Matrix Games Forums

Hey There,

I have seen this a few times. When I bring a sub up to periscope or surface depth, it doesn't seem
to start charging it's batteries.

In the included savefile, I'm referring to B-471 (Kilo-class).

Thanks for looking into this (maybe I'm doing something wrong?)

UPDATE: OK...it get more interesting. In about 2 hours, it starts charging. Does it take 2 hours to rig
for charging? [&:]


KevinB

I was wondering about this the other day when playing the Oyashio on Patrol (2014) scenario, but didn't have time to explore the issue.

BTW, what's the acoustic difference between running on diesel, AIP and battery in the game?

ORIGINAL: kaburke61

Hey There,

I have seen this a few times. When I bring a sub up to periscope or surface depth, it doesn't seem
to start charging it's batteries.

In the included savefile, I'm referring to B-471 (Kilo-class).

Thanks for looking into this (maybe I'm doing something wrong?)

UPDATE: OK...it get more interesting. In about 2 hours, it starts charging. Does it take 2 hours to rig
for charging? [&:]


KevinB

Uhhh, bump? [:(] (No comment from devs)

Here's another example of a sub that won't recharge, to help with the troubleshooting. (B486)

I have a Foxtrot that's completely out of battery, but has plenty of diesel fuel. Fortunately, a Soviet surface group has come to his rescue to prevent prowling ASW aircraft from killing him off while he recharges. Except the sub refuses to start snorkelling. He's been at periscope depth for a couple of hours and still no luck.




While on the subject of the AI's prowling ASW aircraft, this turns out to be a great way to kill them off (so long as they're not toting ASMs). A surface group parks on top of a stationary sub which is at periscope depth. The ASW aircraft somehow detect the sub (in this case probably by ESM, as the sub's radar is turned on) and come in for a closer look, descending to try and find and engage the sub, at which point the ships cheerfully use the airplane for target practice. Despite the fact that the airplane must have detected the ships with ESM (all their radars are on), and then noticed the barrage of incoming flak that surrounds it, it never seems to take evasive action or avoid the area. It blithely flies in circles until it dies. Shouldn't the ASW aircraft's AI have some sort of logic to let it avoid hostile anti-aircraft concentrations like this?



(I've attached a zip with an example of each situation.)

Pretty sure we've got some logic that subs will dive if a MPA detected. That is not exactly wrong.

We'll take a look the rope a dope logic. Our AI is pretty good but far from perfect. Pointing out these cases does help us.Thanks for your time Andy

Mike

ORIGINAL: mikmyk

Pretty sure we've got some logic that subs will dive if a MPA detected. That is not exactly wrong.

We'll take a look the rope a dope logic. Our AI is pretty good but far from perfect. Pointing out these cases does help us.Thanks for your time Andy

Mike

LOL..and my example is invisible....never mind

Definitely not. Your issue definitely exists and I've added it to our list. Sorry for not responding. 4 days was excessive but sometime we get busy.

Examined this.

The sub AI is behaving as instructed. Unless the battery is critically low, it is using the electric drive while also on periscope depth or surface, to avoid using the diesels and thus making much more noise.

We set this after user feedback that indicated that users did _NOT_ want their subs to snort unless they really had to, ie. unless the battery was low.

So, you got what you asked for.

Is there a way to give us manual control over this?

Sure there is. The important question is, is it worth it?

Haha! I am sure you have a billion things on your list and every one of us has different tastes and priorities.

Personally, almost every frustrating moment CMANO has given me (and don't get me wrong it has given me a lot more fun than frustration) was due to one AI behavior or another I could not override. [:D]

If you came up with a $30 'expansion' that allowed me to selectively turn off every AI behavior and override it with manual commands I would buy it in a second!

ORIGINAL: Sunburn

Examined this.

The sub AI is behaving as instructed. Unless the battery is critically low... (snip)

I'm not sure I agree. Unless a completely flat battery and a motionless sub somehow don't count as critical, something sometimes isn't quite right in the AI.

(Pedal faster, you nekulturny kulaks, pedal faster! [:D])

I definitely agree with the default behaviour that you don't turn on the diesels every time you pop up the scope to look around. But sometimes you need to quickly get the diesels going, whether the batteries are low or not. A manual override control would be an asset.

The important question is, is it worth it?

Yes, I think it is. Managing battery charge while keeping a low indiscretion rate in a hostile tactical environment is the primary operational constraint for diesel-electric subs. It's worth investing in player control capability for such fundamental decisions, especially as a given charge ratio may require completely opposite courses of action depending on the submarine's situation and the player's intentions.

Some sort of switch with the option Diesels: Off, Auto, On might be one way to handle it.

With the boat at full stop, why would the batteries charge? It's not like a submerged diesel submarine can remain at any depth with zero forward movement to put flow over the dive planes. However, the current situation levels the field for player and AI alike regarding snorkelling so my $0.02 CAD is in favour of the status quo.

-C

ORIGINAL: Sunburn

Examined this.

The sub AI is behaving as instructed. Unless the battery is critically low, it is using the electric drive while also on periscope depth or surface, to avoid using the diesels and thus making much more noise.

We set this after user feedback that indicated that users did _NOT_ want their subs to snort unless they really had to, ie. unless the battery was low.

So, you got what you asked for.

That's very understandable! However, ideally the AI behaviour should mirror what would happen in real life, and surely that's not what happens?

I'd have thought that subs would operate on diesels by default, but go quiet whenever they're in a hostile environment or on a distance-closing attack run. Certainly scenarios often place subs already in such situations, but maybe that highlights that the AI needs to decide the threat/opportunity level and act accordingly. That could be tricky to implement, as it depends on detecting enemies and judging their sensor abilities, otherwise using scenario-specific 'expected threat' knowledge. Indeed, attack runs may only be engaged if there's enough battery to do so.

Perhaps a manual override would be a good short-term solution, at least until the AI decision process can be finessed a bit more. I also agree that recharge should require movement.

ORIGINAL: Sunburn

Examined this.

The sub AI is behaving as instructed. Unless the battery is critically low, it is using the electric drive while also on periscope depth or surface, to avoid using the diesels and thus making much more noise.

We set this after user feedback that indicated that users did _NOT_ want their subs to snort unless they really had to, ie. unless the battery was low.

So, you got what you asked for.

LOL...."I" didn't ask for this (the ability to decide would be what "I" would have picked). But OK....Thanks for looking at it.

Any volunteer committing himself that he will step up to troubleshoot each and every single bug that will pop up as a result of adding such a switch?

Let's see some hands now.

ORIGINAL: Sunburn

Any volunteer committing himself that he will step up to troubleshoot each and every single bug that will pop up as a result of adding such a switch?

Let's see some hands now.

I am not sure if this is serious or you are messing with us, but I will happily beta test any 'give more control to the player' feature you wish to implement. [;)]

ORIGINAL: Sunburn

Any volunteer committing himself that he will step up to troubleshoot each and every single bug that will pop up as a result of adding such a switch?

Let's see some hands now.

Well, if you're seriously asking, I'm up for helping too! [:)]

Bear in mind all we can do is beta-test or confirm what someone else has reported by testing their savefile, unless we get a version of the game that can generate relevant diagnostic information. I'm assuming sources will stay off-limits [;)]

ORIGINAL: Sunburn

Any volunteer committing himself that he will step up to troubleshoot each and every single bug that will pop up as a result of adding such a switch?

Let's see some hands now.

Geez, no need getting testy. I had a simple enough question, which you answered (sorta, with attitude). The reason
one would like some control is to have the batteries "topped up" before an engagement (which was just the kind of
thing I think I was trying to do before engaging a target). Having your batteries mostly discharged AND THEN
getting in a furball certainly can't go well....

ORIGINAL: Sunburn

Any volunteer committing himself that he will step up to troubleshoot each and every single bug that will pop up as a result of adding such a switch?

Let's see some hands now.

If there's a practical way for a non-programmer to help test this sort of thing I would be glad to do so.