Mission Request

[Travis Reed]

I have a request for those who are good at creating realistic missions (complete with realistic tasking messages, orders, etc). I would like a mission set up (solo/multi) where a US submarine (Seawolf preferably) is tasked with sinking one or more Russian SSBNs attempting to break out through the GIUK Gap. Likely there will be at least one escorting Russian attack sub. Perhaps some surface ships as well. The plot could something along the lines of Russians selling an SSBN or two to some other nation (China, Iran, North Korea, etc) and the US doesn't want this to happen. I'm sure some of you have read some of Patrick Robinson's books (Kilo Class, Nimitz Class, USS Seawolf, among others). I'm looking for something that could easily be found in something he'd write. Perhaps a version that is less heavily escorted and a version that has a significant escort (surface, and a few SSNs). The idea is the Russians would be expecting attacks from subs, surface ships, and aircraft. Lighter one might be 2-3 stars, heavier one is definitely 4+ stars. I can place ships, subs, etc. However, I have trouble with scripting/triggers, and phraseology of tasking messages and mission orders.

[suBB]

Originally Posted by Travis Reed

I have a request for those who are good at creating realistic missions (complete with realistic tasking messages, orders, etc). I would like a mission set up (solo/multi) where a US submarine (Seawolf preferably) is tasked with sinking one or more Russian SSBNs attempting to break out through the GIUK Gap. Likely there will be at least one escorting Russian attack sub. Perhaps some surface ships as well. The plot could something along the lines of Russians selling an SSBN or two to some other nation (China, Iran, North Korea, etc) and the US doesn't want this to happen. I'm sure some of you have read some of Patrick Robinson's books (Kilo Class, Nimitz Class, USS Seawolf, among others). I'm looking for something that could easily be found in something he'd write. Perhaps a version that is less heavily escorted and a version that has a significant escort (surface, and a few SSNs). The idea is the Russians would be expecting attacks from subs, surface ships, and aircraft. Lighter one might be 2-3 stars, heavier one is definitely 4+ stars. I can place ships, subs, etc. However, I have trouble with scripting/triggers, and phraseology of tasking messages and mission orders.

Hey,

Well for starters this is what I’m currently working on, and with a playable beta which includes all the features listed there and below plus some bugs to resolve. It’s long overdue for an edit but this is the rough draft:

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=92394

Please travis, take time and share your thoughts by responding to that thread. After all I’m doing this out of free will and I would really appreciate your feedback. Believe me it helps! I’m surprised with all the views it has received; it only received a few responses excluding my immediate circle of peers.

I plan on making mission objective maps for multiplayer only that focus on either 1 platform or two opposing platforms while other platforms affect the chances of success/failure of the missions tasked to all playables. Also multiplay maps will be made compatible with lwami and single player mode. I also intend on making maps that require full functionality of platforms such as strategic missile strikes, use of dsrvs, special ops to name a few.

MHO - Lwami is setting a new standard and is tapping into DWs potential. My intent is to harness that in an effort to make quality, practical scenarios on a multiplayer level. There are a few points I want to emphasize and the impact it would have on this mission of your request, using it as an example:

• Cold war multiplay – I intend to make some missions where resolve isn’t a salvo of torpedoes, but instead how well you strategize, undergo planning and use of stealth to complete mission tasking. I don’t think your mission will involve this feature, but for example missions like intel gathering, strategic missile strikes, recon or stealth transit will require some thought and approach as to how you plan on fulfilling your mission w/o being detected. Of course remaining undetected should make things easy for you, but if not that can lead to other undesired events.

• Mission Tasking – all mission tasking will be received via radio comms for all playable platforms and not before like you would normally see. Hopefully the skipper is paying attention because if not he/she will miss out and not have clue. You would be surprised how many times people asked me “what do I do now? What’s the mission objective?” during beta testing – its right there in tasking – read it! Of course the only briefing you will receive before spawn is loadout suggestions. In this case the wolf will be tasked to locate and intercept ssbn(if you can locate it before it reaches safe distance) The sub escort will be an akula tasked to escort and protect the ssbn at all cost.

• ROE violations – in this case if the wolf is tasked to sink the ssbn then wolf ROE is weapons free, while the akula is weapons hold. In other words the akula(playable) can’t litter the sea with asw torpedos and ugst in an effort to flush out a seawolf at the beginning of the mission. This would constitute a violation of ROE on the akulas part and can’t complete mission for the akula as well as the seawolf.

• Securing General quarters – I think this is by far the most critical and definitely the most interesting as its proven itself many times over in beta testing. Its one thing the bop around in your seawolf and find your target and sink it and win the game while the Russian SAG is going full bore on your sub. But its totally different to sink your target and return to minimum safe distance. And yes this can be done on a multiplayer level – It’s being done right now

• Intel updates – from time to time I can have your radio operator suggest you(wolf or akula) to check for radio comms as this would provide intelligence update if /when gathered. This of course will be random events for either wolf or akula(all playable platforms)

• Random events – I think this is also very practical but nothing is perfect in this not-so-perfect world including multibillion dollar platforms. Anything can happen while out to sea that can jeopardize the mission. The question then is how well the skipper handles these unexpectant events in effort to fulfill the mission tasking. OKO can simulate reactor damage, so imagine dealing with such an event(or any other unexpectant event) when you are in enemy waters.

• Scripted AI – for sake of single player mode AI will honor ROE, perform mission tasking, localization, interception and attack. And if/when successful disengagement and securing general quarters(reach safe distance). In this case if AI skipper is the wolf and locates the ssbn and sinks it, the AI wolf will disengage and attempt to reach safe distance, and if not that shoot its way out in the process. If the AI skipper is the akula, once ROE has changed to wartime can either intercept the wolf or thwart its efforts by buying the ssbn time to reach safe distance. It really depends on the mission designer on how far AI can and will go. If you need help with scripting there is plenty of talent here to have an answer for just about anything – so please just ask - MaHuJa has been a tremendous help getting my beta to work and is full of awesome ideas as well as Molon labe, Luftwulf and the community.. its best to work collectively if you need answers to anything

• Mission status deliberately left out – The main reason why I do this is to reduce the predictability factor in effort to increase dynamic multiplay, among other factors. In beta testing this seems to be working like a charm. Reason being it is easy to look at mission status and plot your strategy around unfinished goals and this isn't practical either in my mind to do so. Intel reports will be sent privately to platfroms as the situation changes - for better or worse, if sent at all. I'm also working on interception of radio transmissions but this is a WIP.

• Random spawn positions of playable platforms and travel paths – I’ve made it as such to where spawn positions are not to far from each other where the map becomes unplayable or not too close where map becomes short lived. Also you have to consider returning to safe distance, or in this case reaching safe distance. Once ssbn is destroyed the wolf will have to return to safe distance(two way travel path) while the ssbn with escort will have to reach safe distance(one way travel path)

• Ambient noise detection – this is a WIP on my beta but will include detection of hull popping, or even a freak accident where your sub is making a loud noise for a brief moment of time. For example what if there was an accident in the wolf galley where the utensil storage toppled over and came crashing to the floor. The akula skipper(including AI I think) could hear that if the conditions were met As I would expect anyone to hear such an event. This is a WIP but the main thing is I want to keep this practical. Stuff like this can be done with doctrine.

• Dynamic multiplay and chance of success – due to factors in an effort to reduce predictability will at the same time increase dynamic multiplay. And because of that nothing is promised or guaranteed. In this case it is not promised the wolf will find the ssbn before it reaches safe distance, its not promised that the akula and SAG will protect the ssbn if attacked, its not promised that if the ssbn is sunk that the wolf will make it to safety, its not even promised that the ssbn will fail at evading incoming torpedoes. So by default your chance of success is 50%. The other 50% depends on how well/poor you strategize and undergo planning to fulfill your mission tasking.

• Missions made to justify platforms – The biggest problem I have with DW is deathmatch mode of gameplay. It’s been like this for years and years since 688i came out, so enough is enough for me and this mode of game play. In fact because of lwami and mission objective maps, these two reasons are the only reasons why I started playing again. And all those maps made for deathmatch, over hundreds and hundreds of them, are all identical! Playing under these conditions is a hindrance of game play experience as it really doesn’t require anything but ‘point and shoot’ from the player. When a mission objective is on the line it’s completely different. It’s not practical nor does it makes a heck of a lot of sense to have a submarine on the surface hunting down helos and and p-3, or 6 seawolves in a deathmatch, even DM sub team dives for that matter. Also I want to say DM is predictable by leaps and bounds. This mode of gameplay is not practical in my mind, but only good for arcade pace gameplay – to each his/her own.

Heh I just realized that my few points I wanted to emphaize has tuned into a re-write of the the link I gave you… sorry, sometimes I tend to be long winded.

suBB

[Travis Reed]

Seems like a good idea (replying to your commments in this thread). Though I'm not really interested in multiplayer missions, I just thought it might be a good idea to include a multiplayer version (with Akulas instead of Victor 3s) incase others would like this type of mission. As for mods, I don't use any, and most weren't designed for use with my version anyway. I'm still using 1.0 and the only problem I've found is a mk46 torpedo hitting me at 520+ (keel depth was 540 in an Akula 2) meters. That torp isn't supposed to be able to go below 457 meters. If the torp is modeled as being able to exceed this for any reason, then the entry in the USNI Reference should be updated (though it doesn't have to say what the crush depth is, it should mention that the depth given is max operating depth, with a similar note to the ones given about sub max depths).

[goldorak]

Originally Posted by suBB

• Missions made to justify platforms – The biggest problem I have with DW is deathmatch mode of gameplay. It’s been like this for years and years since 688i came out, so enough is enough for me and this mode of game play. In fact because of lwami and mission objective maps, these two reasons are the only reasons why I started playing again. And all those maps made for deathmatch, over hundreds and hundreds of them, are all identical! Playing under these conditions is a hindrance of game play experience as it really doesn’t require anything but ‘point and shoot’ from the player. When a mission objective is on the line it’s completely different. It’s not practical nor does it makes a heck of a lot of sense to have a submarine on the surface hunting down helos and and p-3, or 6 seawolves in a deathmatch, even DM sub team dives for that matter. Also I want to say DM is predictable by leaps and bounds. This mode of gameplay is not practical in my mind, but only good for arcade pace gameplay – to each his/her own.

Heh I just realized that my few points I wanted to emphaize has tuned into a re-write of the the link I gave you… sorry, sometimes I tend to be long winded.

suBB

I don't know if you had the occasion to play some multiplayer scenarios designed by Furia.
They were goal oriented (and not at all like deathmatch type thing you loath so much).
He hosted some games on CADC some months ago, but since he has completely vanished from the dw community.

Why don't you post some interesting cooperative multistation-multiplayer missions on CADC ?
You could organize one match every 1-2 weeks.

[hyperion2206]

As I stated earlier: This just sounds freaking marvelous!!!!

[Kapitan]

Come with me under ice 1 v 1 and then see who goes grey first (ah goodness me ive lost already )

[Travis Reed]

Originally Posted by Kapitan

(ah goodness me ive lost already )

Quite true, especially considering you've spotted me homefield advantage...

[Kapitan]

Ive spent years under the ice, not only that ive written manuals and trained people in under ice warfare. ice warfare is my specialty.

[suBB]

@ Goldoark

I’ve played some of those maps and I’m not quite sure if I played some of them designed by Furia, but I will definitely keep my eye open for those. Mainly I played black market boomer, Baltic break in and some other ones. Then shortly after I started editing and since then I haven’t played anything, including my own map w/o hang-ups and bugs.

Sometimes it's frustrating....

And once all these bugs are worked out, eventually cooperative mode will definitely need to be tested as well as some other items on my to-do list. I would expect it to fare well but won’t know exactly until otherwise.

I don’t want to seem like a slack @ss but I’m taking my time with this and in doing so new ideas come to mind easier without the pressures of ‘hurrying up to get done so we can play’ The primary focus is this beta I’m currently working on. When all goes well that will lay the foundation to build from.

----------------------

@ hyperion2206

I don’t want to seem one-sided but at the present time, this map I’m making is for lwami only. This beta represents itself well, which gives me all the more reason to continue supporting lwami in this light. Speaking of support, LW, where can i get a coffee mug!!

That doesn’t mean you still can’t play it in stock, but the main concern I have about stock on this type of map is there is a very good chance dives will become short lived.

Lwami sonar model:

Which was voted by the community(IIRC) which also means this is something the people wanted to see, and in my opinion is a ‘true to life’ sonar model compared to stock. Meaning detection is relative to speed and distance of the target.

Assuming same layer conditions: If a noisy sub is going 5 kts from 5nm away then is detected, then changes speed to less than 5 kts to all stop, you will lose contact of the target, even datum from TMA board, as one would expect if contact lost on a signal source.

I also think thermal layers are modeled more accurately than stock as well or so that’s been my experience. Lwami has enhanced the experience by leaps and bounds and has set a new standard. For some this is a dream come true, and for others it’s a nightmare to deal with(learning curve). It also has forced me(willingly) to revamp my typical means of engagement and localization :hmm:, among other things - basically how I run my ship – but all for the better.

Words can't describe how lethal and cunning AI is on lwami, so for mission designers on lwami, missions will prove more interesting and reflect higher quality than before.

You will even find some people say that lwami is a form of cheating, yet they have yet to try it. I've also heard that it was created by those who "obviously really suck at the game so they make a mod so they will have a chance to win"

but i know differently.............

I just cracked up laughing when I heard this **** :rotfl:

Stock sonar model:

Very simple model - this model is not relative (in my opinion) to speed or distance of the target. So using the same layer - same 5kts to all stop – same 5nm away – you will still detect and gather TMA data and have a solution. So to me that makes no sense nor is it life-like to detect and collect data on something that isn’t making noise from 10,000 yrds away And if any sub(in this case) isn’t generating noise, then what then is to say for the noise source at that range, the water flowing around the sub? In other words the sea-state?!?!

If anything, stock sonar model more of a form of cheating than anything else.