A simple fix to give us perfect Surface Combat actions

[Rex Bellator]

One thing which is obvious to anyone who has watched a few Surface Combats is that the action proceeds in rounds - with probably 3 or 4 rounds taking place at altering ranges. It is also obvious that the AI works out which ships have sunk at the very end of the round before proceeding onto the next round.

This current system means that you almost always see ships being overkilled, as enemy ships pour fire into it well past annihilation point, an example I have just watched included a single DD taking 17 8" shell hits thoughout one round! Only when the round was over did the AI obviously declared it sunk.

What I suggest is that the AI calculates in the same way if any ships are sunk in between salvos from different ships. . IE. move the routine to the point where one ship has finished firing, and the AI is about to decide which ship is firing next.

This will result in sunk ships sinking closer to the point when they took enough damage to make them sink, not a long time later. It will also result in a better spread of fire amongst the visible targets, and more realistic results when much larger TFs attack small TFs.

All thoughts appreciated, although Matrix seem to be ignoring me lately

[Echo]

A given ship, engaged in battle with a visible foe in range, should be allowed "X" amount of shots per/turn, dependant on crew experience.

This doesnt deem to be so in the current build.

[1089]

Originally posted by Rex Bellator
One thing which is obvious to anyone who has watched a few Surface Combats is that the action proceeds in rounds - with probably 3 or 4 rounds taking place at altering ranges. It is also obvious that the AI works out which ships have sunk at the very end of the round before proceeding onto the next round.

This current system means that you almost always see ships being overkilled, as enemy ships pour fire into it well past annihilation point, an example I have just watched included a single DD taking 17 8" shell hits thoughout one round! Only when the round was over did the AI obviously declared it sunk.

What I suggest is that the AI calculates in the same way if any ships are sunk in between salvos from different ships. . IE. move the routine to the point where one ship has finished firing, and the AI is about to decide which ship is firing next.

This will result in sunk ships sinking closer to the point when they took enough damage to make them sink, not a long time later. It will also result in a better spread of fire amongst the visible targets, and more realistic results when much larger TFs attack small TFs.

All thoughts appreciated, although Matrix seem to be ignoring me lately

I'll answer this one for them. The display shows the ships firing sequentially, but in reality, they are all firing somewhat simultaneously. The shells are arriving and doing their damage after most of the others have already been sent on their way. A ship that is sinking doesn't always go down immediately, and it is not always obvious to someone miles away that it is sinking, until it does. Since switching targets requires some set up time, and trajectory adjustments based on previous firing, a ship is likely to keep firing on its chosen target until it is sure that it is no longer a threat, or a bigger threat or better target is spotted. What was not realistic was the single heavy cruiser firing 4 or5 times while the 10 ships opposing it only fired once each. I think they addressed this in the new patch.

kp

[pasternakski]

Originally posted by Rex Bellator
All thoughts appreciated, although Matrix seem to be ignoring me lately

Me, too, Rex, but in my case, it's probably a good thing, curmudgeonly old cynic that I am.

I don't share your problem with surface combat, my friend. Engagements (particularly at night) in the Pacific theater were wild, chaotic affairs, particularly at this early stage (even later, as at Samar, things weren't a lot better). The "shoot the cripple until the cripple is REALLY crippled" effect has been documented many times.

Really, I think that the current system is actually a little too pat. Maybe it's the "War at Sea" lineup that bothers me more than anything else, but that's a graphic design bitch, not a criticism of the substantive system. I wish we could have gotten an overhead view of the action with some sense of the actual maneuvering, but, as Darcy said when asking Elizabeth if he could introduce his sister into her acquaintance, "But, perhaps, I ask too much?" CHICK FLICK CHICK FLICK CHICK FLICK (bonus points to any of you torpedo launchers who know what this refers to).

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

I will now proceed to entangle the entire area

[Spooky]

Originally posted by Rex Bellator
One thing which is obvious to anyone who has watched a few Surface Combats is that the action proceeds in rounds - with probably 3 or 4 rounds taking place at altering ranges. It is also obvious that the AI works out which ships have sunk at the very end of the round before proceeding onto the next round.

This current system means that you almost always see ships being overkilled, as enemy ships pour fire into it well past annihilation point, an example I have just watched included a single DD taking 17 8" shell hits thoughout one round! Only when the round was over did the AI obviously declared it sunk.

What I suggest is that the AI calculates in the same way if any ships are sunk in between salvos from different ships. . IE. move the routine to the point where one ship has finished firing, and the AI is about to decide which ship is firing next.

This will result in sunk ships sinking closer to the point when they took enough damage to make them sink, not a long time later. It will also result in a better spread of fire amongst the visible targets, and more realistic results when much larger TFs attack small TFs.

All thoughts appreciated, although Matrix seem to be ignoring me lately

Sorry Rex but I disagree ...

The duration of each round is quite short so it means that even IRL a "overkilled" ship will still take a few minutes to sink - so it is normal that it sinks at the end of the round.

BTW, in UV naval combats, you will get a few "overkilled" ships to sink right away (at the end of the round) and some "killed-only" ships that will sink at the end of the combat ..

Moreover, most of the UV naval combats take place during the night and it is logical for a ship commander to target a ship in fire - very easy to target and to hit - rather than an undamaged ship which is at the best a hard-to-see shadow.

Spooky

[Marc von Martial]

All thoughts appreciated, although Matrix seem to be ignoring me lately

Nobody´s ingnoring anybody here. Just because you guys don´t get a reply to every single topic doesn´t mean we don´t care .

We´re all pretty busy with shaping up the current and oncoming products and forum/posting time is really "limited". Reading takes a lot of time, posting even more . Not to mention all those emails coming in...

[pasternakski]

Originally posted by Marc Schwanebeck


Nobody´s ingnoring anybody here. Just because you guys don´t get a reply to every single topic doesn´t mean we don´t care .

We´re all pretty busy with shaping up the current and oncoming products and forum/posting time is really "limited". Reading takes a lot of time, posting even more . Not to mention all those emails coming in...

HEY, MARC! KEEP SHAPING! KEEP PRETTY (I MEAN PRETTY BUSY)! Only let us interrupt you when we say something that advances the work (which we admire and enjoy so much). When your time is devoted to producing the stuff, as Bogie might say, "dreams are made of," that's when we are happiest.

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

(and who's "we," hoser?)
I will now proceed to entangle the entire area

[RevRick]

For a lot of considered information on this find a copy of Action Stations and read Capt. Zimm's analysis of surface actions - a lot of ships take a lot of damage - and some sink right away, some sink much later, and some don't sink at all but are either towed from the scene, or work up steam enough to crawl away. Take a look a the picture of the Mikuma after Midway - and she was back in action before the war ended by a long shot. Granted, that was bomb damage, but the same could be for shell hits - not all shell hits are going to impact water tight integrity. The SD took forty two hits (IIRC) at Second Guadalcanal and almost all were superficial. She was mission killed for that night, but she was in no serious danger of sinking. San Franscisco took six 14's at first Guadalcanal, I believe, in addition to other shots, and even though the 14's were not AP - on a lightly built CA (as compared to IJN CA's) HC would do as much damage - and she crept away the next day.