Is it my tactics or the game?

[Flipper135]

Okay dudes, this is ridiculous!
The Mk37 cannot be as bad as it is in this game and the Soviet subs and commanders cannot be as aware as they are in this game.
I just had one victor dodge 12 Mk37 torpedoes by basically cranking over the rudder to 30 degrees and accelerating to flank.
The Mk37 cannot catch him and between the noise countermeasure and the knuckles he spontaneously created not one of the 12 torpedoes hit him.
I had 4 torpedoes chasing him with two under wire control to try to intercept him and even locking on at under 200 yards from a front flank, he was able to spoof it while being chased by 2 or more active homing torps.
One recommendation I will make is that they need to add depth information into the target data. When something like a Victor 1 is playing roller coaster at 30+ knots while driving from 700 ft to 150 ft in a continuous random manner, it is very difficult to assign the torpedoes to the right depth if I have to check the Condition screen all the time while trying to control two torpedoes at the same time.
I love this game but some things just cannot be accurate, did I mention that I was in the baffles of the Victor less than 2000yds when I shot and he still spoofed me. My only saving grace was the he initially ran away then starting circling so there was virtually no chance for me to be destroyed by a torpedo with a cut wire.
The Victor 1 never even tried to target me nor did the other 3 Victor 1's or the November sub.
I am not sure why they even offered the 1968 campaign since the weapons are so poor and the enemy has the situational awareness of the Starship Enterprise, I mean like WOW! 3 different torpedoes approaching a submarine from 3 different angles and yet he was able to detect them and spoof them while traveling in a circle at flank speed.
Okay sub guys... What can I do to win this scenario? Why would the game give me a mission that was impossible to complete with the ship and weapons I had.
I would probably had better luck using the outside view and ramming the Victor but I don't think that would accomplish the mission objectives.
Any help??? 😭
I should note that I am playing the 1968 campaign in a Sturgeon class sub.

[rokvam]

Originally posted by makobyte:

Okay dudes, this is ridiculous!
The Mk37 cannot be as bad as it is in this game and the Soviet subs and commanders cannot be as aware as they are in this game.
I just had one victor dodge 12 Mk37 torpedoes by basically cranking over the rudder to 30 degrees and accelerating to flank.
The Mk37 cannot catch him and between the noise countermeasure and the knuckles he spontaneously created not one of the 12 torpedoes hit him.
I had 4 torpedoes chasing him with two under wire control to try to intercept him and even locking on at under 200 yards from a front flank, he was able to spoof it while being chased by 2 or more active homing torps.
One recommendation I will make is that they need to add depth information into the target data. When something like a Victor 1 is playing roller coaster at 30+ knots while driving from 700 ft to 150 ft in a continuous random manner, it is very difficult to assign the torpedoes to the right depth if I have to check the Condition screen all the time while trying to control two torpedoes at the same time.
I love this game but some things just cannot be accurate, did I mention that I was in the baffles of the Victor less than 2000yds when I shot and he still spoofed me. My only saving grace was the he initially ran away then starting circling so there was virtually no chance for me to be destroyed by a torpedo with a cut wire.
The Victor 1 never even tried to target me nor did the other 3 Victor 1's or the November sub.
I am not sure why they even offered the 1968 campaign since the weapons are so poor and the enemy has the situational awareness of the Starship Enterprise, I mean like WOW! 3 different torpedoes approaching a submarine from 3 different angles and yet he was able to detect them and spoof them while traveling in a circle at flank speed.
Okay sub guys... What can I do to win this scenario? Why would the game give me a mission that was impossible to complete with the ship and weapons I had.
I would probably had better luck using the outside view and ramming the Victor but I don't think that would accomplish the mission objectives.
Any help??? 😭
I should note that I am playing the 1968 campaign in a Sturgeon class sub.

I am sorry to say that the mk37 was a poor performer when it came to speed, and this made it a poor weapon against high performance subs. A Victor, in real life, could just turn away increase speed to full or flank, and he would out run it.

In the years I sailed the Norwegian Kobben class we normally had a weapons load out of 6 wire guided TP613 for anti surface only, and we had 2 mk37 mod II's for use against submarines. It was no secret amongst the crew that the only subs we would probably stand a chance against in a war time scenario, were the older diesel eletrics the Russians had, because they could not out run the torpedo. So my feeling is, that even though this is not by any means a realistic submarine combat game, the mk37 is portrayed "accurately" enough.

As for ramming the enemy... In real life, ramming another submarine would most likely cause catastrophic dammage to both submarines, at least with speed involved. But in the game, no dammage is taken, No matter how high your speed is upon impact.

The weapons available in the '68 campaign are poor performers, all around, making this campaign the most challenging in my book.

If they "vamp" up the mk37 to make the game easier, I am afraid it will ruin the game.

As to tactical advice... Get really really close from the side or in front of the target, and shoot them at point blank range :-) Also be prepared to set the torpedo to active emideately after launch because the enemy will have a lesser chance to get away.

A shot from point blank range in the baffles might also work, but If the target then suddenly speeds up, your torp will be left in its wake.

As you probably can tell... I stick to the '84 campaign :-)

-Dolphin 38

[Flipper135]

These was a version of the Mk37 called the NT37 which is both faster and has a longer range, these were available in the 6's and used until the 90's. A few of these would offer some chance against high perfomance submarines.
I will say that afte working with the Mk37 and Mk16, the Mk48 is a breeze.

[rokvam]

Originally posted by makobyte:

These was a version of the Mk37 called the NT37 which is both faster and has a longer range, these were available in the 6's and used until the 90's. A few of these would offer some chance against high perfomance submarines.
I will say that afte working with the Mk37 and Mk16, the Mk48 is a breeze.

But the NT37 is not the version of the mk37 used in this game. In the game it's the slow "* underperforming" version we are forced to use right?

*When I say underperforming, I am quite aware that the torp worked well against the slower submarines with TOP speed below 20 kts...

-Dolphin 38

[Irving Mainway]

NT37 wasn't availible in the 60s and was still under development as of 68. One of the other problems is that the Mk 37 had a depth limit of around 1000 ft which was exceeded by all but the oldest Soviet Diesel-powered subs.

NT-37 is quite interesting though, started out as the Mk37C program, used otto-fuel propulsion from the Mk 46 torpedo and was intended to be deployed in kit form to be fitted to in-service Mk 37s pier-side or maybe even aboard a tender. By the time it was through its testing and ready for production however, the Mk 48s were starting to enter service which for the most part made the 37C unneccessary.

By all accounts the Mk 37 is every bit as ineffective as portrayed (it was designed in the mid-50s with little appreciation for just how radical the improvements of nuclear propulsion were going to be) but isn't quite entirely useless, its just extremely difficult to use it effectively against nuclear powered subs.

One thing I will add though is that baffle detection seems to be much more keen than you would think it ought to be (subs hearing torpedoes bearing 180 behind them) and this makes them speed up an destroy your intercept in situations where you wouldn't think they'd be able to hear the incoming fish.

My suggetsion (and this has worked for me before against Victor Is in 68) is to get in as close as possible (<1000 yards) into his baffles and to keep the torpedo in pre-enable / transit mode for as long as you possibly can. As long as he's not going faster than 14 knots the fish should eventually close on him. When I can I don't enable the torpedo (seeking + 24knot speed) until its less <100 yards. This will preclude him from being able to speed up in time to avoid the fish and with any luck he'll flood out after the first hit. If not there's still a prety good chance he'll be crippled and on his way up to the surface.

[Dirty Rotten Flieger]

Vitcor I are extremely rare in the 68 campaign. I like having a rare high performance enemy sub to worry about. You have to lay an abush for them from the front and surprise them at close range . I have done this a few times but once they know you are there there should be able to leave .

Most of the your enemies in 68 campaign are desiel electric subs that you can kill easily.

I prefer the 68 campaign because the 84 campaign is waytoo easy with almost no challenege at all.

[t(O__ot)]

Like it matters that this was in regards to the mk 37.... All Nato weapons suck (when the player is shooting them). Not when the A.I. Shoots them though.

Enemy subs ALWAYS outperform your torpedoes because apparently it's FUN TO LOSE. The reason I found this thread was in pure frustration after having played "the giants"-mission, in a 688i with adcaps against a November with ugsts.

I don't know whether the game counts UGSTs as a single torpedo, it's not, as it's been upgraded beyond recognition throughout the years but even so, that November fired one single torpedo at a depth of about 300ft or shallower and that thing dove 600 ft when it passed me. 15 minutes later I was dead (and so was he).

While writing this I thought, maybe I'm just being emotional and petty, so I dove into the same mission in a CLEARLY superior boat, the; Seawolf. Immediately fired all tubes at the enemy (which later turned out to be a Shang. A FLIPPING SHANG!). That Shang shot two torpedoes one basically in the wrong direction and one that sort of, kind of graced my original path at a depth of about 200 ft.

By the time it passed me I was facing away from it at flank speed, 1200 ft below it and relatively far from it. That thing dove straight down for me.

AS A SIDE NOTE THE FLIPPING SHANG WAS STILL SUCCESSFULLY DODGING MY TORPEDOES BY THEN... ALL 8 OF THEM. IN DIFFERENT CONFIGURATIONS OF ACTIVE AND PASSIVE.

Now, I know the UGST have often been considered superior until the Adcaps/Spearfish but can anyone say the same about the Yu-9? I'm asking sincerely.

Regardless, I call absolute and utter bull on what happened next. That torpedo ignored 2 moss(es?), 10 decoys, countless depth changes (from surface to what must have been inches from crush depth) and countless knuckles. It followed me until it's fuel ran out. HAD I BEEN IN A SLOWER OR LESS DEEP DIVING BOAT, I WOULD HAVE BEEN SUNK.

Did I forget to mention that this was on casual difficulty? I just lowered it from """REALISTIC""" and I honestly can't tell the difference.

I'm so disappointed in this game. It's been so much fun at times (and a way to channel my growing interest for submarines and U-boats) but I'm absolutely allergic to Bull and this game has so much of it. I wouldn't be so frustrated if the game was garbage through and through but it's got so much good going for it but the flaws really hurt it. It's like a gifted star athlete doing drugs and partying away the talent.

Also, I feel the people defending it are so incredibly inconsistent in their defense of it.

One second a feature is being defended for being realistic despite being a bit annoying and detracting from the game but in the same sentence I've seen people defend other annoying features because the game is suppose to be arcadey and fun.

You can't have it both ways. It's either suppose to be a realistic sub sim or it's the battlefield of submarine games, but you're not allowed to defend it's flaws with both of those points in the same breath.

So, TLDR: No, it's not you, it's the game and that's a shame.

[VanZan_75]

Originally posted by t(O__ot):

Like it matters that this was in regards to the mk 37.... All Nato weapons suck (when the player is shooting them). Not when the A.I. Shoots them though.

Enemy subs ALWAYS outperform your torpedoes because apparently it's FUN TO LOSE. The reason I found this thread was in pure frustration after having played "the giants"-mission, in a 688i with adcaps against a November with ugsts.

I don't know whether the game counts UGSTs as a single torpedo, it's not, as it's been upgraded beyond recognition throughout the years but even so, that November fired one single torpedo at a depth of about 300ft or shallower and that thing dove 600 ft when it passed me. 15 minutes later I was dead (and so was he).

While writing this I thought, maybe I'm just being emotional and petty, so I dove into the same mission in a CLEARLY superior boat, the; Seawolf. Immediately fired all tubes at the enemy (which later turned out to be a Shang. A FLIPPING SHANG!). That Shang shot two torpedoes one basically in the wrong direction and one that sort of, kind of graced my original path at a depth of about 200 ft.

By the time it passed me I was facing away from it at flank speed, 1200 ft below it and relatively far from it. That thing dove straight down for me.

AS A SIDE NOTE THE FLIPPING SHANG WAS STILL SUCCESSFULLY DODGING MY TORPEDOES BY THEN... ALL 8 OF THEM. IN DIFFERENT CONFIGURATIONS OF ACTIVE AND PASSIVE.

Now, I know the UGST have often been considered superior until the Adcaps/Spearfish but can anyone say the same about the Yu-9? I'm asking sincerely.

Regardless, I call absolute and utter bull on what happened next. That torpedo ignored 2 moss(es?), 10 decoys, countless depth changes (from surface to what must have been inches from crush depth) and countless knuckles. It followed me until it's fuel ran out. HAD I BEEN IN A SLOWER OR LESS DEEP DIVING BOAT, I WOULD HAVE BEEN SUNK.

Did I forget to mention that this was on casual difficulty? I just lowered it from """REALISTIC""" and I honestly can't tell the difference.

I'm so disappointed in this game. It's been so much fun at times (and a way to channel my growing interest for submarines and U-boats) but I'm absolutely allergic to Bull and this game has so much of it. I wouldn't be so frustrated if the game was garbage through and through but it's got so much good going for it but the flaws really hurt it. It's like a gifted star athlete doing drugs and partying away the talent.

Also, I feel the people defending it are so incredibly inconsistent in their defense of it.

One second a feature is being defended for being realistic despite being a bit annoying and detracting from the game but in the same sentence I've seen people defend other annoying features because the game is suppose to be arcadey and fun.

You can't have it both ways. It's either suppose to be a realistic sub sim or it's the battlefield of submarine games, but you're not allowed to defend it's flaws with both of those points in the same breath.

So, TLDR: No, it's not you, it's the game and that's a shame.

To be honest , if a " Game " stressed me this much , i'd quit playing said game .

[Twelvefield]

This is a game where the action is designed to be a thrill ride rather than a tactical sim. I enjoy the 68 campaign more than the 84 one because I like having to choose my targets and battleground carefully. I'm not Schwarzenegger laying waste to the police station, I'm John McClane picking off the terrorists one by one.

If the situation becomes too dire, just bug out. That usually isn't hard since even though the AI has superior "powers" in the game, the 68 weapons are easily fooled. Unfortunately, the exploits against the AI that the player can use in 84 campaign are to my mind exaggerated in the 68 campaign: run silent and deep and when you are detected charge the enemy head-on and sprint inside his activation range then blast away. It's far from realistic at that point, but there are no shortage of Hollywood movies with Kelsey Grammar-level actors where the subs do pretty much that.

[t(O__ot)]

Originally posted by Peppa-Pig:

Originally posted by t(O__ot):

Like it matters that this was in regards to the mk 37.... All Nato weapons suck (when the player is shooting them). Not when the A.I. Shoots them though.

Enemy subs ALWAYS outperform your torpedoes because apparently it's FUN TO LOSE. The reason I found this thread was in pure frustration after having played "the giants"-mission, in a 688i with adcaps against a November with ugsts.

I don't know whether the game counts UGSTs as a single torpedo, it's not, as it's been upgraded beyond recognition throughout the years but even so, that November fired one single torpedo at a depth of about 300ft or shallower and that thing dove 600 ft when it passed me. 15 minutes later I was dead (and so was he).

While writing this I thought, maybe I'm just being emotional and petty, so I dove into the same mission in a CLEARLY superior boat, the; Seawolf. Immediately fired all tubes at the enemy (which later turned out to be a Shang. A FLIPPING SHANG!). That Shang shot two torpedoes one basically in the wrong direction and one that sort of, kind of graced my original path at a depth of about 200 ft.

By the time it passed me I was facing away from it at flank speed, 1200 ft below it and relatively far from it. That thing dove straight down for me.

AS A SIDE NOTE THE FLIPPING SHANG WAS STILL SUCCESSFULLY DODGING MY TORPEDOES BY THEN... ALL 8 OF THEM. IN DIFFERENT CONFIGURATIONS OF ACTIVE AND PASSIVE.

Now, I know the UGST have often been considered superior until the Adcaps/Spearfish but can anyone say the same about the Yu-9? I'm asking sincerely.

Regardless, I call absolute and utter bull on what happened next. That torpedo ignored 2 moss(es?), 10 decoys, countless depth changes (from surface to what must have been inches from crush depth) and countless knuckles. It followed me until it's fuel ran out. HAD I BEEN IN A SLOWER OR LESS DEEP DIVING BOAT, I WOULD HAVE BEEN SUNK.

Did I forget to mention that this was on casual difficulty? I just lowered it from """REALISTIC""" and I honestly can't tell the difference.

I'm so disappointed in this game. It's been so much fun at times (and a way to channel my growing interest for submarines and U-boats) but I'm absolutely allergic to Bull and this game has so much of it. I wouldn't be so frustrated if the game was garbage through and through but it's got so much good going for it but the flaws really hurt it. It's like a gifted star athlete doing drugs and partying away the talent.

Also, I feel the people defending it are so incredibly inconsistent in their defense of it.

One second a feature is being defended for being realistic despite being a bit annoying and detracting from the game but in the same sentence I've seen people defend other annoying features because the game is suppose to be arcadey and fun.

You can't have it both ways. It's either suppose to be a realistic sub sim or it's the battlefield of submarine games, but you're not allowed to defend it's flaws with both of those points in the same breath.

So, TLDR: No, it's not you, it's the game and that's a shame.

To be honest , if a " Game " stressed me this much , i'd quit playing said game .

Haha, you're not wrong. It did sound more high-strung than I intended though.

The thing is, I like this games campaign (where I'm not only shooting at A.I. subs) and there aren't that many games that do what this does. I've had a ton of fun playing it and it plays to an other interest of mine.

That's why I'm playing it.

The sub to sub combat and A.I. does infuriate me quite often, though. The game brings both pain and joy. I just wish it was more of the later and less of the former.

[Cheap_Trick]

For that reason alone...skip the 68 campaign, or edit the weapons file to boost the mk37 characteristics

[stuart666]

Im sorry to say, the Mk37 was actually worse than its modelled in this game, which is effectively buffed in performance. Because they buffed the sonar of the Russian boats, its impossible to get in the sweet spot and nail them from behind as they did in real life. The British Tigerfish was little better, and they had to use the same identical tactics, not unlike you see in the Hunt for Red October. Get in the baffles, plug them from behind before they can accelerate away from the fish.

I did a mod some years ago that fixed all these things. Why nobody else has restructured the game to be more like reality Ive no idea. The data is all out there.

[Cheap_Trick]

If you're determined to play the 68 campaign, you're better off going into the sensor file and weapons file and make your own edits/adjustments (w/o going way overboard with the numbers). Once you've done that, the 68 can be quite pleasant.