Page 2 of 2

Re: [JP] Malliki Tosha vs. Pawel Abrams; Eastern Strait

Posted: Wed Sep 29, 2010 2:59 pm
by Malliki Tosha
Saw that now, thanks.

Re: [JP] Malliki Tosha vs. Pawel Abrams; Eastern Strait

Posted: Wed Sep 29, 2010 3:02 pm
by pawelabrams
Mhm... I could actually overrate its abilities...

Yes, now I checked it on Wikipedia. I've always thought about them having at least six tubes. I'll change the post voluntarily.

Re: [JP] Malliki Tosha vs. Pawel Abrams; Eastern Strait

Posted: Wed Sep 29, 2010 3:04 pm
by Malliki Tosha
Pawel, you still have to do a damage report from my ten torpedos and one missile before you make any counter-moves.

Re: [JP] Malliki Tosha vs. Pawel Abrams; Eastern Strait

Posted: Wed Sep 29, 2010 3:36 pm
by Malliki Tosha
Again, I protest, this time against this post by Pawel. The first thing he does in his order is not to call damage, it is to again attack my submarine. After that, he is hit by one torpedo, launches another torpedo, is hit by another torpedo, and is hit by a missile. Apparently eight of my launched torpedos missed a target that doesn't make any defensive maneuvers or launches any counter-measures.

Also, a submarine hit by two torpedos and one missile isn't just "immobilized". For reference: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y863lraJ3F4. That's one.

This is getting ridiculous. I move that the judges declare the Interlandian submarine destroyed and we can be on our merry way.

Re: [JP] Malliki Tosha vs. Pawel Abrams; Eastern Strait

Posted: Wed Sep 29, 2010 4:10 pm
by Lord_Montague
FFS!

I just posted a bloody long post and it didnt work!

1. The sub is sank but it did fire two torpedoes, which are self guided and are heading for the loudest sonar contact. What that is will be up to Malliki (within reason).

2. In regards to how they find each other, if either force was using active sonar searching then they would find each other; active sonar is indiscriminate in searching and lights up a whole area of the sea including its originating unit (there is a specfic way of not doing this but only in shallow waters). If the units were not and were using passive sonar then Malliki would have been easier to find with his large fleet (more ships = more noise). However, Pawel himself says the sub should go faster. If a sub goes faster, it then makes more noise which makes it a lot easier to find. This is the logic of how they find each other in Saikar's judgement.
A further question for a further judgement, depending on the answer, apart from the torpedoes fired in the Pawel's sub's death, did any ship, submarine or helicopter use active sonar?

3. In regards to Judges decisions, the first judge's decision is the one taken UNLESS there is active dissent from a different judge. The last judge will then be required to cast his support for either. Other judges should be allowed, as above, to flesh out the decisions and add to them with supplementary comments.

Re: [JP] Malliki Tosha vs. Pawel Abrams; Eastern Strait

Posted: Wed Sep 29, 2010 4:25 pm
by SaiKar
Lunch break ftw

Sorry, I'm new at this whole juding thing. I should have let Pwel reply before making it official. I figured his statements in the topic seem to sum up his position on the dispute pretty well and wouldn't have much to add.


Regarding the submarine, I was willing to let it have surrendered, but Montague posted before me so he gets to make the call. In the battle, Malliki's forces proabably recieved the surrender signal too late to prevent the attack. At least, I'm sure something like that will be the official story. :twisted:


And finally, regarding the ANTILORDS system, it appears to be completely fabricated specifically for this war. Searching on the Antican forums and Antiwiki for the word "radar" doesn't yield me any results for a system as elaborage and far-reaching as ANTILORDS. Via the charter:
Detail their defensive structures in a single, public post in their Ministry of Defence or equivalent. This post can include links to other posts and to city or terrain descriptions. Where such descriptions do not exist, the MCS Physical Map or equivalent will be considered authoritative.
If it was something minor in a single OrBat, I'd just let it slide, but you're basically claiming that you can see any movement anywhere in the battlefield. This would be a serious, war-altering advantage. Can anyone on the Antican side provide some sort of proof that this system was in operation before the war prep, if only so that we can know how it operates? If you have some development, and I'm missing it, then I'm sorry and it's all good.

I swear that thing wasn't in the original posting of that thread...

If it helps, I'm also strongly considering how to deal with defensive radar and sonar detections as well. Because right now all secret moves on either side are completely bunk as everyone can apparently see every movement of every enemy unit, and I can't see that ending well. OrBat-range detection, like Malliki's ships searching for submarines, is completely acceptable. Continent-spanning systems that don't miss a thing seem to break the parameters of the secret move system.

Re: [JP] Malliki Tosha vs. Pawel Abrams; Eastern Strait

Posted: Wed Sep 29, 2010 4:37 pm
by Malliki Tosha
The Los Angeles class submarine has a passive sonar and a system to detect active sonar. My destroyer based helicopters are of the SH-60 Mark III variant, aka MH-60R, using advanced active sonars. I have eight of those.

Re: [JP] Malliki Tosha vs. Pawel Abrams; Eastern Strait

Posted: Wed Sep 29, 2010 4:48 pm
by Malliki Tosha
I told Ardy that we needed to make a public post about that. Apparently, he neglected that. ANTILORDS doesn't claim to see all movement on the battlefield, since it's a system for air surveillance. I understand if you disallow the use of ANTILORDS on technical grounds, but we should still be able to see aircraft movement over Montauk using civilian air traffic control systems or ordinary radar. The island is pretty large, but it is very close to the Antican mainland.

Re: [JP] Malliki Tosha vs. Pawel Abrams; Eastern Strait

Posted: Wed Sep 29, 2010 4:50 pm
by pawelabrams
As I said. I am not the expert in this matter, and I do not know the technical details of the Mk 48 torpedoes - I only think they're quite expensive toys ;p

I am quite confused by the radius of these circles - I believe that they're range of single stations. If that's the case, they should be on quite a high tower because of the curvature of Micras...

Re: [JP] Malliki Tosha vs. Pawel Abrams; Eastern Strait

Posted: Wed Sep 29, 2010 6:13 pm
by Lord_Montague
Malliki Tosha wrote:The Los Angeles class submarine has a passive sonar and a system to detect active sonar. My destroyer based helicopters are of the SH-60 Mark III variant, aka MH-60R, using advanced active sonars. I have eight of those.
The range of those active sonars on the helicopters should, for the purpose of this war, be less than that of an SSN or ASW Frigate etc.

As for ANTILORDS, I've had such systems used on me in the past and I thought it was an unfair advantage then and I still think so now. However, I will leave the decision to Saikar as he is more neutral in his thinking on this than I am.

Re: [JP] Malliki Tosha vs. Pawel Abrams; Eastern Strait

Posted: Fri Oct 01, 2010 8:42 am
by chrimigules
Well, when it comes to the battlezone, it doesn't even really matter anymore.

Image
Purple circle: radar range of destroyer's air and surface array, AN/SPY-1
Green circle: radar range of E-2 Hawkeye

And of course, the Hawkeye flies around.

Re: [JP] Malliki Tosha vs. Pawel Abrams; Eastern Strait

Posted: Fri Oct 01, 2010 12:53 pm
by Malliki Tosha
Disclaimer: This image is a representation of the various ranges described in the post and does not indicate the exact location of any Antican military units.

Re: [JP] Malliki Tosha vs. Pawel Abrams; Eastern Strait

Posted: Fri Oct 01, 2010 2:27 pm
by SaiKar
Gunna call this one settled.

Re: [JP] Malliki Tosha vs. Pawel Abrams; Eastern Strait

Posted: Fri Oct 01, 2010 7:18 pm
by chrimigules
Yeah, that image is just for representin'.