[ADJUSTED B936.5][936.2] Tweak to Sonobuoy drop rate?

[kaburke61]

Please don't kill the messenger! [:D] I was not one of those who complained about the old drop rate.

That being said though, It looks like it went from 1.5x (what i read in a post?) to .5x It is dropping a buoy
with a detection radius of 2 mi every 1 mile (is that .25x when you consider the circumference? I dunno..my head hurts)
Why not 1.0x? Seems like a reasonable compromise to me.

I didn't think a save was needed (my system has a problem consistently uploading successfully to Matrix).
I use "FOST: Advanced ASW exercise" to test.

[mavfin]

I think I saw this when I was testing the Hellfire illumination issue last night. I'll see if this still needs a save when I get home, after I apply the newest pack.

[Eggstor]

The current tweak is in response to issues with the convergence-zone-capable AN/SSQ-77B/C VLAD, which has a max detection range of 40 nm. The original formula for sonobuoy drop distance was ((1.5x detection range sonobuoy 1) + (1.5x detection range sonobuoy 2)), or 3.0x detection range total if the sonobuoys are the same type, which kept the AI from dropping a VLAD within 120 nm of another VLAD, and from dropping any other sonobuoy from any aircraft assigned to the same ASW mission within 50+ nm of a VLAD.

The current ((0.25x detection range sonobuoy 1) + (0.25x detection range sonobuoy 2)), or 0.5x detection range for sonobuoys of the same type, while it works for the newer VLADs, is far too close for the older sonobuoys, even with alternating shallow/deep drops. Indeed, even under the old formula, it was hard to penetrate a sonobuoy line made up of older sonobuoys (see Barents Sea Boomers).

Maybe the old formula, with a maximum detection range value of 9.5 nm (reflecting the maximum direct-path detection range), would work.

[Dimitris]

Maybe we should just run an auction and the highest bidder would get his desired sonobuoy spacing.

[Eggstor]

Heh. I'll start the bidding at 5 Simoleons and a slight modification of max detection range to 6.33 nm (2/3rds direct-path).

[kaburke61]

Oh Cmon Sunburn.[8|] Eggstor has it summarized pretty good. I guess what works for VLAD does not work so well for others.

[mikmykWS]

Perhaps adding a mission option where players can type in their preferred spacing would be best. The default can be what's there now or last week.

Mike

[Raptorx7_slith]

Hmm yeah maybe the best solution lies between both.

I will say though that it is better for modern platforms now, ill play around with CWDB and report back.

Edit 2: Older platforms definitely suffer from this more since they run out of sonobuoys way faster and have far less coverage of an area.

This isn't the end of the world i'm sure we'll find a fix [:)]

[Eggstor]

Hmmmm, mission option. Would that include depth control (over/under layer) or active vs. passive?

Consider this can of worms opened

[mikmykWS]

Added a request to add both as options.

Thanks

Mike

[kaburke61]

Preferred spacing option is a great idea.

[ComDev]

We need proper sonobuoy patterns...

Net, Line and Random. Other?

Plus 'WRA'-type logics to properly handle search and attack sonobuoys.

Lets see...

[Lowlaner2012]

What with the cockpit visibility add-on and this, you guys are what all devs should be....awesome

Cheers

[Eggstor]

Did I say "can"? I meant "barrel". [:D]

A wholesale rework of sonobuoy logic would be something suited for 1.13 (or later).

[kaburke61]

This went quiet, so I thought I'd ask. If there is not time in this release to make desired spacing an option, can you at least for now look at splitting the difference between old and new (1.5 to (.25? .5?)). That would probably work as a decent compromise in my book anyway.

Thanks for all your work guys

[Raptorx7_slith]

Yeah I feel bad because I'm partly responsible for reporting the VLAD problem and making the devs do this. If anything I think going back to how it was is the easiest fix if the ability to choose spacing won't make it into the official 1.12 release. Hopefully that's also the easiest solution.

Sorry to to everyone and the devs again.

[kaburke61]

Bump.... Hiya devs. Possible to get an update on this? Change it to compromise rate? Original? Leave it as is? (please I hope not, my poor little helos dump their loads way to fast, and the big planes leave a mess). Configurable?

Guys like me are very sub-centric as far as scenarios, so this is a bigger deal.

Thanks!

[Dimitris]

We haven't forgotten you, but we're in the middle of 20 things. Give it some time.

[Eggstor]

Just 20? Seriously, I won't toss cluster munition performance into the mix right now then (besides, I need to rebuild my demonstration scenario on that).

[kaburke61]

Thanks for the reply Sunburn..will do!