The truth is: most players doesn't know how to use manual TMA. So if you wanna play more than once in 2 month, you should give a choice.
Auto TMA isn't perfect. Its true that computer use "mystical knowledge" for predicting course and speed but in other hand, auto TMA very often gives you:
- too big error for contacts tracked long time.
- dont updates solutions (even with strong SNR)
- first solution can be very accurate 50%
- first solution can be terrible unaccurate 50%
In my opinion players should learn how to play with auto TMA. Its like "area of enemy presence" in Harpoon games on CMANO. Game draws you large figure where is enemy ship. In DW auto TMA players should have in mind "virtual area" just like in Harpoon or CMANO.
Quote:
|
Now with the discussion deviating to the inaccuracy of the towed array introduced in DW vice SubSim. It would be interesting to prove or disprove the validity of the dual contact accuracy vs the longer TMA solutions that your videos are showing. I would believe that more than likely three sets may actually be required now in DW due to the induced towed array error.
|
Ok I will try to make video which will show how much this "trick" was effective only in SC (and 688 H/K). But i think you should have more wider perspective on TMA work. Of course merging contacts from different sensors in one Master gives you more informations. But not in that way as you think (not via crossing lines as 100% location of target). I have observe that many players are focusing on dots like students on mathematical riddle
Its wrong! You should have more resoluteness in TMA work. When i see screens on subsim where someone tries to cross lines in one point and speed of his sub is only 1-3 kts i know - he do it wrong.
BTW im not TMA specialist. My games are in 99% with auto TMA. I just know how it works - not only from "red/blue books" but mainly from single player testing in DW.
I think FPSchazly is much better in TMA because he likes this work - I dont :P