PDA

View Full Version : What do u want SH4 to be???



WilhelmSchulz.-
08-31-2005, 05:05 PM
The more I keep reading books like Submarine and run silent run deep the more I want to have a PacFlt sub sim. Dose anyone agree with me???

WilhelmSchulz.-
08-31-2005, 05:05 PM
The more I keep reading books like Submarine and run silent run deep the more I want to have a PacFlt sub sim. Dose anyone agree with me???

fizilbert
08-31-2005, 05:25 PM
In my opinion, a pacific theater sub game would be boring. I played the first Silent Hunter, and the Silent Service games way before that, and they were not nearly as interesting as the Atlantic theater. Going to the Pacific theater would really make the game an arcade shooter.

Maj_Solo
08-31-2005, 05:59 PM
They can go there when they made a decent simulation of the the big U-boat war, I mean, I am 40 years old, media had plenty of time to inform me the pacific theatre U-boat war was bigger or more important, no, the only info that penetrated my ignorant mind has been the war in the Atlantic,

In the pacific the only thing that got into my mind was uncountable landings on a lot of islands with Japanese that didn't want to surrender .... and the Japanese had a big ship I liked, the Yamamoto, but it turned out to be useless, and the Japanese got a free swing at Pearl Harbour other than that ....

No, maybe it is so that the war in the Atlantic was a big thing ....

I want them to make a realistic strategic sim of that, then they can move to the pacific ....

I don't think any of them canibalize much development resources from each other, what imporvements done to the game engine both benefit from, and I do want them to work on the game engine ........

Whitewulf1218
08-31-2005, 06:01 PM
I really want to see a modern day u-boat sim. That would be nice for the next Silent Hunter.

Dizyer
08-31-2005, 06:08 PM
Be nice if SH-4 had playable enemy crusiers and enemy submarines to hunt u down. Also, It would be nice to be able to combind IL-2 Sturmovik with SH-4 for online play. Fun Fun!

Luftwaffe_109
08-31-2005, 06:24 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Be nice if SH-4 had playable enemy crusiers and enemy submarines to hunt u down. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Cruisers don't chase submarines though.

Gunnersman
08-31-2005, 06:37 PM
Cruisers, destroyers...they all have big guns and blow stuff up real good. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

As for me, I'd be happy if they took the existing engine and made a Pacific subgame out of it. Heck, they are already half way there with out the milk cows. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif They have the map. They just need names for ports, graphics for the ports and coding for missions in the campaign to rescue downed pilots or take pictures of harbors, and give us the chance to sink other Japanese subs. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif

I wouldnt mind the ability to play a destroyer either.

If there were a SH4 (An Atlantic SH4), all they really could do is add milk cows, Elco Boats that shoot torpedos, tweak the graphics, just generally improve and tweak the existing game already. That is if they were to make an Atlantic SH4.
I think it is a great game as it is already.

Kaleun1961
08-31-2005, 06:38 PM
Ironically, the American submarine campaign achieved that which the U Waffe was unable to do, choke off the flow of resources to the home island. By '45, I read in a book about the Pacific submarines, a ship sailing for Japan had a 50% chance of reaching port. As successful as it was, the American submarine campaign did not achieve the same level of fame [or notoriety] as the German U-boats.

The Marines and the Navy got most of the media limelight, and the Army, which actually had more troops in the Pacific Theater than the Marines, were sideshow Cinderellas, mainly due, I suppose, to Macarthur's egoism.

Kaleun1961
08-31-2005, 06:52 PM
Getting back to what we would like to see in a newer game, I'd like something that is really not all that big of a deal. I'd like to be able to input my course, instead of just clicking around on the compass dial. So, I'd like to be able to say turn to 270 degrees exactly, not fumble around clicking until I finally hear the voice saying 270. In Aces of the Deep there was a status line which told you your exact heading and speed. Like I said, not that big a deal.

What I think is sorely lacking in terms of recreating the German experince in the Atlantic is the lack of interaction with other U-boats, BDU and perhaps the Luftwaffe and Kriegsmarine's surface units. I've just finished reading about the Bismarck sinking. BDU used U-Boats to try to screen Bismarck as he [yes, He, the Germans thought it too mighty a ship to be referred in feminine terms] tried to make St. Nazaire. One U-boat [U556, Herbert Wohlfahrt] actually got into firing position on two of Bismarck's pursuers, a battleship of the KG5 class and a carrier, probably Ark Royal. But he had no torpedoes left after a convoy hunt.

Unfortunately, as the game is, you cannot create wolfpacks or be called in to join one. So the convoy escorts are all free to gang up on your lone boat, whereas in the war, they didn't like to strip all the escorts to chase down one sub when they knew others were in the area.

Kaleun1961
08-31-2005, 06:54 PM
And one more thing: better time compression. It sucks having to lose to a plane or destroyer just because of a time compression issue. Not all of us can or want to play the whole game in 1X.

Luftwaffe_109
08-31-2005, 08:38 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">If there were a SH4 (An Atlantic SH4), all they really could do is add milk cows, Elco Boats that shoot torpedos, tweak the graphics, just generally improve and tweak the existing game already. That is if they were to make an Atlantic SH4.
I think it is a great game as it is already. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
And wolfpacks.

Anyway, what I'd like to see is seperate Russian, Japanese, Italian, British and US submarine campaigns. Also more and populated harbours.

I wonder if it is possible to have all of these campaigns run concurrently? Like, for example, if you were a German Monsoon boat captain and went to penetrate into the Pacific it would be awesome if there was a Pacific War raging down there.

Dominicrigg
08-31-2005, 08:48 PM
I want SH4 to be a nice patch which fixes things unfinished in this game. For free http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Then they can add British and Italian subs, or Destroyer online capability.

Then onto the pacific with the fully working game engine, with compressed air and a supa dupa damage engine.

Then i want Britney spears to hand deliver it, and if she is still preggers when it comes out then Jessica Simpson will do, and then i want...

WilhelmSchulz.-
08-31-2005, 09:00 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Dominicrigg:
Then i want Britney spears to hand deliver it, and if she is still preggers when it comes out then Jessica Simpson will do, and then i want... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Shut up uy horney basterd!!! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

WilhelmSchulz.-
08-31-2005, 09:01 PM
hey 109 u know that u got a ME-262 for a pic???

Luftwaffe_109
08-31-2005, 09:17 PM
Yes I do, it's a Messerschmitt Me-262. At least, that is what it is now. I tend to change my sig fairly often. Last time it was a couple of Focke-Wulf Fw-190 D-9s. Before that a Junkers Ju-87 Stuka. Before even that it may have been a Messerschmitt Bf-109E or F, I can't quite remember well.

Best Regards

Trydan
09-01-2005, 02:18 AM
I'd like to see SH4 as the "next generation" version of SH3. That means:
<UL TYPE=SQUARE><LI>Keep it as German U-Boots. PLEASE!!!That is the only theatre where the challenge level goes up as the war goes on, making it suitable for a game. There is a great variety of theatres (Mediterranean, Norway, etc.). There is a good technology progression.
<LI>Include scaling graphics for screen resolutions greater than 1024x768.
<LI>Fully model the U-boot interiors, so you can walk from the Bow-Torpedo Room to the Stern-Torpedo room continuously.
<LI>When the U-Boot is damaged make compartments have water on the floor and more convincing leaks. Also, half the lights could go out, making deep shadows. Or some compartments could fill with smoke!
<LI>Then fill this model with working/sleeping crew members. E.g. When you load torpedoes from the external reserve you can watch the men do it. Or have that chef cooking. Crew playing cards. etc. And when silent-running, or at battle stations, have them react accordingly.
<LI>Make it so that you have to move around the U-Boot (well... it could be an option). In the control room, you could toggle between the 'scope, charts etc. rather quickly, but giving orders to the crew would take time if you had to go and visit that compartment.
<LI>Improve the modelling of the crew, so they look more life-like.
<LI>Implement a system so that you could assign crew to shifts. That way, you could set up a roster for Shift-1, Shift-2, Shift-3, Battle-stations, Repari stations and all the crew would move. Even on time compression, the crew would rotate through their shifts and the fatigue model would accurately reflect this.
<LI>Make the world-map better, so it doesn't look so pixelated when you move it.
<LI>Have a better system of radio messages
<LI>Implement all U-Boot flottille and bases. E.g. Narvik and Trondheim are missing.
<LI>Put in Milchkuhe
<LI>Add CPU-controlled U-Boots (both allied and axis)
<LI>Improve the U-Boot performance models (e.g. the dive times need to better reflect the superstructure and crew activity at the time).
<LI>Improve U-Boot configuration models. E.g. a Typ-VIIC/41 with VIIC/4 Turm (that is, U-Flak) shouldn't be able to take on a full complement of torpedoes. You should also be able to decide the ratios of shell types to take on board for the deck gun.
<LI>The weather model should be better to refelct the weather appropriate to region/latitude.
<LI>Improve the graphics to take advantage of the latest developments
<LI>Plus... all the features already in SH3!
[/list]
Please don't take me the wrong way. I love SH3 and regard it as State of the Art. It is miles better than any other sub/Uboot-sim that existed before. However, SH4 won't be released for probably 2 years, so in that time I think the above improvements would be appropriate.

bogusheadbox
09-01-2005, 03:26 AM
Well i would like SH3 completed before SH4 is released.

However as we know that that will most likely not happen.

Then Sh4 should be a true sim.

By that i mean
1. controlable dive planes,
2. Controllable ballast compartments.
3. milk cows.
4. Scripted missions with the dynamic campaign
5. Engine damage modelling like sh2 had
6. ghost ships removed.
7. better ai for enemy planes so they don't kill themselves in the air
8. no super dooper acceleration and decelation for ships and warships. You know, from stationary to 25 knots in 2 seconds.
9. A more true to life deck gun.
10. the death screen removed and the damage compartment screen shown instead until all compartments are destroyed or the captains compartment (CC) is destroyed. Then a cinematic.
11. populated harbours.
12. Better AI for enemy ships so they don't run aground and hit sea walls.
[edit]
13. Elco boats that actually shoot torpedos.


BASICALLY ALL THE **** THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN IN SH3 AND WASN'T !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Kaleun1961
09-01-2005, 04:00 AM
There should be restrictions on the loading of external torpedoes into the boat. To do it for real, the crew had to set up a type of winch\pulley system, which took time to erect and then disassemble. During this time the boat was more vulneralbe to attack, as you could imagine. A torpedo half-way into the deck hatch and suddenly a scream of flugzeugen sicht! Also, you would not be able to move those external torpedoes in bad weather. I make it a "point of honour" in my game not to move external torpedoes in bad weather or when I know the enemy is near. It's the best I can do for now.

Having said all of this, if somebody out there is more of an expert on this subject, please set me straight if I am errant on any of these observations.

K61

Caseck73
09-01-2005, 09:52 AM
If they do it WWII PTO like they're saying, from the IJN point of view... You need the ability to smack your crew around to improve efficiency.

Kind of like in "Evil Genius".

That's how the IJN was...

Mik1984
09-01-2005, 10:23 AM
And certainly more sophisticated diving/surfacing controls, giving you full possibilities of manouvring the ship like a real sub, however allowing you to do simple manouvers without any additional effort. More of a real sim.

Mik1984
09-01-2005, 10:26 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">
Improve the graphics to take advantage of the latest developments
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The hell with graphics, they are OK!

Don't waste too much time on it, make a better game!

WilhelmSchulz.-
09-01-2005, 11:00 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by bogusheadbox:
6. ghost ships removed. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>There aint no gost ships. U think the ships are going to just sit there??? They move after they give there postion.

Kaleun1961
09-01-2005, 05:53 PM
I'd like to see the escorts limited to the historically correct number of depth charges, hedgehogs, etc. And if possible, I'd like to see a mechanism in the game, even if it has to be a crew member with a slate and chalk like in Das Boot for counting the number of depth charges dropped.

WilhelmSchulz.-
09-01-2005, 06:14 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Kaleun1961:
And if possible, I'd like to see a mechanism in the game, even if it has to be a crew member with a slate and chalk like in Das Boot for counting the number of depth charges dropped. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Its called a pad and paper next to you. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

WilhelmSchulz.-
09-01-2005, 06:33 PM
If its a german game, FIDO. HERR KALEUN!!! TORPEDO PORT SIDE!!! ITS FLOWING US!!! SHIEZER!!!

Kaleun1961
09-01-2005, 07:07 PM
Yup, Schultzy, I've got it. It would be nice to be able to delegate it to a crew member. "Herr Kaleun, the batteries are cracked, hull is leaking, chlorine in boat... Not now I'm counting wabos!"

Flakwalker
09-01-2005, 08:40 PM
Here what I like on first priority to lower:

1) Italian Subs
2) Japanese Subs
3) Posibility to use any nation Destroyer (Destroyer Command)
4) Moonlight acording to the phase
5) Allied Subs (any nation)
6) Minelayers, both subs and ships
7) German Cruisers, Escort ships, etc as on SH2 (better than the armed trawlers)
8) More complex aircraft enviroment on both sides with FW-200 and Ju-290 atlantic patrols etc, and on the allied side Beaufighters, Typhons etc.
9) Posibility to use Torpedo boats
10) More ships

Then slighty off-topic, WW1 sub and torpedo boats sim

WilhelmSchulz.-
09-01-2005, 09:26 PM
Radar that works. ie u being able to use it.Like the sonar.

Dominicrigg
09-02-2005, 05:41 AM
pet hamsters.

Messervy
09-02-2005, 06:29 AM
Oh my god!!! I am not takeing part in it.

WilhelmSchulz.-
09-02-2005, 11:40 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Dominicrigg:
pet hamsters. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Pet hamsters??? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif What the **** would need a pet hamster for???

U107Wolff
09-02-2005, 01:05 PM
A worldwide theatre of operations and the choice to use axis OR allied subs (and even destroyers if possible). And plz. plz. plz. do something about the crew managment (I ain't their nanny. NOW GO TO BED 1st OFFICER).

Messervy
09-02-2005, 04:53 PM
It`s even worse.
I have to drag each watchman down from the bridge, find him an oilskin, dress him and take him back up everytime we hit the storm. They are like little kids.
- "Mommy, mommy.....I am cold, wet and miserable..."
- "Well... get dressed then Hansi."
- "Bhuaaaaa.....I don`t know where my coatie is...buaaaaaa"
- O.K. Hansie, take my hand and I`ll show you one more time, Willi, Berti, Pippo...come along you are obviously not old enough as well."

Maj_Solo
09-02-2005, 05:58 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Kaleun1961:
Ironically, the American submarine campaign achieved that which the U Waffe was unable to do, choke off the flow of resources to the home island. By '45, I read in a book about the Pacific submarines, a ship sailing for Japan had a 50% chance of reaching port. As successful as it was, the American submarine campaign did not achieve the same level of fame [or notoriety] as the German U-boats.

The Marines and the Navy got most of the media limelight, and the Army, which actually had more troops in the Pacific Theater than the Marines, were sideshow Cinderellas, mainly due, I suppose, to Macarthur's egoism. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

well ...... did they have the same THREAT as the german U-boats, the german U-boats have fun until allied got their act together .... have not read about it I guess the americans did not face the same amount of DD/sub or DD/square sea mile ratio, they just couln't have .... I mean if they were firing at Jonks or whatever they are called ...

Have not read much about the pacific, but I guess cruises were long, and then ofcourse they probably had a sub designed for it, and when that sub found a merchant there were no DDs around ...... am I reasonably right or completely off the mark?

My view is Japan was a 'relatively' weak country that faced some strategical resource problems that it had to fix, and also a sense of the neighbours being weak, it had built a few units "which it was proud of", but did not have a complete balanced war machine that could sustain prolonged battle, ofcourse tracing back to the strategic resource problem, so I guess it could be easily hurt, and also that they could not take a loss of the grand proud units they built, so, at least versus the USA the whole campaign must be based on one success story after the other and that the victory after that should be political not military.

OK forget that then, was the subwar in the pacific a difficult one except from how long the cruises were. Speaking of that, hat bases did the US subs use??

CannonFodda_99
09-02-2005, 06:04 PM
Quite a lot of these ideas SHOULD be in SHIII such as radar that works etc.

I dont really want to think about SHIV yet, I'd prefer they just spent a bit more time improving SHIII, then when they have got all they can out of SHIII, move on to SHIV.

But one thing I would like in SHIV would be the ability to have human players play the stations in some sort of co-op mode http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Cannon

Kaleun1961
09-02-2005, 06:38 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Maj_Solo:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Kaleun1961:
Ironically, the American submarine campaign achieved that which the U Waffe was unable to do, choke off the flow of resources to the home island. By '45, I read in a book about the Pacific submarines, a ship sailing for Japan had a 50% chance of reaching port. As successful as it was, the American submarine campaign did not achieve the same level of fame [or notoriety] as the German U-boats.

The Marines and the Navy got most of the media limelight, and the Army, which actually had more troops in the Pacific Theater than the Marines, were sideshow Cinderellas, mainly due, I suppose, to Macarthur's egoism. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

well ...... did they have the same THREAT as the german U-boats, the german U-boats have fun until allied got their act together .... have not read about it I guess the americans did not face the same amount of DD/sub or DD/square sea mile ratio, they just couln't have .... I mean if they were firing at Jonks or whatever they are called ...

Have not read much about the pacific, but I guess cruises were long, and then ofcourse they probably had a sub designed for it, and when that sub found a merchant there were no DDs around ...... am I reasonably right or completely off the mark?

My view is Japan was a 'relatively' weak country that faced some strategical resource problems that it had to fix, and also a sense of the neighbours being weak, it had built a few units "which it was proud of", but did not have a complete balanced war machine that could sustain prolonged battle, ofcourse tracing back to the strategic resource problem, so I guess it could be easily hurt, and also that they could not take a loss of the grand proud units they built, so, at least versus the USA the whole campaign must be based on one success story after the other and that the victory after that should be political not military.

OK forget that then, was the subwar in the pacific a difficult one except from how long the cruises were. Speaking of that, hat bases did the US subs use?? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

While saying that the American submarine campaign succeeded whereas the German one failed, I did not intend an apples to apples comparison. Sorry for giving the wrong idea.

The Imperial Japanese Navy were not suited to fight an antisubmarine war. They were mainly configured for carrier operations or surface engagements and of course their own submarine efforts against the USA. Because of this, the American submariners did not face an increasingly daunting foe, whereas the U Waffe did in the case of the Royal Navy et al. They strove to attain an empire by military conquest but neglected to secure their resource transportation network.

Japan, as the United Kingdom, was a country which could not afford to lose a submarine campaign directed against them. The English realized this, the Japanese did not, until it was too late.

Germany by circumstances came to rely on the U-boats as their best means of bringing the British to defeat militarily. Germany's Navy was not ready for war in 1939, nor was the U Waffe. Therefore, it was more economical and feasible for Germany to use submarines against the British than to try to develop a large surface fleet which could challenge the Royal Navy. Germany could still win the war if they lost the U-boat war. Britain could not win the war without first defeating the U-boats.

For the American submariners as compared to the Germans, it would have been an "easier" war. The Germans were faced by an opponent who, once having recognized the importance of anti-submarine warfare, invested great resources into defeating them.

The Americans built submarines ideally suited for their operating environment: large, fairly comfortable, for the most part, "fleet boats" with extended cruising range. These they were able to operate from the Phillipines [whilst available], Hawaii and Australia, and whatever other bases I may have omitted. Like the Germans, they experienced difficulty at first with unreliable torpedoes. Once the torpedo problems were solved, they went to work with deadly efficiency. And, if I am not mistaken, they developed an operational search radar for their subs. On top of this, they had the support of their own Navy and air support which was dedicated to achieving the same end: destruction of the enemy's merchant fleet.

The U Waffe never enjoyed the full support of their own Luftwaffe. Goring insisted that anything that flew belonged to the Luftwaffe, which in turn belonged to him. He was very miserly when it came to giving support to the Kriegsmarine and U Waffe.

To sum up, the Americans were more practical and co-ordinated with their resources, which they devoted to defeating an enemy who never seemed to grasp the situation. The U Waffe lost the technology race against the Allies, not being able to counter that situation until it was too late.

Chrystine
09-02-2005, 07:39 PM
Some of this is hilarious€¦ http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

€˜Pet hamsters€ is brilliant€¦ http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

In more-seriousness tho€ €" I agree with those replies which seem to be saying in essence €" €˜the devil is in the details.€

Trydan€s Post, 1 Sept. 4:18 am. really is great €" and I agree completely.
I€ll say the same for Kaleun1961€s Post of same date, 6:00 am.

I€d add another €˜detail€ too €" it ought be made that Only steam torpedoes can be loaded into the external reserves. Electrical torps in the external reserves could not receive their mandatory pampering-maintenance and would very-shortly become worthless appendages and useless ballast.

Best!
~ C.

Kaleun1961
09-02-2005, 09:42 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Chrystine:



I€d add another €˜detail€ too €" it ought be made that Only steam torpedoes can be loaded into the external reserves. Electrical torps in the external reserves could not receive their mandatory pampering-maintenance and would very-shortly become worthless appendages and useless ballast.

Best!
~ C. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That makes sense. They had to haul them out of the torpedo tubes every now and then and check the charge condition of the batteries. A work-around for this would be to manually set the external torpedoes to steam. A bit of work, but possible. A possible twist would be that every now and then you would have a tube temporarily out of service for this reason, the crew are servicing the torpedo.

Mik1984
09-05-2005, 06:12 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WilhelmSchulz.-:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Dominicrigg:
pet hamsters. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Pet hamsters??? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif What the **** would need a pet hamster for??? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Haven't seen those stupid mangas with Ebichu, the pet hamster?

Anyway, Is there going to be a SH4 or at least an exp pack for SH3 at all? There is no talking about it anywhere...

wirelessg2.4ghz
09-05-2005, 10:01 AM
I don't know if anybody else had played Dangerous Waters, but for all those who talk about a modern day subsim with multiple platform types - thats exactly what it is.

Fly, hover, float, and dive.

bogusheadbox
09-05-2005, 10:41 AM
Dangerous waters has only two set backs.

A major bug with the helo platform with no known work around.

And the graphics.

Now. For those interested in a propper sim. Then you can disregard the graphics. And the helo bug is not a game destroying feature.

Add in the pluses that each station aboard the platform (sub, destroyer, helo, orion) are so accurately moddeled that even the forces have commented on them as a possible training tool.

Added together with the ability to play online with other people manning the different stations on your sub, destroyer etc.

And you do have a brilliant sim that not only has acceptable graphics. But has unparalleled realism in the way each station is modelled and performs.

Dangerous waters is a true acclaim to those that produced it.

But by crikeys. You had better set some real time aside to study how these systems work. Becuase this game has a mind boggling array of information your poor brain will have to swallow http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif

WilhelmSchulz.-
09-05-2005, 12:09 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by wirelessg2.4ghz:
I don't know if anybody else had played Dangerous Waters, but for all those who talk about a modern day subsim with multiple platform types - thats exactly what it is.

Fly, hover, float, and dive. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>But its a scripted mission campign not a dynamic.