I don't think torp performance in this mod is "about the same." The torps being dropped by Silex's are crappy, they lose their lock if the target sub takes a sharp turn. ASROC dropped torps are a bit better, but their locks are a but tenuous. ADCAPs, and maybe UGST's, are like mad dogs, once they get a bite they don't let go!

I think the relationship between CMs and torps is working pretty well right now. If I had a choice between a "false lockup" effect and a "jamming" effect, I'd go with jamming. It's just cooler behavior.

Going back to the philosophy of evasion... I don't want a game where torp evasion is easy. I hated the stock DW feature of torps exploding on decoys for exactly that reason. The bottom line is that I want kills and evasion to be about the skill of the player. SC and SCX struck a very good balance with this. If a torpedo locked onto you, you were in trouble, and only a very well placed CM pattern with appropriate maneuver would get you out of it. And, if the shooting player was on his game, he could resteer and thwart you anyways. Getting the first detection and first shot, and maintaining superior tactical awareness throughout the engagement, were very important (I think in SCHQ, the first shooter would win about 2/3 of the time).

Stock DW was a huge step backwards. CMs could ruin a great shot even in spite of good resteering. Preventing the detonations is as far as you need to go to set things right. Feedback from the weapon is a really cool feature too. But, if in its implementation, you absolutely guarantee a kill, then this has gone too far in the wrong direction. This is made even worse by the ridiculously accurate aTMA in DW. There is no excuse for not getting a torpedo into acquision range. There's no skill there. If the feedback makes the correct target so obvious that it can't be missed, then there is no skill in that either. Victories become meaningless.

As for first detection, skill comes into play a little bit, but so does the tactical situation (up to the mission designer), the tech level of the sub, and pure luck (TA facing the right way at the key moment). After that, its just a question of who's torpedo is has the greater relative speed compared to its target. That's it. That's what determines the outcome.

I still haven't had a chance to test this in MP. I hope it's not as bad as it seemed from SP.

I'm not sure exactly what the 50% effectiveness parameter really means. CM effectiveness, even in stock DW, has to do with the placement of the CM. There does seem to be a random component, but it isn't dominant. In general, a well-placed CM WILL attract the torpedo, and a poorly placed one will only rarely draw a torpedo off track.
--------------------------
This is almost a separate post but I know the mods don't like 3 consecutives.

I finally got around to some testing of the feedback in MP.

I went first. I fired an ADCAP at my hapless pal, Mercedes, in her Akula 1-I. She fired 3 decoys as it approached, which I identified as decoys easily; the first decoy attracted the torp and required me to resteer it. The others didn't seem to attract the torp or interfere with the lock, and I had a nearly effortless kill.

Then we turned it around, she fired a UGST at me. It actually took 3 tries, because she kept losing me during my runs. The shorter seeker range is having a strong effect; but then again, that was manual TMA. Had it been auto, acquiring might have been a snap. So, I moved off at about a 50 degree angle to the torp, fired two decoys about 10 seconds apart. Then got on the rudder hard and crossed behind the decoys, forcing the torp to run one of them over in order to get to me while I was moving off in the other direction. Didn't work.

I think it's possible that my evasion tactic might work if I began the process slightly earlier. I'm also thinking maybe holding one decoy for the last moment might jam the torp at the terminal phase and let it go by once.

Has anyone been able to evade one of these, and if so, please share! :ping:

Hmm some thing for me to think about...

I tell you that have not decided myself yet if I want it in final mod or not. I see both pros and cons of it. Yes, it's cool, especially in SP, it shows you what targets torpedo see and you can steer it to right one. But there are some unrealistic aspects of this feature. It works at any ownship speed - even if enemy counter-shot forces you to evade, you can still see feedback data and steer your torp while making turns at flank, with ownship sensors blocked. It works outside real wire range, which should be 10nm for ADCAP - in fact it works even without a wire, fortunately steering is not possible then. It shows passive tracks at any speed, even with washed-out sensor. So hard to decide... If SCS fixed feedback sensor wash-out and made torpedo wires breakable, it would be much more realistic than is now.
I think if it's possible to make running (not stationary) CMs, at least advanced ones. I would make big running decoys launched from torpedo tubes, but we can't modify armament of playable subs :-/. Currently you would have to use SLMM to have mobile decoys :).
I also think about additional modification to torp homing doctrine, to make each second few percent chance of dropping target if the target is on the other side of the layer. Longer the torpedo stays on the other side, higher cumulative chance of it losing the target. For a moment.. or maybe forced to few seconds ? If enemy set wrong search depth , or you changed your depth while evading, you would have slightly better chances. But this would require much testing and fine tunning of right values.

BTW I have to test different torpedos with CMs set to 100%. I don't really believe that different torpedos are smarter or dumber, I don't see in database any values that could be responsible for that. All torpedos had similar parameters and all shared same sensor in standard DW...
I'll make some tests of ADCAP vs E45-75A with same sensor and we'll see.

The topic of CMs cause a furore a few weeks back.

I cannot comment fully on CM torp interaction, (yet) but a feature subtends which I think detracts from gameplay.

Under SCX both active and passive CMs (SW ) were ejected some 50 yards from the sub and then for example
with a sub speed of 30 knts they would continue on the subs course for the same before making a 135 or 180 deg.
course change. Total distance travelled from launch 30 yds appx.(30 kts - launch speed related)

Now the CMs just clear the sub and stop !! This would be appropriate only in circumstances where the torp explodes
on them and IMO was introduced by SAS as a dumbing down for the general player.

SCX CM behaviour is surely preferable given that the torp takes a 'heading off' course so the skill for
the diver is to interpose the 'spoofing' cm.

The new mod adcaps are beatable mostly only by violent manouvre.

We know little of how 'real' cms work but IMO we look to flight sims for the clues.

Surely an active cm is like a flare and would be projected/launched with the intention of attracting the 'homer'
On the other hand a passive cm is like chaff and its purpose is to confuse/blind the torps seeker with 'noise'

For brevity I grossly oversimplify but my point is if that if the DW software doesnt permit (?) variable launch
performance characteristics for cms then the former (SCX) projection method is preferable ? :hmm:

I always thought the way SC shot CMs way out of the tubes was kinda hokey. Just ejecting it from the tube seems more realistic t me.

Under SCX they ejected only if the sub was at stop they went 50 yds to clear and stopped - if the sub was
moving they carried the momentum as in my example of 30 knts they went 300 yds.
Thats kinda realistic ? :yep:

Even under DW they do more than just eject - measure it ! ;)

I liked the idea of the perfect first shop. It should be extremly difficult/impossible to spoof. I liked the less effective CMs. Keep it the way they are now.

Well, I've played a few more games. I haven't seen a torpedo that was providing feedback be evaded yet. I'm not prepared to say it's impossible, but it's close enough.

I found the argument about the 10nm wire length and the failure of the wire to break during manuevering or high speed very persuasive as well. My vote is cast... :down:

I must agree that my initial favourable response has faded with further tests over the weekend.

The 'feedback' coupled with reduced cm effectiveness has steeply tipped the advantage to the torpedo.
Add to that the 'wire' control bug/fault and torp avoidance has become extremely difficult.

The effectiveness of CMs is the lynch pin. But given that this is a simple (?) arithmetic factor whereas 'feedback'
is a constant then I join ML in a :down:

We have dissabled torpedo feedback for all torpedos based on your feedback. :know: :up:

Thank you very much for you input on this feature. ;)

For those of you who really liked the torpedo feedback, I can post a method to reinstate it for the proper torpedos, however, we feel that the feedback feature will too unbalance the multiplayer game and making hunting AI subs in single player like shooting guided arrows at deer, just unfair. :arrgh!:

Cheers,
David

so case closed... ;)

maybe we will return to it someday if something change with game feedback/wire modelling.