LuftWolf and Amizaur's Realism Mod Poll #3: Torpedo Behavior

[LuftWolf]

The most important changed to torpedos in v2.0 are: the complex seeker moddling, the non-explosions on CMs, feedback for player wireguided torpedos, and the non-surface casualty mod.

We are interested in how you think these significant changes are functioning in gameplay, together and with the rest of the mod.

Thank you in advance for your feedback!

[Bellman]

The option to vote is not comeing up here. :hmm:

[Bellman]

Wooops - dont know what happened - ok now thanks.

[Deathblow]

The torps work great now, before they seemed too quick to acquire yet too easy to counter with CM, now the feel of the launch and acquistion just feel better and make gameplay more enjoyable.

The only thing I would change, something that I've been messing around with, is the non-surface casualty mod. Its a purdent move most of the time, to keep AI friendly fire down, but it made the torps too predictable. When someone was faced with a SS-N-27, Stallion, Mk 46, or Mk 50 its always a given that you can escape to the surface if needs be.

Oh, and maybe upping the passive sonar range to 2000?

.... on a random note. Would coding the AI helo and ASROC torps to randomized search depths be possible. It seems like all the drops I've seen were always "above the layer", making them predictable (I think it was like that before in the stock game anyway). Perhaps a random function to assign initial search depth. I'm not a coder, but perhaps something along the lines of

SearchDepth = random(40-400)
If SearchDepth -100 < MinAlt Then SearchDepth = MinAlt/2 + rnd(20)
; the If statement to keep the searchdepth too low that it bottoms out the torp

Or something along that idea. Thinks its possible/warranted?

EDIT: or maybe a better method would be:
If (rnd 100 > 50) then searchdepth = 60
elseif searchdepth = layer + 100

[Fish]

Originally Posted by LuftWolf

The most important changed to torpedos in v2.0 are: the complex seeker moddling, the non-explosions on CMs, feedback for player wireguided torpedos, and the non-surface casualty mod.

We are interested in how you think these significant changes are functioning in gameplay, together and with the rest of the mod.

Thank you in advance for your feedback!

I did a few tests., but I don't see any feedback from the torpedo (adcap),even when acquiring?

[LuftWolf]

Fish, are you sure?

The new contacts show up with the prefix T. Try it with the auto TMA off to make sure they don't get merged with the original track.

Also the torpedo must be very close to the target as the sensor that provides the feedback has a range less than 1000m, so the feedback comes from the passive sensor not the active sensor. This models the inability of the datalink to carry all the information required by the active system (re: the DICASS passive vs. active mod GRAM requirement) and helps keep it from being TOO useful a too.

[Fish]

I am doing more tests tomorrow. But the one I did was a adcap active destroying a other sub. There where no contacts at all on my nav map, and none coming when the adcap acquired and destroyed the boat.
I installed your 2.00 mod over the old mod, could that be a problem?

[LuftWolf]

No that's not the problem... hmm... interesting.

Unless the sub was too quiet to be detected by the passive sensor but if it was fleeing then perhaps that's not possible.

Did you have truth off?

[Amizaur]

Feedback is visible only with show-truth off of course .

Second thing is, that it's better to disable Auto-TMA before you activate a torpedo! If not, Auto-TMA crew tends to immediately merge the now target track from torpedo seeker with the old from ownship sensors and you don't see any difference in most cases. Try to disable Auto-TMA crew for the time of shooting.

And then watch as your torpedo chases the only MOVING target in the vicinity, ignoring those stationary :P or the other way, look at it goes for stationary ignoring the one that runs - then you know your intervention is needed .

To Deathblow - I think you don't appreciate me . Have you actually tried this ? I mean to escape an AI torpedo by surfacing ? You can be little surprised if you try :P

Random search depth can be programmed of course, just didn't want to add too much untested features at once.

Range of torpedo passive sensor was intentionally reduced to 1000m for wire-guided torpedos, this minimises the mess on the screen caused by torpedo feedback passive tracks. With wire-guided torpedos 1000m range should be enaugh to lock-on on noisy surface ships, and vs quiet submarines this 1000m range is even too long.

[Deathblow]

Originally Posted by Amizaur

To Deathblow - I think you don't appreciate me. Have you actually tried this ? I mean to escape an AI torpedo by surfacing ? You can be little surprised if you try

You mean the fact that in about 2min a ASM will be heading my way?

Really, I did test this out throughly. Found it out when a had a couple of helo-Mk46s dropped 1000m starboard. I went into panic and turned on the truth (partially to see the new torp doctrines in action, partially because I was panicked and decided to cheat) , went deep, fired off two CMs and ordered flank speed. The Mk46s ignored my first CM, and flew through my 2nd before I could gain any distance. Went deep to 900ft, but they were still closing. Got to the point where their pinging sounded just like one long continue ring, so in desperation ordered "Emergency blow!" and shot to the surface, surpassing 43knots while on the rise in my Akula. Got to the surface with a big splash (Hunt for Red October USS Dallas style) and thought that it was a lost cause.

The torps shot upward too, and closed the final distance, but.....leveled at their min distance passed about 50ft under my hull and then their they were, about 50ft under my hull circling, reacquiring and then recircling, but never passing their min depth. Was kindof funny.

For some reason the AI didn't launch ASM my way (must have been something about their missoin scripts).

Was so funny that I repeated the mission 3 more times to replicate the scenario and each time, the torps always stopped at the min range and circled below, eventually loosing track and researching.

Haven't tried the stallions yet, but its probably the same. I could probably be exploited in MP matches or on some missions especially when the AI doesn't shoot ASM for some reason. Just thought I'ld mention it.

[Amizaur]

OK, sorry for my irony I see you did check this. I will check it too on the same map and will check if there is a bug (they should get you if there were not surfaces close) also will consider changing the doctrine if it's too easy to exploit.

edit: yep, you found a bug, congratulations! :P

It had almost NOTHING to do with anti-casuality mod . Just the default ceiling setting changed from -10ft to -100ft somehow :hmm:, I though that it's default value and didn't change that, but seems that I have changed it myself earlier for some reason or my mistake from 10 to 100, because default value as checked in standard DW torpedo doctrine was -10ft, not -100ft. Torpedo setting was -100ft default, still detonating under surface ships but not under surfaced submarine. Will change it back from 100 to 10 and should work then :-)

Thanks you very much for finding this! As I said - there may be bugs, they probably are bugs but I will correct them as fast as possible. If I only had a place to host fixed version... to fix this, you would have to change ALL occurences of the value -99.5 in the doctrine to -9.5, best would be to make this by Replace command in txt editor, to be SURE that no one was missed. Or, well - I planned to relase this mod as stand alone anyway, so fixed version will be available to download soon

Cheers!

[compressioncut]

Moved this from the thread that more concerns the heavyweight and wire guided torps...

I've run a couple of the same mission now (simple FFG vs. Victor III) and am pretty happy with the way the lightweights are performing. I ran one deliberate attack to just inside TDA (8kyd), and was unsuccessful, as you might imagine. I fired one weapon - it didn't find anything, as the V-III moved away pretty quickly. He fired a snapshot 53-65, which was no danger to me, although I stayed disciplined and ran a timed TCM, not cheating even though I had show truth on. I start the TCM upon my weapon leaving the tube, so he probably doesn't have a very good solution on me

He ran away at high speed, and I didn't have the patience to stalk him again, so I had the helo drop a "Mk.54" on him, which was an easy kill.

Second engagement, I ran in to about 5.5kyd. The weapon again didn't track anything. The 53-65 he shot caused a little more anxiety for me, but it didn't get my wake. That's a nice improvement from the essentially sure-kill torpedoes they were before, although perhaps a little too easy to evade? I've only done two, so that's hardly comprehensive.

Again he took off at 30kts, so the helo put another Mk.54 on him. Another easy kill, even though he got a decoy off. That seems correct, as the decoy rejection logic in the 54 should be that good, especially as it was super close range. I'd like to see the re-attacks they carry out if they do get spoofed.

I'll run in to 3.5kyd next time, about the absolute closest I could expect to get to a sub, I think.

Which brings up a point - the SVTT torpedo interface is a little awkward. I don't know if it can be changed. The worst thing about it is the time it takes for the settings to be input into the weapon. I can't see the OHPs combat system taking that long - ours does it as fast as you can press the buttons.

Another thing that would be nice, and could probably be changed, are the default SVTT mounted torpedoes' settings. A Mk.46-type fired from the SVTT is default 50' ceiling (not changeable), and has no RTE. It starts searching as soon as it powers up.

Those two things would make the SVTT experience a lot better.

In addition to this, I just did a mission where the target sub is openly hostile. This allowed a little better look at my counterfire weapons' behavior, as it turns out.

Anyway, I managed to close to just at TDA (8kyd, again) when the Akula fired a 65-76 at me. I counterfired two barrels, which used the previously input settings - I'm not sure how those settings affect the 46s, but the end result was that they both turned around and headed awaw from the bearing of the threat. The second one was following the first, I get that, as they were both at the same depth, but I'm not completely sure why the first took off to the north. Gyro angle should have been zero, so, I dunno. Maybe the system sets the GA according to the originally input "solution," even though there isn't a solution as such?

See what I mean - I set the torp for GA 0*, 50 foot ceiling, 0 RTE while the ships is on a heading of 300*. Now, it ends up that I want to counterfire while on a heading of 180. Has the gyro angle been automatically compensated to put the torp on a course of 300*? I'll look into that myself a bit later. This is pretty important because, especially in blue water, the 46/54 is almost exclusively a counterfire weapon when in the SVTT.

I'm almost prepared to accept that my weapons were seduced by my own wake knuckles, except that initial search depth was 250ft.

At any rate, my counterfires were completely ineffetive, except they forced the AI Akula to evade. His shot was completely foiled, I only turned three times before I began to close him again to attempt another deliberate attack. He shot first, again, although I didn't counterfire (reloading stbd tubes). Again, I managed to evade his torp without a lot of effort - he fired at about 10kyd, a 65-76.

Then he shot a missile, didn't catch what it was. Club? Probably, as it appeared to be a two-stage job. 76mm and CIWS took care of it.

I put my helo on him at that point, and to my shock, he evaded at Mk.54! The 54 did some pretty wild twists and turns to try and get him, but it failed. He amscrayed at 35kts, so I had to put the helo on him again, this time a Mk.50. It looked as though he was going to get away again, as the 50 had to do one re-attack. But the Akula stopped turning and tried a straight run, which was his undoing.

One thing I noticed with the helo dropped weapons was that they both broached the surface for some reason :hmm:

Anyway, that engagement was alot more challenging than the unsuspecting Victor III of last night, and really showed some good stuff. The only lingering concern is that the AI sub launched torps are pretty ineffective. But to be fair, if I didn't have truth on (for texting puropses, I swear!) I would have continued the TCMs for quite a while, and been at a much bigger disadvantage because of it.

[Molon Labe]

My first impressions of the torp behavior is that it is enormously improved from DW 1.01.

I've seen some prett cool torpedo behavior...torps losing target locks while passing near CMs and going astray, or sometimes re-attacking...very cool. Manuevering seems to have a huge effect as well, since it's important to get out of the way while the torp is confused. I like the shorter acquisition ranges too.

One thing that seems to be happening very rarely, however, is torpedoes locking onto CMs. It seems that CM's are having a "proximity effect" instead, jamming the torpedo's sensor when it is close by. I think I'd like to see some more false locks.

Some of the Russian torpedoes seem to be losing their locks even if there are no CM's around. Maybe they are running too fast for their sensors to work well?

My other concern is that the Mk 48 doesn't seem to be the least bit effected by CM's. The Mk 50 and 54 seem rarely fooled as well. This is only with SP testing though, hopefully by this weekend I'll have some MP impressions, which will be far more meaningful.

EDIT: Further testing has shown the Mk48 can lock onto decoys and lose its lock to due maneuver. It's just a tough sucker to lose.

[Fish]

Originally Posted by Amizaur

Feedback is visible only with show-truth off of course .

Second thing is, that it's better to disable Auto-TMA before you activate a torpedo! If not, Auto-TMA crew tends to immediately merge the now target track from torpedo seeker with the old from ownship sensors and you don't see any difference in most cases. Try to disable Auto-TMA crew for the time of shooting.

And then watch as your torpedo chases the only MOVING target in the vicinity, ignoring those stationary :P or the other way, look at it goes for stationary ignoring the one that runs - then you know your intervention is needed .

To Deathblow - I think you don't appreciate me . Have you actually tried this ? I mean to escape an AI torpedo by surfacing ? You can be little surprised if you try :P

Random search depth can be programmed of course, just didn't want to add too much untested features at once.

Range of torpedo passive sensor was intentionally reduced to 1000m for wire-guided torpedos, this minimises the mess on the screen caused by torpedo feedback passive tracks. With wire-guided torpedos 1000m range should be enaugh to lock-on on noisy surface ships, and vs quiet submarines this 1000m range is even too long.

Yes, show truth was of. And I didn't use ships sensors, just to be sure its from the torpedo what I see on the nav map.

[Amizaur]

You mean, you didn't use ownship active sonar ? Well, the Auto-TMA crew merged active track from torpedo feedback with ownship passive track for me :-/ personally I disable Auto-TMA before enabling torpedo, to not get the new tracks merged immediately by auto-crew.