[Logged] Recommended Changes to the Sonar Model

Post bug reports and ask for game support here.

Moderator: MOD_Command

User avatar
KungPao
Posts: 355
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2016 3:00 pm
Location: Winnie the Pooh's dreamland

RE: Recommended Changes to the Sonar Model

Post by KungPao »

ORIGINAL: Dimitris


* Noisemakers & decoys as "real" objects. Currently decoys & noisemakers (and tactical mobile decoys like MOSS, Korund etc.) are handled abstractly in the point-defence step just like all soft-kill countermeasures, so they do not instantiate as distinct entities. In RL both decoys and noisemakers can stay present for a significant time, both confusing ASW weapons but also contributing to ambient noise increase and direct masking. It is therefore desirable to implement such countermeasures as distinct entities fired just like weapons.

That would be great! Right now the decoys are almost useless. The decoys sucess check is happenning at the time of impact , so it doesn't give torpedo too much penalty if the torp is spoofed. Even an un-wired Torp will re-aquire the Submarine immediately, initate the re-attack one min latter (if Sub is running at flank).

If this feature is too hard to implement, please consider add some calculated penalty for current Torp re-attack mode. For example, in case a torp is spoofed by decoy, make it 75% chance it will dispear.
Sir? Do you want to order a Kung Pao Chicken or a Kung Fu Chicken?
serjames
Posts: 201
Joined: Sun Feb 21, 2016 11:48 am

RE: Recommended Changes to the Sonar Model

Post by serjames »

Second the "in the layer" setting... I tend to use this all the time
thewood1
Posts: 10251
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2005 6:24 pm
Location: Boston

RE: Recommended Changes to the Sonar Model

Post by thewood1 »

"make it 75% chance it will dispear"

Why 75%? Is there source on that? Are decoys that effective? Does it change based on timeline?
Dimitris
Posts: 15478
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2005 10:29 am
Contact:

RE: Recommended Changes to the Sonar Model

Post by Dimitris »

ORIGINAL: KungPao
If this feature is too hard to implement, please consider add some calculated penalty for current Torp re-attack mode. For example, in case a torp is spoofed by decoy, make it 75% chance it will dispear.

I _think_ we already have a certain "torpedo lured by countermeasures and point-failing" probability, but I'll check.
AKar
Posts: 99
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2018 8:38 am

RE: Recommended Changes to the Sonar Model

Post by AKar »

ORIGINAL: Dimitris


* Do not use sonobuoys for initial search: Aircraft currently are allowed to pre-emptively (no initial contact) saturate a search area with sonobuoys as part of their search. This is problematic for two reasons: (a) It does not reflect the fact that sonobuoys are a rather scarce resource and are thus usually used only for localization of an existing initial contact, and (b) because of their tight spacing, they make it much more likely to detect a sub in the area being sowed with them. Therefore need to add an (optional?) setting that restricts aircraft from using buoys on general search.

Wouldn't this issue be mitigated by making sonobuoys (optionally, to not break existing scenarios) limited in numbers found in magazines? This would leave their use at players discretion.
Dimitris
Posts: 15478
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2005 10:29 am
Contact:

RE: Recommended Changes to the Sonar Model

Post by Dimitris »

ORIGINAL: AKar
ORIGINAL: Dimitris
* Do not use sonobuoys for initial search: Aircraft currently are allowed to pre-emptively (no initial contact) saturate a search area with sonobuoys as part of their search. This is problematic for two reasons: (a) It does not reflect the fact that sonobuoys are a rather scarce resource and are thus usually used only for localization of an existing initial contact, and (b) because of their tight spacing, they make it much more likely to detect a sub in the area being sowed with them. Therefore need to add an (optional?) setting that restricts aircraft from using buoys on general search.
Wouldn't this issue be mitigated by making sonobuoys (optionally, to not break existing scenarios) limited in numbers found in magazines? This would leave their use at players discretion.

Without doing any changes in the AI rationale, this would mean that the computer opponent would very quickly diminish his stocks.
User avatar
KungPao
Posts: 355
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2016 3:00 pm
Location: Winnie the Pooh's dreamland

RE: Recommended Changes to the Sonar Model

Post by KungPao »

ORIGINAL: thewood1

"make it 75% chance it will dispear"

Why 75%? Is there source on that? Are decoys that effective? Does it change based on timeline?
Good question sir. I don't know. This is a number randomly generated from my brain after one bottle of sake.

I am presenting an idea here. Dev team can decide if they want reject or take my idea. If they take my idea, they can put any number there.

Sir? Do you want to order a Kung Pao Chicken or a Kung Fu Chicken?
User avatar
KungPao
Posts: 355
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2016 3:00 pm
Location: Winnie the Pooh's dreamland

RE: Recommended Changes to the Sonar Model

Post by KungPao »

ORIGINAL: Dimitris

ORIGINAL: KungPao
If this feature is too hard to implement, please consider add some calculated penalty for current Torp re-attack mode. For example, in case a torp is spoofed by decoy, make it 75% chance it will dispear.

I _think_ we already have a certain "torpedo lured by countermeasures and point-failing" probability, but I'll check.
Hi Dimitris
I looked into this and post a thread before
https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.a ... =&#4873328

the failure check happens after Torp successfully pass the decoy check but failed at hit check. it simulates the torp failed to re-attack.
Sir? Do you want to order a Kung Pao Chicken or a Kung Fu Chicken?
User avatar
Nikel
Posts: 2564
Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2009 10:51 am

Re: [Logged] Recommended Changes to the Sonar Model

Post by Nikel »

For those of you that can understand this topic, not my case :shock:


One of the sources cited by Ping Jockey is available in pdf at Google books.

Robert J. Urick. Sound Propagation in the Sea. 1979

https://www.google.com/books/edition/So ... =es&gbpv=0


Also

Robert J. Urick. Ambient noise in the sea. 1984

https://www.google.com/books/edition/Am ... UDegQIDRAG


Also of probable interest:

Introduction to sonar by Roy Edgar Hansen

https://www.uio.no/studier/emner/matnat ... ressed.pdf
Last edited by Nikel on Sat May 04, 2024 9:08 am, edited 2 times in total.
Dimitris
Posts: 15478
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2005 10:29 am
Contact:

Re: [Logged] Recommended Changes to the Sonar Model

Post by Dimitris »

Thanks! Every useful bit of research helps.
User avatar
ClaudeJ
Posts: 776
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 5:38 pm
Location: Bastogne

Re: [Logged] Recommended Changes to the Sonar Model

Post by ClaudeJ »

Would "History Of Russian Underwater Acoustics" help in any way?
AMD Ryzen 3 1200 @ 3.1, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 4 Go, Windows 10 64bits, 16 GB RAM, Regional settings = French, Belgium
(Previously known as JanMasters0n)
Post Reply

Return to “Tech Support”