I think the only way they could do a dynamic campaign in a modern subsim would be in a manner similar to the old Red Storm Rising game. I mean, DW did try its hand at a dynamic campaign, but rather than a long patrol based campaign like SH3 it was really the results of one mission affecting the next and so on. Pretty limited and to be honest I think I only played two missions of the campaign before moving on to custom missions. I'm not really into the modern modern sub warfare, I'm a cold war man, boomer trailing in a 688i. The Seawolf is nice but just not my cup of tea, but I do like the Seahawk, the Orion is nice but lacks the dipping sonar of the Seahawk...which I keep forgetting to retract before I move to my next waypoint...
The Frigate...I still have no idea how to operate.... :oops:

I THINK I can operate the subs. I don't know how detectable I am sometimes. I can't do much with the aircraft and the frigate....I can do some very basic stuff with it.

The P-3's MAD Sensor kinda makes up for not having dipping Sonar don't you think? I found it useful in the last mission I played with it.

It's called the falcon 4-experience. :)

However, two things.

First, scripted missions can be much more realistic since threy are indivkidually designed, and if the mission designers knows his stuff, his design will allways be more realistic, also more complex if desired, than anything a campaign generator can throw together.

Second, you can randomise a mission setup. That'S what I did in the days I used SC. I had a mission with I think ten potential submarine in a defined area, the arena, and had their positions and probability that they would show up randomised. I also had them in two teams. So every time I started the mission, it was a completely new setup and I could not know at all what was waiting for me, whether I had allied units or not and where they were, and whether I was hunting one enemy with four buddies, or was alone against a force of three. Also, every contact first established I had to identitfy to make sure whether it was Bue or Red team.

Summary: designing missions instead of having them generated, has advantages, and in SC, replay values of own missions can be increased tremendously by randomising them.

MAD is useful but you have to trianglate the location first, and get quite close to the contact before it starts twitching, whereas with the big dipper you can slap it down and work with the buoys to get a good triangulation and eventually work up a nice firm track.

I once managed to nail down a Kilo to the point that when I dropped the torpedo I near enough dropped it on the poor guys sail, I heard the explosion and sinking noises in the helicopter! :doh:

688i masts are made in China...that's all I'm saying. :O::nope:

The 688i's masts last even less than those of a French man-of-war.

In other news, I think I'm beginning to understand this TMA thing, so maybe next time my targeting solutions will be more based on hard data and less on completely random guesswork.

The horror! :o

Next time I'll just park next to them. Snapshots seem to work.


What is the max speed for the radar mast anyway? Still surprised it failed at 5 kts. :hmmm:

*pulls out manual*

*rummages*

Aha, I think I found our problem.

Max depth for the radar in the 688 is 54ft. We were at 65ft when I put it up. ESM is 61ft, although why the ESM broke about five to ten minutes after I'd lowered it is less explainable.

Should we upgrade to Lwami before our next game? Which could be tonight if nothing else occurs before hand. I quite enjoyed last night. :yep:

That works, just yank my chain a bit if I'm distracted by D&D.

I'll stick with 65ft for peri and 50ft for the masts then. Pretty shallow though; starts to broach at 45ft.

That's what I thought, still...if you're painting stuff with Radar then exposing your sail a bit is probably going to be the least of your problems. :haha:

I'll download Lwami now then. :yep: