1.04 reluctance?

fatty · 02-03-07, 06:45 PM

The past few days in GameSpy, the wide majority of players I have encountered have refused to upgrade to 1.04. They cite the reduced ADCAP range as giving an unfair advantage to Akulas, which was referenced in another thread here (by Molon Labe?)

Anyway, I have missed out on a dozen games because I refuse to DOWNGRADE my game back to 1.03. Has anyone else encountered players adamantly sticking to 1.03?

IMHO the nice new models and the bug fixes outweigh giving an edge to the Akula. Is it even that much of an advantage, anyway? The Seawolf still has superior sensors and stealth, and as the aforementioned poster pointed out the range difference in running space is not that much (2nm IIRC). Some of these guys are just so frustrated that their beloved Seawolf is not invincible anymore

LuftWolf · 02-03-07, 06:48 PM

People who play DW on GameSpy are hopeless.

On the other hand, its good people are playing DW anywhere.

My advice is to keep up DW 1.04, use LWAMI 3.05+QuickFixII, and find much better games with SubSim community members.

Cheers,
David

LoBlo · 02-03-07, 06:50 PM

Sounds like people are just spoiled to the imaginary Mk48 performance that used to be there. All the sources say maximum range is 27nm at *less than* top speed. But the old version of the torpedo had it as 27nm at top speed. The currently modeled Mk48 is slated to be a more accurate simulation.

Those folks should get over it.

Ramius · 02-03-07, 07:06 PM

Cant say ive read about this yet, but i get the impression that people think a torpedo will go its max range at its max speed all the time ???

If thats the case then = :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

LoBlo · 02-03-07, 07:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ramius

Cant say ive read about this yet, but i get the impression that people think a torpedo will go its max range at its max speed all the time ???

If thats the case then = :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

Yeah, I think that instead of having the T-Boat Spearfish with 27nm @ 45knots and 12nm @ 70knots... instead we should have it 27nm @ 70knots!

Molon Labe · 02-03-07, 07:41 PM

Just to set the record straight as per my position, I've mentioned in another thread that the change in how torpedo ranges are calculated in 1.04 does cut in favor of the Akula, but that the change is not as big a deal as it's being made out to be.

The precise change, in game terms, is that the no-escape range (for a 35-knot target--like the Akula II) of the ADCAP has gone from 9.82 miles to about 7.74 miles. (Yes, I actually sat down and did the math!) That's not a huge deal. But, I suspect that many 1.03 players didn't realize that the no-escape range was only 9.82nm, so they did not take advantage of that fact. With the change in 1.04, more people are aware of this, and more people are taking advantage of it.

As others have mentioned, this change is realistic.
If people have a problem with the SUBROC weapons being too powerful, the solution is to use LW/Ami, which gives the SUBROC torpedoes less-capable seekers than the ADCAP or "65cm torpedo" in the stock game, decreases overall detection range (making it easier to get within no-escape range), increases the detection range advantage that US subs have over the Russian subs, and provides a substantial launch transient noise (giving US subs a chance to clear datum before the weapon splashes down). Disabling auto-TMA will also reduce the effectiveness of SUBROCs.

1.04 is an unqualified improvement from 1.03.

LuftWolf · 02-03-07, 07:46 PM

Don't forget, LWAMI also introduces a bearing and range error for all SUBROCs, so they won't always fall precisely where you think they will (but pretty close)!

(shameless plug)

Cheers,
David

Molon Labe · 02-03-07, 08:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LuftWolf

Don't forget, LWAMI also introduces a bearing and range error for all SUBROCs, so they won't always fall precisely where you think they will (but pretty close)!

(shameless plug)

Cheers,
David

I knew I missed something....

Madman_GNSF · 02-04-07, 12:40 PM

First the Tb-29 is taken away from the Seawolf.

Second 2knots are taken away from the Seawolf's Maximum speed.

Now - the MK48 has reduced range.

I can accept the Mk48 having reduced range but stripping the Seawolf of the TB-29 and 2knots off its speed is not very good.

The Future of the Seawolf?

-The modders weld shut 4 torpedo tubes giving the Seawolf only 4 torpedo tubes?
-Reduce the max speed of the Seawolf to 35knots?

It seems that some people just can't accept that the Seawolf is that much better than all the other subs. My guess is the Akula and Kilo and 688i drivers are trying their hardest to make the Seawolf into something they can kill easier. Instead of maybe improving their tactics they decide its easier to make the Seawolf an easier target.

I thought the whole points of simulations is to simulate real life? if the Seawolf can go 40knots in real life - then it should go 40knots in any simulation. If the Seawolf has a TB-29 towed array sensor in real life - why on earth would you take it away?

Please modders - try to simulate real life and not take away advantages or disadvantages for any boat. Please.

Thanks

LT Madman TF74
GNSF

goldorak · 02-04-07, 12:55 PM

And it seems people can't accept to play with autocrew (and particularly auto-tma) off.
Play the simulation as a skilled player will play and you'll see that the seawolf hasn't lost any real advantage to the 688i or akula.
It is easy to criticise the so-called advantage of the akula or 688i when auto-tma does all the dirty work isn't it ?

fatty · 02-04-07, 01:27 PM

But what is "real life?" Ranges and speed and equipment performance are all classified. We can come close but nobody here really knows (or is allowed to disclose) exact figures. So we have to tweak until we find something that we think is a fair representation.

And in the spirit of game balance, I'm pleased with the changes. I'm getting pretty bored of taking on three Seawolves in my 688i. I'm glad players will start mixing it up and branching into other platforms.

Thanks for the replies everyone. Where is the SubSim crew meeting for MP games these days?

Molon Labe · 02-04-07, 01:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Madman_GNSF

First the Tb-29 is taken away from the Seawolf.

Second 2knots are taken away from the Seawolf's Maximum speed.

Now - the MK48 has reduced range.

I can accept the Mk48 having reduced range but stripping the Seawolf of the TB-29 and 2knots off its speed is not very good.

The Future of the Seawolf?

-The modders weld shut 4 torpedo tubes giving the Seawolf only 4 torpedo tubes?
-Reduce the max speed of the Seawolf to 35knots?

It seems that some people just can't accept that the Seawolf is that much better than all the other subs. My guess is the Akula and Kilo and 688i drivers are trying their hardest to make the Seawolf into something they can kill easier. Instead of maybe improving their tactics they decide its easier to make the Seawolf an easier target.

I thought the whole points of simulations is to simulate real life? if the Seawolf can go 40knots in real life - then it should go 40knots in any simulation. If the Seawolf has a TB-29 towed array sensor in real life - why on earth would you take it away?

Please modders - try to simulate real life and not take away advantages or disadvantages for any boat. Please.

Thanks

LT Madman TF74
GNSF

This "plea" to the modders is probably best put in a LW/Ami thread rather than in a 1.04 thread. But since you put it here...

Get your facts straight. Variable torpedo ranges are a product of 1.04, not LW/Ami. (EDIT: And it's getting really irritating that people are griping about the "ADCAP's" reduced range when the change effects ALL TORPEDOES!) The TB-29 is present in both 1.04 and in all versions of LW/Ami.

The argument "if the Seawolf can go 40knots in real life - then it should go 40knots in any simulation" fails on its own terms because you have not established that it does make 40 knots in real life. Even if you did bother to complete your argument, it is still rebuttable by the fact that torpedo speeds are essentially hardcapped by a glitch in the DW code. Having "realistic" sub speeds while having unrealisticly slow torpedo speeds would fcuk the game in the ass a lot more than having slightly slow speeds for both.

GrayOwl · 02-04-07, 04:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Madman_GNSF

I thought the whole points of simulations is to simulate real life? if the Seawolf can go 40knots in real life - then it should go 40knots in any simulation. If the Seawolf has a TB-29 towed array sensor in real life - why on earth would you take it away?

Please, show me even one place where is precisely said that SSN21 has speed 40 kts.... :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

For You on a

I can say - put in the database speed for SSN21 -250 Kts to and you will be happy - - he dreams about fast boat be releaced.

Madman_GNSF · 02-04-07, 07:08 PM

Whatever is the most realistic is good enough for me :-)

LuftWolf · 02-04-07, 07:14 PM

Then in that case, you should be using LWAMI, that's pretty much not debatable.

I really don't care at all who does and does not use LWAMI at this point, but you should know that SCS through the USNI intentionally put "bad" information into the database to avoid any suspicion that they are using their classified data, to which they have plenty of access, and it neccessitates that they build a firewall between their own data and the data they allow in the game.

This is why they contracted the USNI, and this is why much of the data is simply wrong.

But it goes well beyond what is simply known data and unknown data. LWAMI adds 1000's of hours of work on a game whose publisher simply doesn't have the time to do finishing.

You can either believe that a modder can improve a game or not, but if realism is your goal, you are limiting yourself greatly by playing stock DW.

Have fun, it's your game.

Cheers,
David

02-03-07, 06:45 PM	#1
fatty The Old Man Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Canada Posts: 1,448 Downloads: 10 Uploads: 0	1.04 reluctance? The past few days in GameSpy, the wide majority of players I have encountered have refused to upgrade to 1.04. They cite the reduced ADCAP range as giving an unfair advantage to Akulas, which was referenced in another thread here (by Molon Labe?) Anyway, I have missed out on a dozen games because I refuse to DOWNGRADE my game back to 1.03. Has anyone else encountered players adamantly sticking to 1.03? IMHO the nice new models and the bug fixes outweigh giving an edge to the Akula. Is it even that much of an advantage, anyway? The Seawolf still has superior sensors and stealth, and as the aforementioned poster pointed out the range difference in running space is not that much (2nm IIRC). Some of these guys are just so frustrated that their beloved Seawolf is not invincible anymore

02-03-07, 06:48 PM	#2
LuftWolf Ocean Warrior Join Date: May 2005 Location: Free New York Posts: 3,167 Downloads: 2 Uploads: 0	People who play DW on GameSpy are hopeless. On the other hand, its good people are playing DW anywhere. My advice is to keep up DW 1.04, use LWAMI 3.05+QuickFixII, and find much better games with SubSim community members. Cheers, David __________________ LW

02-03-07, 06:50 PM	#3
LoBlo Subsim Diehard Join Date: May 2006 Location: Texas! Posts: 971 Downloads: 78 Uploads: 3	Sounds like people are just spoiled to the imaginary Mk48 performance that used to be there. All the sources say maximum range is 27nm at less than top speed. But the old version of the torpedo had it as 27nm at top speed. The currently modeled Mk48 is slated to be a more accurate simulation. Those folks should get over it. __________________ "Seek not to offend or annoy... only to speak the truth"-a wise man

02-03-07, 07:06 PM	#4
Ramius Commander Join Date: May 2001 Location: At sea (again) Posts: 457 Downloads: 43 Uploads: 0	Cant say ive read about this yet, but i get the impression that people think a torpedo will go its max range at its max speed all the time ??? If thats the case then = :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl: __________________ There is a forgotten, nay even forbidden word, which means more to me than any other. That word is England

02-03-07, 07:41 PM	#6
Molon Labe Silent Hunter Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Along the Watchtower Posts: 3,810 Downloads: 27 Uploads: 5	Just to set the record straight as per my position, I've mentioned in another thread that the change in how torpedo ranges are calculated in 1.04 does cut in favor of the Akula, but that the change is not as big a deal as it's being made out to be. The precise change, in game terms, is that the no-escape range (for a 35-knot target--like the Akula II) of the ADCAP has gone from 9.82 miles to about 7.74 miles. (Yes, I actually sat down and did the math!) That's not a huge deal. But, I suspect that many 1.03 players didn't realize that the no-escape range was only 9.82nm, so they did not take advantage of that fact. With the change in 1.04, more people are aware of this, and more people are taking advantage of it. As others have mentioned, this change is realistic. If people have a problem with the SUBROC weapons being too powerful, the solution is to use LW/Ami, which gives the SUBROC torpedoes less-capable seekers than the ADCAP or "65cm torpedo" in the stock game, decreases overall detection range (making it easier to get within no-escape range), increases the detection range advantage that US subs have over the Russian subs, and provides a substantial launch transient noise (giving US subs a chance to clear datum before the weapon splashes down). Disabling auto-TMA will also reduce the effectiveness of SUBROCs. 1.04 is an unqualified improvement from 1.03. __________________

02-03-07, 07:46 PM	#7
LuftWolf Ocean Warrior Join Date: May 2005 Location: Free New York Posts: 3,167 Downloads: 2 Uploads: 0	Don't forget, LWAMI also introduces a bearing and range error for all SUBROCs, so they won't always fall precisely where you think they will (but pretty close)! (shameless plug) Cheers, David __________________ LW

02-04-07, 12:40 PM	#9
Madman_GNSF Swabbie Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Eastern Canada Posts: 14 Downloads: 2 Uploads: 0	First the Tb-29 is taken away from the Seawolf. Second 2knots are taken away from the Seawolf's Maximum speed. Now - the MK48 has reduced range. I can accept the Mk48 having reduced range but stripping the Seawolf of the TB-29 and 2knots off its speed is not very good. The Future of the Seawolf? -The modders weld shut 4 torpedo tubes giving the Seawolf only 4 torpedo tubes? -Reduce the max speed of the Seawolf to 35knots? It seems that some people just can't accept that the Seawolf is that much better than all the other subs. My guess is the Akula and Kilo and 688i drivers are trying their hardest to make the Seawolf into something they can kill easier. Instead of maybe improving their tactics they decide its easier to make the Seawolf an easier target. I thought the whole points of simulations is to simulate real life? if the Seawolf can go 40knots in real life - then it should go 40knots in any simulation. If the Seawolf has a TB-29 towed array sensor in real life - why on earth would you take it away? Please modders - try to simulate real life and not take away advantages or disadvantages for any boat. Please. Thanks LT Madman TF74 GNSF

02-04-07, 12:55 PM	#10
goldorak Admiral Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 2,320 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	And it seems people can't accept to play with autocrew (and particularly auto-tma) off. Play the simulation as a skilled player will play and you'll see that the seawolf hasn't lost any real advantage to the 688i or akula. It is easy to criticise the so-called advantage of the akula or 688i when auto-tma does all the dirty work isn't it ?

02-04-07, 01:27 PM	#11
fatty The Old Man Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Canada Posts: 1,448 Downloads: 10 Uploads: 0	But what is "real life?" Ranges and speed and equipment performance are all classified. We can come close but nobody here really knows (or is allowed to disclose) exact figures. So we have to tweak until we find something that we think is a fair representation. And in the spirit of game balance, I'm pleased with the changes. I'm getting pretty bored of taking on three Seawolves in my 688i. I'm glad players will start mixing it up and branching into other platforms. Thanks for the replies everyone. Where is the SubSim crew meeting for MP games these days?

02-04-07, 07:08 PM	#14
Madman_GNSF Swabbie Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Eastern Canada Posts: 14 Downloads: 2 Uploads: 0	Whatever is the most realistic is good enough for me :-)

02-04-07, 07:14 PM	#15
LuftWolf Ocean Warrior Join Date: May 2005 Location: Free New York Posts: 3,167 Downloads: 2 Uploads: 0	Then in that case, you should be using LWAMI, that's pretty much not debatable. I really don't care at all who does and does not use LWAMI at this point, but you should know that SCS through the USNI intentionally put "bad" information into the database to avoid any suspicion that they are using their classified data, to which they have plenty of access, and it neccessitates that they build a firewall between their own data and the data they allow in the game. This is why they contracted the USNI, and this is why much of the data is simply wrong. But it goes well beyond what is simply known data and unknown data. LWAMI adds 1000's of hours of work on a game whose publisher simply doesn't have the time to do finishing. You can either believe that a modder can improve a game or not, but if realism is your goal, you are limiting yourself greatly by playing stock DW. Have fun, it's your game. Cheers, David __________________ LW