My best advice would be "LOOK, LISTEN, and FEEL". Who did it come from? If you don't have track on the launching platform mark a bearing and evade. Pop a couple of countermeasures go above or below the layer (if present). But, the biggest thing is recognizing range (which can be vary hard). If it's close you should have track on target already. Assuming you are in a 688 or SW class. Operator recognition is key. I all else fails go for - hear it (start evasion), check what bearing it is coming from ( redirect your evasion ), pop some countermeasures and alter depth.

Depending where you are at depends on the tactics you utilize.

I would utilize a combination of tactics. First, assign the tracker to the fish, then go deep below the layer, mark on the map the general location of the fish. Launch 2 UUV's, one above and one below the layer. Steer one towards the location in the layer detection commenced, and have one the same course as yours. Do a few small course changes to check NB very carefully for a faint OPFOR tonal. I wouldn't launch the countermeasures unless you know for sure that the weapon is coming for you. All this does is give the OPFOR a location of where you were, that you were spooked by his fish, and he can fire a spread on either side of the cm's to cover datum.

In this case the torpedoes were shot so distantly that their bearings from the launcher were drastically different from his actual bearing from me, I figured this was the case when I detected the torpedoes in a different area than I expected his sub to be so I didn't countershoot. He just launched from 30+ km away and let the torpedoes search by themselves.

I won't play multiplayer anymore because of tactics like that. Just spoils the fun. More interesting to play against the AI even if it's not as 'smart'.

The smartness of the human host is merely in choosing a scenario in which he is very familiar with the area of dispersion of
'randomised' starting positions.

How often, in sub v sub MP, do you find 'mine host' has a choice position behind a small island from which to launch his 'exploritary' torps into the blue water where you sit. Such cynical techniques, and there are many more, are driving many like Wildcat away from MP.

It would be entirely possible and good practise to randomise the allocation of free for all submarine slot allocations in the pre-launch room.
Nothing worse than devoting two hours to beeing a 'mark' but when this and other 'setups' are repeated incessantly,
you have to wonder whether such MP is a waste of time !!

Fair play and a level playing field are concepts foreign to many MP players. To some extent this corruption is more prevalent in fleets where the drive for promotion points blinkers good sportsmanship.

Generally speaking, I blame the mission designers and the players both...

OKO is a shining example of someone who is both a great MP mission designer and a truly disciplined player.

I've always had a good time playing 1) with OKO, 2) on OKO's MP maps/missions.

Ditto for Molon Labe.

Cheers,
David

When I was active within the Seawolves I used to have a lot of MP games. But very rarely someone came up with such poor way to play (maybe never).
If you use to play within a community you don't want to lower your reputation to zero, and so "miss" the interesting events... :smug:

Imagine your a 688(I) skipper and you know or at least have a clue there is a kilo waiting for you perhaps behind that small island. Why shouldn't you launch a torp around that island to flush him out?:hmm:

You could fire a uuv instead. :yep:
I doubt that in RL, subs doing recon missions fire torpedos just to "flush" an eventual enemy out there.
Uuv are designed right for that kind of mission so why not use them ? :hmm:

Because of the time you have, or haven't?

PS: In recon missions, no, you shouldn't use that tacitc. But in a matter of live or dead?

"Using torpedoes for recon" is certainly a dickheaded way to play, but what he described actually involved firing a snapshot and firming the solution up later. It's a little sloppy since he didn't get a solution first, but it's nowhere near as "evil" as blind fire.

Of course, if LW/A 4 or DWA4 or whatever you're calling it now makes the player more likely to pay for that sort of sloppiness, I'm all for it.

You could have a point, nontheless i think that a sub driver should only fire one or more torpedos when he has pinned down the location of the enemy.
I guess this is the type of issue which should be specified in the roe for the mission in question.

Ok, a torp popped up at five mile from your position, came from the other side of the layer, (sneacky enemy), then you wait till you pinned down his postion? :hmm:

I think in the end it is the othe r player who decide what tactic he should use, not you.

Of course i agree with this.
Want i don't agree on is for a player that has the initiative to fire 5+ torpedos to flush out the enemy. Hoping that the topredos sooner or later will acquire the enemy because of limited playing distances.
Obviously if you're on the receiving end of an attack, then by all means use whatever tactics you want to escape and avoid being destroyed. :yep:

This is why it's good to get to know various MP players, that way you will find people whom you can enjoy a match with. TimmyG and a couple of the Subclub guys were always great to play against, Tim being particular about 'gamey' play.

In stock SC, the Mk48's were like silver bullets - you could launch them on a bearing and be confident of getting a kill. Naturally, alot of maps resulted in torpfests from people making multiple 'probe' shots - simple logic, fire enough and you'll hit something. Likewise, the Akula's Stallion was regularly misused.

I have to say, the early matches I played with DW were good fun. Generally well- disciplined play, with very good ASW players making life difficult for the subbies.

I've not tried LWAMI online yet, I'd love to have some matches.

That was a really fun crowd to play with, but they had pretty much dissapeared even before DW came out. :cry: