Sign in to follow this  
Keijo_Kalmakoura

Let´s talk about ASM(Anti-Ship Missle) Oppinions about it?

Alright, guys & girls lets talk about sea skimming surprises that will most likely find their way into War Thunder. I like to hear your oppinions about it, yes we all know water maps much be mutch larger! How they should be implemented in game most of them being fire and forget type!

c4papdtrdnru4jrvagp1.jpg

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An interesting question, obviously naval forces is still in development but with the recent expansion of ground forces to more modern (late cold war era) vehicles with rank 6, a logical conclusion would seem to be that NF would eventually follow suit, which would likely necessitate the need for including ASM/ASCMs in the game.

 

While many ASM/ASCMs are fire and forget, a number are also remotely guided/capable of having target data updated/changed (ex. C-701). If "fire and forget" were to be included in the game, it would be interesting to model the difference between maximum range and maximum effective range. If not accounted for, this would essentially turn the game into a who can press fire first. Further, there is still a good amount of debate (and some examples) regarding what is actually effective range for ASCMs and the potential for emptying your launchers with nothing to show for it. Additionally, the question of targeting (eg. scouting, etc.) would also need to be further addressed, along with hard/soft kill countermeasures (CIWS, Chaff, etc.).

 

I think we're more likely to see controllable missiles as we currently do with ground forces, or like the torpedoes in the recent April Fools submarine game mode.

Edited by CGFFEMT
Update
medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, it was just tought to start first from Fire and forget, just because theres a German Albatross-Class that has 4x Exocet casings on deck!

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, Only ships that have countermeasures like SRBOC( Super Rapid Bloom Offboard Countermeasures Chaff and Decoy Launching System ) or general Chaff, Flares and CIWS style!

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i would like to have them if you need to guide them like the fritz X. the target should have the chance to outrun it at least... somehow. If it would be controlled like an ATGM it would be to OP

medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Anju_Yuuki said:

i would like to have them if you need to guide them like the fritz X. the target should have the chance to outrun it at least... somehow. If it would be controlled like an ATGM it would be to OP

Well, Albatross Class has  Exocet which is fire and forget missle that uses inertial navigation system (INS) most of its flight and radar seeker activates only in terminal phase scanning for targets!

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

to make it anywhere near realistic .. or enjoyable

they would have to code all the countermeasures that all ships had / have

from 2"rocket launchers that rarely make the ship equipment lists but were the launcher for decoy flares for ships that didnt have dedicated chaff mortars

chaff ammunition for the guns .. that for a few reasons rarely made the lists .. chaff types for various bands  ... then there are the tactics as radar is most often not used because it can be picked up at ranges a lot further than it can reflect an echo ... for missiles any airborne reconnaissance can extend it to max range

then all the jammers and types / breaklock / multiple contact ( repeater ) / and basic frequency flooding as well as all the ciws

thats a huge amount of coding and options just to introduce as missiles .. or the game becomes ( more of a ) lotto

medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Keijo_Kalmakoura said:

Well, Albatross Class has  Exocet which is fire and forget missle that uses inertial navigation system (INS) most of its flight and radar seeker activates only in terminal phase scanning for targets!

i know. but i think that would be OP as hell and also to add the counter measures with the guidance system like the fritz X it could be added easier instead of programming some new stuff.

medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Anju_Yuuki said:

i know. but i think that would be OP as hell and also to add the counter measures with the guidance system like the fritz X it could be added easier instead of programming some new stuff.

Well, from 1944 allied had Type 650 transmitter that scrambled radio link between FuG 203/230  and Fritz X by by jamming the Straßburg receiver's intermediate frequency (IF) section.

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Keijo_Kalmakoura said:

Well, from 1944 allied had Type 650 transmitter that scrambled radio link between FuG 203/230  and Fritz X by by jamming the Straßburg receiver's intermediate frequency (IF) section.

yes thats right but doesnt the fritz X had an wire backup as counter against those things?

medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Anju_Yuuki said:

yes thats right but doesnt the fritz X had an wire backup as counter against those things?

It was changed later into wire-guided  and was still not that great. According National Museum Of The Air Force: Between April 1943 and December 1944, about 1,386 of these weapons were produced; 602 were expended in testing and training. Its combat use was limited by the small number of Luftwaffe aircraft available to carry it and by its relatively poor accuracy, which averaged about 20 percent against Allied shipping.

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Keijo_Kalmakoura said:

It was changed later into wire-guided  and was still not that great. According National Museum Of The Air Force: Between April 1943 and December 1944, about 1,386 of these weapons were produced; 602 were expended in testing and training. Its combat use was limited by the small number of Luftwaffe aircraft available to carry it and by its relatively poor accuracy, which averaged about 20 percent against Allied shipping.

thats what i mean after all i dont think this game should be sooo modern to have fire and forget weapons. i think having something with an frankenstein aim of the fritz X and an ATGM should be fine.

medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 06/07/2018 at 09:23, ReimuHakurei_ said:

I'd rather not unless they never see a WWII ship

 

That doesn't make sense.  Guided anti-ship ord started in WW2, and the first ship to be sunk by a ship-launched missile was a Z-Class destroyer laid down in 1942.  WW2 ships got to see AShM.

medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, AlexanderEllis said:

 

That doesn't make sense.  Guided anti-ship ord started in WW2, and the first ship to be sunk by a ship-launched missile was a Z-Class destroyer laid down in 1942.  WW2 ships got to see AShM.

Depends how we define AShM,Do we count aircraft launched stuff? Do we count Glide bombs? or how about guidance?  depending on that the earliest dates I can find for AShM on a quick search is either 1942/3 with the US Bat and the German Fritz X (both of which being either a Glide bomb or just a Radio guided bomb) or for ship mounted 1958 with the P-15 for the USSR.

medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, the_suztown said:

Depends how we define AShM,Do we count aircraft launched stuff? Do we count Glide bombs? or how about guidance?  depending on that the earliest dates I can find for AShM on a quick search is either 1942/3 with the US Bat and the German Fritz X (both of which being either a Glide bomb or just a Radio guided bomb) or for ship mounted 1958 with the P-15 for the USSR.

 

The first ship destroyed by a ship-launched missile was destroyed by a P-15 and it was a Z-Class from 1942.  Either definition you use, WW2 ships saw AShM.  Ships aren't tanks or aircraft that get outmoded and replaced quickly.  Ships live a long time.

medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, AlexanderEllis said:

Z-Class from 1942

Said ship was the Z-20 being the only Type 1936 to survive the war but it was Scrapped (in most sources) in 1956, but had previously been an Accommodation ship and before that a training ship so it had not been a combat capable ship for almost 12 years, Its the equivalent of leaving a Tiger 2 on a firing range and saying it was destroyed by a ATGM.

 

For both gameplay and balance reasons having ships face AShM that go without any counters sounds like a dreadful idea.

Edited by the_suztown
medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, the_suztown said:

Said ship was the Z-20 being the only Type 1936 to survive the war but it was Scrapped (in most sources) in 1956, but had previously been an Accommodation ship and before that a training ship so it had not been a combat capable ship for almost 12 years, Its the equivalent of leaving a Tiger 2 on a firing range and saying it was destroyed by a ATGM.

 

The ship in question was never scrapped.  Three or four months previous to her sinking, she was victorious in an engagement with enemy naval forces.  She was sunk on what is described as a 'patrol.'  Therefore, I must strongly disagree with your equivalency.  Service is not a firing range, and firing range targets preferably don't shoot back.

 

Again, ships generally have much longer service lives than tanks or aircraft.  Many times they're expected to serve against threats they were not designed to meet.  That is the nature of naval combat, and is true even to today.  I understand the desire for WT to be e-sports ready, but given the status quo of WT, I think at this point it makes more sense to present vehicles in the context that they served in and leave the e-sports to that other naval warfare game.

medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, AlexanderEllis said:

 

The ship in question was never scrapped.  Three or four months previous to her sinking, she was victorious in an engagement with enemy naval forces.  She was sunk on what is described as a 'patrol.'  Therefore, I must strongly disagree with your equivalency.  Service is not a firing range, and firing range targets preferably don't shoot back.

 

Again, ships generally have much longer service lives than tanks or aircraft.  Many times they're expected to serve against threats they were not designed to meet.  That is the nature of naval combat, and is true even to today.  I understand the desire for WT to be e-sports ready, but given the status quo of WT, I think at this point it makes more sense to present vehicles in the context that they served in and leave the e-sports to that other naval warfare game.

Ships that have a long service life are constantly modernized against new threats and have developed countermeasures to them. After WWII most navies scrapped a significant portion of their fleets, some like the Japanese scrapping basically every capital ship. Do you expect these to see anti ship missiles that came out in the 1950s? Ships with 25mms that could be described as less than effective going against nearly supersonic missiles is not fun and should never, ever be implemented in the game.

medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, ReimuHakurei_ said:

Ships that have a long service life are constantly modernized against new threats and have developed countermeasures to them.

 

The example of the INS Elias seems to disagree.

 

7 minutes ago, ReimuHakurei_ said:

Do you expect these to see anti ship missiles that came out in the 1950s? Ships with 25mms that could be described as less than effective going against nearly supersonic missiles is not fun and should never, ever be implemented in the game.

 

Just to provide a comparison to this argument, consider the following:

 

Quote

Do you expect to see anti tank missiles that came out in the 1950s?  Tanks with armor that could be described as less than effective going against nearly supersonic missiles and is not fun and should never, ever be implemented in the game.

 

Yet here we are.  Technically, we can already "see" supersonic AShM in-game, so I don't think it's a stretch that they'll be usable someday.

medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, AlexanderEllis said:

The ship in question was never scrapped.  Three or four months previous to her sinking, she was victorious in an engagement with enemy naval forces.

Care to back that up? because I've seen nothing that comes even close to that. 

 

If you can't source your claims there is no sense even discussing this.

medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, the_suztown said:

Care to back that up? because I've seen nothing that comes even close to that. 

 

If you can't source your claims there is no sense even discussing this.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Rumani_Coast

 

I know, I know, wikipedia, but this one does contain sources.  The map of the naval battle on July 11th is particularly strong evidence.  It was a relatively minor battle in comparison to the sinking of the Eilat, which is relatively famous... Which is why I'm surprised you aren't finding references to it.  I suspect we're talking about different members of the Z-class.

medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, AlexanderEllis said:

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Rumani_Coast

 

I know, I know, wikipedia, but this one does contain sources.  The map of the naval battle on July 11th is particularly strong evidence.  It was a relatively minor battle in comparison to the sinking of the Eilat, which is relatively famous... Which is why I'm surprised you aren't finding references to it.  I suspect we're talking about different members of the Z-class.

Ah now I see,

 

We are talking about 2 different Classes of ship, I was talking about the Type 1936 Class of Germany which all had "Z" designations, so I got confused as to what ship you where referring to as I've seen the 1936s refereed to as "Z Classes".

 

I'll concede that point then as you are completely correct about WW2 ships seeing AShMs but i'll maintain that for in game it wont be such a great idea as for a WW2 ship there would be 0 counters against them unless GJ does something funny with the Guidance ( IE having the player have to do something other than just clicking )

medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, the_suztown said:

Ah now I see,

 

We are talking about 2 different Classes of ship, I was talking about the Type 1936 Class of Germany which all had "Z" designations, so I got confused as to what ship you where referring to as I've seen the 1936s refereed to as "Z Classes".

 

I'll concede that point then as you are completely correct about WW2 ships seeing AShMs but i'll maintain that for in game it wont be such a great idea as for a WW2 ship there would be 0 counters against them unless GJ does something funny with the Guidance ( IE having the player have to do something other than just clicking )

 

It MAY be that ships gained chaff and IR smokescreen at some point in their service history.  For all I know, these systems were standard during the WW2 years.  That's way beyond my scope of research.  In any case, those could be additional researchable components to allow them some sort of defense besides spamming unguided AA fire and hoping to get lucky. It appears that fighter interception was utilized as a counter at some point, for whatever that's worth.

 

As far as guidance, establishing a lock at range(and verifying the the contact is an enemy) is no small feat.  I would expect any kind of AShM mechanic to leverage a proper radar mechanic(which I can only assume that they're futzing with, considering the last April Fools event) and be a game unto itself.  Outside of some very early beamriders(only aircraft launched, from what I can tell), they're not MCLOS or even SACLOS... they are fire and forget.  GJ is moving in that direction, and it'd be nice to have lock-on gameplay and counters figured out.

medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was wondering when someone was gonna bring up the albatross... hell... they should have never added that thing in the game until other modern warships were added. The things missiles make it need to be a post war only B.R That thing with its missles loaded should never face WW2 era ships or bellow. Considering those things can oneshot a carrier or Iowa class, yea...

Only ships with access to countermeasures should be able to fight it when its missiles are added on. It should have a similar BR gap from the Rakketenjagpanzers have to the Stuer Emil.

Edited by jacejax
medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.