What scenarios?

I never get bored in multiplayer, and never feel the need to compress time, however in single player (only when testing maps), I do it all the time.

I think you really need to start to meet 2 things :

1) good MP scenarios (that are VERY different from singleplayer scenarios)
2) good MP players

My MP games is waaaayyyy more existing than any of my singleplayer games.

No question about it ... SO better I couldn't play solo, now, without beeing bored whatever the scenario.
One of the main reason is because whatever you could do for doctrine, an good player is MUCH stronger than an AI.

All scenarios I made have minimum 15 minutes for positionning before the action begin.
15mn is a minimum, but this could be 1hour, depends on random fatcors and on everyone attitude.
But during that time, you are supposed to be REALLY busy : identifying contacts, making your TMA on them and finding the best position to attack or to defend.

So, definitly I think you didn't met good MP sessions.

You find 15 minutes (or hour) of TMA funny ?

Well .. worst case I had was 2 hour game, 1 vs 1 (first mistake) .. I was about quite sure with firing solution when mission ended. My oponent hit the bottom.

I played some better, some was even quite short (15 minutes) .. but most was just that .. long periods of repetitive actions, and sometimes even with no possible enemy contact.

Well .. if you like MP, that's great. I don't.

back to the topic,

it took about 3 minutes to set up a secnario with an akula 2 and 6 enemy seahawks set to random box with rando start boxes all within 5 miles of me or so. have em all set to 100 mph and 150 ft.
ran mission 3 x

show truth on

1) brought akula from 30m to 16m at 5kts. 2 of the helos flew directly over me while doing so. a third flew over me as i jumped to the sam launcher and blew him away. i leisurely set up shot down 2 more helos before realizing a nearby one had launched torps. acclerate tried to make evasive maneuvers and launch cm i shot him down as his torp hit me.
torp was launched too close and i was way too slow to get away.

score 1 sub sunk 4 helos down (of 6)
---


2 and 3 ) were more or less the same , instead of repeating the mistake of staying slow i call flank immediately wait to accel to over 30 kts then come up to 16m. helos again start close enough that at least 1 one
passes directly over head while i am still submerged. (i am wondering if i need different altitude or speed for the to get a mad contact and shoot ? )sail breaks surface and i am off to the sam launcher. in one case i come up and immediately shoot down one no more than 500m on my rel 180. based on his approach this one helo may have noticed me and may have been prepping to shoot. i then proceed to shoot down all helos in both mission runs without having to dodge a torp.

score - 12 helos shot down no return fire.

total of 3 passes - 16 helos to 1 sub sunk - only 1 helo fired at all.
-----

sam hit rate pretty high.
one even locked on to a different helo after being fooled by a cm ( i think ? ).

i cant account for the difference between pass 1 vs pass 2 and 3 beyond inexperience. i had fired a total of maybe 15 sam missiles before this test, and have only had the game a few weeks.

guess i have to be on my honor.

but it REALLY is fun watching em explode.

very tempting...

The sim was designed so that kiddies can have all the fun they want with their little should mounted SAM cannon... :shifty:

Oh well... "who the stock fit, let them wear it". :-j

Actually Luftwolf if the radar worked the way it should :shifty: the kiddies would have a very hard time having fun with the SAM launcher.

In SCS original plan, the SAM launcher was seen as a last resort weapon when all other options are closed, and I think that was a good idea.
Of course having a totally useless radar made this last resort missile launcher a tactically important armament for subs.
Some may argue even more important than torpedos.

You forget something very important :

1)
a usual ASW mission is not during 2 hours but days ...
And the theatre is not 200miles² but 10 to 1000 times bigger.

In this situation, aerials need a LOT of work to find a target.

With DW, the theatre is very small compared to the real thing.
Just beacuse we couldn't play for days.
So, the direct consequence is aerial could find very easily the sub, subs just become easy targets for them ...

2)
I don't know what you mean last ressort ...
for me last ressort is when I have an aircraft above me.
In this case, as will do a real commander on a real theatre, I won't ask myself if it's realistic or not, I will think to SURVIVE.

If you consider aircraft shouldn't be threatned by SAM, just go in one sub with human aircraft above you, and become the target for a turkey shot ...

From the first day human made war, EVERY MEANS possible were employed to get the victory.
SAM is one of this mean, and as it, could be employed.

Why do you think there is real SAM on real submarine ? for decoration ?? or to be used if the ship is threatned ?

You should remember there is RTE on torpedoes setting, that allow you to engage the sub at safe distance, learn how to use it instead to complain about SAM doing a SAM job ...

Funny ?
You want funny games ?
I'm afraid you didn't choose the right game for that ...
excitement, tension, evaluation of the threat, THAT IS DW environment.

But if you want a funny game, you better play to something like battlefield2 ...

Well, I think last ressort was actually well phrased. Only if certain destruction is imminent, a SAM launcher should be viable alternative. As for realistic ... lets compare

DW:
- Being able to keep the masts up with no risk of counterdetection, which means comparable easy detection of Airborne Platforms.
- ability to go from PD to Surface in a heartbeat and then practically immediatly access the SAM Launcher, where you just have to aim it towards the target and of course, due to your prior work you know precisely where it is.
- Shoot, with absolutly zero chance of Escape for the target unless it's close to or outside the range of the missile. Thanks to perfectly workin missiles vs. not really working CMs (for example).
- And of course no ability to get back at you, unless they drop a torpedo which you might or might not evade, at least you have a chance. Fortunatly for you, the missiles which can be carried cannot be targeted at subs, unless you use some time consuming workarounds.

Real:
- Keep the masts up for more then 30 seconds and you are probably toast (I think there is a reason why there is heavy emphasis on quick sweep training for sub skippers), because every platform with a capable Radar has got ya on screen. And given the statements from some former and current TACCOs, the P-3 Radar is perfectly capable of detecting a mast.
- Getting to the surface takes a bit more time and getting up on the sail definitly more then 2 seconds. Which means the Airborne Platform might have already targeted and fired at you some missile to end your fun.
- Even if you get a shot off in time, it might be possible to spoof the missile.

I'm sorry but masts are made in composite to AVOID, as long as possible, any detections.
So even IRL, you need to be close to the masts, and need lots of sweep to detect them.
Especially in high sea, where radars should probably be unable to detect anything like a mast from the sea clutter (I use a real radar on my boat and I can tell you on high sea it's a real mess to detect even sail boat with special radar return device -I don't know the english name sorry-)
Masts are also a very faint contacts compared to a ship of course ...

Are you talking about patch 1.04 ?
With 1.03 and before, you need more than half a minute to come from PD to SAM depth.
This often lead to see an Orion going above you without beeing able to engage him, because it is too late.

as it is in DW, with just releasing some flares ...
A friend of mine is a real expert at this thing : when he know he is in dangerous area, he often release falres and firing SAMs to him become really hard.

But IRL also, aircrafts will not have any detection device against a heat seeker, except on some very recent planes (I know french fighters only -not helos- have this now, I don't know for other countries).


Well I don't see the problem anyway
I learned to use RTE on aircrafts to AVOID to go in the dangerous area, after beeing burned quite a few times by SAM.

On helo, you have a dipping sonar, this allow you to detect the sub at much more than 3 times, the range of the SAM, (talking about LWAMI settings) and engage it in a total safe area for your plane.

So, what do you want exactly ? That subs become only a target without any possibilities to get out of your torps ?

I couldn't be agree with that, sorry !

Aircraft have plenty of means to engage subs without going in the dangerous 3 miles area of them.
I really find the actual situation even for both subs and aircrafts.
On MP matches, there is near 50% of kill beetween them, and I personnally don't want to change that.

Of course, if mast detection could be implemented, this should be nice.
But not what I read, because masts are something VERY difficult to detect.
The first detection device is sonar, not radars, against subs.

hmmm
is there something generally just wrong with ai helo's ?
why do i have to goad them into firing at me ?

ran this tester a couple more times. stayed down . noticed one pass over me and must have got mad contact. the other 5 helos all reacted and they all changed altitude to about 40 ft and spd 130. i went to flank.
they follow and follow and follow circle circle circle repeatedly passing directly overhead....... rarely if ever fire ....

in general im not finding the ffg or helos to be very aggressive at all. (cmon shoot at me ya humps)
when i set helo for sonobouy search instead of dropping in the area designated they just kinda fly off ( ???? !! )
ffg will fire some torps but dont ever really break form to SEARCH and HUNT me down - they just lob a torp my way from 6 miles and keep on truckin'...

i think there is maybe a helo engagement thingy i need to download ?
(among other things)

i am aware the lwami addresses this as well.
it think also addresses lotsa things i havent even encountered yet
not sure how much i will have to learn unlearn relearn on this ...

i tried to go to the script thingy in mission editor to cause damage to the sam launcher but its not an option. :shifty: spose that woulda been too easy eh ? :damn: On the bright side, i noticed that i can destroy torp tubes :up:

maybe a script ?
If ( sub destroys helo and sub depth does NOT = "surface" )
then (all sub torp tubes destroyed)
:-j

erm - ah - hmmm :o

patch 1.04 ???? :hmm:

when/where do i get it ? :ping:

I think that even with composite materials, masts would be detectable if the receiving radar was close enough and if the mast was painted for long enough to stand out of the clutter. OS's 30 seconds sounds fair, perhaps generous at close range situations.

it's still in beta test
not public

30 seconds mean less than 3 radar sweeps.
It's probably more around 6 to 8 sweeps IMHO.

I agree mast should be detected if they are always rised and the detecting platform is quite close to them, in light seas.
But that's far from beeing as crutial as it is mentionned in this thread, and the detecting platform will need some luck to be in range for detection and out of range for sam.

This give you a VERY small area and very short time for an Orion to detect before beeing in the SAM range ... Or he will need a big luck (just in distance to detect with a course avoiding the SAM range)

What I mean is : this is a detail, and certainly not crutial, IRL as in DW.
There is enought means to go without it.

Let me give you a link about this "last ressort" weapon (the embarqued SAM) and the way it's going to be developped

=> http://www.dcn.fr/us/offre/equipements/airdefense.html

not so "last ressort" for the futur isn't it ...
And with these systems, aircrafts will be the real turkeys. :ping:

To be complete : I would have appreciated detectable masts
But DW, as it is actually, will not allow it.
That's not a reason to say it's a big problem when it's a small one.

What would you have said if the conning tower couldn't be detected by radar and visual ! :88)

If you compare a conning tower to masts, you could see there is a real huge difference of volume
Not even comparing masts to a ship hull ....

I don't think its a huge issue, since time has to pass before they'd be detected, but it's still a little aggravating. Before I realized that they didn't show up at all, I took an MH-60 out and I was investigating an active contact with MAD run to see if it was a sub or biologic. I had my finger on the trigger for a torp and a penguin and my eyes on the water for a periscope. The ****er surfaced a few feet in front of me and killed me while the Pengin's "fire" light was still flashing. Had masts been visually detectable, there was no way I would have missed the periscope and I could have attacked with a torp before he surfaced...

Next time I'll just listen closer on the dipper from 2.6 miles out, but still, it would be nice...

A good reading on the whole issue of ASW : The Third Battle by Owen R. Cote, Jr.. Naval War College Newport Papers.

A closer look at this reveals the impact Radar on Air/Surface Platform has/had on submarine detection. While composite material is certainly a lot harder to detect, remember Radars have become quite powerful nowadays. And as I said before, there is a reason why exposing of any of those masts (incl. the periscope) is something the subs are not really fond of.

Either way, the ability to completely avoid detection currently (on behalf of the subs as far as masts go) gives them a clear edge against Air platforms if they have to venture within the range of the SAM.

Its OK to be beaten by good tactics but it sucks to get beaten by an exploit.

Considering most missions designer still like to put a sub in the middle of a 10nm circle and put a big arrow that tells the airdales "SUBMARINE HERE!!!", I'm not losing sleep over the whole mast issue.

If the ASW searches were performed over reasonable areas and the submarine had something to do other than scan the sky for helos and p-3's, I think we'd see a lot fewer cases of bubbleheads starting missions with their balls up against it already and needing to come shallow because they know an airdale is going to be on them within 30 minutes at the most.

I'll start taking the whole issue of masts more seriously when ASW search areas get bigger in missions and bubbleheads are still hanging around the surface even when they ought to be doing something else.