Database question (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Operations series



Message

Brisbin -> Database question (3/18/2017 5:22:56 AM)

I just got the game and I am having fun with it. My question is shouldn't the Russian Titanium subs have higher hull strength? I mean if they can dive deeper wouldn't it mean that they could take more damage. The Harpoon games had the same problem. Also, how come the F22 and the Pak FA have the same agility as the Pak FA can move its exhaust in more directions than the up down movement of the F22?



ExNusquam -> RE: Database question (3/18/2017 3:18:27 PM)

As to the first question, the shaped charges on modern torpedoes don't really care about what metal is, they're going to puncture it regardless. Once watertight integrity is compromised, the boat is done. Here's a video of a shaped charge cutting through a 6+ inch wall like butter - and remember that even lightweight ASW weapons have 20x the explosive power. The boats just don't have enough (read - any) armor so the stronger metal doesn't have a direct effect on survivability. USSR boats with titanium hulls should have deeper operating depths than the US boats, allowing them to take advantage of deeper thermoclines or underwater terrain.

For the vectored thrust question...here's a briefing by a USAF Col. about operations against IAF Su-30MKI, and he compares the Sukhoi's 3D vectored thrust to the Raptor's 2D. His takeaway is that they're both equally useless. It's also important to note that the command agility number surmises both sustained and instantaneous turn rates, so an airplane with great instantaneous (vectored thrust fighters) may have the same value as an airplane with great sustained rate (F-22, Eurofighter).



mikmykWS -> RE: Database question (3/18/2017 3:28:17 PM)

Hi Brisbin

Could you demonstrate in a file a double hulled sub taking the same damage?

As far as Agility scores it can be a subjective thing with the community but for the most part we make objective calls based on what we know.

Perhaps in the future there will be a lua way to impact agility scores so we can get out of that business all together[:)]

Thanks!

Mike



SeaQueen -> RE: Database question (3/19/2017 2:13:34 AM)

Damage modeling is always a sketchy business. There are people at the Naval Undersea Warfare Center (NUWC) who spend their careers obsessing over it. I'm sure some people there could show you things that would amaze you.

For submarines, at the right depth, if the right pipe breaks in a submarine it might very easily sink to to the bottom and the hull might never be breached. The deep diving Alfa, theoretically, was more resistant to pressure, and might, particularly at shallower depths, be more resistant to certain types of damage (e.g. overpressure). There are other mechanisms by which a warhead might damage a submarine, though. Just the shock of an explosion transmitted through the hull can break pipes, causing it to sink without the hull being damaged at all. Command doesn't take all that into account. The damage model is an abstraction. It's the "good enough" solution, not necessarily the perfect solution. After ADCAP, the program to update the Mk48, I suspect that any theoretical advantages that the Alfa had on older Mk 48s were nullified. Hooray for spiral development!

As far as the agility modifiers, once again, they're intended to be approximate. An extra degree of freedom on the engine nozzles probably doesn't provide a decisive advantage for the PAK-FA vs. an F-22, particularly in the domain of combat that Command really captures best.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Brisbin

I just got the game and I am having fun with it. My question is shouldn't the Russian Titanium subs have higher hull strength? I mean if they can dive deeper wouldn't it mean that they could take more damage. The Harpoon games had the same problem. Also, how come the F22 and the Pak FA have the same agility as the Pak FA can move its exhaust in more directions than the up down movement of the F22?




ultradave -> RE: Database question (3/19/2017 6:10:34 PM)

Put simply (from someone in the submarine business) the thickness of steel to allow the deepest depth of modern submarines is nowhere near what would be required to stop the explosive power of a torpedo. And as SeaQueen above stated, the shock of nearby explosions can do considerable damage. Breach a seawater system and bad things begin to happen quickly. Possibly more quickly than can be mitigated, depending on what else is damaged (the ability to close hull valves being the biggest issue in that case).



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
2.828125