Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Molon Labe
I'm not sure active decoys are always right... and I think you have it the other way...passie decoys sometimes attract active torpedoes, I don't think it works the other way...
|
The reason probable is - active torpedos sometimes home with passive seeker, and then it's possible that passive decoy works against them :-).
Active CMs emit zero sound, this is set in database. Passive decoys have zero active sonar signature. So active decoy never can work against passive torp, and probably should a little because it makes noise when producing bubbles, also the cloud of bubbles could mask a target passive noise if it happened to be between.
The human player in most cases drops both active and passive decoys at first, because there may be passive torp after active one. AI sub should be no dumber, don't we want to make SP too easy ? AI inteligence is very limited anyway... I think it should relase both at start, and then "decide" what to "reload" next, so it may randomise passive and active then.
Other nice solution would be to add some passive noise to active decoy, and little active signature to passive decoy (10?). Then there probably would be some chance of active spoofing passive torp and a very little chance that very close passing active torp would be decoyed by a passive decoy. I believe that this was made in SCX but have to look there to confirm this.
The torpedo in active intercept baffles could be part of the problem, I seen funny behaviour when AI subs evaded sonobuoys - they turned away from they and run, but after some time they "forgot" that there was active threat behind them because the stopped to hear pings. So they slowed and turned, then heard pings again and everything started once again :-).
I think evade course values should exclude those that sets torp in AI baffles. But I understand that this is already done now ?
And the sub should not only run! When decoys don't detonate torps, this tactic is sucide. I've seen many AI subs running from active torp in stright line, dropping several active decoys and torpedo homed on some of them, but after passing through each decoy torpedo started to search again and the target sub was ditrectly in front of it. Boom. I think the sub should first drop a CM and run in the right direction as usuall, but when it drop SECOND CM while running fast, it should turn 90 degrees to not be in front of the torp when it passes through decoy. Just running straight and dropping decoys is very dumb currently :-/.
I didn't analyze evade scripts yet, but I wonder why there was a random, why could AI sub "want" to NOT relase active decoy if it was pinged by torp ? Maybe something like that - the condition to not relase could be only related to threat range, there could be a random chance that AI sub "knows" range to torpedo and then IF torpedo is far away, it would not relase active but only evade. If the roll was unfavourable, so AI sub doesn't "know" range to torp, it would always relase active decoy ? Would it be good tactic ? I'm not sure, I only show example of how this could be done, but what should be done in similar way (i.e. what tactic, what evade algorithm) should be determined by more experienced players.