I'm curious whether having multiple torpedoes in the water concurrently has any effect on the probability of any of them getting a hit.

 

The reason I ask is that I've noticed that if I have multiple ASW assets attacking an AI sub and they launch torpedos before previous torpedos have hit or expired - or even just one platform, if it fires multiple times before its first shot hits or expires - then none of the torpedos will ever hit, and rarely even achieve near-misses. In comparison, if I deny further shots until the current shot is "done", then I see a noticably higher rate of hits and near-misses. So, I'm wondering if having excess torpedos running around somehow decreases all of their probabilities of hit - or if there is some other reason involved.

 

It also raises the question of whether counter-firing torpedoes would be a defensive strategy, by virtue of reducing the PH of incoming torpedos - at least in the context of the game, where there are -to my knowledge- no other counter-measures available to the player.

 

By the way, a couple of semi-related questions about terminology:

 

1. What is the display called that comes up in place of the Report Window and provides an animation of missiles or torpedos reaching a target ship or sub, and either hitting or destructing in the vicinity. A further aside: Does that display indicate in any way whether misses are due to being shot down by point defenses or due to being spoofed or simply missing? I've read discussions where people seemed to be distinguishing between those cases, and so I'm curious how they can tell the difference.

 

2. What is the conventional meaning of the term "near-miss"? I've seen it used in contexts where it seemed to mean, "a hit that almost missed" (i.e. - "nearly a miss"), and alternatively, "a miss that was near enough that it caused some damage" (i.e. - a miss that was very close to being a hit). My own understanding was the latter meaning, but... ?

I'm curious whether having multiple torpedoes in the water concurrently has any effect on the probability of any of them getting a hit. The reason I ask is that I've noticed that if I have multiple ASW assets attacking an AI sub and they launch torpedos before previous torpedos have hit or expired - or even just one platform, if it fires multiple times before its first shot hits or expires - then none of the torpedos will ever hit, and rarely even achieve near-misses. In comparison, if I deny further shots until the current shot is "done", then I see a noticably higher rate of hits and near-misses. So, I'm wondering if having excess torpedos running around somehow decreases all of their probabilities of hit - or if there is some other reason involved. It also raises the question of whether counter-firing torpedoes would be a defensive strategy, by virtue of reducing the PH of incoming torpedos - at least in the context of the game, where there are -to my knowledge- no other counter-measures available to the player.

 

I have to admit to wondering about that myself, though most probably because it does matter in real life. There, multiple acoustic homing torpedoes can potentially interfere with one another. In HCE, I have a feeling that it doesn't matter. I haven't observed any relationship between multiple launches and hit probability.

 

By the way, a couple of semi-related questions about terminology:

1. What is the display called that comes up in place of the Report Window and provides an animation of missiles or torpedos reaching a target ship or sub, and either hitting or destructing in the vicinity. A further aside: Does that display indicate in any way whether misses are due to being shot down by point defenses or due to being spoofed or simply missing? I've read discussions where people seemed to be distinguishing between those cases, and so I'm curious how they can tell the difference.

 

We generally just call it the "animation". It shows missile or torpedo hits, misses and point defense hits (against an incoming missile). It does not distinguish between whether a miss was caused by spoofing (successful countermeasures) or would not have hit anyway (just a bad roll of the die).

 

2. What is the conventional meaning of the term "near-miss"? I've seen it used in contexts where it seemed to mean, "a hit that almost missed" (i.e. - "nearly a miss"), and alternatively, "a miss that was near enough that it caused some damage" (i.e. - a miss that was very close to being a hit). My own understanding was the latter meaning, but... ?

 

In conventional terms, a "near miss" generally refers to a miss that was near enough to have caused some damage, such as a bomb or missile that does not directly strike the target but is close enough to have inflicted damage by shrapnel or blast. In HCE terms, there is no such beast, as everything is either a solid hit or a clean miss.

The only game effect multiple torpedoes has is trapping the target. If your have weapons approaching the target from four different directions it is harder to run away than if there is one torpedo from which the AI can try to turn and burn away from.

 

Hit percentage is not affected.

 

The animations show as Brad said if the weapon is close enough to the target that the hit calculation is run (including point defense). The exception being launch animation for standoff weapons of course.

 

I don't know if counter-firing is going to help you against the current incoming torpedo but it will make it less likely the AI will be lobbing another torpedo against you on its own terms (i.e. you are successfully complicating the AI's tactics, the AI will tend to run from your torpedo instead of maintaining contact with you and lobbing more torpedoes. The AI may even lose the exact contact it had with you while trying to evade).

Speaking of the animation and hit calculation, there is another thing that I've always wondered about, but never really figured out:

 

After a ship has been hit and damaged enough that it is sinking, or at least on fire and presumably heavily damaged, during an attack, it often happens that many separate subsequent missile animations pop up for that same ship - even when all incoming missiles were fired in the same volley and were targeted at other ships in the group. This seems to have (or produce) the undesirable effect that a bunch of additional missiles (more than originally targeted on that ship) get wasted on a sinking target, instead of going against their other intended targets.

 

So, I'm wondering what is actually going on here, and I suspected a couple of possibilities, and am curious if any are correct:

 

1. The fire on the ship somehow confuses the targeting of the remaining missiles or torpedos, and "attracts" them to that sinking ship, diverting them from their intended targets... or...

 

2. The AI is smart enough that it does not intercept incoming missiles that are targeting an already-sinking ship, and thus a whole lot more missiles get through to hit the ship than would normally be the case (although this does not explain having more missile hits being animated than the number of missiles actually targeted on that ship in the first place).

 

Anyway, if a sinking or on-fire ship really does divert missiles and torpedos from other targets in the simulation, then I need to account for that in some way. The Catch-22 is that the obvious ploy of targeting fewer ships in a volley and/or just sending in fewer missiles, means that the volley will be less likely to overwhelm the defenses (read, more likely to get defeated). So, what's a weapons guy to do?

In conventional terms, a "near miss" generally refers to a miss that was near enough to have caused some damage, such as a bomb or missile that does not directly strike the target but is close enough to have inflicted damage by shrapnel or blast. In HCE terms, there is no such beast, as everything is either a solid hit or a clean miss.

FWIW, when I was using the term "near-miss" here, I was trying to describe the situation where the shot(s) came close enough to activate the animation display, yet did not score a hit - as opposed to a shot that didn't even come close enough to activate the animation. Is there a more conventional term or terms to use to describe these "almost hits" versus the "not even close" shots?

Speaking of the animation and hit calculation, there is another thing that I've always wondered about, but never really figured out: After a ship has been hit and damaged enough that it is sinking, or at least on fire and presumably heavily damaged, during an attack, it often happens that many separate subsequent missile animations pop up for that same ship - even when all incoming missiles were fired in the same volley and were targeted at other ships in the group. This seems to have (or produce) the undesirable effect that a bunch of additional missiles (more than originally targeted on that ship) get wasted on a sinking target, instead of going against their other intended targets. So, I'm wondering what is actually going on here, and I suspected a couple of possibilities, and am curious if any are correct:

 

1. The fire on the ship somehow confuses the targeting of the remaining missiles or torpedos, and "attracts" them to that sinking ship, diverting them from their intended targets... or...

2. The AI is smart enough that it does not intercept incoming missiles that are targeting an already-sinking ship, and thus a whole lot more missiles get through to hit the ship than would normally be the case (although this does not explain having more missile hits being animated than the number of missiles actually targeted on that ship in the first place).

 

Anyway, if a sinking or on-fire ship really does divert missiles and torpedos from other targets in the simulation, then I need to account for that in some way. The Catch-22 is that the obvious ploy of targeting fewer ships in a volley and/or just sending in fewer missiles, means that the volley will be less likely to overwhelm the defenses (read, more likely to get defeated). So, what's a weapons guy to do?

 

Were your missiles launched against specific targets or were they BOL?

FWIW, when I was using the term "near-miss" here, I was trying to describe the situation where the shot(s) came close enough to activate the animation display, yet did not score a hit - as opposed to a shot that didn't even come close enough to activate the animation. Is there a more conventional term or terms to use to describe these "almost hits" versus the "not even close" shots?

 

The animations only show "almost hits". (This is starting to sound like an Abbott and Costello routine).

Speaking of the animation and hit calculation, there is another thing that I've always wondered about, but never really figured out: After a ship has been hit and damaged enough that it is sinking, or at least on fire and presumably heavily damaged, during an attack, it often happens that many separate subsequent missile animations pop up for that same ship - even when all incoming missiles were fired in the same volley and were targeted at other ships in the group. This seems to have (or produce) the undesirable effect that a bunch of additional missiles (more than originally targeted on that ship) get wasted on a sinking target, instead of going against their other intended targets. So, I'm wondering what is actually going on here, and I suspected a couple of possibilities, and am curious if any are correct:

 

1. The fire on the ship somehow confuses the targeting of the remaining missiles or torpedos, and "attracts" them to that sinking ship, diverting them from their intended targets... or...

2. The AI is smart enough that it does not intercept incoming missiles that are targeting an already-sinking ship, and thus a whole lot more missiles get through to hit the ship than would normally be the case (although this does not explain having more missile hits being animated than the number of missiles actually targeted on that ship in the first place).

 

Anyway, if a sinking or on-fire ship really does divert missiles and torpedos from other targets in the simulation, then I need to account for that in some way. The Catch-22 is that the obvious ploy of targeting fewer ships in a volley and/or just sending in fewer missiles, means that the volley will be less likely to overwhelm the defenses (read, more likely to get defeated). So, what's a weapons guy to do?

 

Were your missiles launched against specific targets or were they BOL?

If you're asking about the general case (and not the specific situation that occurred the other night) then I can't say for sure about all the cases... but... it is highly probable that most of the situations were cases where the missiles were launched against specific targets. The reason for this estimate being simply that I rarely use the activation distance mode, due to it not working for me.

FWIW, when I was using the term "near-miss" here, I was trying to describe the situation where the shot(s) came close enough to activate the animation display, yet did not score a hit - as opposed to a shot that didn't even come close enough to activate the animation. Is there a more conventional term or terms to use to describe these "almost hits" versus the "not even close" shots?

 

The animations only show "almost hits". (This is starting to sound like an Abbott and Costello routine).

Maybe that explains some things!

 

Anyway, I was just asking if there is any conventional terminology used to describe/differentiate the two conditions - so as to make any discussions more concise... and less Abbott and Costello-esque.

FWIW, when I was using the term "near-miss" here,

That is the term I use. Sometimes I call the others far misses though I doubt very much that is a standard term, clear miss is also used on occasion.

The only game effect multiple torpedoes has is trapping the target. If your have weapons approaching the target from four different directions it is harder to run away than if there is one torpedo from which the AI can try to turn and burn away from.

 

Hit percentage is not affected.

If i'm desperate for an early kill and have plenty of torpedoes, I'll launch them in twos or threes, (particularly if the sub has got into range of my standoff weapons, which makes me very nervous as I'm probably in range of all of his weapons). Sometimes the first torpedo goes close (you see it glide past the target in the hit animation) but the second or third slams in for damage points. Even without a kill, the damage may significantly slow the sub or damage it sensors (I assume) and make your escape to safer waters easier, from where you launch attacks at your leisure.

 

I don't know if counter-firing is going to help you against the current incoming torpedo but it will make it less likely the AI will be lobbing another torpedo against you on its own terms (i.e. you are successfully complicating the AI's tactics, the AI will tend to run from your torpedo instead of maintaining contact with you and lobbing more torpedoes. The AI may even lose the exact contact it had with you while trying to evade).

If you are lucky (i've seen it maybe twice in three years of play) you sink the attacking sub, definitely worth while

Don Thomas

FWIW, when I was using the term "near-miss" here,

That is the term I use. Sometimes I call the others far misses though I doubt very much that is a standard term, clear miss is also used on occasion.

I'd say "near miss" and "clear miss" respectively.

I'd hope that with the near miss the torpedo has made a sonar fix on you but was unlucky and didn't get a hit, and that with the clear miss it never made contact.

Hmm, I might try a test with logging and see what comes of it

Don Thomas

The only game effect multiple torpedoes has is trapping the target. If your have weapons approaching the target from four different directions it is harder to run away than if there is one torpedo from which the AI can try to turn and burn away from.

 

Hit percentage is not affected.

If i'm desperate for an early kill and have plenty of torpedoes, I'll launch them in twos or threes, (particularly if the sub has got into range of my standoff weapons, which makes me very nervous as I'm probably in range of all of his weapons). Sometimes the first torpedo goes close (you see it glide past the target in the hit animation) but the second or third slams in for damage points. Even without a kill, the damage may significantly slow the sub or damage it sensors (I assume) and make your escape to safer waters easier, from where you launch attacks at your leisure.

 

I don't know if counter-firing is going to help you against the current incoming torpedo but it will make it less likely the AI will be lobbing another torpedo against you on its own terms (i.e. you are successfully complicating the AI's tactics, the AI will tend to run from your torpedo instead of maintaining contact with you and lobbing more torpedoes. The AI may even lose the exact contact it had with you while trying to evade).

If you are lucky (i've seen it maybe twice in three years of play) you sink the attacking sub, definitely worth while

Don Thomas

 

I've also seen it make the target sub speed up to evade, and then get a hard lock on it because I can hear it better, too. Then kill it with a followup shot, especially when I have SS-N-14s or VL ASRocs.

What is the display called that comes up in place of the Report Window and provides an animation of missiles or torpedos reaching a target ship or sub, and either hitting or destructing in the vicinity.

see game options (CTRL-K)