Personally, I just took your new subs and kept the defaults for the rest, for now.

Just out of curiosity what sources are you using for some of these values (outside of personal preference)?

All the research can be found in this thread.

But, to make your life a little easier I'll break it down here:
These are purely my personal preference. For ex. with recon ranges I think the game gives you too much information about where the enemy is - there's no uncertainty common in submarine warfare - that's why I changed it.

Basically, I starter by comparing 688 with DW. After achieving roughly similar results I based values for other boats on displacement difference (for ex. displacement ratio between Narwhal and 688 is 1.288, so for Narwhal I multiplied LA's values by this number).

This paper: http://calhoun.nps.edu/bitstream/han...pdf?sequence=1
page 42 (took the middle value for 60 latitudes)

Based on gut feelings with comparing to DW

Personal preference and gameplay reasons (I think TMA's are too quick in base game)

First, I took warhead sizes from this website: - new warhead sizes for all torpedoes
Then I calculated their TNT equivalent. After that I replaced the Mk48 warhead in the game with a real value and did some tweaking so you need 2 torpedoes to kill Sovremenny but 1 for most submarines. Turned out it's 0.83 of real value. Then I multiplied real values for all weapons by 0.83 and put those in the game.

Here's the spreadsheet that contains all calculations: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...gid=1880361556

Gut feeling based on playing DW

Mostly, denis_469's forums (http://sovpl.forum24.ru/?1-4-20-00000051-000-20-0#020) and conversations in this thread.

Personal preference

This to account for different hull design (single hull for us, double for Soviet) - basically this means that any torpedo except UMGT-1 will kill any US sub.

That's also personal preference

Can we have these values added to a mod which lets you tweak them in the settings page?

Does this mean I need to be updated or is it OK?

What do you mean updated?

The mod is made to work on the latest Cold Waters patch (1.04 currently).

Hate to rain on the parade but this is kind of pointless. What make people here thinks that they have more accurate info on varies systems than the Dev. Sure everyone is claiming sources but most of those (if not all) is in English. What happen to foreign language source, Did anyone check/translate those. Without knowing what the Dev uses for reference, What make you guys think your source is more accurate. Some even used data from other games, much older games, sure some of the team back then even have professional consulting for them or in their team but if anyone watched Jive's video, you'll see that he probably thought certain thing may be inaccurate but he can't say anything without getting a visit from the DOD so basically any mods resulting from is is just a personal preference mod and have nothing to do with realism, at least not without someone violating their security clearance.

Well, obviously most of the exact parameters are classified.

But the devs need to make the game playable for everyone so they need to make some exceptions. For example, all boats in the game turn in a simplified manner - without any momentum. It's a good idea from a gameplay perspective, but if you want realism, you can safely change those values.

For MAD sensors I provided a source, which seems accurate enough - even document date is close to game time.

Or let's look at the most radical changes in my mod - torpedoes. If I remember correctly, devs stated that a lot of their info about torpedoes comes from this site: http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/index_weapons.php which is what I also used initially. But even using just this you can clearly find that for ex. Mk48 were said to be extremely noisy (which is also quite easy to deduce when looking at their propulsion types), yet in the game they are generally as noisy as any other homing torpedo (despite being faster). Then Denis_469 showed up with a great deal of detailed information on Soviet and US weapons that seemed to shed some new light.

The thing is, while making this (and others similair) mod we don't need to worry about accessibility to every type of player. So yes, there is some personal preference, but it's at least backed by research. And also, isn't this the whole point of modding?

Well actually on the Mk48 noise, Jive's did burb out that it's actually fairly quiet and even they can't hear it past a short distance till they go active and kick to high speed. That's why you're suppose to dogleg your torp before they go active so if they fire a snapshot to the bearing it won't be pointing at you.

Well, that just poses a question how quiet it is compared to other torpedoes. Perhaps that would mean that Russian torpedoes are even more quiet.
You can't get around the issue of it using piston engine and water jet propulsion as opposed to electric motors.

Actually, i think he's referring to the later ADCAP as those got a lot of sound isolation improvements so the original MK48 maybe much louder but I can actually answer that without security clearance. My company used to work for Gould Inc that build the Mk48 and since I was already deep into modern military stuff back then. I did raise that question in the early 80s and the answer (no actual noise level was ever mentioned and the answer are in very general terms) I got is that it's slightly quieter or about the same as that Soviet torp in that era depending on which model but given that Soviet sonar equipment was generally inferior to their US equivalent at the time, they believe that we'll always pickup their torps before they pickup ours.

Another point that was raise is that in general, it's much easier to pickup launch transients before you pickup the torp's self noise so if you're able to masking that (firing from the other side of the layer), the chance of them getting a bearing to shoot back is much less.

I wonder how a Russian working on their torpedoes would answer that question ;)

BTW, don't think I'm contradicting you just for the sake of contradiction.
I'm just not very good at this whole "believing what people say" business :)

No offense taken at all, I would have treated it the same way, but all the varies sub sims back then tends to point to the same conclusion. But then again, they're all made by imperialist Americans.:03:

Does this help?:haha:


http://i1276.photobucket.com/albums/...psy817bjg8.jpg[/URL]

And that is the healthy attitude to have. When reading American and Russian sources on the period from the US side it appears that the Russian subs were rubbish that would be picked apart instantly (without even considering different uses) whereas the Russian side refers to their subs as more equal although they had some disadvantages in terms of SONAR and acoustics. Looking at your noise levels for Russian and American submarines appears to tell the same story. And then we enter the Russian domain of wake tracking and detection which is still classified research to this day and non acoustic methods of detection which the Russians explored a lot more from what I could find.

"In the first half of 1969, an experimental Soks "Snegir" was installed on it. In September-October of the same year, as part of the Pacific Fleet exercises, the boat was engaged in the search and tracking of the US Navy's nuclear submarines in the Philippine Sea and on approaches to Fr. Guam. K-14 managed to track one of the ships of the probable enemy with the help of this system for almost 40 days. Due to this success, Soks "Snegir" was developed and subsequently one of its modifications was installed on domestic third-generation nuclear submarines."
K-14 is submarine project 627A (NATO - November). It was US submarine "Benjamin Franklin" class. Our sub start tracking when US sub go from Guam and continue before US sub return to Guam base.

It is 1969 year. First non acoustic system. During this patrol "K-14" few times go to US sub for acoustic contact. "K-14" not need acoustic contact with US sub and know where US sub was.