The improvements of the 1.03beta Patch?

[FERdeBOER]

Well, for the momment I only have seen reports about "bugs" in the patch, and only one thing about the improvement on the sonar features.

What things does the patch improve for the game? Is real that increases the framerate?
Does now the IA subs become more agresive/smarter?

Thanks in advance

[Bellman]

Where sonar operations are concerned -

The ones who know may never talk.
The ones who have helped, cannot talk.
Most will speculate.
Some may approach a truth,
Which is ephemeral and infinitely variable.

Its like going into a large darkroom with a pencil torch - you spot some things but there are a lot of shadows.

It would be much appreciated if SAS could state clearly, in a final post Beta readme, what changes
they have implemented particularly to the sonar performance characteristics. :hmm:

I doubt it helps you but I have noticed, from a small sample, many subtle and some not so subtle changes'
The latter includes unbelievably slow diving rates. (I reported elsewhere)
I am hoping that this is SASs 'deliberate mistake.'- giving them the benefit of the doubt - planted to assess
who is really testing ( Sorry Machievelian)
Its just more likely that there has been a simple mistake like x2 instead of 1/2.

[OKO]

the most important thing concern the sound propagation model.
Of course there is other things in this patch, some bug corrections, like the end of the sound clic bug on the KILO and the MH60 (and other bugs, see the readme)
but the most important change, to my eyes, is concerning the sound propagation model.

It is really improved, and give the same kind of problem as real ones => before this change, SSP just increased or decreased your capabilities to detect the contacts = you could detect contact farther or closer, depending on the SSP type.
Now, this is completly changed = the SSP type will allow you in some case to hide from surface contact, completly.
There is real shadow zones, convergence zone, and you could be at less than 3 miles of a warship pinging, without any track on sonar and not even the ping of the ship on the active intercept.
On the other hands, you can suddenly have a loud contact appearing on the sonar, and disapearing after some minutes => you just met a convergence zone.

So, the SSP profiles is much more strong than before.
This will need to develop and learn new tactics, much closer to the real ones, where you could approach a target in absolute silence at very close range, where you could use distant occasional sonar contact on a convergence zone to detect a target you will approach the more stealthy way you could, to pop up at close range and engage it without beeing detected.

In resume, this new sound propagation model is A W E S O M E
DW is GREATLY improved with it.
But I must admit tactics will be much harder now.

In fact, with this new SSPs, depending on the type of SSP, you could have VERY different tactics for your mission.
All will need to exploit SSP singularity and specifications.
For the good and the realism of DW.

This is just the best improvment from the release of DW.
We now have SSP much closer to the real thing than before ... much difficult to use also.
But now a good commander of a KILO could really snake inside a defensive screen without beeing detected if he kow how to use the layer and shadow zones.

Thank you Sonalysts.

[Amizaur]

Don't forget the active sonar which now works :-). Acceleration fixed (and adjustable now). Many small improvements and bugfixes. But the changes in sonar model are probably most important of all, as OKO said :-).

[Molon Labe]

Have you tried hard turns during torp evasion?

I bled off so much speed I literally went backwards. Go figure.

[Amizaur]

Real submariners said that ordering full rudder at high speed in a submarine would make it lose 2/3 of the speed (and some mess on board too) and they use very gentle steer deflections on high speeds. So it's quite OK. Only subs could turn better with low steer deflections, if they only turned so easy like FFG... On the other hand people says the FFG should behave like do subs now, so seems that subs/FFG turning performance and behaviour should be switched :-)

P.S. Sorry Molon, I see it now, the Seawolf really becomes to move backwards after bleeding all speed

[Bellman]

Tested SW turning :-

1. No speed bleed-off with 90 deg turns at 15 and 30 knots both when manual and 'dialed-in' induced.
2. Progressive bleed starts when a sustained manual turn goes through its 180 deg point.
3. With a manual (only) sustained turn when the turn has reached its 360 deg point all speed has gone and
the sub reverses (breaks TA) at 1 knot as its nominal heading goes through the next 90 degs When it has
completed this final 90 deg forward motion is regained progressively.
4. Depth loss is progressive egs at 30. knts -142 ft in 360 degs.
5.The rate of bearing change is proportionate to speed.

Would have expected some bleed at high speed and max rudder inclination in turns up to 180 degs. :hmm:

[FERdeBOER]

Testing a campaign I'm making I noticed that the IA is much improved.

On one mission with a task force, a AI sub attack them without any script ordering her to do so

The main ship (a cruiser) and most of the escorts turned to go away the area of the sub while the helos that were on air turned back, launched suonobys (again without any script), and when there was a contact, one of the escorts, who was heading directly to the sub, launched a torpedo.

After the kill of the sub the task force regained its course (helos included), but the escort who launched the torpedo. She remained in the area patroling over the zone where the sub was killed (maybe to make sure that it was a kill and no a lost of contact? :hmm: )

[LuftWolf]

That's good news you report, because almost none of that behavior seems to be controlled by doctrines, so there isn't anything modders can do about things like sonobuoy prosecutions and some of the more complicated fleet coordination.

[LuftWolf]

Originally Posted by Molon Labe

Have you tried hard turns during torp evasion?

I bled off so much speed I literally went backwards. Go figure.

The sub turning actually seems fine to me.

If you look at a turn from the overhead view with the TA out, you can see clearly that the submarine is "spinning out", meaning that the submarine is changing the heading of it's nose faster than the actual direction that the sub is heading changes.

So, the physics themselves seem fine to me, if a sub can turn that fast based on rudder deflection in terms of the heading of its nose, then it is highly doubtful that it could transfer all it's momentum into a new heading that quickly.

The issue is not with the core physics, but whether the submarine rudders are that efficient in turning the nose of the submarine. And the reason it is more noticable in the Akula and SW is because they are heavier and have more inertia than the 688i.

[Molon Labe]

Originally Posted by LuftWolf

The sub turning actually seems fine to me.

If you look at a turn from the overhead view with the TA out, you can see clearly that the submarine is "spinning out", meaning that the submarine is changing the heading of it's nose faster than the actual direction that the sub is heading changes.

So, the physics themselves seem fine to me, if a sub can turn that fast based on rudder deflection in terms of the heading of its nose, then it is highly doubtful that it could transfer all it's momentum into a new heading that quickly.

The issue is not with the core physics, but whether the submarine rudders are that efficient in turning the nose of the submarine. And the reason it is more noticable in the Akula and SW is because they are heavier and have more inertia than the 688i.

Except that there is thrust being applied throughout the manuever...and a lot of it.

[LuftWolf]

If the propeller has a significant flow over it perpendicular to the thrust it is creating, it will experience a dramatic loss of efficiency.

Now, assuming this isn't modelled in DW, I still don't think that the thrust being generated by the screw is enough to over come the inertia of the submarines...

Do you think that a sub uses it's full rudder deflection at flank as you are ordering your crew to do... I don't think so. :hmm:

However, I will freely admit that we are in "stuff I don't really know jack about" territory.

But everything feels right to me.

[LuftWolf]

If you want proof of what I am saying, try this.

Set speed to 10 kts and then hit hard right rudder. Go up in speed at 5kts intervals. You will see how the sub handles at different speeds.

When you get to high speeds doing it is this manner, with the hard right rudder and the highest speed settings, over 30kts or so, the sub will begin to sink--fast and eventually go out of control, but it will not lose such a dramatic amount of speed or start to go backwards.

Rather, the submarine performs pretty much the way you would expect a 9000 ton object with various control surfaces and a regulated buoyancy.

I recommend doing this with the TA out so you can clearly see the path of the submarine.

In addition, when my SW got to about 50 degrees down angle and 2000ft, I hit emergency surface and my sub was rising back up at about 70 degrees and 70kts! Note, this speed slowed down dramatically as my crew was able to level off the sub somewhat on its way up, as a result of the increased drag from rising in a more horizontal position. Pretty cool and dramatic, but unreasonable? not my estimation.

All this means now is that you can make your submarine go out of control if you don't maneover properly, and again, that seems just right to me.

This is another example of how SCS has brought us closer to a simulation in DW than we are used to experiencing... we don't even have the prespective now on what is a bug and what is proper modelling because of how long we have played with less than the full deck of cards.

Thank you again, Jamie, Hutch, and the rest of the SCS staff!

Now if we can just get the diving autopilot just right!

[Molon Labe]

Originally Posted by LuftWolf

If the propeller has a significant flow over it perpendicular to the thrust it is creating, it will experience a dramatic loss of efficiency.

Now, assuming this isn't modelled in DW, I still don't think that the thrust being generated by the screw is enough to over come the inertia of the submarines...

Do you think that a sub uses it's full rudder deflection at flank as you are ordering your crew to do... I don't think so. :hmm:

However, I will freely admit that we are in "stuff I don't really know jack about" territory.

But everything feels right to me.

It's going backwards when at Flank ahead! I don't care if there is rudder being applied, or if some efficiency has been lost, it shouldn't be going backwards!

[Molon Labe]

Originally Posted by LuftWolf

If you want proof of what I am saying, try this.

Set speed to 10 kts and then hit hard right rudder. Go up in speed at 5kts intervals. You will see how the sub handles at different speeds.

When you get to high speeds doing it is this manner, with the hard right rudder and the highest speed settings, over 30kts or so, the sub will begin to sink--fast and eventually go out of control, but it will not lose such a dramatic amount of speed or start to go backwards.

Rather, the submarine performs pretty much the way you would expect a 9000 ton object with various control surfaces and a regulated buoyancy.

I recommend doing this with the TA out so you can clearly see the path of the submarine.

In addition, when my SW got to about 50 degrees down angle and 2000ft, I hit emergency surface and my sub was rising back up at about 70 degrees and 70kts! Note, this speed slowed down dramatically as my crew was able to level off the sub somewhat on its way up, as a result of the increased drag from rising in a more horizontal position. Pretty cool and dramatic, but unreasonable? not my estimation.

All this means now is that you can make your submarine go out of control if you don't maneover properly, and again, that seems just right to me.

This is another example of how SCS has brought us closer to a simulation in DW than we are used to experiencing... we don't even have the prespective now on what is a bug and what is proper modelling because of how long we have played with less than the full deck of cards.

Thank you again, Jamie, Hutch, and the rest of the SCS staff!

Now if we can just get the diving autopilot just right!

Oh so we have a dive plane hotkey now? What we don't? So the crew is supposed to be doing this for us automatically? You don't say...