Google
Web
This Site


News Feeds











This is our archive forum. It contains posts from 1999 to 2003. If you prefer, you may participate in our current COMBATSIM.COM Forum




  
my profile | register | search | faq | forum home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
»  COMBATSIM.COM ARCHIVE FORUM   » Site-Related Discussions   » Article Feedback   » Feature: The Warship Database Project V6.5

   
Author Topic: Feature: The Warship Database Project V6.5
Editor
Moderator
Member # 2239

posted 05-23-2000 12:30 PM     Profile for Editor   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote

Feature: The Warship Database Project Version 6.5

------------------
Ed Reddy
Managing Editor
COMBATSIM.COM


Posts: 406 | From: COMBATSIM.COM | Registered: Jan 2000  |  IP: Logged
Abrams
Member
Member # 2631

posted 05-23-2000 03:15 PM     Profile for Abrams   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
I'm glad Warship has improved Fleet Command to its state right now. I was a beta tester from the beginning of the project and what the editor said, he's only skimmed the surface of what the Warship project offers. I remember in the beginning when we found out that Jane's mixed up the sub decoy and the ship decoy, so they never worked. We also figured out how to get the missiles to go for the chaff in the early stages but we couldn't keep the missiles to follow it once they've found it. Anyways, good job Warship.


Posts: 168 | From: NAS Pensacola, FL, USA | Registered: Jan 2000  |  IP: Logged
scrapser
Member
Member # 606

posted 05-24-2000 09:40 AM     Profile for scrapser   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Good article. I liked reading that the SSM's and ASM's are detected at more realistic ranges. By the same token, are ship detection values reworked as well? For example, if an action group is below the horizon both visually and on radar (including airborne radar), then should you be undetectable?

One of my gripes with the original was that you could have everything shut down and still the game would become "Missile Command" with a huge incoming salvo of anti-ship missiles (not to forget that the target ships would just sit there and do nothing).

I'd like to see scenarios where all you have for intelligence is that there's an enemy surface group "out there" and it's up to you to detect them and set up an approach/attack while trying to remain undetected yourself. This seems a more realistic start than already knowing approximately where everything is and simply reacting.

Feedback would be welcome!

-scrapser


Posts: 195 | From: Washington, DC | Registered: Oct 1999  |  IP: Logged
Abrams
Member
Member # 2631

posted 05-24-2000 09:46 PM     Profile for Abrams   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
The ships kinda have their RCS working, meaning jammers can prevent the ship from being detected and the radar ranges have been reduced so that they simulate over the horizon effects. I agree the original seemed like missile command. before CM's had a 20% change of working correctly!
Posts: 168 | From: NAS Pensacola, FL, USA | Registered: Jan 2000  |  IP: Logged
Kurt Plummer
Member
Member # 358

posted 05-25-2000 06:54 AM     Profile for Kurt Plummer   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Hey Ho,

This probably isn't a fair question to ask (I don't have the game) but three questions:

1. RT
Do any of the units employ remote targeting (say proximity flyby on the guidance platform or arrival-at-X timing requirement to get auto-handoff coordinates...)?

ASST from an S-3/SH-60B/P-3 or Nimrod with either 'smart' or 'dumb' (GPS orientation) gate-handing to a Tornado/A-6/F-18 flight can extend the fourships downrange launch footprint, selectivity (APS-137B ISAR) and even it's salvo numbers (Tornado's only have two 'smart' rails for the Sea Eagle, while fuel can also be critical if you have to monkey around.

For the Russians, this also extends to the missiles themselves. I believe either the Kingfish or the Sunburn have linked-targeting capabilities.

For helos and particularly PC type craft, it's also the ability to steer the emission line away from bearing-X back to the shooters.

2. Decoys.
Do any of the aircraft get sophisticated decoys like the TAAED or the Loralei/ASTE kinematic flare? I realize it's just glitz but to see a flare pop, fly alongside your airframe and then gradually curve away while drawing an 'active' (rocket) plume is neat. So two a 100 meters of 'neaner neaner NEEEEE-ner! explode behind me on rf homing missiles going after my Gilligan (this would be applicable to both the B-1B and the JAS-39 btw).

3. Rf Ducting
The ability to see through an air corridor to longer than normal ranges and/or lower than normal popup acquistion heights, including 'below the horizon' on the naval threat.

I /think/ it uses the anaprop lines like a tropobounce 'channel' between air and sea but gives you upwards of 50% more range.

4. Active Hydro Defense.
I forget the program name but one of the more interesting test programs I've seen involves laying or dragging floating explosive relays like a giant primachord and then detonating it just before an AShM passes overhead.

The wall-of-water is again 'pretty to look at' and more importantly, effectively destabilizes the weapon into the drink and because it isn't directly tied to the protected hull-LOS is not as vulnerable to late-acquistion, secondary-threat servicing delays or close-aboard warhead shock effects as conventional CIWS.

Together with conventional rf beaconating it also provides you with a strategic choice: hunt the bad guys 100nm over the horizon or play it 'close to the boat' at home.


Just some thoughts...


Posts: 672 | From: | Registered: Sep 1999  |  IP: Logged
WarshipFC
unregistered

posted 05-25-2000 09:16 AM       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Hi this is Warship the WDP Designer..

I dont frequent this Forum so if you have any question concerning the WDP please come over to the WDP website at http://members.xoom.com/Warship100/WDP/index.html or use my official email address at WarshipFC@bellsouth.net. Thanks for your interest in this ongoing project.

Sincerely,
WarshipFC


IP: Logged
Abrams
Member
Member # 2631

posted 05-25-2000 02:28 PM     Profile for Abrams   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Kurt,

I take it you haven't read the remarks about this game here or else where. The game isn't that advance to have all that modeled, although Warship is trying to compensate for these things!

1) They have super radars that can find targets at max range no matter what the target is and how big the RCS is. So you don't need to link up the missiles to give them over the horizon data.

2) The decoys could be sophicated but the 3D art of them just shows them as a normal chaff (kinda like what you would see a plane shoot off). You can edit how powerful the effect the decoy has on a missile. So that all depends on how you edit the database.

3) Not exactly sure what you mean by RF ducting but I'll try my best to answer it. You can see everything that moves (or doesn't, hovering helicopters) at max range. The horizon had no effect on the radars at all. They have super radars that detected targets at max range, like I said in the first statement.

4) Wow that sounds interesting! The only decoys that ships carry (not all of them do I believe, at least in the normal version without the Warship Database in they didn't) are ones to decoy torpedos. Until I found out that Jane's switched the ship decoy with the subs' and got it working right, torps were a guarenteed killing weapon in the game. They (ship decoy) work with good success if you can get the torp to do a tail chase with your ship.

I hope this answers your questions. ;-)

[This message has been edited by Abrams (edited 05-26-2000).]


Posts: 168 | From: NAS Pensacola, FL, USA | Registered: Jan 2000  |  IP: Logged
Kurt Plummer
Member
Member # 358

posted 05-26-2000 01:57 AM     Profile for Kurt Plummer   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Thanks Warship, Abrahms...


Kurt


Posts: 672 | From: | Registered: Sep 1999  |  IP: Logged
shooter923
Member
Member # 4958

posted 05-30-2000 06:50 PM     Profile for shooter923   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
For those of those interested. One of the complaints voiced in this article is the lack of campaign(s). Good point. One that people are trying to fix. But writing a good belivable single scenario is tough. Writing a good belivable, balanced campaign is murder. I know. I partaly wrote two and then through them away. Perfection is tough.

Be patent man. They are comming!


Posts: 1 | From: Austin, TX, USA | Registered: May 2000  |  IP: Logged

All times are MST (US)  

   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | COMBATSIM.COM Home

© COMBATSIM.COM, INC. All Rights Reserved.

Powered by Infopop Corporation
Ultimate Bulletin Board 6.04b



Home of the VMF-124 Death's Head Virtual Marine Squadron
Home of the VMF-124 Death's Head Squad