Helicopters - why distance scale needs to be 2:1
 

Repeated attempts to get choppers to behave in the least bit potent against my sub all failed. While the bear always finds me, the choppers never do.

From my observation they're patrolling too close to the surface ships. My sub is usually 20nm+ out, they're somewhere around 10nm. They just won't take that extra 10nm leap.

Ofc as a result the surface ships are just turkey shoots every time.

So after some rest it occurred to me perhaps it was the distance scale - was at 1:1. Lo and behold at 2:1 they found me pretty soon-ish, and pretty much every time in a surface force encounter!

Why the devs didn't scale distance in the air... I dunno. As it is, I think the game is a little bit broken if not at 2:1 (the negative) / best played at 2:1 (the positive):D

That is plus the most discussed spawn distance thing - didn't have any problem with that, but guess this one does it for me...

Hmmm. Playing at 1:1 ratio and realistic, I have pretty much the exact OPPOSITE experience as you :)

The choppahs seem to be pretty danged good at getting into my general position and putting some death fish in my general vicinity (and requiring me to do lots of crazy maneuvering to evade death).

Even when I manage to finally get back to being undetected, they will continue to lurk my area for a long time.

I had one encounter off Norway coast where I foolishly ventured in a bit too close to shore so I was pinned with only about 400 ft of depth to work with.

I had managed to sink about 4 escorts and a couple merchants and I got greedy and came in to the shallows looking for one of the escorts which was "hiding" (sitting way over there motionless). Since he was a long way off (detected him with radar if I recall) I decided to use harpoons, and for some reason that summoned a helicopter to my location very quickly.

Net followed quite a desperate series of attempts to evade his torps and escape. I hope it was more than one aircraft the game was sending because it is hard to believe a single chopper could carry that many . . . In the course of all this, I discovered some ways to "cheat" (sort of . . .) even with all the settings on "realistic" (e.g., no 3d without full Identification of targets).

For some reason, that "No 3D" doesn't apply to wrecks, it doesn't apply to the owner ship, nor does it apply to the sea floor nor aircraft. So, in spite of aircraft not appearing on the tactical map, I was able to figure how where he actually was by using wrecks/sea floor markings to figure out where I was relative to him and thence get away from his search pattern.

Eventually he started moving off to the west, southwest and I presume he was returning to his secret undersea lair in the middle of the North Sea?

I had seen some past complaints by users that the aircraft exhibit unrealistic protracted loiter times, and in particular that choppers whose mother ships have been sunk should pretty much bug out immediately. I cannot comment on the latter, as I don't know if that chopper(s) would have been one which necessarily came from one of the escorts I sank or not. But it does seem like they have impressive loiter time.

The situation in the campaign at this point was Norway still in allied control, so I'm not sure what an ASW helicopter whose mother ship was sunk in that locale would do. If another viable mother ship was handy then that would make sense, but short of that, I suppose trying to get back to friendly territory via the shortest route (overland) might be the only option? Else just kamikaze it into an allied location or radio in to the allies and request to be taken prisoner and that you are going to scuttle your aircraft near the coast??

Please don't feel that I am intentionally picking on you. You are just the most prolific poster at the moment. :-) The gist of your posts seems to be the same, "I don't like the way things are so they should be changed". I have a teenager who thinks like that much of the time...

Your decision to fire a missile was what brought the chopper to your neighborhood. Like an uninvited guest, patrol aircraft can be hard to get rid of. Had you opted to fire a torpedo at the escort and then launched a MOSS in the opposite direction (and employed an additional stealth technique), chances are you would not have had to deal with aircraft at all.

If you choose to use missiles, then you have to expect that every enemy in the area knows where you are and will send over ugly dance partners for you to enjoy. Just like, every time you engage the enemy in shallow water you know that your defensive maneuverability is limited. So do you fire now, move to a better spot and fire later, or do you post a complaint that your in game options are too limited or are not realistic?

If it really bugs you, you have the option to go into the control files and limited the effective range of the helicopters making it easier to get away. They will still show up every time you fire missiles though. Some offensive choices come with an in game cost, that's just the way it is - wishing it was something different is tilting at windmills.

Yep that is kinda what I figured. I guess this is why the USN stopped putting harpoons in their subs at some point in the 1990s!? :)

Thanks for clarifying that the harpoon is an aircraft magnet.

About the only things I'd really like to see "changed" if it were possible, or if not then to be considered for the design in CW Part Deux:
1. More Time Compression settings
2. Crews modeled, and Skipper modeled according to developmental status (ability to 'learn' special abilities or something).
3. Capacity to communicate with allied forces to gain intell or provide intell
4. Less inactive and utterly impotent allied presence in the campaign. Every single mission is "Help me Skipper Wan Kenobi . . . You're our only hope." and that is a bit hard to beleive.
5. More enriched campaign map functionality: i. zoom; ii. ability to configure sub however one wants (including transiting on the surface, albeit with the potential cost of whatever the consequences for that would be, and possibly to include being court martialed?)
6. More "realistic" missions in campaign mode. For example, I'm sent toward Norway to take out an amphibious landing force. I spot it, it comprises 3 LSTs and 4 or 5 escorts. I kill all the escorts and 2/3 of the LSTs. Screen for "Invasion of Norway" boo hooo, still loads!? :haha:

Wonderful game! But for my tastes, I would be looking at 300 to 500% more prospective use time IF these types of design elements were present in campaign mode. Definitely, I'll still be able to get my money's worth, but just offering my two cents on how it coulda been even better.