| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Sea Demon
Joined: 28 Mar 2004
Posts: 970
Location: USA
|
 Posted: Thu Apr 13, 2006 6:36 pm Post subject: Harpoon Missile upgrade? |
 |
|
One thing that I would like to see is a more realistic representation into how the Harpoon works in real-life incorporated someday into DW. The Harpoon in DW is modelled so simply. There is no way to give it the ability to hit below the waterline, nor execute a pop-up attack. I know there are more options, but these things would be necessary to give it more realism.
My friend at work showed me Janes F-18 on his lap-top the other day. Janes F-18 did model a pop-up attack option, Bearing only launch, etc. in their Harpoon.
So I was wondering if this could be upgraded at some-point to give the Harpoon more realism. The one in DW is good. I just think this is one area that needs improvement.
Any other thoughts? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
bos
Joined: 19 Mar 2005
Posts: 7
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 13, 2006 8:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The harpoon does provide a nice weapon to demonstrate when a FFG has beat a sub in a sub-escorted convoy scenario.
Any improvements are definitely welcome, for realisms sake, but DW is primarily a submarine & ASW simulation. Enhancements to that aspect of gameplay (maybe some harpoon improvements would!) should come first.
I would love to see a more comprehensive treatment of Ship v Ship in the next game in the series, though =] |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sea Demon
Joined: 28 Mar 2004
Posts: 970
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 14, 2006 2:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Come on guys. I know I'm not the only FFG player that wouldn't love a more realistic/capable Harpoon. 
I know what you're saying bos, about DW being mostly focused on ASW, but the FFG is an ASW asset that lives on the surface. Therefore it needs a reliable and effective ASuW punch. I've set up scenarios where there's a Jiangwei FFG or a nasty Sovremenny lurking around that needed elimination. I've used DW's Harpoon to good effect combined with my helo's Penguin ASM's. I would just like the option to set them for pop-up attack, and make them a little less observable......that's all. A little more realism. 
This ain't a major criticism of the game, just something I'd like to see incorporated at some point. The DW Harpoon's are fine. Just wish for more options on them. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mau
Joined: 11 Jun 2005
Posts: 189
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 14, 2006 5:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Way to go Sea Demon!!
I'm all with you!
I need to find some of your scenarios!!
That is exactly right. People has to understand that even though this game is an oriented one on the ASW, the platform above water has to be able to defend themselve somewhat reasonably well against a limited threat. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kazuaki Shimazaki II
Joined: 03 Jan 2006
Posts: 146
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 15, 2006 1:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Sea Demon wrote: | | I know what you're saying bos, about DW being mostly focused on ASW, but the FFG is an ASW asset that lives on the surface. Therefore it needs a reliable and effective ASuW punch. I've set up scenarios where there's a Jiangwei FFG or a nasty Sovremenny lurking around that needed elimination. I've used DW's Harpoon to good effect combined with my helo's Penguin ASM's. I would just like the option to set them for pop-up attack, and make them a little less observable......that's all. A little more realism. |
I'm sure if you just want pop-up LW can play around with the doctrine or something, but unless the hit chance change is correctly modeled, all you may get is the missile taking MORE time to hit the target, thus more chance it'd get sniped off.
This won't be a simple problem to solve. It can be harmful or beneficial to various degrees depending on very system-specific things. For example, it might have been entirely below the effective min alt of System A until it began a pop up, which gave them a brief firing opportunity. A slow System B that was tracking might get thrown off by the change in parameters, but a fast System C might be able to adjust the solution so fast that all you did was extend the time the missile was in valid parameters for the defender. Modeling all this properly is probably beyond the current radar and weapons model.
As for observability, in the stock game, Harpoons are as invisible as anything else, including tiny air to air missiles. In LWAMI, it is the stealthiest missile in the game.
You might also realize that you aren't fighting enemies with a full deck either. Nobody else gets evasive maneuvers either. Most (if not all) seaskimming Russians missiles don't. (Check the DB sometime).
Improved realism is always good, but this particular proposal is probably not as easy as you think it is, and this puts it in some perspective. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SeaQueen
Joined: 23 Jun 2005
Posts: 358
Location: Washington, DC
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 15, 2006 2:22 pm Post subject: Re: Harpoon Missile upgrade? |
|
|
I'm all for more surface warfare in general. I think that if there were more playable surface platforms, the whole surface thing would take off in a big way.
I think before we worry about the particularlities of cruise missiles, I'd rather see more playable surface platforms. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bill Nichols
Joined: 14 Mar 2001
Posts: 2657
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 15, 2006 2:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Sea Demon wrote: | Come on guys. I know I'm not the only FFG player that wouldn't love a more realistic/capable Harpoon.
I know what you're saying bos, about DW being mostly focused on ASW, but the FFG is an ASW asset that lives on the surface. Therefore it needs a reliable and effective ASuW punch. I've set up scenarios where there's a Jiangwei FFG or a nasty Sovremenny lurking around that needed elimination. I've used DW's Harpoon to good effect combined with my helo's Penguin ASM's. I would just like the option to set them for pop-up attack, and make them a little less observable......that's all. A little more realism.
This ain't a major criticism of the game, just something I'd like to see incorporated at some point. The DW Harpoon's are fine. Just wish for more options on them. |
I would be happy just to have my P-3 carry Harpoons . . .  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SeaQueen
Joined: 23 Jun 2005
Posts: 358
Location: Washington, DC
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 15, 2006 2:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Bill Nichols wrote: |
I would be happy just to have my P-3 carry Harpoons . . . |
Right! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sea Demon
Joined: 28 Mar 2004
Posts: 970
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 15, 2006 6:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| SeaQueen wrote: | | Bill Nichols wrote: |
I would be happy just to have my P-3 carry Harpoons . . . |
Right! |
Yup, to both of you. The P-3 without the Harpoon, takes a significant ASuW capability away from it. I find myself being overly cautious in attacking surface platforms with the AGM-65 due to the range issues. The Harpoon and P-3 were made for eachother.
| Kazuaki Shimazaki II wrote: | | Modeling all this properly is probably beyond the current radar and weapons model. |
Fair enough. But I'm assuming it wouldn't be too difficult. Like I said, Jane's F-18 modelled this in their Harpoon. And it seems rather effective there. I don't know, I'm just throwing ideas out for future improvements. :8
| Mau wrote: | Way to go Sea Demon!!
I'm all with you!
I need to find some of your scenarios!!
That is exactly right. People has to understand that even though this game is an oriented one on the ASW, the platform above water has to be able to defend themselve somewhat reasonably well against a limited threat. |
Thank you for your kind words, sir. And I agree with your assessment as well.
BTW, I normally build missions by the masses to try different scenarios. All of them are currently broken. I'm in the process of scripting and completing goals/triggers for 5 of them. I've got two 688(I), 1 Seawolf SSN, and two FFG missions almost done. The FFG ones are around China in high density maritime traffic areas, with definite PLAN surface and sub-surface threats present. I'll finish those and release them as soon as possible. The two 688(I) ones will be done this week. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Deathblow
Joined: 11 Sep 2005
Posts: 392
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 15, 2006 7:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Bill Nichols wrote: | | I would be happy just to have my P-3 carry Harpoons . . . |
The P-3 carries Harpoons? In real life? :hmm:
Converting the penguins to harpoons would be no problem at all, afaik. Just a matter of switching the model referencing and reasigning the sensors, doctrines, and performance stats. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TLAM Strike
Joined: 30 Apr 2002
Posts: 4866
Location: Rochester, New York
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 15, 2006 7:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Deathblow wrote: | | Converting the penguins to harpoons would be no problem at all, afaik. Just a matter of switching the model referencing and reasigning the sensors, doctrines, and performance stats. |
For one its the Mav that would need to be changed nto the Penguin. And second its not that easy the interface isn't set up for a Harpoon. :nope: |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kazuaki Shimazaki II
Joined: 03 Jan 2006
Posts: 146
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 15, 2006 9:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Sea Demon wrote: | | Fair enough. But I'm assuming it wouldn't be too difficult. Like I said, Jane's F-18 modelled this in their Harpoon. And it seems rather effective there. I don't know, I'm just throwing ideas out for future improvements. :8 |
1) Did they just have the pop up mode, or does it actually make a difference? As I said, even we can probably put a fixed pop up mode, but it has to make a difference (and the correct one) to matter.
2) I don't know how the F-18 ranks up in simulation fidelity, but a fighter simulation has the advantage that its physical models are designed for this, with optimized radar, fire control, aerodynamics and collision detection models. That along with the right assumptions entered for all the missiles and radars will allow them to model this correctly, in theory. We have, uh, pretty much none of these. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LuftWolf
Joined: 09 May 2005
Posts: 1872
Location: Free New York
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 16, 2006 2:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
1) The Harpoon cannot be added to the P-3 by modders, unless there is someone out there much more clever than the rest of us.
2) All kinds of capability can be added to the individual weapons that are already in the game. Amizaur's SS-N-27 Two Stage ASM is a perfect example. In the original version of this missile, it included a pop-up phase, as well as evasive maneovering. These advanced features were removed to make the missile easier for the AI to use and more reliable from a scripting perspective.
So remember, features like pop-up can be added to missiles (just wait until you guys get the full advanced torpedo mods  ), but its important to remember two things: 1) Does it actually add anything to missile performance in game terms? 2) Can the AI use it without consistently causing the weapon to run errantly?
There is so much that can be done with every aspect of DW to be honest... too bad I'm not smart enough to start a for-profit company based around such an endevor.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LuftWolf
Joined: 09 May 2005
Posts: 1872
Location: Free New York
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 16, 2006 4:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
Yeah, so I was wrong, maybe the Harpoon can be added, but at what cost?
See the poll thread I just started... :know: |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mau
Joined: 11 Jun 2005
Posts: 189
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 16, 2006 8:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
Is the SS-N-22 Sunburn has or kept the weaving capability at the end like in RL? I didn't check that one.
Now for the SS-N-27 as you know there are 5 different versions:
3M-51E with the dart at the end (mach 2.9 and weaving)
3M-51E1 which is subsonic from the start to the end (slightly better range than the 51E
3M-14 land attack capability
3M-92E1 (or something like that) against sub
3M-92E2 against sub as well
as per the Harpoon, I'm all for it as long as we don't compromise too much. If not them I prefer to just keep the Maverick.
I am all for realism.
But understand your hard work on this Luftwolf and again we are very greatful to you!
Happy Easter!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
