RA and Alfa tau - A case for freespeach

[Onkel Neal]

I did receive a response, they are going have a meeting over it and get back with me.

Neal

[Castout]

Originally Posted by Neal Stevens

I did receive a response, they are going have a meeting over it and get back with me.

Neal

Thanks Neal the community owes you for your effort . Much appreciated

[Molon Labe]

Originally Posted by Neal Stevens

I did receive a response, they are going have a meeting over it and get back with me.

Neal

So they left someone behind in the lighthouse after all!

[To be]

Quite unprecedented.

[PeriscopeDepth]

Originally Posted by Neal Stevens

I did receive a response, they are going have a meeting over it and get back with me.

Neal

Thank you for presenting our case to them Neal. I appreciate this as well.

PD

[Raptor_341]

>> Ill just reply here to be quick. I got alot of PMs over the "issues" i found with RA. Its not a major bug, but i didnt want to play it until i fixed it after i found it. I dont know who uses DWedit here but i do to check stats and make small changes if i need to. RA has, what i think, are poor damage values for most torpedos. Even advanced ones such as the shaped charge Mk50 in stock RA only do about 50 damage, not even enough to sink a kilo. You would need 10 to sink the phoon. Shes strong but i dont think even she could take 10 torps. So what i did was just update the damage back to LWMAI values which are much more on par with how deadly a torpedo would be, save for that 30 pound POS one. I like RA, but the damage is my biggest problem, even the harpoon only does 90 damage. So after i fixed it, then it works well. I could make a better change then post it so others dont have to put up with useless ASW torps.

[Raptor_341]

What i meant also is that AT has good damage values right off the start, but i believe RA favours the submarines because of badly weak ASW torps, even the large ones. After its changed though it performs much better.

[goldorak]

Yes it can be a thorny issue, depending on who you talk to.
Lwami damage model is not perfect either. The weapons are much too powerful.

[Raptor_341]

Its not perfect im sure but i think its the best ive seen. I dont think some people really think about how much damage a torp slamming into the side of the pressure hull would do. And seeing as DW doesnt model flooding, i believe its best to model the torps around the max damage as you all know you need 100% damage to sink AI where as in realife you just need to criple it. I know it changes with who you talk to but im sure they make AWS torps such as the MK 50 and 54 to sink something, not just put a little dent in the side of a kilo. The spearfish "should" be able to sink a tyhoon with a single hit as it uses a double shaped charge to go through both hulls. But im sure you all understand what im talking about.

[goldorak]

Well I just did a test, a p-3 dropping a lightweight torpedo on a 688i and it scores 100% damage with lwami. It seems just too powerful.
Now on the other hand, its true the other mod does tone down a little bit too much some weapons. Same exercise, a p-3 charging a 688i took me 3 lightweight torpedos to sink.
I think *good average values* should be in between those 2 extremes.

[Raptor_341]

thats what ive done - ive made it a good balance i think. However, the 688i is nothing special, no double hull, could it really stand up to a 100 kg shaped charge? Realism is more important than balance, and SCS always had Mk50s sinking 688s with a single hit like LWMAI. However, in the changes i made to RA a single Mk50 will criple, but not always sink a 688.

[Castout]

Originally Posted by goldorak

Well I just did a test, a p-3 dropping a lightweight torpedo on a 688i and it scores 100% damage with lwami. It seems just too powerful.
Now on the other hand, its true the other mod does tone down a little bit too much some weapons. Same exercise, a p-3 charging a 688i took me 3 lightweight torpedos to sink.
I think *good average values* should be in between those 2 extremes.

Hmm it's supposed to be a secret but the 688i is using plasma shield


:rotfl:

[LoBlo]

SCS could easily not make any statement one way or the other.

That way we would mod in our community yet their *official* customers (the US military) would still be dependent on their official releases for upgrades. IE, the US military would not be using the mods, but we as laypersons will.

Seems the ideal solution to me.

[Castout]

Pls share your work in the end. Sounds interesting

[Kazuaki Shimazaki II]

Originally Posted by Raptor_341

>> Ill just reply here to be quick. I got alot of PMs over the "issues" i found with RA. Its not a major bug, but i didnt want to play it until i fixed it after i found it. I dont know who uses DWedit here but i do to check stats and make small changes if i need to. RA has, what i think, are poor damage values for most torpedos. Even advanced ones such as the shaped charge Mk50 in stock RA only do about 50 damage, not even enough to sink a kilo. You would need 10 to sink the phoon. Shes strong but i dont think even she could take 10 torps. So what i did was just update the damage back to LWMAI values which are much more on par with how deadly a torpedo would be, save for that 30 pound POS one. I like RA, but the damage is my biggest problem, even the harpoon only does 90 damage. So after i fixed it, then it works well. I could make a better change then post it so others dont have to put up with useless ASW torps.

Well, I hadn't really checked the damage, but I should have been more sensitivity when missiles keep hitting my Udaloy with so little effect.

Looking at it, RA pretty much just uses the 1kg warhead = 1 point damage system (though why are the Harpoons only 90?) Which is OK. The real problem is how much variation there is in survivability with different ships in different conditions that using one number just doesn't work.

For example, it actually makes some sense for the a shaped charge torpedo like the Mk50 not to sink a Kilo, or even for Spearfish not to bag a Typhoon.

The issue is that the shaped charge quickly punches a hole in the sub, and THEN the water floods in, but not so much the blast. At under 100m, the compartmentalization might hold (that's what it is there for) and with the reserve buoyancy the sub may well survive (though it won't be doing much fighting). However, at a bit over 100m, the chances fall to zero because most of the internal compartments are only rated for 100m (not full pressure) and so as the compartment floods at great depth it starts going into other compartments...

Meanwhile, the same Mk50 would certainly spell the doom for any submerged US submarine at any depth too deep to VERY quickly patch the hole in the hull since Thresher with their 3 compartment layout and a low reserve buoyancy. The compartment is holed, it floods, it sinks.

I would suggest, therefore, instead of fiddling with the damage, you focus on fiddling with the survivability scores.