Destroyer Command 2/Surface Sim Addon [Merged]

[Apocal]

Originally Posted by Dargo

You mean this from Von Spike:

Determining depth by SONAR

This method requires practice on the part of the destroyer Capt. In order to become comfortable with the procedure. However it is the only method that is available!
It is important to keep some things in mind when attempting to determine the depth of a U-Boat using your sonar, the most important of these is that the SONAR measures distance. The height of the “ping” being displayed is a measure of signal quality only, a smaller spike means that the signal being returned to the SONAR unit is of lesser quality, not that the U-Boat is deeper or shallower.
The physics of the SONAR are such that a “cone” of sound is projected from the sound head at a predetermined angle for each “ping”, and then the SONAR listens for an echo of that sound impulse. If an echo is received, it is displayed on the SONAR screen as a spike wave. The method used to determine the depth of the U-Boat is to determine its distance from the destroyer when it passes beneath the cone of sound.

The angle of the SONAR sound head is such that at 100 yards from the sound head, the bottom of the sound cone is 100 feet deep, at 200 yards the bottom is 200 feet, etc.
These measurements are probably a rough approximation of actual SONAR physics but can be used for determining depth in a battle.

Sweet, been looking for this for awhile, had trouble finding it. Do you happen to have a link to the original chart he'd put together?

Originally Posted by hellfish6

I'd like a surface warfare sim, maybe as a DLC or addon for SH5. I like subs just fine, but my real interest is in surface ships (which means, basically, I'm stuck with mods for SH3 and SH4 to get my fix).

Yeah, for the good longest the best we've had is Enigma: Rising Tide and Dangerous Waters. E:RT has it's moments but not really for me, Dangerous Waters is pretty awesome but it's modern so there is a different flavor to the tactical problems presented.

My idea would be to start it out kinda scaled - join as a lieutenant or lieutenant commander in command of a sloop or corvette, then you can 'unlock' more ships as you complete patrols and increase in rank (i.e. once you make commander you can captain a destroyer, etc). Things like number of u-boats sunk or percentage of ships in your convoy that survive would help you increase in rank/renown. Eventually maybe you can become a convoy commander and manage 4-5 escorts.

I mostly agree, although I'm more partial to the Pacific for a hypothetical DC2 since it's more a full-spectrum theater, you had ASW, you had plenty of varied surface actions, you had air attacks, you had amphibious operations and you stay relevant pretty much right up until the very end.

Of course the Atlantic and Med have most of those as well, and I suppose as long as the campaign is still dynamic, it'll be cool either way. Dynamic within context of course. You still get tasking assigned from on high, but the whole thing would play out before you. That's one thing I really disliked about Destroyer Command, the campaigns: the mission format was such a fantastic way of jarring me out of the "you are there" feeling.

Plus, why stop at destroyers? Why not let the player command stuff like cruisers, especially if it involves the USN, since I recall at least one cruiser-class, the Atlantas, had torpedoes, depth charges and sonar installed.

It does boggle my mind, though, that some people seem to think a sub sim and a surface sim are mutually exclusive. Everything you do to enhance the realism of subs can translate directly into a surface ship game.

Exactly. You build a high-fidelity sonar model, radar model, visual model, etc. and it cuts both ways and gives a more satisfying experience. Plus adversial play would be far more interesting, even if the ratio was skewed in the submariner's favor. There are, admittedly, a lot of ways for MP balance to be done real life vs. RPS and it could be a source of discontent, but really the community can probably hash that out themselves and probably leans towards RL anyway.

FWIW, I'd much rather be able to crew a destroyer than watch 3d figures load torpedoes into a tube. I spend 90% of my time in SH3 or SH4 looking at my navigation map, 5% looking through a periscope and 5% on the conning tower or deck gun. I'll watch my crew load a torpedo once or twice, say 'that's cool' and never look at it again.

Hmm not so much I agree here, people talk about caring more for gameplay than graphics, but then you see the sales figures for games with fantastic gameplay, but only middling graphics and they compare poorly to those with 'good enough' gameplay and WOW factor. Of course, they never actually say "graphics", because that's a dirty word for any true sim fan, but they do use words and phrases like "immersion" and "it feels like I'm actually there."

I see where graphics and other such eye candy plays it's own part and I appreciate it for what it does, even if I'm like you and send ninety plus percent of my time staring at a 2D map. Otherwise, I'd have to argue about the necessity for 1X time when I spend most of my time in some form of time compression to cut down on the wait.