PDA

View Full Version : Mounting Evidence



Thomas Norton
05-20-2004, 10:12 AM
Obvioulsy, when Tiberius and crew, arrived at E3-2004, they knew Silent Hunter III was going to face the sub sim public in a major way.
Alpha build or not, the buying public was about to see what the potential of Silent Hunter III held.
Some time has now passed since E3, and the evidence collected as reported by eye witnesses, leads to the following observations.
One, based upon the fine reporting of Mr Neal Stevens, of Subsim.com, we are informed that Silent Hunter III has no dynamic campaign built into the game engine. This is futher collaberated by Gamespy, and Gamespot, and a few other independent observations posted on the various game forms.
Silent Hunter III will have scripted missions, which lead to a random selectiion of three missions, that apparently take you through a campaign. Built into these missions, is a variable chance encounter matrix, seemingly to allow replay.
Gamespy, reports that missiion advancement will be based upon tonnage sunk.
Another preview of the future, though not seeing much print, is the comment made by Mr Stevens that indicates that Silent Hunter III, will have sub and destroyer battles "balanced" to make the simulation more interesting. Mr Stevens indicates he has a minor conern regarding this. I share his concern, in a major way.
It should be noted that while there is a large amount of disquiet over the above elements of Silent Hunter III, on this and subsim.com forms, the graphics are fantastic! It was reported that there was a constant crowed around the Silent Hunter III demonstration.
So, while the evidence points toa game that is not living up to most sub simmers expectations, it is certainly drawing crowds of potential buyers.
It is concievable, that a sub simmer is expected to buy Silent Hunter III, due to the fact it is a U-Boat game.
And, that may in fact be the verdict. You are going to buy it. This game is going to be praised for what it does do right. Does this sound familiar? Not only for a subsim, but how about a flight sim?

We few, we happy few, we band of brothers; For he today that sheds his blood with me Shall be my brother.

Thomas Norton
05-20-2004, 10:12 AM
Obvioulsy, when Tiberius and crew, arrived at E3-2004, they knew Silent Hunter III was going to face the sub sim public in a major way.
Alpha build or not, the buying public was about to see what the potential of Silent Hunter III held.
Some time has now passed since E3, and the evidence collected as reported by eye witnesses, leads to the following observations.
One, based upon the fine reporting of Mr Neal Stevens, of Subsim.com, we are informed that Silent Hunter III has no dynamic campaign built into the game engine. This is futher collaberated by Gamespy, and Gamespot, and a few other independent observations posted on the various game forms.
Silent Hunter III will have scripted missions, which lead to a random selectiion of three missions, that apparently take you through a campaign. Built into these missions, is a variable chance encounter matrix, seemingly to allow replay.
Gamespy, reports that missiion advancement will be based upon tonnage sunk.
Another preview of the future, though not seeing much print, is the comment made by Mr Stevens that indicates that Silent Hunter III, will have sub and destroyer battles "balanced" to make the simulation more interesting. Mr Stevens indicates he has a minor conern regarding this. I share his concern, in a major way.
It should be noted that while there is a large amount of disquiet over the above elements of Silent Hunter III, on this and subsim.com forms, the graphics are fantastic! It was reported that there was a constant crowed around the Silent Hunter III demonstration.
So, while the evidence points toa game that is not living up to most sub simmers expectations, it is certainly drawing crowds of potential buyers.
It is concievable, that a sub simmer is expected to buy Silent Hunter III, due to the fact it is a U-Boat game.
And, that may in fact be the verdict. You are going to buy it. This game is going to be praised for what it does do right. Does this sound familiar? Not only for a subsim, but how about a flight sim?

We few, we happy few, we band of brothers; For he today that sheds his blood with me Shall be my brother.

SailorSteve
05-20-2004, 11:14 AM
And yet another very well said message from yet another disappointed subsimmer. We can only hope they listen.

______________________________

Taxes are never levied for the benefit of the taxed.

Egan2.0
05-20-2004, 11:15 AM
'Balanced battles'? I hadn't heard that one before.... http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

Let me put it this way: I thought Enigma rising tide sucked, A very pretty game that was just far too 'bang bang' for my taste. The fact it had subs in it really wasn't a strong enough reason to buy it. I'm really beginning to feel that SH3 is gonna be much the same and i'm simply not interested.

If theres one thing that makes a simulation suck it's artificial balancing.

Do you ever get the feeling your screeming at a brick wall? C'mon Ubi, do the decent thing and sell the license to someone who aren't embarressed to make proper sims.....

Kejotikk
05-20-2004, 12:01 PM
They are seriously thinking of balancing the battles to make it more "interesting"?! Ok..that's it, no more constructive criticism.

The devs are freaking idiots!

Redwine
05-20-2004, 12:31 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Egan2.0:
'Balanced battles'? I hadn't heard that one before.... http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

Let me put it this way: I thought Enigma rising tide sucked, A very pretty game that was just far too 'bang bang' for my taste. The fact it had subs in it really wasn't a strong enough reason to buy it. I'm really beginning to feel that SH3 is gonna be much the same and i'm simply not interested.

If theres one thing that makes a simulation suck it's artificial balancing.

Do you ever get the feeling your screeming at a brick wall? C'mon Ubi, do the decent thing and sell the license to someone who aren't embarressed to make proper sims.....<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


I think so they are refering to a lot of claims in SH2 about "rope periscope linked DDs" and "laser guided Depth Charges"........

If we look about staistics, the probability of a DDs to sink a sub, was......

1% to 2 % at early times of war.......

this will be raised by technology and tactics to

30% in later times ......

and 35% and 40% in so later times.......

In early times DDs lethality was solow due to the low technology..... in example Russians do not develope high technology to hunt subs, and the results was incredible........

Russians expend 90.000 depth charges to sink only 7 german u-boote along the complete war.........

Only 250 was sunk by surface units and not all them by depth Charges......

I do not remember well, but about 1250 was buildd......

Some subs was under attack many hours and survive with no damage........

Examples.........

_________________________________

U427, attacking the convoy RA.66, 29 april 1945, was egaged and was attacked by canadian escorts, HMCS Haida and Iroquois..........

They launch 678 depth charges over the U427......... he scaped and survive.......

__________________________________

U744, a Type VIIC, 6 march 1944, attacking canadian convoy C2, under command of kapitan Heinz Blischke, was engaged by escorts HMS Kenilworth Castle, HMS Icarus, HMCS Chilliwack, HMCS Fennel, HMCS Chaudiere, HMCS Gatineau and HMCS St Catharines.......... U744 was under attack during 36 hours, was forced to surface due to oxigen need, but was not destroyed and no damage after 36 hours of attack......
_______________________________________


I think so a real simulator must to reflect the real statistics...........

Of course...... there will be some persons who will want the game more hard or more easy........

1]
Initially I think so the game must to reproduce real statistics.....

2]
Will be great if the Developer team let the codes open like as in SH2 to be able to make Customer adjustements........

3]
Then the user will be able to have a game UNREALLY HARD or UNREALLY EASY.......


The Dev Team is a great group of people........ and is working hard, it is imposible for them to satisfied all kind of opinions.......

I think so their hardest job is to resist our claims............

______________________________
.
http://personales.ciudad.com.ar/pietraroja/imagenes/firmas/EscudoU552b.jpg
.
The Ancient History of the Submarine
"Subgenesis" (http://www.iespana.es/Subgenesis/subgenesis/sg00.htm)

Manual TDC
"HTDC Tutorial" (http://www.iespana.es/rotteufel/htdc_tutorial/a_start.htm)
.

HeibgesU999
05-20-2004, 01:18 PM
i think they do need to make the depthcharge attacks a little more deadly than the historical figures.

i never get killed by the supposed "super accurate dc" attacks in SH2, but i know that if I don't take the proper defensive countermeasures they can easily get me.

although it might be more "realistic" to go with historical numbers, if you know there is almost no chance of you being killed, it is much less historically "authentic".

Egan2.0
05-20-2004, 01:30 PM
Ah, okay. If they meen altering the AI + DC's to reflect more realistic battles then, of course, i'm all for that!

Hopefully attacking convoys at night will become better, especially early in the war.

Late war I fully expect to get my **** kicked on a regular basis. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Redwine
05-20-2004, 03:46 PM
I soupose, if the Dev. Team let the files open to make changes, as in SH@, we will be able to make a fine adjustment of them after some weeks of play, if we are not satisfied......

Changing DDs settings, Sub armor, Sonar settings..... and depth charges lethal radius and damage.........

Will be better to have a slider with REAL settings at midium, and one or two steps at left and right to make the game easy for beginers and hard to Aces.....

But in my opinion ....a sim, must to simulate reality......... in medium setting it must to simulate real statistics.......

If you found them so easy, you can increase lethality.......

______________________________
.
http://personales.ciudad.com.ar/pietraroja/imagenes/firmas/EscudoU552b.jpg
.
The Ancient History of the Submarine
"Subgenesis" (http://www.iespana.es/Subgenesis/subgenesis/sg00.htm)

Manual TDC
"HTDC Tutorial" (http://www.iespana.es/rotteufel/htdc_tutorial/a_start.htm)
.

Drym
05-20-2004, 06:11 PM
Ripped straight from the FAQ:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> What kind of missions will there be?
SH3 will try to cover several types of mission inspired from the real actions of U-boats ranging from normal patrols with free roaming of the ocean in a patrol area to more historical scenarios inspired from real naval battles. Players will get a chance to be involved in single ship hunting, convoy battles in wolfpacks or cooperate with surface and air units in attacking enemy targets. Among other features, the player will have the option to replenish at sea, as well as access to reconnaissance plane assistance. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

From Neal Stevens of subsim.com who checked out SH3 at E3:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> The campaign is going to be very similar to the first SH1. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Roaming patrols? Convoy battles in wolfpacks? Resupply at sea? Working with recon aircraft? Sounds good to me http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif as long as the non-historical missions are randomized. As many have pointed out previously, nothing is worse than starting a patrol knowing exactly where to find the enemy, how many there are, speed, heading, and so on. Really spoils a sim.

The big question for me is how mod friendly will it be? Custom campaigns would be awesome! Gets me dreaming: relive the chronological careers of some famous U-boat men and see if you can do better, or how about a campaign dedicated to S. Atlantic and the Indian Ocean? East USA and the Caribbean? The possibilities!

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> Gamespy, reports that missiion advancement will be based upon tonnage sunk.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I've read the article and this is not an accurate statement. The Gamespy article does state the missions require you to sink tonnage, however it does not state that this is required to advance the campaign. In fact I argue that this is not the case at all.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> As you progress through the game, your crew (assuming they survive) will become more experienced and efficient in their jobs. The missions you're provided and your resources will also depend on how well you do as a U-boat commander. Do your job well and you'll be rewarded with better subs and experimental weaponry like acoustic torpedoes. Do your job poorly, and you'll find yourself depressingly short on your precious torpedoes.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Doing your job poorly to me would mean not realizing the objectives and tonnage requirements of not just one mission, but a number of them. In other words, you do not need to replay a mission simply because you did not meet the tonnage requirements or mission objectives.

RedTerex
05-21-2004, 12:30 AM
no serious offence intended but I am also a Raven Shield Rainbow 6-3 player. Yes thats right the heavily bugged and super heavily patched game....by Ubi-soft.
And when I heard that nUbi-Soft was holding the reigns for SH3 as well my heart sank faster than a crash dive at flank speed!

( JUST read that a person by the name of 'Kejotikk' already used a similar analogy in another post well before this one. I didnt copy it and have just inserted this note here back into my post..just proves that we all think the same. )

Sorry nUbi-Soft but my expectations wont surface past periscope depth !

But..........
You CAN prove us all wrong..you still have time to listen to us and make the right moves to improve what Could and Should be a great game after all the time and effort that the Dev team has put into it.

RedTerex

[This message was edited by RedTerex on Thu May 20 2004 at 11:40 PM.]

[This message was edited by RedTerex on Thu May 20 2004 at 11:41 PM.]

Redwine
05-21-2004, 09:46 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by RedTerex:

And when I heard that nUbi-Soft was holding the reigns for SH3 as well my heart sank faster than a crash dive at flank speed!

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I Feel the same, I am a "little bit" tired of Ubi Soft..........

______________________________
.
http://personales.ciudad.com.ar/pietraroja/imagenes/firmas/EscudoU552b.jpg
.
The Ancient History of the Submarine
"Subgenesis" (http://www.iespana.es/Subgenesis/subgenesis/sg00.htm)

Manual TDC
"HTDC Tutorial" (http://www.iespana.es/rotteufel/htdc_tutorial/a_start.htm)
.

Redwine
05-21-2004, 09:57 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by HeibgesU999:

i think they do need to make the depthcharge attacks a little more deadly than the historical figures.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Interesting point of view........

Why for ?

Is good to know another opinion........



<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by HeibgesU999:

i never get killed by the supposed "super accurate dc" attacks in SH2, but i know that if I don't take the proper defensive countermeasures they can easily get me.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Are you user of any PM Patch ?



<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by HeibgesU999:
although it might be more "realistic" to go with historical numbers, if you know there is almost no chance of you being killed, it is much less historically "authentic".<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sorry I can not understand it due ti my bad englis.........

Regards, Red.

______________________________
.
http://personales.ciudad.com.ar/pietraroja/imagenes/firmas/EscudoU552b.jpg
.
The Ancient History of the Submarine
"Subgenesis" (http://www.iespana.es/Subgenesis/subgenesis/sg00.htm)

Manual TDC
"HTDC Tutorial" (http://www.iespana.es/rotteufel/htdc_tutorial/a_start.htm)
.

Egan2.0
05-21-2004, 11:26 AM
RedTerex:
Yup, your right. Ubi has a golden opportunity here to make a landmark game. I for one REALLY want it to work out and be the best sum SIM ever.

One of the major problems I see it is that, with a possible september release date, all the major features of this game are locked in and won't be changed just because they have got the community worried.

It could go two ways, really. It could either be the game of our dreams or a world class example of getting it wrong. Its about time we got a worhty successor to SH1 and AOD. Will this game be it? Impossible to say......

altstiff
05-21-2004, 10:14 PM
I really would prefere a dynamic campaign system but what is most important to me is unscripted AI. They were VERY predictable in both previous SH games.

See you in the fence....

Asus P4B 533 Intel 2.4GHZ
1 GIG Ram
GeForce FX 5700 256MB (56.64)
SB Audigy
MSFF2 & X45 throttle

RedTerex
05-21-2004, 11:43 PM
I just hope as many of you are already doing so that along with great graphics, sound and it has to be said 'general' gist and the amount of hard work put into this game by the Devs that this Sub Sim is not sunk at sea with all hands lost. for the sake of a simple Dynamic Campaign (Please read the posts nUbi-soft http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/52.gif all the feedback is right here !)

For it would be a crying shame to lose what I can only imagine would be the planets best SubSim ever created for PC for the sake of ignoring the customer/player/Submarine lovers practical advices and wishes..unbeleivable !

I mean they have it all there, the screenies look absolutely super, the effects and 3d modelling looks...well...a subsim fans dream.
but will it ALL be lost by shortsightedness as it can be...so easily.

And if it can be lost so easily then it can be rectified so easily before disaster stikes.

Lets hope they listen, as it will be a long time before another equal comes out and Im not getting any younger.

regards

RedTerex

HeibgesU999
05-22-2004, 11:29 AM
i mean that if you know that you can't be killed once you dive below a certain depth, a lot of the tension is removed from the game.

that is about the only thing i didn't like about sh1. once you got below 300ft you were safe. you could now evade 6 destroyers at 64x time compression. its less scary.

Didn't the Allies have a rather limited depthsettings on the depthcharges compared to how deep a uboat could dive?

i guess you have to make a choice about what you would rather see simulated in this instance. its a choice between simulating historical algorithmic depthcharge accuraracy tables and simulating fear.

from the time the soundman announces depthcharge in the water, you come to flank speed and order radical changes in course and depth, but, for the most part....you can only wait.

imho, the fear factor is pretty important

but this is not to say i don't think the ubersurface sensor of escorts doesn't need some serious curtailing. i want to be able to do night surface attacks as much as the next guy.

but once forced to submerge, or detected while submerge, i am the hunted and not the hunter.

i takes about an hour per dd (an you better be in real time) to evade escorts in sh2. (1 hr for 1dd, 2hrs for 2 dds.

SailorSteve
05-22-2004, 01:10 PM
British depth charges could originally be set for any depth up to 300ft (91m). By 1943 they could be set for depths up to 1000ft (305m).

U.S. depth charges: early war standard Mk 7 could be set for any depth from 30 to 300ft (9-91m). The Mod 1 version entered service in August 1942; depth increased to 600ft (183m)
Mk 8: Magnetic and hydrostatic pistol. Magnetic pistol would set off the charge automatically if within 25ft (7.5m) of the sub. Hydrostatic pistol good to 500ft (152m). Spring 1943.
Mk 9, also issued in early 1943 could be set to 600ft, later modified to 1000ft.

Japanese depth charges:
Type 95: depth settings 30m (98ft), 60m (197ft) and 90m (295ft) only, nothing in between.
Type 2 (1942): depth settings as above with increases to 120m (394ft) and 145m (476ft).
The Japanese tended to assume that no submarine would be operating below 200 feet. They started changing this assumption in mid-1943.

Information from Naval Weapons of World War Two by John Campbell.

All this is to say that a U.S. sub being safe below 300 feet was not unusual, at least early in the war.

______________________________

Taxes are never levied for the benefit of the taxed.

Redwine
05-22-2004, 02:36 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by HeibgesU999:
i mean that if you know that you can't be killed once you dive below a certain depth, a lot of the tension is removed from the game.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well...... OK, I understand this point of view, but may be due my bad english...... I never talked about the maximun depth set for depth charges.......

Of course, this point splained by you is a good point.......

The problem in SH2 was it has so accurate DDs sonars........ and so big Depth Charges Lethal Radius....... plus depth charges has so big damage points level, and the subs has hull resistence based on its tonnage, wich is unreal, and make some small subs so vulnerable.....

I soupose this was taked in account when they talk about "Subs and DDs balanced".

Due to that my comment to Egan2.0 above........


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by HeibgesU999:
that is about the only thing i didn't like about sh1. once you got below 300ft you were safe. you could now evade 6 destroyers at 64x time compression. its less scary.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well I am agree with you about that but.......

What about reality ?

It is not good to know a trick to survive, but if it is not a trick, if it was a real advantage in some years of the war...... ?

I was at the side of to simulate the reality, I prefer the sim as near of reality as posible.......

Souposing this was a real advantage of american sub in the pacific war......... well, you can not stay under 300m for ever...... you will be enforced to surface in few hours, and you will be hunted............



<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by HeibgesU999:
Didn't the Allies have a rather limited depthsettings on the depthcharges compared to how deep a uboat could dive?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I soupose yes........ as Sailor Steve wrotte englands rise up settings in their depth charges at 305 m at 1943........



<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by HeibgesU999:
i guess you have to make a choice about what you would rather see simulated in this instance. its a choice between simulating historical algorithmic depthcharge accuraracy tables and simulating fear.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I respect your opinion, but I prefer see simulated the real capabilities of DDs and Subs year by year.....

What think you if i said........


"Dangerous Waters....... with active acoustics torps ? Nahhh....... too easy, just only straight ahead torps like in WW1 and WW2, to make the game more interesting.........."


Just it is not real...........


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by HeibgesU999:
from the time the soundman announces depthcharge in the water, you come to flank speed and order radical changes in course and depth, but, for the most part....you can only wait.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I do not believe it can be a help, sonar man can announces depoth charges in the water but he do not know if they was released above you, at one side or another..... or at front......

Attempt to evade depth charges afeter sonar man announce is matter of good luck only.......


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by HeibgesU999:
imho, the fear factor is pretty important<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Agree with you..........



<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by HeibgesU999:
but this is not to say i don't think the ubersurface sensor of escorts doesn't need some serious curtailing. i want to be able to do night surface attacks as much as the next guy.

but once forced to submerge, or detected while submerge, i am the hunted and not the hunter.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Agree with you, the surprise is the best weapon of the sub kapitan....... after be discovered.... he is only a prey.......

those romantics hollywood films showing those hard battles between a Dd and a Sub.......mmmhhh.

I soupose was some Kapitans so agresives, but many of them do not survive the war......

Some time I read about words of some Kapitan, I do not remember who, may be Topp......

He said, he wait for a good oportunity, if the oportunity was there but it put the sub in a too high risk, he forget it and wait for a better situation..........

When they was discovered, the only objective was to scape, not to fight against the Dds..........

I soupose this kind of kapitans with "cold brain" was those who survive the war and those who more tonnes sunks.........


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by HeibgesU999:
i takes about an hour per dd (an you better be in real time) to evade escorts in sh2. (1 hr for 1dd, 2hrs for 2 dds.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Here an interesting point..........

I want the game simulates reality capabilities of Dds and Subs........

But it must to simulate real behaviors too, there are many histories about DDs hunting sub by a complete day, and more....... and sub forced to surface by loss of air...........

DDs capabiliies to kill a sub was so low in real life..........

But we must not to be able to shake them easy in few time as one hour in example.........



I soupose the better way is to make the sim as near to reality as posible.........

And put as in SH2, a selection of precent of survability or a slider.........

Increasing or reducing the ability to survive and DDs capabilities according user pleasure........more easy than reality or more hard than reality.......

But at middle of the slider...... I want the reality simulated..........

A pleasure to share opinions with you, regards, Red.

______________________________
.
http://personales.ciudad.com.ar/pietraroja/imagenes/firmas/EscudoU552b.jpg
.
The Ancient History of the Submarine
"Subgenesis" (http://www.iespana.es/Subgenesis/subgenesis/sg00.htm)

Manual TDC
"HTDC Tutorial" (http://www.iespana.es/rotteufel/htdc_tutorial/a_start.htm)
.

HeibgesU999
05-22-2004, 02:53 PM
the thing is, the germans did not know the exact capabilites of allied depthcharges.

so if the depthcharges have "historic" values, you have, as a player, critical information that a kalue never had, the exact depth he could dive below to be safe from allied depthcharges.

this piece of information is so crucial, that allowing the player to have it changes the game much more than just saying that all dcs can be dropped to a depth of 1000ft.

and if they every make destroyercommand2, you would never get a destroyer to play a muliplayer game before 1943 if they could only drop their dcs to 550ft.

Egan2.0
05-22-2004, 05:59 PM
Although you are right when you say that U-boat skippers probably didn't have much in the way of hard and fast scientific evidence about DC depths, They certainly had a good enough idea about the DC capabilities.

In the book 'Walker RN' about Johnny Walker of the Second Support Group, a story is recounted about a U-boat skipper who simply went deep knowing that the DCs were ineffective at that depth (650 - 700 ft or so.) His entire game plan was hoping that the DDs would simply go away. Unfotunately he ended up having to surface and surrender due to the fact that the escorts simply played the waiting game better.

In SH3 i would like the AI to reflect this characteristic: tenacity and a willingness to see the job through. If the AI is good enough, knowing the technical stuff of the DCs shouldn't help us too much because there are other ways to get us...

Redwine
05-22-2004, 09:57 PM
Is not a help for the sub player to know if the depth Charges has historical settings related to , lethal radius, damage power.........


Difeerent situation is with depth charges max depth settings.......

May be if Subs can overdive, the Depth charges maximun depth settings......

I was preparing a mod for SH2 to increase crush depth......
If we read about maximun operative depths and crush depth, we can observe crush depth was near to double than maximun operative depth...........

In SH2, max operative depth is set as crush depth and are so low........

The problem was if we increase crush depth to more real values, subs can be able to overdive depth charges max depth settings....... resting interest to playability making the game too easy.......
For those mod was not done........


But I really prefer, a sim wich simulates reality as better as posibly.........

Subs may be modelated to overdive depth charges in some months of the war........ but DDs must to be modelates to be as hunter dogs....... to stay hunting hours nd hours....... as Egan2.0 described.......

______________________________
.
http://personales.ciudad.com.ar/pietraroja/imagenes/firmas/EscudoU552b.jpg
.
The Ancient History of the Submarine
"Subgenesis" (http://www.iespana.es/Subgenesis/subgenesis/sg00.htm)

Manual TDC
"HTDC Tutorial" (http://www.iespana.es/rotteufel/htdc_tutorial/a_start.htm)
.

HeibgesU999
05-22-2004, 10:58 PM
i totally agree. if i was forced to surface by a hunter killer group by exhausting my oxygen or battery, i would probably cry with happiness.

Redwine
05-23-2004, 11:57 AM
Will be great to have a real probability to survive, and have those neverending DDs attacks........

We had it now in SH2 with CB, DES 5 V3 Mod, and more pronunciated with the Historical Depth Charges Lethal Radius Mod....... 10, 20 up to 30 hours under attack and survive with only a 10 or 20 % of hull integrity....... very adrenalinic.........

______________________________
.
http://personales.ciudad.com.ar/pietraroja/imagenes/firmas/EscudoU552b.jpg
.
The Ancient History of the Submarine
"Subgenesis" (http://www.iespana.es/Subgenesis/subgenesis/sg00.htm)

Manual TDC
"HTDC Tutorial" (http://www.iespana.es/rotteufel/htdc_tutorial/a_start.htm)
.

WhiteKnight77
05-23-2004, 05:57 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by RedTerex:
no serious offence intended but I am also a Raven Shield Rainbow 6-3 player. Yes thats right the heavily bugged and super heavily patched game....by Ubi-soft.
And when I heard that nUbi-Soft was holding the reigns for SH3 as well my heart sank faster than a crash dive at flank speed!

( JUST read that a person by the name of 'Kejotikk' already used a similar analogy in another post well before this one. I didnt copy it and have just inserted this note here back into my post..just proves that we all think the same. )

Sorry nUbi-Soft but my expectations wont surface past periscope depth !

But..........
You CAN prove us all wrong..you still have time to listen to us and make the right moves to improve what Could and Should be a great game after all the time and effort that the Dev team has put into it.

RedTerex<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I feel your pain about RvS. I and others held great expectations about the new version of Rainbow Six, but I saw that there would be lots of problems even when the demos first came out.

Unlike Splinter Cell, RvS was and still is plagued by bugs. I hope that with SH3 Ubi gets things right and releases something that will not need patching every month.

While I am a casual player of SH2 and DC, I hope that SH3 provides as much gameplay as the earlier games do. I would prefer a good mix of both historical and random missions. I am not sure if I would want more accurate antisub work or not. If the tin cans had trouble hitting a sub with it's depth charges, the game should reflect that.

Staff GhostRecon.net (http://www.ghostrecon.net) | Aggression (http://www.agr-s.com)
WhiteKnight77 (http://whiteknight77.homestead.com/index.html) | Team Aggression (http://teamaggression.homestead.com/index.html)
http://whiteknight77.homestead.com/files/wksig01.gif

misha1967
05-24-2004, 11:04 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>And, that may in fact be the verdict. You are going to buy it.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
No.

I'm not.

And that IS the verdict.

Blackjack174
05-24-2004, 07:16 PM
@HeibgesU999:

there is no problem in making a multiplayer mission 1942 with realistic depth charges on DD

problem:
Deapth charges of that time only can reach ~550ft and gives one side an advantage ?

solution:
Build a multiplayer mission where the convoi is in water that never exceeds ~600ft in depth, so sub can be hit.
http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif