news about RA. current problems

[dyshman]

http://redrodgers.com/forums/showpos...&postcount=121
CrazyIvan:
"Bad news, guys.

The attempts of modeling of real job of torpedos, completely have killed gameplay of game.

It to become at the absolutely other level.

We are inclined to think, that we should make TWO versions.

The first version - will be adapted to game opportunities.

The second version - will be adapted to the advanced players.

We ascertain - it is impossible to combine PLAYABILITY vs REALISM.

We are compelled to divide these two types of game. In one game, we can not combine these two contrasts.

The modeling of the advanced behaviour, completely changes game features. "

in this thread you can express your opinion about versions of RA:
choose "preferred variant"
1. "game": uses old torpedo-attack doctrines, which based on engine of simulator and "weapon effectivnes"
2. "hard-core simulator": re-attack torpedoes, other lewel(higher) of effectivnes of counter-measures,new "real" torpedo sensors, to kill one AI-sub by 2-4 torpedoes is UNREAL! its look like a bug, because you may spend too many torpedors per one "kill", torpedoes always attack CM and ignores subs.
(old torpedoes(cold-war era) mainly attacks tracks\targets with most powerfull noise lewell. new torpedoes, like ugst and Mk 48 adcap\mod7, has re-attacking feature and can select between CM and target at close range) but it uses very often! very often torpedo re-attack CM instead sub.
express your opinion here, its very important for us!
next days we'll monitor this thread, after this we'll realese Addon
(i hope))))

[LoBlo]

Yep, we've been play testing the beta and found the same problem. Thanks for the hard work, but after 2 entire afternoons of play testing and bug fixing, I came to the conclusion that the original behavior was the most reliable. Although it would be nice to have "real-world" seeking, any attempts at a "rotating seeking" modeling just makes the torps more complex, less reliable, more buggy and with more glitches and illogical behavior. In the end, the most effective and consistent torpedo model was with the simplist snaking torpedo doctrine (a version of the original).

I'm in favor of returning to the original torpedo.doc behavior. In a way, the 'snaking' behavior is a good approximation to what the team is trying to accomplish anyway. It forces torpedos 'search' speeds to automatically be lower than their 'attack' speed (which I got the impression the team was trying to do anyway). And it provides 'blind spots' when the torpedos are looking away (much like the rotating seeker was trying to do). All and all its an adequate representation and the the least frustrating to use.

If anyone in the RA team is interested, I even made a version of the Mk48 Adcap based off snaking, that I thought was working well so far and works with the current RA beta database. Here it is if anyone's interested.

btw, thanks for all the hard work guys.

var PreenableCourse
var PreEnableSpeed
var PreenableDepth
var RunToEnable
var Runout
var CircleSearchPattern
var Enabled
var Homing
var SearchDepth
var Floor
var Ceiling
var AcousticMode
var InitTime
var initX
var initY
var run
var snakecrs
var snakeleft
 
IF INIT THEN {
 DebugOut "MK48 Launched!"
 InitTime = ( Time + 3 )
 Enabled = 0
 Homing = 0
 snakeleft = false
 initX = OwnX
 initY = OwnY
 PreenableDepth = OwnAlt
 SetAlt PreenableDepth
 ; Default to roughly .5 nmi enable for AI Torps
 RunToEnable = 1000
 ; Default to no runout monitoring
 Runout = -1
 ; Default to 3000ft floor
 Floor = minalt
 ; Default to 10ft ceiling
 Ceiling = -8
 ; Default to 100 ft search depth
 SearchDepth = -100
 SetSpd PreEnableSpeed
} ELSE {
; ==============
; Homing Targets
; ==============
 IF NEWTRACK THEN {
  IF ( ( TgtClass $= "Weap" ) AND ( TgtType $= "CM" ) ) AND ( TgtConf >= 85 ) THEN {
   DEBUGOUT "Mk 48 detected a Countermeasure and was not fooled!"
  } ELSE {
   IF ( NOT AcousticMode ) THEN {
    DEBUGOUT OwnName
    DEBUGOUT "Acquired with passive sensor"
    DEBUGOUT TargetName
    DEBUGOUT "AOB"
    DEBUGVALUEOUT TgtAOB
    SensorEnable "Prox" 1
    SetTactic "ADCAP_II_Passive_Homing"
   } ELSE {
    DEBUGOUT OwnName
    DEBUGOUT "Acquired with active sensor"
    DEBUGOUT TargetName
    DEBUGOUT "AOB"
    DEBUGVALUEOUT TgtAOB
    SensorEnable "Prox" 1
    SetTactic "ADCAP_II_Active_Homing"
   } ENDIF
  } ENDIF
  Runout = -1
 } ENDIF
 IF LOSTTRACK THEN {
  DEBUGOUT "Torpedo Lost Target"
  DEBUGOUT TargetName
 } ENDIF
 run = xyrng ( OwnX - initX ) ( OwnY - initY )
; ===================
; Snaking or Circling
; ===================
 IF Enabled THEN {
  IF CircleSearchPattern THEN {
   ; lower priority to make sure we don't interfere with homing
   SETPRIORITY 224
   SetRudder 3
  } ELSE {
   ; lower priority to make sure we don't interfere with homing
   SETPRIORITY 224
;   DebugOut "Mk 48 Searching"
   snakecrs = RelativeBearing PreenableCourse OwnCrs
   IF snakecrs > 30 THEN {
    snakeleft = true
   } ELSEIF snakecrs < -30 THEN {
    snakeleft = false
   } ENDIF
   IF snakeleft THEN
    SetRudder -5
   ELSE
    SetRudder 5
   ENDIF
 
  } ENDIF
  SetAlt SearchDepth
  SetSpd PreEnableSpeed
 } ENDIF
;  ===================
; WHEN TIME TO Enable
; ===================
 IF NOT Enabled THEN {
  IF ( RunToEnable != -1 ) AND ( run >= RunToEnable ) THEN {
   IF ( NOT AcousticMode ) THEN {
    PASSIVEENABLE
;    =========================================
;    Only Adcap Pas Attack Mode (8010) Enabled
;    =========================================
    SensorEnable "7930" 0
    SensorEnable "7940" 0
    SensorEnable "7950" 0
    SensorEnable "7960" 0
    SensorEnable "7970" 0
    SensorEnable "7920" 0
    SensorEnable "8000" 0
    SensorEnable "8020" 0
    SensorEnable "8030" 0
    SensorEnable "8040" 0
    SensorEnable "8050" 0
    DEBUGOUT "Torpedo Passive Enabled"
   } ELSE {
    ENABLE
;    =========================================
;    Only Adcap Act Attack Mode (7930) Enabled
;    =========================================
    SensorEnable "7940" 0
    SensorEnable "7950" 0
    SensorEnable "7960" 0
    SensorEnable "7970" 0
    SensorEnable "7920" 0
    SensorEnable "8000" 0
    SensorEnable "8010" 0
    SensorEnable "8020" 0
    SensorEnable "8030" 0
    SensorEnable "8040" 0
    SensorEnable "8050" 0
    DEBUGOUT "Torpedo Active Enabled"
   } ENDIF
   Enabled = 1
   RunToEnable = -1
;  ============================
;  Transiting while preenabled
;  ============================
  } ELSE {
   IF ( Time > InitTime ) THEN {
    ; lower priority to make sure we don't interfere with homing
    SETPRIORITY 224 
    SetCrs PreenableCourse
    SetAlt PreenableDepth
    SetSpd PreEnableSpeed
   } ENDIF
  } ENDIF
 } ENDIF
} ENDIF
; ========
; Shutdown
; ========
IF ( Runout != -1 ) AND ( run >= Runout ) THEN {
 DEBUGOUT "Torpedo failed to acquire"
 RunOut = -1
 SHUTDOWN
} ENDIF

The "ADCAP_II_PASSIVE_HOMING" doctrine

IF INIT THEN {
 DebugOut "Torpedo is on Passive Homing"
 Debugout TargetName
 Debugout "Range"
 DebugValueOut TgtRng
} ENDIF
IF GetEntVar "Enabled" THEN {
 SetSpd 47
 SetPriority 252
 TerminalHome
} ENDIF
IF TgtAge > 30 THEN {
 SetSpd PreEnableSpeed
} ENDIF

The "ADCAP_II_ACTIVE_HOMING" doctrine

 
IF INIT THEN {
 DebugOut "Torpedo is on Active Homing"
 Debugout TargetName
 Debugout "Range"
 Debugvalueout TgtRng
} ENDIF
IF GetEntVar "Enabled" THEN {
 SetSpd MaxSpd
 SetPriority 252
 TerminalHome
} ENDIF
IF TgtAge > 30 THEN {
 SetSpd PreEnableSpeed
} ENDIF

btw, before the final version the team should release a 2nd beta version so that we can iron out any bugs we find.

[Driman]

I greatly prefer "2. "hard-core simulator"

I want to have to use several torpedoes to sink an enemy sub that's using countermeasures and evasive maneuvers. It's probably far more realistic that way. Dangerous waters is already very unrealistic in many ways, so any opportunity to make it realistic should be taken without hesitation.

So please give us the option to have the 2. "hard-core simulator" setting!!

BTW, you might want to post this in the Dangerous Waters general discussion, since more people probably look at that one...

[FERdeBOER]

I think it's better to have the two options, at least since the "hard-core" one gets "gold".

I prefer the hard-core option, but a radical change maybe would "scare" many players so, having the possibility to choose among the two options seems the best idea to begin with.

[LoBlo]

Questions for the mod team.

1. what specific reattack techniques are the torpedoes modeled to do.

2. what behavior are they actually showing. Has the team noticed any bugs, inappropriate, or unintended torpedo behavior.

[rotorfib]

Any updates on problems possible release date?

[Alexei Vostrkov]

Any chance to have access to the RA Mod repository or something else for having an updated version? i would like to do some bug hunting too

[Castout]

Hi dyshman thanks for the news update.

Personally I DON"T WANT playability.

For me it's 100% REALISM

I'm against ADCAP snaking!!! lol

[dd149]

Why not have both, with either install option or two different files, as it cannot be handled by JSGME, which would be easier. In any case cheers to the guys who spend so much work to make our game better. BTW a French team is also brewing some mods.

[dd149]

It would be nice to get our hands on the new version soon. Does somebody have news?