LOL Sounds Like A gOOgLe of Fun! :lol:

Not for the dog... :dead:

Luftwolf, i have cleared out the issues of misfunctioning weapons. dont ask what it was, my head still hurts from bashing it against the wall for hours after i discovered the "seed of evil".....

all is fine now besides the fact that the mk48 seems to be the worst torpedo in DW now.

edit: typo

Could you clear it a bit ? :D What happened and why it's worst torp now ?

Well, if you set it to run passively at above 35kts, it will wash itself out, and you may not notice it with other torpedoes because they are a bit slower in their runs...

In terms of active mode, should be foolproof, so I'm not entirely sure what you are talking about... could you be more specific?

Some more information on the Sphere Array tracker issue.

You will be able to see a faint trace on the BB long term and then the short term before you can assign a BROADBand tracker to the target. However, you can assign a NARROWBand tracker to the target as soon as you can see it on the NB, which will be very very shortly after you can see the trace on the long term BB, IF you have your screen contrast set correctly.

Apparently, the BB trackers are dependant on the Signal to Noise ratio whereas the NB trackers are dependant only on the signal strength, which makes perfect sense given the acoustic differences between BB and NB signals and sonar arrays. So be aware of this... I really like the fact that you have to use a little more skill now to make the sonar sing to at it's peak efficiency.

All hail the skills game! :yep: :-j :up: :rock:

:rotfl:

A note to the SeaWolves Testers:

I recommend that you download Ludgar's DWEdit program and take a look at the database itself. I think you will have a much better time experimenting with the Mod if you take a look at the mechanics of the changes we have made, especially when you are unsure of something you have found.

For example, you can take a look at all of the torpedo sensors, and see that the ADCAP's have not only the longest range seeker, but also the widest scanning seeker in the game (along with the UGST).

Please email or ICQ me (or post) if you need any help with this! :up:

Thank you very much for your consideration, and I want to give you guys any possible support that I can in your efforts to evaluate Amizaur and my work. :)

Some further further information:

In order to assign a BB tracker on the SA for the SeaWolf, you have to have a SNR of at least 11 (at least in my testing...). :o

Yes, that's really really high, and no I wouldn't have set this value in my ideal world... but obviously this is in the interface. :hmm:

I can't change this... nor, to be honest does this overly bother me, call me crazy. :88) Because...

This effects only your ability to perform DEMON analysis on the contact, since you can assign a NB tracker to the contact between when it shows up on the long term BB and the short terms BB (exactly between actually, the contact will show up on NB...). And, in the exact same gameplay situation prior to me making the changes to the SA sensitivity, the contact wouldn't show up at all on the BB or the NB, so it's still an improvement over what was there before. And who knows what the "realism" factor on this is... but at least in gameplay terms, I don't see it as a reason to revert the SA back to a totally useless sensor.

Bach, CJ, concurring in judgment:

The ability to perform DEMON analysis is absolutely crucial to performing TMA on a manuvering target. Especially in a time when many players are attempting to forgo the use of the nearly omniscient aTMA, anything that effects the feasibility of abandoning the autocrew should not be a factor cast aside as insignificant...

However, in the light of the fact that the end-user's ability to use DEMON has not been decreased by this change, the decision of the majority is sound.

Yes, the net change for the player is towards the positive in terms of sensor-based situational awareness.

The solution to hiding the interface limitation on the BB tracker, is to make the sensor well-neigh useless... so it doesn't make any sense to go back to what was there before, especially because the NB performance and ability of the player to use the BB for situational awareness, short of DEMON, has been significantly enhanced.

Has anyone been able to confirm this on their testing?

well, what i am talking about is that only 4 of 16 mk48 adcap'S managed to get a lock on this french carrier. all other 12 just ignored the ship as it wasnt there. passive work better as it seems as 4 of the torps where passives and 2 of em hit. so the hit ratio is 50% for the passives and 18% for the actives wich is a bad joke imo. i just tested them on the carrier tho. will do more testing, probably it was just a bad day...

I just tested the torpedoes against the carrier in fairly average conditions, and they seem just fine to me, picking up the carrier at basically the maximum range for the seeker... maybe you set them too deep? :hmm:

Maybe too deep, maybe too far away (are you aware of new ADCAP's seeker range?) maybe those passives were too fast (over 45kts they don't hear much). And really nothing was changed with torpedos from 2.01...

... other than their passive sound level and sound vs. speed, but this has nothing to do with their performance as a weapon, only how loud they are on sonar.

I managed to reproduce the above behavior vs. an FF-PTG group by accidentally forgetting to turn a passive torp down to 40 knots. :hmm:

Well, there is no mystery... passive torpedoes will wash themselves out if you set the run-out speed over 35-40kts, and I'd even use 35kts because the torpedoes will run 6kts over the speed you set them, because of some mis-programming in the torpedo speed calculations in the game engine.