PDA

View Full Version : Mr. Oleg: ships must take way longer to sink!



Aeronautico
04-14-2005, 11:28 AM
I understand it's a game and it's best to see result when the player is stilla round the server, or the mission is not over yet. But what about few minutes instead of a bunch of seconds?

Aeronautico
04-14-2005, 11:30 AM
Oh, and craters lasting much longer too!

JtD
04-14-2005, 11:40 AM
I'd love to see some ships at all because historically there were ships in the Pacific.

VW-IceFire
04-14-2005, 12:37 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Aeronautico:
I understand it's a game and it's best to see result when the player is stilla round the server, or the mission is not over yet. But what about few minutes instead of a bunch of seconds? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Depends on the ship too...

For instance, I'm just doing some research on FAA Corsairs and the like. I stumbled across the story of Canadian pilot Robert Gray who died during an attack on a Japanese destroyer. He hit the destroyer with a single 500lb bomb (the other bomb had been blown off by the flak that had set his plane onfire) and it rolled over and capsized before his Corsair crashed into the sea. Pretty quick http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

LLv34_Stafroty
04-14-2005, 01:05 PM
this is still Flight sim and not naval sim. dont see point to extend sinking time of ships

xTHRUDx
04-14-2005, 02:08 PM
i agree with Stafroty, the time taken to recode the sim for such a feature could be put to better use. Might i suggest SH3 if you're interested in detailed ship sinking

Aeronautico
04-14-2005, 03:36 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by xTHRUDx:
i agree with Stafroty, the time taken to recode the sim for such a feature could be put to better use. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Is a sim not supposed to be realistic? To me, watching a team mate in front of me release a torpedo and hit the ship, and the ship sink as I fly by is not very realistic. A hsow-stopper rather.

And I suspect the time required for such a modification would be as long as changing a digit in the code.

LEXX_Luthor
04-14-2005, 05:35 PM
Good Request Aero. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

What should be possible is coming back to your carrier after flying your mission and seeing it half under water, and not just totally gone.

aipilotmarkone
04-15-2005, 06:15 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Aeronautico:
Is a sim not supposed to be _realistic_?...
...And I suspect the time required for such a modification would be as long as changing a digit in the code. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Agreed. Making ships sink more realistically can't be that hard.

xTHRUDx
04-15-2005, 09:22 PM
i'm sure many community members can provide a long list of things "that can't be that hard" to fix that would improve the sim better than how fast ships sink. just dig up a bug list for this version of the sim.

Aeronautico
04-16-2005, 05:50 AM
Bugs are bugs and need to be tracked down and understood.
Modifying a well known parameter is quite different.

RxMan
04-16-2005, 08:36 AM
I have seen ships take quite a while to sink in this sim,
the damage model seems varied enough to vary the 'sink time'
from what I've seen. There are times when they sink very quickly, which did happen in RL, depending on the type and location of damage: and times when they (esp larger ships) take quite a while to sink.

Tater-SW-
04-18-2005, 10:12 AM
I've never seen a ship take more than a couple minutes to sink, and I tested all of them a while back. Sure, a few ships sank really fast, but if you remove ships that sank after taking a catastrophic magazine hit/explosion from the list of fast-sinkers, it's a short list indeed. Then you need to look at the size of the ship vs the bomb/torp that hit it. Sure, a DD might be expected to go under very fast, but many of the CVs sunk in ww2 took many many hours to sink, and even after perhpas a day had to be scuttled by their own DDs, or they would have drifted as hulks for days, if not indefinitely.

tater

avimimus
04-20-2005, 12:07 PM
Hopefully BOB will have a ship damage model comparable with SHIII -except with more rigging and material on deck to be damaged in light strafing attacks!

aipilotmarkone
05-06-2005, 07:28 PM
Has this thread sunk?

Aeronautico
05-08-2005, 09:17 AM
Yeah, and way too fast if you ask me... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

aipilotmarkone
05-09-2005, 05:36 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Dimensionaut_
05-13-2005, 07:25 AM
Originally posted by aipilotmarkone:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Aeronautico:
Is a sim not supposed to be _realistic_?...
...And I suspect the time required for such a modification would be as long as changing a digit in the code.

Agreed. Making ships sink more realistically can't be that hard. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Making sinking ship realistic WILL be VERY HARD.
When the game is able to do it, we will whine that the game is too heavy to run.

To have a realistic sinking of ships, first a damage model as complex as for the aircraft is needed. Now it is much more simple something like 'if x > hitpoints then sink'.
Then there are many, many conditions that determine how fast a ship will sink. Like stated above one ship will sink in a few minutes, another can float around for weeks (records are known that abandoned ships hit by a torpedo was found floating weeks after).

Another thing I think will happen if the ships sink that slow: people will start whining that they never see a ship sinking.

And how realistic it is in SH3? Well, most ships there also sink in minutes.

Bremspropeller
05-13-2005, 07:47 AM
Well, if you want the ships to sink realisticly, Oleg had to model some rescue-boats which spread from the sinking ship.

A bit of an overkill for some people's FPS-rate http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Sturm_Williger
05-13-2005, 07:52 AM
I must agree about SH3 - even with "realistic Ship sink times" enabled, the bulk go down much too fast.

Tater-SW-
05-13-2005, 09:39 AM
It would be infinitely better if the sinking times were simply multiplied by maybe 10-20 times. Anyone upset (ie: twitch gamers) can go play quake, or something on xbox.

tater

Aeronautico
05-14-2005, 12:39 PM
Originally posted by Serval_1JaVA:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by aipilotmarkone:Agreed. Making ships sink more realistically can't be that hard.

Making sinking ship realistic WILL be VERY HARD.
When the game is able to do it, we will whine that the game is too heavy to run.

...

And how realistic it is in SH3? Well, most ships there also sink in minutes. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I believe he was referring (as I do too) just to the time they take to sink, nothing else.

As for SH3: I agree, they sink too fast there too. In fact, I think PF ships should take THAT time, and SH3 should take at least double that time. Evidently, gameplay reasons have to kill realism and... immersion.

unseen84
05-14-2005, 05:48 PM
I agree with this. Ships, particularly capital ships, need to take much longer to sink. I've not played SH3, but this has bothered me about FB/PF from the start. Watching ships like the Essex and KGV calmly sink in about 3-4 minutes is a definite immersion killer.

Tater-SW-
05-15-2005, 10:29 AM
Yeah, it would be far more realistic to fly away with them just smoking very badly.

If ships sank remotely as fast as PF (in most cases) the Japanese would not have claimed 4 Lexington Class CVs sunk before Midway, or they might not have claimed the Yorktown 3 times within the same period. (they sure must have been surprised at Midway since they had already claimed more US CVs sunk than we had at the start of the war, lol.

tater