SeaQueen
Posts: 1451
Joined: 4/14/2007 From: Washington D.C. Status: offline
|
The problem is that at some point you have to make an assumption about the MPA's tactics regarding sonobuoy use. Most likely different nations and weapons systems use different tactics. Furthermore, the whole point of a wargame is to be able to experiment with tactics (including different patterns, active v. passive search, etc.). So, what's there right now is a sort of minimal set of behaviors to get it functional. If you want to go into more detail, you can take control manually. One of the things I think is cool about Command, is the increasing number of settings allowing one to define a given object's tactics, enabling one to take a more "hands off" approach and deal with increasingly large scenarios while still having the tactical flexibility to make meaningful decisions regarding weapons employment, sensor employment, etc. MPA just isn't quite there yet, I'm sure they'll get there though. Overall, I'm pretty happy with how things behave. quote:
ORIGINAL: Gizzmoe We don't actually need that if you would make the ASW Strike AI a bit more decisive ;) IMO it shouldn't be that a P-3 drops just a single passive sonobuoy on a six-minute old sub contact (probability diameter 3.3nm) and then waits 15-20 minutes before it drops the second one. Yes, sometimes it drops an active buoy, it's 50/50. And why not drop two buoys simultaneously more often at different depth settings?
|