PDA

View Full Version : Type XXI - how early will it be introduced?



Pr0metheus 1962
11-11-2004, 11:45 AM
I've just been looking at some info regarding the Type XXI U-Boats. In reality they didn't go out on operational patrols until April 1945, and only two such subs made sorties, once each, and no tonnage was ever sunk by Type XXIs during the war. So will this be accurately portrayed in the sim? Will they only be available from April 1945? Or will the developers succumb to temptation and issue them before their historical deployment?

ParaB
11-11-2004, 12:17 PM
I'm pretty sure that if you are REALLY successful during your career you will get to command a Type XXI MUCH earlier than the historical date.

From a gameplay point of view it would be rather silly to introduce a new boat to the player a few weeks before the war ends. Especially when you consider that the type XXI is pretty much THE single most interesting sub of WW2 for many subsimmers. My guess is that the type XXI will be available from mid '44 on, so we will have a nice toy for the last couple of months of the war.

Pr0metheus 1962
11-11-2004, 12:41 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ParaB:
I'm pretty sure that if you are REALLY successful during your career you will get to command a Type XXI MUCH earlier than the historical date. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think they should keep the operational dates the same as they were historically, if we're playing at full realism. It's not as if the Germans held the XXIs back for the really good skippers. I suspect they were made operational as soon as they could be.

If playing at 'casual' level, sure - bring in the XXI in 1939 as far as I'm concerned. But if at full realism I reckon we have to wait until the time they really appeared.

u2336
11-11-2004, 01:58 PM
using the XXI for only 1 month wont be interesting for sure.
I guess it will be up to you to be historically accurate or not. Maybe a sort of option...or a kind of "Kriegsmarine '46" (like the Luftwaffe '46)
If I want to remain historically correct I wont use the XXI too early even if I can.
If I want to have some fun and see what would it have been to do a whole war patrol with it (and have the authorization to open fire)

Pr0metheus 1962
11-11-2004, 02:55 PM
Options are always a good thing. But what I'm trying to get at is this: if I choose full realism, I should get my first Type XXI in April 1945. But there's going to be a temptation (which, ironically, is shown in this very thread) to issue those boats earlier - even on maximum realism settings. The problem stems from two natural human desires: 1 - that no one wants to think that he's not playing the game at full realism, but 2 - most people want to do at least a couple of patrols in a Type XXI. My point is that it should at least be an option to have full realism in this regard. My fear is that everyone will be forced to accept a false operational date for the type simply because that decision is popular, and even those few of us who don't want it will be given the boat before it could possibly have sailed historically.

ParaB
11-11-2004, 04:17 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Beeryus:
...no one wants to think that he's not playing the game at full realism <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Why is that so? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif

I for example will play SH3 with whatever settings I feel are best for my personal playing experience. Couldn't care less if someone thinks this is only 99% "realistic" or 80% "realistic".

There's always a simple solution for the 'type XXI problem': decline the offer for one if it is offered 'too soon' in a campaign... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

I won't.

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Pr0metheus 1962
11-11-2004, 05:09 PM
Well, let me adjust that a bit. Most people, in my experience, think that full realism is the ultimate test, and they consider it the optimal way to play.

Pr0metheus 1962
11-11-2004, 05:11 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ParaB:
There's always a simple solution for the 'type XXI problem': decline the offer for one if it is offered 'too soon' in a campaign... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

If I have that option, I certainly will. However, in my experience with sims I have been automatically assigned planes or boats that I knew were not right for the period. Let's hope that doesn't happen, because although that won't bother you one bit, it sure would bother me, and don't you think we should each get what we need from the game? I do, because if we don't, it makes SH4 less likely because folks like me will be disappointed in the simulation, and I want this franchise (and the simulation market in general) to have a rebirth and success after being dormant for so long. The reason it failed 5 years ago, in my opinion, is because (among other things) simulation developers tried too hard to include non-sim players by catering to the online market and ignoring aspects like the dynamic campaign, and thereby alienated their base of support.

ParaB
11-11-2004, 06:10 PM
The best option would be to offer the player a very large variety of 'realism option' to play with. This way everyone can play the game as he wants to, as it should be.

But the devs have already stated that one of the features of the campaign will be 'rewards' based on your performance. Yes, it's not historically correct, but then there sometimes have to be made concessions with regards to gameplay in certain areas.

Pr0metheus 1962
11-11-2004, 06:24 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ParaB:
...there sometimes have to be made concessions with regards to gameplay in certain areas. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

It's fine IMO, as long as it doesn't exist on the full realism settings. Gameplay and realism aren't incompatible, and in fact often go hand-in-hand, but 'realism' and 'arcade' are incompatible, and let's not fool ourselves: what we're talking about here is an arcade feature, meant to appeal to players who aren't concerned with realism. There's nothing wrong with that, but why must we pretend about it? Why can't we admit that it's an arcade feature?

Sorry, I guess this is a pet peeve of mine.

ParaB
11-11-2004, 06:37 PM
The problem is that a 100% accurate simulation doesn't have to be a good game per se. For SH3 in order to be a success it will have to provide more than realism, that is immersion, interesting gameplay and replayabiltiy. I personally like ultra-realistic simulations (I love Falcon 4.0, FS2004 and other hi-end sims) but will gladly sacrifice some IMO minor details for a better game experience.

But we're all just guessing here, since nobody yet knows for sure how the devs will implement these features.

Might be a good wednesday question for the devs...

CB..
11-11-2004, 07:06 PM
purely in my own opinion, i feel that sims need to get as far away as possible from the old fashioned centering around giving the player the semi instant gratification of being able to blow things up with an eye on the top score section of the campaign engine...(virtually every game that involves shooting weapons at some form of target ,uses the top score as it's primary motivation wether it's space invaders or a sub sim..or at the very least a heavy reliance on success and failure) i would love to see something new come along in this area...

i want other rewards for maintaining a reasonable "score" ...i would like other motivations built into the gameplay than beating the top scores...i would rather be given an up-graded boat for having kept my original boat in good condition and have maintained a reasonable casuality rate amoungst my crew...and have allso maintained a reasonable tonnage kill rate...there are hundreds upon hundreds of games where you are constantly rewarded for top scores...surely the minute short term satisfaction of getting the type XXI early..and going out and getting massive tonnage scores on each patrol has got to be pretty basic stuff..

me LOL i'd rather get a type II and be sent to the black sea to hunt russian trawlers....that would be more immersive....a decently modelled minelaying career would hold my interest longer... anything other than the type XXI just so i can pretend im uber tonnage king of the century ...i'm not nor do i have any desire to be...maybe ive got some screws loose..but i'd rather struggle like crazy to get even average tonnage results..just so i can genuinely shout yeeeeees!!!!!! when i do sink an enemy ship...makes the gameplay mean something..i just cannot get my head around this endless beat the top score ....slow paced sims like these are not console games where you pass the controller to your mates to see if they can beat your score...great fun as that usually is...it's not going to create great in depth games for the future...i see games as having the potentail to be as immersive as reading a well written book couple with watching a great moivie ..and allso have-ing the interactivity of the game itself...this top score stuff is a downer...give me the dang type II and i'll go hunt those russian trawlers..
oops rant over sorry folks http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

Erich Hartmann
11-11-2004, 07:15 PM
The fact remains, that SH3 must be a financiall succes, and if the devs want that to happen, the game must satisfy more than just the full realism (like me) players. So, the solution its very simple. They have the type XXI, they have the capability of offering it in the time period they want to. Then they just have to make it an <span class="ev_code_RED">OPTION</span>, and thats all. And if youre the kind that wants 100% realism, but want to use it in 1939, well just select that and you will have like 80% realism, whats the problem, everithing else will be 100%, and if you change your mind and think its not ok just mark the box that quits the feature.

The most important phrase in bussines is "To the costumer, what he asks".

CB..
11-11-2004, 07:25 PM
yes but the point is that any gamer who is not allready interested in WWII submarine war-fare (and there fore will be liable to buy the game anyway) wouldn't know a type XXI if it fell on them whilst they were sleeping...they will have to have played thru the campaign at least long enough to decide wether they like it or not in order to be in a position to recieve the type XXI, even if it is made available early..if they do like the game then the type XXI wont neccesarily make then like it any better and if they dont like the game they will have un-installed it long before they might have been awarded it...it's a non argument..if you see what i mean..

lets have a sense that it's not the quantity of the kills but the quality of the gameplay that counts....multiplayer will take care of the mass appeal..

Pr0metheus 1962
11-12-2004, 03:38 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by CB..:
purely in my own opinion, i feel that sims need to get as far away as possible from the old fashioned centering around giving the player the semi instant gratification of being able to blow things up with an eye on the top score section of the campaign engine... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Exactly!

I think that in recent years sim developers made a big mistake in focusing on eye-candy and arcade features (like scoring) rather than on making the sims more detailed in other ways. The last 5 years have produced a number of simulations which looked great (SH2 is a great example) but which, at least in their original form, were mediocre simulations.

Developers' unwillingness to take the time to create a proper dynamic or (at least) random campaign often turned away a lot of simulation fans. The developers cut costs while pinning their hopes on attracting players who were more concerned with looks than with overall game quality, and what resulted was mediocrity in terms of the game, and a loss of player support from the habitual sim player which was the base demographic for such games. This led to what seemed to be the death of the hardcore simulation. We haven't seen a quality WW1 air combat sim in 6 years, we haven't seen a good tank sim since M1 Tank Platoon 2 in 1998 (and it lacked a proper campaign), in my opinion we haven't seen a truly great modern air combat sim since Falcon 3.0 in 1991, while Command: Aces of the Deep was the last truly great sub sim, which came out 9 years ago. Maddox Games have kept the sim bandwagon going with its IL-2 franchise, but apart from the influx of Eastern European sim developers such as Maddox and Akella, which have filled the vacuum left by such developers as Dynamix and Microprose, the genre is in tough shape. However, with the new batch of developers who are producing games for developer/distributors like UbiSoft the future is now much brighter than it was two years ago, when it seemed like the sim community was facing extinction because of a bunch of stupid developer decisions which resulted in the almost ritual suicide of some once-great US game companies and which created 5 years of just plain bad games.

I mean heck, I consider myself a dyed-in-the-wool hardcore simulation player, and it's been six years since I found a simulation that I was willing to keep on my hard drive longer than a week. I think that illustrates how bad the situation has been for us.

bertgang
11-12-2004, 03:50 AM
I have little interest for XXI's in campaign game, early or later they could appear: I see campaign game as an effort to feel what WWII was, not what it could have been.

The "what if" is often interesting, but we will have a scenario editor to explore this side.

Pr0metheus 1962
11-12-2004, 04:09 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Bertgang:
I see campaign game as an effort to feel what WWII was, not what it could have been. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well said! I've been rambling on in the 75% casualties thread, and in this one, about this subject, but that condenses my own thoughts nicely.

CB..
11-12-2004, 02:33 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Beeryus:
it's been six years since I found a simulation that I was willing to keep on my hard drive longer than a week. I think that illustrates how bad the situation has been for us. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Cheers!! the most recent flight sim i have on my computer is in fact red Baron 3d (thanks for your work on this sim by the way!!)

ive tried all the more recent ones that took my fancy and ended up un-installing them all one by one... RB is the only one left..thos i have to admit if Luftwaffe Commander had come with any sort of dynamic campaign that would remain my top vote for a WW2 flight sim...fantastic game lousy replay value..i spent some time hex editing the variuos files and didn't find a way to really alter the campaign beyond replacing the aircraft types used..and moving the buildings and other features around..couldnt sus out the methodology in the code to alter the mission objectives , squadron locations, types etc..tho it did look possible...i love that sim tho..i was able to cure most of the AI problems tho which reduced the tendency for the AI to fly into the ground all the time..some sneakyness with the ai pilot rankings removing the novice pilots from the campaign solved most of it..i loved the flight characteristics in the game..they were fairly simple by todays standards but allways enforced (at my level anyway.. im no ace)tactical fighting on me as a player...and this made the AI a more severe adversary..if i was in the ME109 i knew i had to climb to avoid the Spitfires forcing a satisfying boom and zoom tactical approach on me which made evry encounter one that needed carefull planning if i was to survive..

liked the view system too...and found it a very attractive game to look at as well..a certain convincing artfullness to the graphics which allthough fairly basic allways convinced me what i was seee-ing was real enough to make it an immersive experience..went loking for mod sites for the game and was quite surprised when i didnt find any at all!!

Yarrick_
11-13-2004, 08:18 AM
I liked the system in 688(I) Hunter Killer; the first simulation I played seriously, and I think that the most of you will remember it. Depending on your degree of succes in every mission (and that included not being detected, and lots of other little things) you recieved points representing the regards of the high command towards you, and you could spend this to get better equipement, such a reinforced hull or a more silent helix, or to recieve veteran crew.
I took for garanted that this will be implanted in SH3 but I may be wrong, but it might be this system plus the chance to buy a new sub by spending a great amount of "fame points".
Subs could change their price, being much more easy to get a VII A or a II B at the end that on the beginning.
WOuldn't you like this system?

Pr0metheus 1962
11-13-2004, 08:48 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by CB..:
Cheers!! the most recent flight sim i have on my computer is in fact red Baron 3d (thanks for your work on this sim by the way!!) <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

It was my pleasure. I understand you've done a lot of mod work yourself - I hear a lot about your great work on SH2, although I never played that game. It's nice to know that if anything in this game does need attention, we already have folks who might be willing to work on those things if the developers don't see the need themselves.

hauitsme
11-13-2004, 08:55 AM
The only 'points' that should even be considered/known are those for promotions/decorations for the crew. What the h*ll are 'points' doing in a sim? This isn't a pinball machine or an arcade, or is it? Anyone that has a 'need' to know how well they're doing in relation to others in regarding to a 'high score' should just go back to the arcades. Actually, maybe the DevTeam should. They're the ones that are keeping this ridiculous 'point' thing going. But since they keep giving 'points' to us, we have to deal with them. It's a shame.

Pr0metheus 1962
11-13-2004, 10:31 AM
Yeah. I'd like to see points done away with altogether. They are nice to get a quick grasp on relative strengths and weaknesses, but if a crewman is good at his job, I'd rather see a rating of 'competent' than a rating of '4 out of 5'. The former is more natural and realistic, whereas the latter is artificial.

Yarrick_
11-13-2004, 12:39 PM
So, how will you deal with fitting schnorkel, and AA guns and getting new subs? maybe apart from criticize you two might show us all a good idea!

Would you like to reccive a letter when arriving at port saying "do you want to change your VIIA sub for a VII C/41?" this is not much more realistic that a sistem of points representing your chances of getting new subs and crews, maybe you would like to have a screen saing "high command is willing to give you a schnorkel" or something like that?

Pr0metheus 1962
11-13-2004, 03:57 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Yarrick_:
So, how will you deal with fitting schnorkel, and AA guns and getting new subs? maybe apart from criticize you two might show us all a good idea!

Would you like to reccive a letter when arriving at port saying "do you want to change your VIIA sub for a VII C/41?" this is not much more realistic that a sistem of points representing your chances of getting new subs and crews, maybe you would like to have a screen saing "high command is willing to give you a schnorkel" or something like that? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

A points system you trade in for upgrades is okay - I have no real problems with it. All I'm saying is that it's a bit artificial. In my view any points should be kept in the background, and instead you should receive a letter from BdU offering you choices - something like this:

Congratulations on your last patrol. Since you are one of our best U-Boat officers, BdU has determined that you are to get a material upgrade to your boat. Please choose your preference:

1. A new Type VIIc boat (available immediately).
2. A new Type IX boat (requires 3 months training).
3. 3 months R&R to refresh your crew and to overhaul your boat.
4. A new Schnorkel to be fitted to your boat (3 weeks delay).

Please make your choice and reply to BdU as soon as possible.

---------------

You click on your choice and it generates a letter which your adjutant has typed up for you. This goes out to BdU (after you approve it - you click on it and a signature appears). Your choice determines what you get.

This would allow you to use your points in whatever manner you wanted without losing the sense of immersion. Each choice would impact crew morale and training abilities, with longer rests restoring fatigue points faster, and with extra training impacting ability points. In this way you need never see any 'points' system - all 'points' work behind the scenes while all you see are text-based reports of crew morale, abilities and your boat's condition.

CB..
11-13-2004, 07:26 PM
i agree it would be even better if they guaged the points system for the distribution of new tech on the whole flottillas performance ..we are going to be see-ing AI wolf packs and other friendly subs in the game (so it's said) so lets make the most of it and have an over all performance figure for the entire Flottilla..this will get you interested in your Flottilla and make you more involved in the simulated careers of your fellow commanders..for example if a especailly adept AI commander gets killed and replaced by a novice commander, you will actually feel a moment of grief (how ever slight and trivial) see-ing his name crossed of the Flottila roster board might even make you angry...especailly if you have been able to have some sort of conversation with him in the Flottilla bar...and next time you go in his favourite chair is empty (standard stuff in some games RPG's etc) that would add an emotional impact to the sim and simulate some sense of loss..this too me would be ahuge advancement in gameplay immersion and realism.. we have 3d modeled crew ..why not a simple 3D modelled bar in port with all the commanders in your flottilla drifting in and out as they return and leave on patrols...lets see theyre individual results on a chalk board in the bar ..lets know that this means something in gameplay terms ...lets have some desire and aticipation as we enter the bar to see the board and find out how the Flottilla is doing...absolutely brilliant....
if we lose a commander then we no longer see that 3d AI commander in the bar (simple matter of changing the 3d models skin/texture perfectly normal old school game stuff)
and a new face appears in the bar after a time..
got to be done...the scope for developing a whole new level of involvment and realism here is endless..lovely stuff IMO
im betting we'd find our selve rooting for a particular AI commander if he was doing well and genuinely up set if he was lost in action..
realism!!! as mentioned in other threads there's more to realism than just getting rewards for high tonnage
a point system based on the whole flottillas performance would have a much greater effect on the gameplay and would mean so much more than just a way for you to get a snorkel or a boat up-grade...works for me..makes it fully dynamic aswell..no ones going to send off for a snorkel or a new type IX just for one commander...they im sure were issued to flottillas for the CO to distibute not directly to an individual commander..so im guessing that flottilla performance is better realism gauge than just your own tonnage..if we have to have one at all.

king_cam
11-13-2004, 08:00 PM
first of all i didnt read the full thread so if this doesnt make sence dont flame me

i the option to be able to choose this in the realism options and if i so want to be unrealistic to have fun when i am bord one day then i should have the option to play this craft at the startof the war!!!!

Pr0metheus 1962
11-13-2004, 09:41 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by king_cam:
first of all i didnt read the full thread so if this doesnt make sence dont flame me

i the option to be able to choose this in the realism options and if i so want to be unrealistic to have fun when i am bord one day then i should have the option to play this craft at the _start_of the war!!!! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think we all agree on that. What we don't agree on is what the date should be for the 'full realism' setting. I say it should be the historical date of April 1945 (which allows for one patrol), whereas others have argued that it should be earlier.

Yarrick_
11-14-2004, 03:51 AM
Yes, the system of the flotilla points or the one with letters from the BdU is interesting, but this could be a problem for some players who might want to try specifically a type of sub and they will, perhaps, not ever get it offered to them.
This will not be a problem for me, because you've got an editor and single missions, but it can be for some players, and I think that it is not possible to introduce different systems (with reasonable time).
Otherwise, this system is the most immersive we could have.

Pr0metheus 1962
11-14-2004, 08:10 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Yarrick_:
Yes, the system of the flotilla points or the one with letters from the BdU is interesting, but this could be a problem for some players who might want to try specifically a type of sub and they will, perhaps, not ever get it offered to them. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Why would you not get offered a sub? The letter would explain ALL your options. If you get the points, you'll be offered the sub. If you haven't got the points, the letter will say something like "The X U-Boat is still in development and may be available in 2 months" or "X U-Boat is now ready for those commanders who have excelled. BdU awaits the result of your next patrol before a decision is made as to your suitability" and then an option to "wait for X sub".

If you never get the points, or if you can't be bothered waiting, just turn off that realism option and you instantly have the sub available at any point in your career.

There's no reason why a player would miss out on any possibility.

Pr0metheus 1962
11-14-2004, 10:00 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Yarrick_:
I think that it is not possible to introduce different systems (with reasonable time). <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Clearly we're talking about future games. I doubt that any proposal that is made now could be implemented in time for this game's release, unless it's just a tweak to an existing feature.