with 5000 yard active range and holding passive contact on cavitating submarine out to 120000 yards.

Trout Cheek which equips several Soviet subs is credited with detecting a destroyer making 15-18 knots at 7km at an ownship speed of 15 knots.

Pike Jaw which is the active set of the November was credited with 4000 yard range.

Shark Teeth that equips the Charlies and Victors was considered comparable to the US BQQ-2 in performance.

My conclusion with this data is that the supposed limited effectiveness of Soviet ASW is not due to them having worse sonars sets but mainly attributable to superior silencing on the US boats, up until the 80's when they caught up.

From 'The silent deep', it would appear the sonar system on the Victor would be based upon the British Type 2001 sonar from Dreadnought, which was stolen in the Portland spy ring, the capability of which is actually listed in Silent Deep. So the active component you would expect to be pretty good, whether the signal processing was actually good enough to get a similar effect out of the passive side of it is another matter. I mean look at the report, it basically says they have ships in 1972 with sonar as good as the USN, but they dont have the processing capability to make use of it. They dont even seem at the time to have an ability to categorize the sound contacts they DID pick up. Presumably they had to depend on operator ability to do that.


im just looking the figures in the game. It lists sonar in many cases as just as effective as US submarine sonar, when looking at a period report (and the USN had to have a fairly good idea) it just wasn't happening that way in real life. I can entirely believe the Soviet Active gear was as good as Western Equipment, but the passive gear really shouldn't be comparable till the 1980s when they were making use of stolen towed arrays.


I dont think superior silencing can be the only reason. Its notable in many books how noisy Soviet boats were, and how wholly oblivious they were to it. They dont seem to have made any serious effort towards that till the walker spy ring told them how noisy they were. And that suggests to me (and this is pure conjecture admittedly) that if their own sonar systems were not capable of picking them up, they assumed the Americans couldn't either. And its not as if the American boats are that quiet, its quite clear from Polmar that the Victor was as noisy as a Sturgeon class. The Americans seemingly had little difficulty picking them up (and even used their loudness as a way of tracking the rather quieter Yankee's they escorted) but the Soviets were clearly not able to repeat the capability.

Look, im not trying to be contentious. Im just requesting someone, either the devs or one of you fellas who clearly know your stuff, seriously look at the same data there I trawled up and compare it to other references out there. I dont have the USNI reference book, but the suspicion is that they have taken data for US sonar systems and 'assumed' Russian ones of a similar age are comparable. The modern ones might be, but the information on the ones up to the 1970s are they were badly lagging behind. When the CIA was assured that Soviet sonar systems were at best half as effective as US ones in 1972, it seems the Soviet sonar systems are behaving far too effectively in game, particularly at sprint speeds. And as the USN was spending so much time trailing them, they really ought to be the ones to know.


Just my view, and absolutely no disrespect to anyone intended.

[Stuart666]

Stuart666!:Kaleun_Salute:EXCELLENT NAME!:yeah: CAPTAIN HADDOCK: WELCOME BACK AFTER A NINE YEAR SILENT RUN!:Kaleun_Salute:
Thanks Aktunbby :)

[GeneralGamer]

Beta Version 1.08b Now Available
This should fix the issues that came up with 1.08.

Fixes
HUD layout only applied once to prevent the toolbars and other panels "wandering" off screen
Noisemaker reload times fixed
Fixed the issue causing the 68 campaign to not load properly
Fixed the Kommunist missing profile graphic

Fixed the Mk45 diving once going active (added weapon settings as per the MK37 sensor suite)
Fixed the MK45 missing weapon graphic
Removed MK45 from the game, commented out weapon reference still in weapons.txt for modders who wish to reactivate it


Thanks!

So far all is good and the reload times are back to normal too.:yeah:

[SaltmineMinion]

HUD looks fixed now in 1.08b :Kaleun_Thumbs_Up:

[Julhelm]

From 'The silent deep', it would appear the sonar system on the Victor would be based upon the British Type 2001 sonar from Dreadnought, which was stolen in the Portland spy ring, the capability of which is actually listed in Silent Deep. So the active component you would expect to be pretty good, whether the signal processing was actually good enough to get a similar effect out of the passive side of it is another matter. I mean look at the report, it basically says they have ships in 1972 with sonar as good as the USN, but they dont have the processing capability to make use of it. They dont even seem at the time to have an ability to categorize the sound contacts they DID pick up. Presumably they had to depend on operator ability to do that.


im just looking the figures in the game. It lists sonar in many cases as just as effective as US submarine sonar, when looking at a period report (and the USN had to have a fairly good idea) it just wasn't happening that way in real life. I can entirely believe the Soviet Active gear was as good as Western Equipment, but the passive gear really shouldn't be comparable till the 1980s when they were making use of stolen towed arrays.


I dont think superior silencing can be the only reason. Its notable in many books how noisy Soviet boats were, and how wholly oblivious they were to it. They dont seem to have made any serious effort towards that till the walker spy ring told them how noisy they were. And that suggests to me (and this is pure conjecture admittedly) that if their own sonar systems were not capable of picking them up, they assumed the Americans couldn't either. And its not as if the American boats are that quiet, its quite clear from Polmar that the Victor was as noisy as a Sturgeon class. The Americans seemingly had little difficulty picking them up (and even used their loudness as a way of tracking the rather quieter Yankee's they escorted) but the Soviets were clearly not able to repeat the capability.

Look, im not trying to be contentious. Im just requesting someone, either the devs or one of you fellas who clearly know your stuff, seriously look at the same data there I trawled up and compare it to other references out there. I dont have the USNI reference book, but the suspicion is that they have taken data for US sonar systems and 'assumed' Russian ones of a similar age are comparable. The modern ones might be, but the information on the ones up to the 1970s are they were badly lagging behind. When the CIA was assured that Soviet sonar systems were at best half as effective as US ones in 1972, it seems the Soviet sonar systems are behaving far too effectively in game, particularly at sprint speeds. And as the USN was spending so much time trailing them, they really ought to be the ones to know.


Just my view, and absolutely no disrespect to anyone intended.
We have much better primary sources available today after the fall of the Iron Curtain than the CIA had. The russians trialled their sonars against russian boats. Thus superior silencing on US boats is probably the primary factor. That said, it is irrelevant if historically the russians were completely blind and a non-threat. It does not make for good gameplay. The game needs to be challenging in order to put you into the correct frame of mind, and as such the russians are set up to be a credible opposition. I've balanced the sensors with this objective in mind.

Btw, the passive sonars are pretty useless at sprint speeds in the game. The escorts use hunter killer teams to get around this.

[Stuart666]

Yes, but how can one say that silencing is a superior factor, when there are American boats modelled in the gameas about as noisy as the Soviet boats are? Either the modelled db level is wrong, or the sonar systems are modelled wrong.

Personally speaking Id rather go for reality and just have the Soviets come at you mob handed as they would in reality. Thats much more interesting than pretending all the submarines in the game are equal for gameplay purposes. I mean they had dozens of diesel submarines. Its not as if they cannot afford to expend boats to work out your datum.


Well I guess I can mod it to get the game I want out of it. Im already modding a 1973 campaign, I may as well have a go at the sonar systems as well.

[Stuart666]

Incidentally, what USNI guide are you fellows using, is it the 1993 edition? Just curious.

[Julhelm]

What the hell, they are not equal at all. Overall the Soviet boats are louder until the the Victor II and Victor III which incorporate rafting, as per history. The diesel boats are quiter because we assume they are running their electric engines. The only noisy US boat is the Skipjack, and even then it is far quieter than any of the boats the Soviets have in the 68 campaign. All of the US boats have better sensors in the game than their Soviet counterparts.

So quieter US subs + louder Soviet subs = large US advantage as per history. On average you are going to have at least a 10db advantage against nuke boats until you face Victor III's and Sierras, which are not that common.

[Julhelm]

Also, the USNI ref I'm using is the 2006 edition, along with History of Russian Underwater Hydroacoustics (http://www.worldscientific.com/worldscibooks/10.1142/6125).

Both of which are better sources than period CIA documents.

[Stuart666]

Look, Im just trying to have an honest debate here, im not trying to rattle anyones chains or upset anyone. I have to say im a little disappointed when I post 3 documents that delineate actual sound levels and sonar capability, and the only answer I can get is 'well its out of date'. Please, have a look at all three and tell me that the DTIC document on sound levels in the Norwegian sea isnt just a little interesting at least? It even delineates the sound levels which look on nodding terms with those already in the game. The only point it seems to disagree is background noise.

The point im trying to illustrate is, in service these systems were upgraded. If you plugged in some of those old sonar systems with new signal processing systems later, yes, you might well end up with better results. The point is at the time in the 1970s, that was the analysis of how well they were performing. Yes, im aware there are book figures you believe are correct, but compare with historical accounts of US and British boats training these soviet boats and you are a loss to uderstand how they did it. Unless the sonar systems, for whatever reason, were not performing as well as they book says they were.

You disagree, thats absolutely fine. I had hoped for a little less aggression in trying to actually help the process along, which was my sole aim here.

And thanks for the book recommendation. Ill keep an open mind and get it.

[thereddaikon]

Stuart are you saying that US subs are too loud or Russian subs have sensors that are too good? I think as things are its close enough, especially considering the type of game we have here. CW isn't silent hunter. It's not supposed to be a hardcore sim like SH or DCS world. It's more like Strike Fighters, a sim-lite game. Realistic modeling stops when it gets in the way of good gameplay. I am fine with this. If I wanted a super accurate subsim that took me days to figure out I would play SH. I just want to sink stuff and feel like an awesome sub captain while doing it.

The Soviet Subs are clearly inferior while not being so much so that they aren't challenging.

The suggestion I would actually make is rebalancing aircraft and subs so instead of hopeless red SSNs and uncanny MPAs and Helos, the SSNs are a bit better and the aircraft are less godlike. The only subs that have ever given me trouble in this game, even on elite are modded modern Russian subs. Sierra's are mk48 food. Those Damn MPA's always know where I am though.

[Julhelm]

Historically the Soviets were unaware of blade rate and LOFAR which was a closely guarded secret in the West. For quite some time they were also unaware of rafting, which explains why they didn't pay much attention to quieting. When designing the November, the comparable US subs were the very noisy Nautilus and Skates, and the comparatively noisy Skipjack. They incorporated rafting in the Victor II and Charlies, so clearly they were aware of their noise disadvantage by then.

The sensor figures are derived from me setting up the cited trial scenarios and running them through our sensor model. For instance, Trout Cheek was set up using a Kotlin DD as the reference destroyer at 85db ambient noise. When you do that, you end up with a Trout Cheek that performs much like a BQR-2. The BQR-2 will still detect the November at twice the range the Trout Cheek can detect the Skipjack because Skipjack is a good 12db quieter, which is in line with the performance you quoted.

The detection ranges in the game also conform to reality, especially in the 1968 campaign. The famous Batfish trail was against a noisy Yankee class while the Batfish was fitted with a towed array, probably BQR-25 or TB-16. On the other hand, the Augusta collided with a Delta 1 it had failed to detect. Through Polmar we also know that Victor III could detect 688 class, and we know that perididcally Soviet boomers could penetrate out into the Atlantic without detection. We also know that on occasion, surface forces would detect intruding US submarines and harass them with small depth charges.

In the game, the US subs generally have a >10db advantage against same generation Soviet nuke subs. This translates to half the detection range using similar sonars. Only with the Victor III are the stakes more even, and in the case of Sierra, in their favor.

If the US player has too much of an advantage over the Soviets, they cease to be a credible threat and the game becomes much more unrealistic. It is possible to have a perfectly historically accurate simulation that is unrealistic simply because the player has prior information that was never available those who did the fighting back then. Having competent adversaries places you in the right frame of mind.

[The Bandit]

Historically the Soviets were unaware of blade rate and LOFAR which was a closely guarded secret in the West. For quite some time they were also unaware of rafting, which explains why they didn't pay much attention to quieting. When designing the November, the comparable US subs were the very noisy Nautilus and Skates, and the comparatively noisy Skipjack. They incorporated rafting in the Victor II and Charlies, so clearly they were aware of their noise disadvantage by then.

The sensor figures are derived from me setting up the cited trial scenarios and running them through our sensor model. For instance, Trout Cheek was set up using a Kotlin DD as the reference destroyer at 85db ambient noise. When you do that, you end up with a Trout Cheek that performs much like a BQR-2. The BQR-2 will still detect the November at twice the range the Trout Cheek can detect the Skipjack because Skipjack is a good 12db quieter, which is in line with the performance you quoted.

The detection ranges in the game also conform to reality, especially in the 1968 campaign. The famous Batfish trail was against a noisy Yankee class while the Batfish was fitted with a towed array, probably BQR-25 or TB-16. On the other hand, the Augusta collided with a Delta 1 it had failed to detect. Through Polmar we also know that Victor III could detect 688 class, and we know that perididcally Soviet boomers could penetrate out into the Atlantic without detection. We also know that on occasion, surface forces would detect intruding US submarines and harass them with small depth charges.

In the game, the US subs generally have a >10db advantage against same generation Soviet nuke subs. This translates to half the detection range using similar sonars. Only with the Victor III are the stakes more even, and in the case of Sierra, in their favor.

If the US player has too much of an advantage over the Soviets, they cease to be a credible threat and the game becomes much more unrealistic. It is possible to have a perfectly historically accurate simulation that is unrealistic simply because the player has prior information that was never available those who did the fighting back then. Having competent adversaries places you in the right frame of mind.

To piggy-back on this, it can't be stressed enough the game-changer that the Akula was when it came out, Soviet submarines went from being predictably and dependably detectable to seemingly able vanish without a trace.

While the Sierra class did come first and an argument could be made that the Akula MAY have additional / enhanced capabilities (not much of an argument in terms of the later boats) but lets not forget that the Akula essentially came into being as a cheaper, steel Sierra which could be built in much larger numbers.

Sierras and Akulas (and to a lesser extent the Victor IIIs) were scary boats and caused a lot of headaches in the mid-to-late 80s. Lets also not forget that the Seawolf / "Ultimate COLD WAR ASW" design was basically created in response to these developments.

[-Pv-]

Warning, verbosity man attack...

"It is possible to have a perfectly historically accurate simulation that is unrealistic simply because the player has prior information that was never available those who did the fighting back then."

Unlike WWI and WWII where we have definitive documented historical stats on the effectiveness of various weapons platforms against each other, the cold war was not a naval shooting war where submarines were sinking in numbers as a result of unlimited combat. As such we really don't have deciding proof of the use of these systems verses attrition/survival rates. As a theoretical game, development will reasonably lean toward game play balance vs reality (since "reality" is guesswork theory based on unclassified-safe anecdotal stories and analysis.) As WWII demonstrated many times, superior technology on both sides can get nulled by a complex combination of battle field, environmental, social, political, leadership, resource, failure rates, training, motivation, force composition, error, chance and a nearly endless list of other factors.

Ultimately, the game becomes what the developers believe is a fantasy theme inspired by fictional publications based on known technology during politically sensitive historical settings in a "what if" game of cat and mouse.
As such, technology can be debated endlessly because there would be contradictory information from experts and analysts supporting just about every scenario war planners tried to prepare for.

In order for the game to be immersive, the devs will have what they consider a reasonably researched base line of realism expectations. To be playable over time, they'll have what they believe is a balance between threat and dominance.

Personally, I keep looking at the stated expectations for the game when released as a medium skill Red Storm Rising inspiration. It's been so long since I played RSR, portions of it has faded into dusty memory considering the hundreds of games I've played since, but I do remember having a lot of fun with it, but also it was contemporary with the popularity of the book release with few if any comparable games on the market and graphically far simpler capability compared to now.

Games now days must focus either on very broad popular markets or niche markets where there is no competition to be successful in a world where computer games have been common for over 25 years and some player bases have enormous experience and expectations while some players are just now entering the war game market.

I try to keep looking at the original un-modded game the devs designed and test to determine if I'm entertained, challenged, with lasting play value.
Can I still win sometimes over what seems like overwhelming odds? Are there fine points in the game when learned through experience which give me an edge I didn't have when I first started playing the game? Or, is the game stacked against me, frustrating me, making the time spent seem lost?
Is it too predictable where once I have understood the scenario composition, is either success or failure already determined beyond doubt resulting in closing the game.

There are games I've had for years I and return to every time KNOWING I will have a fun time with it. Every game I play gets compared to that experience. Does the game draw me back when I have other entertaining games I know I will enjoy every time?

Right now, I view CW as a playable late beta where its full potential is not yet cemented. Because of my life's interests, the theme of the game keeps me interested in the possibilities careful design may yet reveal.

Eventually, as the game matures, mod skills stabilize, if I'm still playing the game by then, I'll branch out into new territory to experience other "what if" scenarios.
-Pv-

[Wiz33]

Look, Im just trying to have an honest debate here, im not trying to rattle anyones chains or upset anyone. I have to say im a little disappointed when I post 3 documents that delineate actual sound levels and sonar capability, and the only answer I can get is 'well its out of date'. Please, have a look at all three and tell me that the DTIC document on sound levels in the Norwegian sea isnt just a little interesting at least? It even delineates the sound levels which look on nodding terms with those already in the game. The only point it seems to disagree is background noise.

The point im trying to illustrate is, in service these systems were upgraded. If you plugged in some of those old sonar systems with new signal processing systems later, yes, you might well end up with better results. The point is at the time in the 1970s, that was the analysis of how well they were performing. Yes, im aware there are book figures you believe are correct, but compare with historical accounts of US and British boats training these soviet boats and you are a loss to uderstand how they did it. Unless the sonar systems, for whatever reason, were not performing as well as they book says they were.

You disagree, thats absolutely fine. I had hoped for a little less aggression in trying to actually help the process along, which was my sole aim here.

And thanks for the book recommendation. Ill keep an open mind and get it.

Wow, read a couple books and suddenly you're an expert in undersea warfare? We have people on this board that have done more research than that or have actual experience on modern day subs.

[thereddaikon]

Tried the 1.08b just now. Same results as 1.08, only duel and the 1968 campaign available and neither actually work. Looks like I'll be sticking with the regular releases for now.

[Killerfish Games]

Tried the 1.08b just now. Same results as 1.08, only duel and the 1968 campaign available and neither actually work. Looks like I'll be sticking with the regular releases for now.
Do you have any mods installed? New updates and mods don't play well together until the mods have been updated as well.

[thereddaikon]

I had deleted it but that doesn't seem to be enough. Just did a complete clean install and it works now.

[wilky210]

Is the MK 45 Torpedo coming back? was looking forward playing with a new weapon. I assumed it was removed until the problems with it are fixed, yeah?

[jackyyan]

Is the new heli, plane and torp only usable in the 1968 campaign?

[nesbit]

Is the new heli, plane and torp only usable in the 1968 campaign?

I think I saw a HIND helicopter near shore in the 1984 campaign.