Realistic Sub Communications

[GeneralVikus]

Hey guys,

I've been playing around with automated ASW scenarios, and it occurred to me that it would probably be ideal to have realistic sub communication enabled for only one side.

For example, if a defending submarine (i.e. a Soviet SSN defending a bastion) detects an enemy sub, its optimal reaction would pretty much always be to immediately come to periscope depth and report its position, rather than attempting to engage alone. As such, realistic sub communications should probably be disabled for this side, since there would only be a couple of minutes lag between the classification of the Goblin by the defending sub and the reporting of its position, and having the sub in constant communication with friendly forces is a close enough approximation of this behavior.

By contrast, an attacking sub (such as a NATO SSN invading a protected bastion) would more likely remain at depth to stay hidden; it has little incentive to report the contact unless it knows there are friendly forces nearby who will receive the report and respond. Therefore, realistic sub communications is preferable for this side.

Is there any way to do this, or to approximate it in game?

[Fido81]

This feels like something you could do with Lua.

My intuition is you're better off creating a special action using

Code: Select all

ScenEdit_SetUnit(outOfComms=True/False)

for a few seconds or

Code: Select all

ScenEdit_SetUnit(depth = [whatever periscope depth is])

if you want to simulate changing course to call in and risking losing the track.

[Kushan04]

There's a few scenarios in TSS that have realistic sub comms modeled using Lua. Could look at them.

[thewood1]

A non-lua way is to use zones, events, and mission switching. I have done it a few times in limited tests. Detect a sub in a zone that triggers the event to change missions. The triggered mission is at peri depth. Set for X minutes than reengage original mission. You have to tweak it a little to stop porpoise-ing. I use events and multiple missions for a lot of AI and hands off stuff. This is the same concept.

[GeneralVikus]

A non-lua way is to use zones, events, and mission switching. I have done it a few times in limited tests. Detect a sub in a zone that triggers the event to change missions. The triggered mission is at peri depth. Set for X minutes than reengage original mission. You have to tweak it a little to stop porpoise-ing. I use events and multiple missions for a lot of AI and hands off stuff. This is the same concept.

That's a great concept, thanks! And to @Fido81 and @Kushan04, as well.

[thewood1]

A non-lua way is to use zones, events, and mission switching. I have done it a few times in limited tests. Detect a sub in a zone that triggers the event to change missions. The triggered mission is at peri depth. Set for X minutes than reengage original mission. You have to tweak it a little to stop porpoise-ing. I use events and multiple missions for a lot of AI and hands off stuff. This is the same concept.

That's a great concept, thanks! And to @Fido81 and @Kushan04, as well.

Thanks. It seems a lot of very experienced players first suggestion is lua. I always try to avoid lua and use as many built in tools as possible. I have found, in my experience, that lua is less stable and transferable through the many updates CMO goes through. I consider lua a gap filler for functions that don't exist.