Index of Stickied topics + RA Mod Discussion here

[Wolfcat]

I discovered another issue with American Aegis and SM-2's. The new issue is about SM-2's intercept altitude and climb rate. This problem is especially acute against high flying supersonic antiship missile such as SS-N-19 shipwreck. Due to the primitive missile logic design in Dangerous Waters.
Missiles would only hit a target when they are co-altitude with the target. This is what I observe:

1. Shipwreck's profile: vertical launch up to about 10k then level off. When closing to about less than 10 nmi, it would gradually descent and dump tons of CM's.

2. SM-2's intercept profile against shipwreck: horizontal launch(even though VLS is supposed to be vertical launch), cruise at 2-3 mache and gradually climb to 5-7k ft. At the last moment of interception, it would do a high angle pitch-up to catch shipwreck at higher altitude.

3. Russian SAM's fare far better because the initial vertical launch put them at much higher altitude and they are 2-3 times faster than SM-2. This can put them into co-altitude with target much quicker thus having much higher chance of success.

This problem is especially obvious at long range intercepts. At long range, SM-2's success rate against shipwreck (before shipwreck's CM phase)is below 15%. Russian's SA-N-6 grumbly's chance about 40%. I have created 2 identical scenario (one with a US task group and the other with a Russian ships). The Russian group even has one less escort warship. The difference is so obvious. If you want to test it out, I can somehow upload the scenarios.

If you compare the success rate of sm-2 between vanilla 1.04 and RA1.48, I believe the key that makes them so different is the altitude gained from initial vertical launch. In 1.04, all US VLS ships can do vertical launch but in RA, US ships cannot do vertical launch any more.

[fireship4]

I have been playing a couple of the sub command missions against Kilos over and again trying to learn the game.

The first: "Super Escort", has you escort a super tanker through a strait, requiring you to navigate around some 43ft (!) undersea geography and protect the tanker from unknown lurking subs.
The mission is typically played as a 688I FIII, and is a bastard. I have tried everything from slow and quiet with the tb-26, going further south, going as close around the underwater hill as possible while pinging, either using the TB-16 at medium speed or with it stowed and at high etc. etc.
What is to be done against a lurking diesel boat? I understand when they are on battery they are supposed to be pretty much invisible, so presumably if they are waiting for you in ambush, active sonar must be the answer. But even at under 10kyards I am not reliably picking them up at any depth and speed, and I have tried to account for them being close to the bottom or in shadow zones etc.
I find it hard to believe active sonar and US subs would be so useless against these (old and presumably non-elite crewed, export version) targets. Perhaps I am a poor submariner or the mission is unwinnable.

I am having similar trouble with a second such mission: "Iran to the Strait", in which you have to intercept a Kilo moving south through the Gulf of Oman from Bandar Abbas, before it crosses a certain line of longitude.
Several neutral ships are in play (as with the previous scenario) and the kilo moving south will shadow one on occasion to mask its signature. Complicating matters is a patrolling enemy P-3 Orion.
I have more success picking up the enemy in this mission and have won a few times, but I understand that staying outside 10kyards is recommended practise with diesel subs, and at this range they can be hard to detect in game even with the TB-29. I understand this mod has at times been portrayed as making red subs unrealistically effective - I am not sure I can make that judgement. But shouldn't a Virginia (used in this mission) be more effective against these platforms?

PS A couple of potential bugs are noticable in the second mission:

# The mission will sometimes be called a failiure before the southbound Kilo has reached the line mentioned in the briefing (always in fact, but sometimes even as it is still stuck rounding the land to the NW).

# I have a suspicion the enemy Orion can somehow "hear" you ping. On two occasions when I have made use of active sonar (at 200-250ft) it seemed to notice and drop a torpedo on my head. I have a replay file of this happening if it is useful.

[FPSchazly]

I personally find RA's remasters of the Sub Command missions to be near suicidal and not very enjoyable. Definitely buggy, too. So much so, I actually remastered one myself a while back. The problem with that, of course, is then you know how the mission goes already.

[fireship4]

I understood going in that default and Sub Command missions would be harder/impossible in RA, and that it is more suited to multiplayer, though work has gone into updating them for RA.

But I wonder would these scenarios be solvable problems in real life or are they a symptom of under-modeled sensors etc. As I understand it active sonar is even weaker in LWAMI.

Obviously anyone who knows the exact numbers is unlikely to be able to help but can we say as interested laymen that active sonar in RA on a 688i or a Virginia is modeled about right in terms of performance?

[ET2SN]

Originally Posted by fireship4

# I have a suspicion the enemy Orion can somehow "hear" you ping.

Think it through.
If the P-3 has dropped buoys, then yes he can hear you ping.

Those two missions are tough due to their location. There isn't that much water under your keel so you can mostly forget about the towed arrays. To be truthful, they really aren't SSN missions- they are more suited to a DDG.

There's no strict rule in DW that you can only play a mission once, that's why there's a save feature and a replay view when you debrief..

Try a tactic, then see how it played out. Then, figure out why it didn't work and try again.

A good stand-alone mission should kick your butt the first time you play it... and the second time and maybe a third.

RA makes things tougher but with RA 1.48 you at least have a chance in single player.

[fireship4]

No sonobuoys in the water according to the replay. The Orion turns around right around when I start pinging and drops a torp on my head.

Regarding trying the missions over, as I said I have done so multiple times, perhaps 20 times each.

EDIT: I have just viewed the replay again and the Orion was 21nm away on patrol and turns to my bearing when I start pinging. It simultaneously drops a sonobuoy and torpedo on me as it flies over. I suppose it is possible one of the neutral assets communicated my position to it, but I'm not sure weather this is modeled in game, and they are portrayed as generally neutral, i.e. not Iranian, as far as I can tell. Other enemy assets should be under the surface and therefore not able to transmit my position.

[ET2SN]

Right, I'm trying to say that those two missions didn't make sense in SC, let alone DW.

US submariners don't mind a bit of the daring-do, but we weren't crazy.
Maybe try it in a Virginia class? Its got better sonar and its supposed to work better in shallow water than a 688.
Or, better yet, edit in a DDG as your drive-able platform. Its much better suited for those kinds of missions.





PS- From your last edit: Yes, the DW mission editor has limitations. If the P-3 is tasked with finding and attacking you, that's what it will do.
You could check if you did something that gave your position away (radio mast or scope?) but I also doubt that was the problem.

[FPSchazly]

The enemy (or friendly) AI uses the Link feature to an extent that makes them appear to be cheating. That sub probably sent you to the P-3 via Link after it got your ping. And to put the cherry on top, they transmit a perfect Link solution immediately.



I'm with ET2SN, try the mission with a Perry or something. Could be pretty fun, especially with that P-3 flying around.

[fireship4]

Originally Posted by ET2SN

Right, I'm trying to say that those two missions didn't make sense in SC, let alone DW.

US submariners don't mind a bit of the daring-do, but we weren't crazy.

Maybe try it in a Virginia class? Its got better sonar and its supposed to work better in shallow water than a 688.
Or, better yet, edit in a DDG as your drive-able platform. Its much better suited for those kinds of missions.

PS- From your last edit: Yes, the DW mission editor has limitations. If the P-3 is tasked with finding and attacking you, that's what it will do.
You could check if you did something that gave your position away (radio mast or scope?) but I also doubt that was the problem.

Would you say it is an unwinnable mission? I have previously tried the Virginia without much luck, and a DDG might be a better fit in real life (for the first mission, I can't imagine a sole DDG sailing up the Gulf in a hot war with Iran), but would still come up against the fact that a diesel boat sitting still makes no noise (correct me if I'm wrong), not to mention its sonar is weaker in game I believe. Its advantages might be that the helicopter could visually identify the subs in such shallow water and allow it to wait at a safe range, it can go fast, and its towed decoy. Thinking about it a DDG would be the right platform for this mission, but I would still like to hear if you think it could be done in reality, or if there is a method with a 688i/Virginia I haven't thought of, or if the active sonar is underpowered as I suspect.

Originally Posted by FPSchazly

The enemy (or friendly) AI uses the Link feature to an extent that makes them appear to be cheating. That sub probably sent you to the P-3 via Link after it got your ping. And to put the cherry on top, they transmit a perfect Link solution immediately.

I'm with ET2SN, try the mission with a Perry or something. Could be pretty fun, especially with that P-3 flying around.

Oh dear! Yes I think that must be it - I don't think it was mast-detection as the replay shows an immediate change in behaviour on pinging. I wasn't aware of this fact, I wonder if RA's developer can ameliorate it in some way (though I guess he would have done so by now if it was possible). I'm not ready to learn the Perry yet, but as I said above I think it would suit the first mission a bit better. In any case I'm taking a little break and switching to Factorio (the only other game I can really play these days on my Vista system) for a little while until I can suspend my disbelief once more. With any luck Sonalysts will have imported DW into their new engine within the next couple of weeks and I can try it there, Brexit will have been put on indefinite hold for negotiation, and a busload of nubile mathematiciennes will break down outside my house and I can share my innuendo about Mandelbrot sets.

[Wolfcat]

My new laptop has Win10. I installed the latest RA. I can play fine, but when I change the screen resolution, the game crashes out. I am right now stuck with the lowest resolution.

[ET2SN]

Originally Posted by Wolfcat

My new laptop has Win10. I installed the latest RA. I can play fine, but when I change the screen resolution, the game crashes out. I am right now stuck with the lowest resolution.

Find your main DW folder. You should see the dangerouswaters.exe and the dangerouswaters.ico files. Look below them and you'll also see dangerouswaters.ini.
You may need to set file types for .ini files in Win10. Make SURE you open and save .ini files only with notepad.
Click open the .ini file and look for the following:

[Graphics]
.MapStretch No
.ScreenStretchQuality 3
.ParticleMax 500
.ParticleRate 5
.LocalLights Yes
.TransparentWater No
.WantRain Yes
.Disable3D No
.Want3DClouds Yes
.WantVegetation Yes
.AdapterID 0
.DeviceID 0
.ModeID 3
.DetailTextures Yes
.BlendTextures Yes
.Caustics Yes
.WaterParticles Yes
.WaterReflectionQuality 3
.WaterQuality 4
.WaterDrawMethod 1
.CameraFOV 60
.WantShadows Yes
.ModelDetailTex Yes
.RunInWindow No
.Gamma ""
.SoftwareCursor No

Your line should be set to 0 right now. Change it to 3 and save* the file. With some GPUs you may be able to run in Mode 4 but many can't and Mode 3 still looks pretty good. Mode 4 also tends to be less stable. BTW, feel free to use the rest of the settings listed above.

*-Win10 might treat your .ini file as "protected" and make it a pain to save your work. If that happens, just Copy the .ini out to your desktop and make the change and save it. Then move that file back into your main DW folder and say "yes" to "overwrite?".

[Kapitan]

I don't know how many of you play the Udaloy but i have come up against something annoying.

Three times i have run this mission (one i made) i load out with 2 silexs and the rest 34 gauntlets, it is a very heavy fast paced mission so in 15 minuets ive done 1/3 of the guantlet load out.

Now 3 times this has happened to me, i fire off the guantlets i get to around 22 missiles remaining then i cant fire no more guantlets or silex's, i can lock up the target and load the weapon just wont fire i dont even get the conformation to fire button light up.

Its happened 3 times in the same mission and twice in another mission.

I also dont know how to contact the guy who makes the mod so any ideas will be helpful.

[p7p8]

What mission and what version of RA?

[Kapitan]

Using a mission I made

And DWX 1.48 V3.07 off the top of my head the latest one

[p7p8]

RA 1.48 + patch 3?

I didn't notice any problems with firing gauntlets in large number before.

Below is video from MP session where player's Udaloy launched 22-24 Gauntlets missiles.



Its from friend replay because i forgot to uncheck "read only" attribute from replay.dat


Currently Bergamini is bugged (fix will be added in new version) but Udaloy works fine. Nobody report problems with firing gauntles.

Can you share your mission?
I can test it myself and make video from it.


Developer of RA is banned here, contact with him is available on Red Rodgers forum.

Link