Silent Hunter 4 'Add On' Info

[TDK1044]

Some of you may be aware of this thread over at the Ubi Forum.

http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/6421019045/m/2551012895

Ubisoft has been planning to announce an add-on to Silent Hunter 4 that includes a new campaign, U-boats in the Pacific and Indian Ocean, and patch 1.4. The news was leaked prematurely on the Ubisoft forums.

[mookiemookie]

So, while I do genuinely appreciate the "heads up" he gave me, I have to say that posting publicly is probably not the best way to stay in communication with the devs—unless your source desired the nature of 1.4 to be leaked. I think it actually has the exact opposite effect of the desired, "I hope now that we will get the attention that we deserve..." comment. Instead, it says "When devs throw some active forum members a private bone at ubi, what do they do with it? Spill the beans."

Not what I'd have done publicly.

tater

Agreed. The patch 1.3 leak, and now this. :nope:

[mrbeast]

Hmmm think I can smell humble pie baking. :nope:

Hope its not for me, if it is make mine a small piece!! ;)

[tater]

If his public post had been as vague as the PM he sent me (basically a "you might not want to work too hard on the campaign until the patch due to what they told me" that I refered to in that quote as the "heads up"), he'd have not spilled any beans.

Odd that in a private note he'd be very circumspect, yet so explicit in that thread.

tater

[AVGWarhawk]

Thus far I have read complaints about the Uboat in the PTO. The uboat is to be in the Indian Ocean. If I'm not mistaken, this was a place of operation for the uboat. I'm really getting the feeling that some think they will be sailing a German uboat from Pearl!!!!!

[Bilge_Rat]

good news, plus this may finally entice the SH3 modders to switch to SH4.

[tater]

Yeah, while I'm not in favor of any "wasted" effort WRT add ons for Wolves of the PACIFIC, I have been trying to correct the notion at ubi that it is fantasy. Course the idea that 5-6 U-boats had more impact on the Pacific War then the entire IJN submarine force is patently absurd.

What some there fail to realize is the "bang for the buck" factor. I posted at the zoo about it after a fashion. Adding SH3 stuff had to be fairly easy for them, unlike adding japanese externals, internals and crew. The stuff is all there, and could be ported over in a straightforward way with just upgraded textures (1024, plus the added O and N stuff) and possibly upgraded DMs.

You can't fault them for doing that if it was easy to do. If they spent a lot of time creating german supply ships (most were sunk en route anyway) I'd be a little annoyed if they didn't make some badly needed small escorts for the IJN. Same reason, bang for the buck. Chose 3d units to build based on them, one, being targets/adversaries, two, being built in large numbers. To me that means coastal jap shipping, and/or matsu and a kaibokan.

tater

[John Channing]

If his public post had been as vague as the PM he sent me (basically a "you might not want to work too hard on the campaign until the patch due to what they told me" that I refered to in that quote as the "heads up"), he'd have not spilled any beans.

Odd that in a private note he'd be very circumspect, yet so explicit in that thread.

tater

In a pm he would not have got the attention that he craves. Hence the leak.

And they wonder why the developers shun that forum...

JCC

[letterboy1]

As long as they iron out some more code bugs with 1.4 which modders can't address (except with workarounds like starting out of Pearl at the other side of Midway for the dateline bug), then I don't care if they add Volkswagons and Lugers into SH4. As long as I can be an American sub commander starting out from Pearl in 1941, then I'll be happy because that's what I bought it for. But that's just me . . . I respect everyone's right to voice their preferences.:)

[Seeadler]

U 862 was the only U-boat which operated in the Pacific, all the other "Monsun" Boats had as area of operation the Indic Ocean and the South China Sea.

[AVGWarhawk]

As long as they iron out some more code bugs with 1.4 which modders can't address (except with workarounds like starting out of Pearl at the other side of Midway for the dateline bug), then I don't care if they add Volkswagons and Lugers into SH4. As long as I can be an American sub commander starting out from Pearl in 1941, then I'll be happy because that's what I bought it for. But that's just me . . . I respect everyone's right to voice their preferences.:)

Thats the spirit Letterboy1:up: But, we can now think globally for both PTO and ETO within the same game.:yep:

[Captain Vlad]

Does seem a bit silly to me to expand on a WWII Pacific Theater submarine game by modelling German U-Boats so we can play out obscure Kriegsmarine operations that had little to no impact on the Pacific or European wars.

Especially since there are American submarines that have not been modelled, Japanese escorts that would be great to see in an official patch, etc, etc, etc.

That said, I am happy support for the game is continuing. I just have to question why they're pursuing objectives that are, as one might say, not related to the overall mission. It'd have been much, much more immersive/logical to add the capability to play Japanese submarines (despite their low impact on the war) or perhaps Allied boats, such as those of the Dutch or British.

[iambecomelife]

I have mixed feelings about this. Some of the people at the Ubi forum are understandably upset that U-Boats are going to be modeled i/s of Japanese subs and/or several important American classes.

The implication that Japanese subs did not really have an impact on the war is strange, and slightly offensive IMO. The Japanese fought bravely under a faulty tactical doctrine, and I am sure the survivors of the "Juneau", "Wasp", and "Indianapolis" would have some pretty strong opinions of their own about the Japanese's effectiveness. :roll:

I do appreciate that they are still willing to provide support for the game at this late date, especially since many people consider simulations to be a money losing proposition.

My main hope is that by concentrating on the most important aspects of porting over U-Boats and a Kriegsmarine career, the developers will enable modders from "Atlantic Sharks" and maybe some people from the GWX team to create a fully functional U-Boat campaign using SH4. The main concerns would be adding more Atlantic shipping lanes (easy), porting AI vessels & aircraft (fairly easy), adding any U-Boats and weaponry not included in this upcoming add-on (hard) and making appropriate career/interface screens (fairly hard).

[tater]

Perhaps the added u-boat functionality will allow an easy way to have multiple nationality campaigns. Select country, then select fleet and year.

Might make it a little easier to mod in dutch and brit boats...

tater

[Greentimbers]

Not knowing for sure what will be added with this patch(addon?), all I can say is THANK YOU developers and Ubi for taking the time and money to add to my enjoyment of SHIII and SHIV. :up:

[The General]

I think a few people are missing one glaring benefit of this add-on, namely, Sub Vs Sub in Multiplayer mode. I personally think it'd be pretty cool to have the choice of playing either a German or American Sub in Multiplayer, don't you? Besides, I kinda miss my old U-boat from SH3. I know it's not historically accurate, but it sure sounds like fun! Imagine looking through your periscope 100 feet down and seeing a Gato class (crewed by another human in Cyberspace) headed in your direction? Or even better, picking it up on Sonar! Awesome!

[tater]

Iadding any U-Boats and weaponry not included in this upcoming add-on (hard) and making appropriate career/interface screens (fairly hard).

In the case of some of the SH3 weapons (ships, anyway) it seems to be as simple as placing the guns.dat/.sim/.zon files inside Library.

RSRD has added such a file (I assume it was from SH3 to go with the converted SH3 ships). I used some of the SH3 weapons in a test, and I can just add them to SH4 ships with the eqps.

I'm not saying it is easy for all of it, but that aspect was surprisingly straight forward, least in my tests.

tater

[Limerick]

As a daily member of the Ubi forum (lane2512) I want to chime in here.

MANY did not support KrazyFrenchy.......he requested my help in posting his 'call-in' thread here in this forum and I declined.

I understand the rivalary between the forums. It is natural (hell 99.99% of both forums is pure testosterone). But Ubi has some good people, people who's focus is as dedicated to the PTO as many of the forum members on Subsim.

One of the things that is overlooked is that the Ubi forum is generally going to be the first forum visited by a new skipper simply because of the fact that it is linked to the game via the start menu. Regular Ubi forum members, like myself, gladly point new skippers to this forum for information and mod listings. One of the things that has been very noticable, and welcome, in the last month, is the increased cross traffic between forums. That benefits both of our chosen venues.

Beer and BBQ is available on my deck anytime.

Cheers.

[tater]

The one multiplayer thing that I'd really like to see added (for single player ;) ) is no instant success. Meaning that you only find out what sank after you RTB.

tater

[AVGWarhawk]

The world will be our ocean! After all, it was a global conflict. Imagine if you would, all SH3 with the SH4 engine. Years of enjoyment, modding and playing.

[tater]

I'm sure that will interest many, though I'll not be taking any u-boats for a spin myself.

tater

[KrvKpt. Falke]

If its true with playable u-boats - then - in my opinion - it augurs well for future: theres hope that SH5 will have at least two campagins (Pacific and Atlantic). Or even not SH5, but SH4 will be expanded with such addons.
But with uboats or not - i hope the Devs would fix this game so i can play full carreer, not a single mission once a week when im tired of SH3...

[The General]

I'm sure that will interest many, though I'll not be taking any u-boats for a spin myself.

taterWhy?

[MONOLITH]

I never go to the UBI forums.

This is my first contact with KFM.

Is it me, or is he rather "Self Important" to himself?

And if he is leaking out things that UBI trusted him with, he needs an ass kicking.

[mrbeast]

Actually I'm a little disappointed that they chose to go with U boats in the Indian Ocean and not Japanese subs. Would have added a massive new dimension to the game. I've read quite a few accounts of encounters with japanese subs and seem to have been a fairly common occurance, plus the threat of enemy units lurking unseen outside US bases would inject a little excitement to some of the more mundane parts of the game.

[AVGWarhawk]

I'm sure that will interest many, though I'll not be taking any u-boats for a spin myself.

taterWhy?


I'm staying with the submarine as well. Perhaps Tater has had his fill of the uboats. My interests are with the PTO.

[The General]

@Limerick a.k.a. Lane

I appreciate your getting in touch. I'm sure that any rivalry that exists between forums is purely for fun. I personally bare you guys no ill will, Crazy French Man will no doubt be punished for his sins in time.

[The General]

I'm sure that will interest many, though I'll not be taking any u-boats for a spin myself.

taterWhy?


I'm staying with the submarine as well. Perhaps Tater has had his fill of the uboats. My interests are with the PTO.How can you guys call yourselves subsim fans and not wanna check out the semi-new U-boat models in a SH4 (ROW enhanced) environment?! When, for example, you could get close enough to a buddy [in Multiplayer mode], who's on the bridge of a U-boat, while you're on your Gato, to hear him shriek 'ALARM!' in German as he dives his U-boat to get of the way of your deck gun!? How could you wanna miss out on fun like that!?

[AVGWarhawk]

I'm sure that will interest many, though I'll not be taking any u-boats for a spin myself.

taterWhy?

I'm staying with the submarine as well. Perhaps Tater has had his fill of the uboats. My interests are with the PTO.How can you guys call yourselves subsim fans and not wanna check out the semi-new U-boat models in a SH4 (ROW enhanced) environment?!
I will check them out, no doubt. But currently I want to grow with SH4 and explore this theater of war, much like I did with the Atlantic. I have books on top of books about the Atlantic. Now I'm getting book after book for the PTO. New subject matter for me. Not to mention my work on the USS Torsk. It is were my interests lay.

[Nightmare]

I'm sure that will interest many, though I'll not be taking any u-boats for a spin myself.

taterWhy?
I can’t speak for tater, but in my case I won’t be playing a u-boat either. For me, a lot of it has to do with that we’ve been playing the German side of things for 6+ years since Silent Hunter 2 was released. The original Silent Hunter was released back in 1996, which put a Pacific focused game well over due. As hard as it seems to some people that prefer the Atlantic side of things, some of us actually prefer the Pacific. Neither side is/was more important than the other, however that is honestly where our interest is. Just like some won’t play the Silent Hunter 4 as they have zero interest in the Pacific, that is there right and I don’t fault them for it.

My only concern about the addition of U-boats is if it was done at the sacrifice of fixing, tweaking, or adding other features. For me, I’d rather have had the Narwhal class added as a playable sub and additional Japanese capital ships.

[tater]

I have no interest in roleplaying a u-boat captain. I'll happily SINK u-boats. I didn't ever buy SH3 because as good as it looked, I have no interest in sinking allied shipping. I've been in ww2ol since beta, and I have never spawned german in there, either. Haven't flown ~half the planes in Il-2, either. I love seeing new tanks in there for the germans though---on fire. :arrgh!:

tater

[MONOLITH]

Here's what I'm thinking, after absorbing what's being given to us;

When I'm playing SH4, I can scroll the nav map over to the ATO.

There is already a mod that put's the training missions off the Long Island/Connecticut coast.

We can be in the ATO.

Now, Dan and his team are going to give us Uboats, done in the SH4 engine.

This puts us halfway to creating SH3 in the SH4 engine.

A German Uboat Atlantic campaign, with the SH4 engine, never smelled so close.


Am I wrong here?

[The General]

Part of me hopes that by doing this Ubisoft are kinda closing the book on WWII and making way for a Cold War era Silent Hunter! Yeaahhh!! :rock:

@Monolith

No, Monobrow, you're not wrong. Except that SH4 uses the SH3 engine, not the other way around. Bye bye WW II!

[tater]

^^^ where we can historically never fire a shot in anger?

Not my cup of tea :D

tater

[The General]

^^^ where we can historically never fire a shot in anger?

taterThat's true, but it'd be fun getting up to ramming speed in a Nuclear Sub! :rotfl:

[tater]

"Sir, there's a jap fishing trawler above us."

"Surface the boat!"

:lol:

[The General]

:rotfl: :damn:

[Misfit138]

Don't know about the rest of you but I really hope that the devs will bring that Abraham Lincoln looking dude in to this game. Can anyone still remember him from those early vids?

:smug:

[AVGWarhawk]

Don't know about the rest of you but I really hope that the devs will bring that Abraham Lincoln looking dude in to this game. Can anyone still remember him from those early vids?

:smug:
Ah yes, Capt Ahab. He said something about a big white whale and then started just muttering. -shrug-

[MONOLITH]

Except that SH4 uses the SH3 engine

Sort of.

It's still based on the GDS engine, but a much improved version.

Not only is that clearly visually obvious, but I can get a quote from Dan on it. It's more than apropriate to call it the SH4 engine.

You don't really want me to play wth your name too, do you?

[Rockin Robbins]

Looks like KFM continues his god complex. What a loser! He is totally blind to the fact that his only function in this has been that of a shell hole in a submarine.:rotfl:He thinks violating confidences with Ubi is proof if his "habilities." I'm glad I spend my time here, and that he had the good sense to send his surrogate.

[gymrat57]

I think the dev team is trying to give us our monies worth.
Maybe to make up for all the stuff that we have had to endure.
Also maybe the Great Mods we use may of had something to do with the higher up's
to proceed on this course.
Maybe an Olive Branch,perhaps:sunny:

From my "3rd time" in the China Sea, just back from the "3rd" agent thing. :rotfl:

gymrat

[The General]

Except that SH4 uses the SH3 engine You don't really want me to play wth your name too, do you?Yeah, I think that could be kinda fun. But first you gotta justify, in a single paragraph, why SH5 shouldn't be Cold-War era?

[The General]

Looks like KFM continues his god complex. What a loser! He is totally blind to the fact that his only function in this has been that of a shell hole in a submarine.:rotfl:He thinks violating confidences with Ubi is proof if his "habilities." I'm glad I spend my time here, and that he had the good sense to send his surrogate.He hasn't got a Messiah or 'God' complex. His actions stem from an inferiority complex and justifiably so, he is inferior.

[Rockin Robbins]

How can you guys call yourselves subsim fans and not wanna check out the semi-new U-boat models in a SH4 (ROW enhanced) environment?! When, for example, you could get close enough to a buddy [in Multiplayer mode], who's on the bridge of a U-boat, while you're on your Gato, to hear him shriek 'ALARM!' in German as he dives his U-boat to get of the way of your deck gun!? How could you wanna miss out on fun like that!?

I dunno General, I guess it's called personal preference, the reason we have all these mod things anyway. I'd guess modders have stronger personal preferences than most the rest of us and that's what motivates them to do all that work we appreciate.:up:

[Rockin Robbins]

Looks like KFM continues his god complex. What a loser! He is totally blind to the fact that his only function in this has been that of a shell hole in a submarine.:rotfl:He thinks violating confidences with Ubi is proof if his "habilities." I'm glad I spend my time here, and that he had the good sense to send his surrogate.He hasn't got a Messiah or 'God' complex. His actions stem from an inferiority complex and justifiably so, he is inferior.

I gotta unconditionally surrender to that one: point, game and match to The General for that observation:rock:!

[mrbeast]

^^^ where we can historically never fire a shot in anger?

Not my cup of tea :D

tater

Don't think there will ever be a cold war era sub sim entirely for that reason.

[The General]

How can you guys call yourselves subsim fans and not wanna check out the semi-new U-boat models in a SH4 (ROW enhanced) environment?! When, for example, you could get close enough to a buddy [in Multiplayer mode], who's on the bridge of a U-boat, while you're on your Gato, to hear him shriek 'ALARM!' in German as he dives his U-boat to get of the way of your deck gun!? How could you wanna miss out on fun like that!?

I dunno General, I guess it's called personal preference, the reason we have all these mod things anyway. I'd guess modders have stronger personal preferences than most the rest of us and that's what motivates them to do all that work we appreciate.:up:Uh, that's a pretty weak argument. I urge you to re-read carefully what I wrote above. It's all about fun! You aren't actually influencing the outcome of WWII you know?

[gymrat57]

Ya Got to admit. This is alot of fun for the money we put down on this game.:up:

[The General]

^^^ where we can historically never fire a shot in anger?

Not my cup of tea :D

tater

Don't think there will ever be a cold war era sub sim entirely for that reason.Well, I hate to tell you this; but this forum is dedicated to submarine simulation fans and to miss out on the entire Cold-War era of electro/diesel and Nuclear subs would be criminal to any serious subsim fan! There are subs out in the oceans of the world right now, conducting war games and I assure you the danger is pretty f*%ing real to them!

[MONOLITH]

why SH5 shouldn't be Cold-War era?



I'm actually with you on that one. I would be playing Dangerous Waters if it wasn't missing a few thousand polygons and some human element.

I would gladly play a Cold War Era SH game. :up:


We've had WW2 ATO and PTO, I'm all for moving forward into new territory.

[gymrat57]

:up:

[The General]

Ya Got to admit. This is alot of fun for the money we put down on this game.:up:Amen to that Brother!

@Monobrow

Holy smoke! Somebody agree's with me! I think I'm gonna cry!:cry:

[Hitman]

This puts us halfway to creating SH3 in the SH4 engine.

A German Uboat Atlantic campaign, with the SH4 engine, never smelled so close.


Am I wrong here?

Thanks God I'm not the only one who inmediately saw that :D Though I had to come to page 2 of the thread before Monolyth sayed it.....

It is obvious that the Dev Team is giving us the TOOLS and BASICS we can't encode ourselves, to allow the modders fill the rest of the Atlantic campaign!!! Thety're giving us two sims for the price of one, even if the modding community will need to hammer hard (Nothing they had not already been doing enthusiastically). The only thing left now will be to to port some more ships/planes from SH3 and create the new german Flotillas and campaign layers for the Atlantic :D

Oh my God....they have eyes but they can't see :damn:

[gymrat57]

SH5

Red Oct stuff.

Sound Good!:lol:

[The General]

Oh my God....they have eyes but they can't see :damn:Or..."Boy, I've got vision while the rest of the world wears bifocals." Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid - William Goldman

[The General]

SH5

Red Oct stuff.

Sound Good!:lol:Yeah, that's what I say! Who here loves The Hunt for Red October?!........Everybody right!? Right! Of course SH5 should be Cold-War era! It's the next logical step!

[MONOLITH]

@Monobrow



I'm about to take my agreement back.

[Rockin Robbins]

How can you guys call yourselves subsim fans and not wanna check out the semi-new U-boat models in a SH4 (ROW enhanced) environment?! When, for example, you could get close enough to a buddy [in Multiplayer mode], who's on the bridge of a U-boat, while you're on your Gato, to hear him shriek 'ALARM!' in German as he dives his U-boat to get of the way of your deck gun!? How could you wanna miss out on fun like that!?
I dunno General, I guess it's called personal preference, the reason we have all these mod things anyway. I'd guess modders have stronger personal preferences than most the rest of us and that's what motivates them to do all that work we appreciate.:up:Uh, that's a pretty weak argument. I urge you to re-read carefully what I wrote above. It's all about fun! You aren't actually influencing the outcome of WWII you know?
Tater said that he wouldn't want to play as the U-Boat. You said the above, not putting tater in the U-Boat. Look, if we're going to argue, we have to have different positions here. It just ain't happening!:rotfl:

Personally, I'd love to run a U-Boat in the Indian ocean. I'd have to learn about what the real ones did, and I always have loved SH3 (am I allowed to say that any more?:oops:) I don't carry any animosities from the war with me as I play these games.

The point I'm proud of is that the United States demonstrated without question that it was a new kind of victor, not exacting penalties as the Allies did in World War I, not annexing conquered territory as its own as the Soviets did after the same war, but rebuilding its former enemies to function as independent entities to rejoin the community of nations as equals. Keeping with the spirit of that kind of victory precludes us from continuing the hostilities that victory conquered. Both Germany and Japan are world leaders today, not puppets of the US. That is by design and it is the best possible outcome of the war. In fact, it would qualify as a miracle if we were to permitted to credit such things any more.

[cdrsubron7]

I'm not very excited about seeing U-boats adding to SHIV, but as I have no say in the matter, Ubisoft can put whatever they like in their 1.4 patch. I've been a member of this forum for many years and always enjoy my time that I spend here. I've also been spennding alot of time at the UbiForums lately also, I enjoy my time spent there also. Now as for the krazyfrenchman, my opinion is that that man likes to blow his own horn and doesn't really matter about what. Time will tell as to how effective the 1.4 patch will be.

[The General]

@Monobrow



I'm about to take my agreement back.Oops, sorry Monolith, just a bit of fun.;)

[Penelope_Grey]

Well I'm over the moon about the inclusion of a U-boat element in SH4. I like SH4 as a game, its beautiful to behold and the times I have played it, I enjoyed, apart from them ridiculous bugs it has... Which can grind one down after a time.

U-boats in SH4, I wonder if you will get an option to play them? though my main interest in SH4 will be seeing them bugs fixed.

[bigboywooly]

Personally, I'd love to run a U-Boat in the Indian ocean. I'd have to learn about what the real ones did,.

Uboat.net has a bit on the ole monsoon boats

http://uboat.net/ops/monsun.htm

[gymrat57]

Well I'm over the moon about the inclusion of a U-boat element in SH4. I like SH4 as a game, its beautiful to behold and the times I have played it, I enjoyed, apart from them ridiculous bugs it has... Which can grind one down after a time.

U-boats in SH4, I wonder if you will get an option to play them? though my main interest in SH4 will be seeing them bugs fixed.

I do think this is a good point! The bugs is a BIG thing.

[capt_frank]

I'm taking whatever their giving...:up:

[Penelope_Grey]

Truthfully I prefer the Atlantic, however, I'm not aversed to have a dabble with SH4. I do think the U-boats are better in terms of you are the underdog, you know, no matter what you are going to lose... and I think that is a cool twist in a game as with games you play, you expect to win don't you? You can't win at SH3 its not possible. All you can do is survive.

This add on could well pave the way for some awesome stuff, who is to say.

[Wilcke]

The world will be our ocean! After all, it was a global conflict. Imagine if you would, all SH3 with the SH4 engine. Years of enjoyment, modding and playing.

Well I am ready for my heaping plate of crow! No, really aside from the 1.04 fixes this alleged patch will fix.......the rest is hard to judge....but the possibilities sure look good in an optimistic way.

I will still keep my current install as is and a add a second install! Like I said previously my current install is very, very good!

Wilcke

[mrbeast]

^^^ where we can historically never fire a shot in anger?

Not my cup of tea :D

tater

Don't think there will ever be a cold war era sub sim entirely for that reason.Well, I hate to tell you this; but this forum is dedicated to submarine simulation fans and to miss out on the entire Cold-War era of electro/diesel and Nuclear subs would be criminal to any serious subsim fan! There are subs out in the oceans of the world right now, conducting war games and I assure you the danger is pretty f*%ing real to them!

Don't get me wrong would be interesting to see a Cold War Era subsim (I've got K19 on DVD the early Nuclear boats are very interesting even if a little dangerous!). I don't think there is enough there though to sustain a sim of a period that didn't see any 'hot' naval war.

Modern subsims get away with the 'what if' scenarios because, as they are usually set in the very near future they don't spoil the atmosphere with the knowledge that the cold war never turned hot.

[SteamWake]

First let me say it is a crying shame and a travisty that 'someone' leaked this. In my eyes they betrayed a trust and should be ashamed of their actions like a little child.

Phew... now that is off my chest.

The dev's probably made the best decision as to model Uboats in lieu of other boats.

They open intrest to some players who like the Uboats so had no interest in SH4.

Now you can have your cake and eat it too. Uboats with awsome graphics.

Lets see how the game play is.

I also hope that they paid as much attention to the bugs as they did to adding content.

Lastley I end with a question.

How much ?

Is this going to be a payware addittion or a labor of love ?

[gymrat57]

I have not look lately on how many gigs I got in this game. The sound files,
the MOD ROW, "thanks this is classic" ,TM 1.6+, the "J" man ,the patches , all the forums,all the backups of DVDS of stuff that I got are way COOL
All this just because of a crappy first press of the game disk. Thank's UBI.
;)

[Bilge_Rat]

Lastley I end with a question.

How much ?

Is this going to be a payware addittion or a labor of love ?


labor of love? we are talking about Ubisoft after all.

I would guess $ 19.99, download only.

then in a few months, they will package it into SH4 and resell it as SH4 GOLD for $ 49.99.

[THE_MASK]

Well if you have playable uboats in SH4 then bye bye SH3 modders . Welcome to SH4 . More sales of SH4 for UBi .

[The General]

Modern subsims get away with the 'what if' scenarios because, as they are usually set in the very near future they don't spoil the atmosphere with the knowledge that the cold war never turned hot.Well, I'm ashamed to say that I didn't think of this. :oops: I retract my idea to limit SH5 to the Cold-War. As you've hinted at, a near future theoretical campaign could be what we need, a Red Storm Rising like scenario anyone? I just wanted to see a sim incorporating Post WW II diesel/electric subs and some of the early Nukes, including the odd reactor leak and everything! :huh:

[Captain Vlad]

Oh my God....they have eyes but they can't see :damn:

I see it. I'd just rather see more attention being focussed on the Pacific. Was stuck in the grimy interior of a clunky little Type VII for six years. I want the luv for the USN fleet boats to have priority in the game that was supposed to be theirs.:D

[mrbeast]

Modern subsims get away with the 'what if' scenarios because, as they are usually set in the very near future they don't spoil the atmosphere with the knowledge that the cold war never turned hot.Well, I'm ashamed to say that I didn't think of this. :oops: I retract my idea to limit SH5 to the Cold-War. As you've hinted at, a near future theoretical campaign could be what we need, a Red Storm Rising like scenario anyone? I just wanted to see a sim incorporating Post WW II diesel/electric subs and some of the early Nukes, including the odd reactor leak and everything! :huh:

Now that idea certainly has legs:up:

Many scenarios to be played out here:

1. A resurgent Russian fleet backs up an increasingly agressive foreign policy. Maybe Russia attempts to take control of the Arctic Ocean so as to exploit natural resources. Imagine sub to sub combat under the Ice!

2. China attempts to control the pacific with an enlarged fleet of SSN's.

3. Iran tries to force US from Arabian Gulf with her KIlo class subs etc.

And thats just three off the top of my head linked to RL events and developments in the world.

[Bilge_Rat]

exclusive pictures of the new SH4 addon loading menu:

http://img430.imageshack.us/img430/3111/allyourbase18hk.jpg

[sqk7744]

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

[sqk7744]

Modern subsims get away with the 'what if' scenarios because, as they are usually set in the very near future they don't spoil the atmosphere with the knowledge that the cold war never turned hot.Well, I'm ashamed to say that I didn't think of this. :oops: I retract my idea to limit SH5 to the Cold-War. As you've hinted at, a near future theoretical campaign could be what we need, a Red Storm Rising like scenario anyone? I just wanted to see a sim incorporating Post WW II diesel/electric subs and some of the early Nukes, including the odd reactor leak and everything! :huh:
Now that idea certainly has legs:up:

Many scenarios to be played out here:

1. A resurgent Russian fleet backs up an increasingly agressive foreign policy. Maybe Russia attempts to take control of the Arctic Ocean so as to exploit natural resources. Imagine sub to sub combat under the Ice!

2. China attempts to control the pacific with an enlarged fleet of SSN's.

3. Iran tries to force US from Arabian Gulf with her KIlo class subs etc.

And thats just three off the top of my head linked to RL events and developments in the world.

Good points mrbeast!

There's a reason Atlantic subs are redeploying to the Pacific ;)

[mookiemookie]

I would like to add a few words in DeepBlueWolf's memory and I am sure --my friend up there where you are-- that you have a smile on your face. It is mainly because of him that I pushed myself into collecting the information; took the time to share what I knew with the very few so much priviledged to get the "preview".

Another gripe I have about this whole deal...he drags DeepBlueWolf's name into this again, and is called out later in the Ubi thread about it. I just find that to be in very poor taste considering the fact that he leaked this priveledged info. :down:

[TDK1044]

I totally agree, mookiemookie. Check out my last post in that thread (I'm shadow_858 over there) I really thought it was time to say it as it is. :D

[Kpt. Lehmann]

This puts us halfway to creating SH3 in the SH4 engine.

A German Uboat Atlantic campaign, with the SH4 engine, never smelled so close.


Am I wrong here?

Thanks God I'm not the only one who inmediately saw that :D Though I had to come to page 2 of the thread before Monolyth sayed it.....

It is obvious that the Dev Team is giving us the TOOLS and BASICS we can't encode ourselves, to allow the modders fill the rest of the Atlantic campaign!!! Thety're giving us two sims for the price of one, even if the modding community will need to hammer hard (Nothing they had not already been doing enthusiastically). The only thing left now will be to to port some more ships/planes from SH3 and create the new german Flotillas and campaign layers for the Atlantic :D

Oh my God....they have eyes but they can't see :damn:

SilentHunter 3.5 :rock: :rock: :rock:

[Torps]

Some of you may be aware of this thread over at the Ubi Forum.

http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/6421019045/m/2551012895

Ubisoft has been planning to announce an add-on to Silent Hunter 4 that includes a new campaign, U-boats in the Pacific and Indian Ocean, and patch 1.4. The news was leaked prematurely on the Ubisoft forums.


Sweet, I was kinda right about the post under new GWX aircraft about the possibilities.

[The General]

Damn it's good to see you GWX guys again!

[Sailor Steve]

SilentHunter 3.5 :rock: :rock: :rock:
Copywrited! I said it at least a year ago! I'll expect my two cents in the mail by Thursday.

And I don't care if it costs $0.41 to mail it!:rotfl:

[MONOLITH]

Thanks God I'm not the only one who inmediately saw that :D Though I had to come to page 2 of the thread before Monolyth sayed it.....

It is obvious that the Dev Team is giving us the TOOLS and BASICS we can't encode ourselves, to allow the modders fill the rest of the Atlantic campaign!!! Thety're giving us two sims for the price of one, even if the modding community will need to hammer hard (Nothing they had not already been doing enthusiastically). The only thing left now will be to to port some more ships/planes from SH3 and create the new german Flotillas and campaign layers for the Atlantic :D

Oh my God....they have eyes but they can't see :damn:


Exactly my thinking.

The Atlantic Sharks already had one started, now they will be given gifts from heaven to use.

SH3's shelf life is coming to a close, so the GWX crew will make their way over to the future, which is here.

That's 2.

And quite frankly, if no one else did it, I'd put together a team of my own. Bringing the german campaign of SH3 into the updated SH4 engine really gets my blood flowing, and we clearly have the talent here that already know the files inside and out.

One way or another, I believe this is going to happen.

[mookiemookie]

SilentHunter 3.5 :rock: :rock: :rock: Copywrited! I said it at least a year ago! I'll expect my two cents in the mail by Thursday.

And I don't care if it costs $0.41 to mail it!:rotfl:

I remember this! The "Kaleun's Edition!" Give that man a cigar! :|\\:lol:

[Rockin Robbins]

I would like to add a few words in DeepBlueWolf's memory and I am sure --my friend up there where you are-- that you have a smile on your face. It is mainly because of him that I pushed myself into collecting the information; took the time to share what I knew with the very few so much priviledged to get the "preview".
Another gripe I have about this whole deal...he drags DeepBlueWolf's name into this again, and is called out later in the Ubi thread about it. I just find that to be in very poor taste considering the fact that he leaked this priveledged info. :down:

The man (I use the term loosely) will stop at nothing.... and remember, in view of his slimy betrayal, we should not ever "doubt his habilities" again. Anybody looking for a decent definition of "demagogue" just needs to read his two threads. And he has actual followers!:know: I just hope that Ubi and the devs realize that he represents nobody. If they think he actually represents the point of view of most owners of Silent Hunter 4, we can kiss the subsim genre goodbye. The man is not our friend. As John Kay of Steppenwolf sang:

Remember if you plan to stay
Those who give can take away
Don't bite the hand that feeds you.

[THE_MASK]

A little leak is good , it keeps people interested .

[Kpt. Lehmann]

Thanks God I'm not the only one who inmediately saw that :D Though I had to come to page 2 of the thread before Monolyth sayed it.....

It is obvious that the Dev Team is giving us the TOOLS and BASICS we can't encode ourselves, to allow the modders fill the rest of the Atlantic campaign!!! Thety're giving us two sims for the price of one, even if the modding community will need to hammer hard (Nothing they had not already been doing enthusiastically). The only thing left now will be to to port some more ships/planes from SH3 and create the new german Flotillas and campaign layers for the Atlantic :D

Oh my God....they have eyes but they can't see :damn:


Exactly my thinking.

The Atlantic Sharks already had one started, now they will be given gifts from heaven to use.

SH3's shelf life is coming to a close, so the GWX crew will make their way over to the future, which is here.

That's 2.

And quite frankly, if no one else did it, I'd put together a team of my own. Bringing the german campaign of SH3 into the updated SH4 engine really gets my blood flowing, and we clearly have the talent here that already know the files inside and out.

One way or another, I believe this is going to happen.

I tried to tell you guys that! :yep:

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=667753&postcount=116

(Thank God I made my post the day before that "krazyfrenchman" guy over at the UBIzoo forums did... I didn't have any knowledge of the SH4 update that he speaks of until about thirty minutes ago.)

It will happen... one way or the other. All that is needed is time and patience. (Sub drivers are patient right?:p )

Seriously, this kicks open the doors for a lot of things if you look far enough ahead.

British Subs.

Italian Subs.

Russian (WWII) subs.

<You aren't thinking big enough yet!>

After enough groundwork is done... you could even convert things over to the cold war.

All you will need to do is flick a mod enabler switch and go!

Bored with U-boats? No problema!

Bored with Gato's? No problema!

I think driving an American S-Class in the Atlantic would rock!

The world will be yer oyster guys.

Just give it time.

Maybe .... MAYBE ... Submarine sims won't reside in such a small niche anymore in five years time.

OOOOoooooo. I feel giddy.

To quote a statement floating around over in the GWX forums lately...

"BAM chikka WOW WOW!!!" :rock: :rock: :rock:

Long live Silent Hunter!

[stabiz]

:rock:

[TheBrauerHour]

:rock: indeed.

[THE_MASK]

I am willing to spend no more than $100 on an addon :lol: .

[Q3ark]

This is just going to be a patch with a few extra goodies right? It's not an addon that i'm gunna have to buy is it?

[GT182]

One thing to remember... the Germans and Japanese were "Allies". German Uboats were in the Pacific as well as the Indian Ocean. Maybe not all of the Pacific Ocean as some think it will mean, but they were there just the same. The Germans shipped ME-262s to Japan as well as other war materiel, including some technology for the atomic bomb they were working on.... Heavy water I believe was shipped to Japan.

I see no problem at all with Uboats in the Pacific.

[Kpt. Lehmann]

This is just going to be a patch with a few extra goodies right? It's not an addon that i'm gunna have to buy is it?

Sounds like a patch to me.:ping:

I guess we'll all find out in a month or so.

[Kpt. Lehmann]

One thing to remember... the Germans and Japanese were "Allies". German Uboats were in the Pacific as well as the Indian Ocean. Maybe not all of the Pacific Ocean as some think it will mean, but they were there just the same. The Germans shipped ME-262s to Japan as well as other war materiel, including some technology for the atomic bomb they were working on.... Heavy water I believe was shipped to Japan.

I see no problem at all with Uboats in the Pacific.

I don't think that the devs will script U-boats where they don't belong.

Operations out of Penang and Jakarta... sure.

Attacking Dutch Harbor via U-boat ... errrm I doubt it.

[stabiz]

Oh, Lord! I feel giddy too now! Mamma, I`m coming home!

[GT182]

by krazyfrenchman at UBI
My contact explained that patch v1.4 will be in fact an add-on plus a patch.

Patch with addons, which I assume means "No Pay to Play" addons.

[pythos]

You know what all?

I couldn't care less whether or not there are U-boats patrolling the same waters as my fleet boat. I don't care if I can choose to play germans or americans.

What I care about is the sim getting what it deserves and that is propper programing so all the intended features WORK!!!!!

I want naval bands playing Ancors aways while a croud cheers as my boat leaves the dock. I want my conning towers to upgrade when they should! I want the surface sonar to work right. For the AI lookouts on the enemy ships to not have superman's eyes and zero in on my boat WHEN I CAN'T EVEN LOCK THE CROSSHAIRS ON THEIRS!!! I would like the constant ctds to be addressed. It would be nice to have "living ports" to depart from and arrive at.

I would like a patch that does not introduce a new bug (ie the periscopes not operating in the 3d view.)

A tech tree not unlike the one in SH3.

Some damnable suit pushed this project out way too soon, and the result is a sim that leaves a lot to be desired. Hopefully it is that suit that decided to allow this Add on/patch, and hopefully he or she let the devs do the job correctly.

[AVGWarhawk]

by krazyfrenchman at UBI
My contact explained that patch v1.4 will be in fact an add-on plus a patch.

Patch with addons, which I assume means "No Pay to Play" addons.


No pay addon. Just like IL2 was handled with a lot of addon and bonus stuff. Free for your enjoyment.

[GT182]

I don't think that the devs will script U-boats where they don't belong.

Operations out of Penang and Jakarta... sure.

Attacking Dutch Harbor via U-boat ... errrm I doubt it.


Exactly. Only where they actually were. :yep:

Sorry if i made it sound like they were all over the Pacific. They weren't, or we couild have been in deep doo doo. ;)

[AVGWarhawk]

You know what all?

I couldn't care less whether or not there are U-boats patrolling the same waters as my fleet boat. I don't care if I can choose to play germans or americans.

What I care about is the sim getting what it deserves and that is propper programing so all the intended features WORK!!!!!

I want naval bands playing Ancors aways while a croud cheers as my boat leaves the dock. I want my conning towers to upgrade when they should! I want the surface sonar to work right. For the AI lookouts on the enemy ships to not have superman's eyes and zero in on my boat WHEN I CAN'T EVEN LOCK THE CROSSHAIRS ON THEIRS!!! I would like the constant ctds to be addressed. It would be nice to have "living ports" to depart from and arrive at.

I would like a patch that does not introduce a new bug (ie the periscopes not operating in the 3d view.)

A tech tree not unlike the one in SH3.

Some damnable suit pushed this project out way too soon, and the result is a sim that leaves a lot to be desired. Hopefully it is that suit that decided to allow this Add on/patch, and hopefully he or she let the devs do the job correctly.


You're preaching to the choir on this issue.

[AG124]

Just had a few comments to make here:

First, in regards to adding new shipping, from what I understood from the leak, the new ships planned for addition were those related to the German eastern fleet, and that there would only be a couple. However, if indeed we get to see more Japanese and US vessels, (probably only a few, if any), these are the ones which I would personally consider essential:

- Japanese Coastal Merchants:
- 'Sea Truck' (maybe two variants).
- Coastal Freighter under 1,000 GRT.
- Coastal Tanker (Juyusen Class, 906 GRT).

- Japanese Escorts:
- Kaibokan (Either Type C or D, preferably C but maybe both).

- Japanese Heavy Cruisers:
- Pre-Hybrid Mogami Class CA.
- Tone Class CA (Lower priority).

- Japanese Carriers:
- Junyo Class CVL
- Zuiho Class CVL
- CV Akagi

- US Carriers:
- Essex Class CV (I know why we can't have the Yorktown class, but what about the Essex class? Using the Wasp to fill in for the whole US CV fleet is stretching the imagination).
- Independence class CVL.

- SHIII Conversions (Quicker and Easier than building new models):
- Small Tanker, [Patapsco Class] (US, UK, maybe Australia).
- Armed Merchant Cruiser [As liner coverted to transport] (US, UK, Australia).
- Small Coastal Vessel (All Nations).
- Illustrious Class CV (UK).
- Fiji Class CVL (UK, Canada).
- J/K Class DD (UK).
- C/D Class DD [Modified for E class] (UK).
- V/W Class DD (UK, Australia).

I was a little more lenient in my expectations for new US warships, as the Monsoon boats probably wouldn't see US Capital warships too often, and US subs would get to sink them at all, of course.:88) Plus, with the exception of carriers, the US fleet is already pretty well represented. On the Japanese side, again, there are only a few areas not well represented - basically, coastal merchants and carriers, plus the glaring absence of kaibokans. There are many other vessels I would like to see, including the Nagato class BB and a Japanese Whale Factory Ship modelled after the Tonan Maru No. 2, but I think the list I presented is pretty decent for basic rosters. Of course, this also depends on the size and price of the expansion - if it is large and expensive, I would expect a few more ships than I put on the list.:hmm:

The other point I wanted to make was in regards to using the Eastern Campaign from the expansion to make a full scale Atlantic campaign. I personally love the idea (the SHIV engine is techincally superior to the SHIII engine, and the graphics are indisputably better as well), but this would have to hinge upon (at least tacit) approval by Ubisoft. Right now, they have been ignoring conversions of SHIV materials for use in SHIII, and (perhaps more predictably) have been ignoring conversions of old SHIII models for SHIV. However, they just may be concerned about a full scale conversion if the game if they are planning to do any further work with the new German angle of the expansion once it has been released. Their addition of the Monsoon boats into SHIV may indeed indicate (as posted earlier) that they are giving us the foundation to build an Atlantic Campaign (which could potentially increase sales of the game for Ubisoft, and thus, their profit margins), but it could also signify plans to do it themselves in yet a further expansion, which would thus be threatened by a freeware mod. I don't have a clue which explanation is right; I was just posting these scenarios as possibilities to keep in mind.

[Kpt. Lehmann]

Very good points Pythos.

From a modder standpoint... it can be quite maddening to fix such problems... or create workarounds to enable missing bits... physics, sounds, graphics.

It is a bucket of work... and requires a sustained passion to dig deep into the code for what feels like ages and ages.

Rome wasn't built in a day though. It was built one brick at a time.

[GT182]

I hope they don't throw in kamakazi's. The Japanese AI are too good now for them to be added. We'd really be up Sh*t Creek. :yep:

[Q3ark]

This is just going to be a patch with a few extra goodies right? It's not an addon that i'm gunna have to buy is it?

Sounds like a patch to me.:ping:

I guess we'll all find out in a month or so.

Yeah guess you're right. Hope it's compatible with Trigger Maru tho, I've been having a blast with that and the Refletions on the water mod. I think with those mods the game is complete. Anything that patch 1.4 adds is a welcome bonus:smug:

[Kpt. Lehmann]

I hope they don't throw in kamakazi's. The Japanese AI are too good now for them to be added. We'd really be up Sh*t Creek. :yep:

I dunno if any U.S. subs were sunk or even attacked in this way or not... but it would be cool to see them attacking other ships.

If yer gonna build a sim... go for it!

Late war SH4 arguably needs more "pucker factor" anyway no?

[THE_MASK]

Please Lord , let there be a SH4 GWX team:rock:

[AVGWarhawk]

I hope they don't throw in kamakazi's. The Japanese AI are too good now for them to be added. We'd really be up Sh*t Creek. :yep:

I dunno if any U.S. subs were sunk or even attacked in this way or not... but it would be cool to see them attacking other ships.

If yer gonna build a sim... go for it!

Late war SH4 arguably needs more "pucker factor" anyway no?


Thats the thing Lehman, late war there was no pucker factor. Sure, kamakazi went after the picket boats and other warships. Never a sub that I recall. That pucker factor for the Atlantic boys is what make it so dramatic and draws a lot to the Atlantic. As Penelope stated, the Atlantic boys were not look to win towards the end, the just wanted to survive. Exactly how GWX did it for me....just to survive....damn second patrol your dead club of mine:roll:

[GT182]

I dunno if any U.S. subs were sunk or even attacked in this way or not... but it would be cool to see them attacking other ships.

If yer gonna build a sim... go for it!

Late war SH4 arguably needs more "pucker factor" anyway no?

Yep, that sure would make the factor pucker. I've never heard of a US sub being attack by a kamakazi, and sure wouldn't want to be the one they picked on. But yer right Kapt., it would be one heck of a sight to see.

[Kpt. Lehmann]

Thats the thing Lehman, late war there was no pucker factor. Sure, kamakazi went after the picket boats and other warships. Never a sub that I recall. That pucker factor for the Atlantic boys is what make it so dramatic and draws a lot to the Atlantic. As Penelope stated, the Atlantic boys were not look to win towards the end, the just wanted to survive. Exactly how GWX did it for me....just to survive....damn second patrol your dead club of mine:roll:

Hmmm.

Maybe "the thing" to do then is to focus on the first half of the war in the Pacific, and not be overly concerned about the latter half.

I know that the first half of the war in the Pacific was a desparate time for the U.S. Navy.

Now, I won't pretend to know the Pacific war history like I do for the Atlantic... but any time that you can make the player feel afraid during a historically appropriate desparate time...

Well, maybe that's your magic bullet!

Just brainstorming.

[AVGWarhawk]

Thats the thing Lehman, late war there was no pucker factor. Sure, kamakazi went after the picket boats and other warships. Never a sub that I recall. That pucker factor for the Atlantic boys is what make it so dramatic and draws a lot to the Atlantic. As Penelope stated, the Atlantic boys were not look to win towards the end, the just wanted to survive. Exactly how GWX did it for me....just to survive....damn second patrol your dead club of mine:roll:

Hmmm.

Maybe "the thing" to do then is to focus on the first half of the war in the Pacific, and not be overly concerned about the latter half.

I know that the first half of the war in the Pacific was a desparate time for the U.S. Navy.

Now, I won't pretend to know the Pacific war history like I do for the Atlantic... but any time that you can make the player feel afraid during a historically appropriate desparate time...

Well, maybe that's your magic bullet!

Just brainstorming.


Hardcore torpedo failure in the early part of the war. Truth be told, the torpedoes sucked. Pucker factor here when going after a DD. Will the torp work or not:o . If not, we are in for it. But late war the Japanese had depth charges with 600lbs of TNT. No time to pucker with one of these...your days of puckering are over. A few other ideas.

[GT182]

by krazyfrenchman at UBI
My contact explained that patch v1.4 will be in fact an add-on plus a patch.

Patch with addons, which I assume means "No Pay to Play" addons.


No pay addon. Just like IL2 was handled with a lot of addon and bonus stuff. Free for your enjoyment.

Exactly, until that changed after patch 4.04m. LOL And yes I broke down and bought the newest ones.... IL2 1946... but I haven't used it yet. I'm holding out as along as I can. LOL And with the new mortgage payment, I might have to sell my soul, computer and it's goodies to pay for the house. :damn:

[AVGWarhawk]

by krazyfrenchman at UBI
My contact explained that patch v1.4 will be in fact an add-on plus a patch.

Patch with addons, which I assume means "No Pay to Play" addons.


No pay addon. Just like IL2 was handled with a lot of addon and bonus stuff. Free for your enjoyment.

Exactly, until that changed after patch 4.04m. LOL And yes I broke down and bought the newest ones.... IL2 1946... but I haven't used it yet. I'm holding out as along as I can. LOL And with the new mortgage payment, I might have to sell my soul, computer and it's goodies to pay for the house. :damn:

I have 1946. Sort of the end of the line for me. What got me here to stay was GWX.

[GT182]

Yep, GWX is the only thing keeping SHIII on my computer. I'm just waiting to upgrade to GWX 1.04 when it comes out. As of last April IL2 is no longer on my pc from a HDD crash. After we move it will be back on. Gotta fly this winter when I'm not sinking the Allies.

[jdkbph]

- US Carriers:
- Essex Class CV (I know why we can't have the Yorktown class, but what about the Essex class? Using the Wasp to fill in for the whole US CV fleet is stretching the imagination).

I agree about Wasp... weird choice, as there was only one ship in the class. But I'm curious... why wouldn't the Yorktown class work?

JD

[tater]

Regarding IJN ASW. They only "got with the program" in the spring of 1944. That was the point at which their escort command finally got more that 2 part time officers (for the entire ocean, lol). They also started seeing more purpose built escorts, the Kaibokans, and the Matsu DEs (not really DEs in IJN nomenclature, they were considered 1st rate DDs).

While the IJN failed to concentrate on ASW technology as they should have, they were not completely without a clue. Their greatest failure was one of broad, operational doctrine, not the ability of individual platforms to prosecute submarines. The failure to convoy effectively meant that the density of escort platforms to shipping was pretty poor, and their assets were spread all over the ocean instead of with the ships being attacked.

A few things are missing from SH4 that are there, but not turned on yet. DF gear for IJN ships (at the very least a non-directional version that got them alerted would be cool). ASW mortars would be cool, too.

I think that is can certainly be challenging later in the war, the real key is that they need to aggressively prosecute attacks, but not be super effective when they do. There are many stories of US bats being held down for many many hours, even to the point of planning to surface and duke it out with guns before they sneak away.

The early war is plagued not just by bad fish, but also poor US doctrine. The Philippine boats were abysmally tasked, for example. It took the US a long time to realize the Luzon Straight was a good place to send boats, etc. Many boats were co-opted for dumb special ops, and so forth.

tater

[Nuc]

I'm sure that will interest many, though I'll not be taking any u-boats for a spin myself.

taterWhy?

I think this pretty well sums up Ubisoft's market analysis. They realized that due to historical, cultural and geograhical differences they had a split Subsim market. Those who, like myself , had no interest in simulating U boat operations (and passed on SH II & III) and those who had a strong loyalty to the U boat history (who were not buying SH IV). Despite any outside influence I think this add on has been solely focused on unifying the market to a single product which can be extended - and that is a good thing! Why not simulate historically important INJ submarines? Where is the market interest?

[Kpt. Lehmann]

I think that is can certainly be challenging later in the war, the real key is that they need to aggressively prosecute attacks, but not be super effective when they do. There are many stories of US bats being held down for many many hours, even to the point of planning to surface and duke it out with guns before they sneak away.

EXACTLY!!!

Find the point of balance on that issue... and you've got another bit of the potential masterpiece that is just waiting to happen.

[Bosk]

I'd love to see german subs in SH4 even if they are part of a campaign of lesser historical importance.


But what I would REALLY like to see is Ubisoft make a game that is easier for modders to plug new content into.

Take a look at Flight Simulator X and you'll see exactly what I mean. The developer benefits by having third parties create additional content, it increases the longevity/immersiveness of the game and increases sales when each addon that gets released attracts additional attention to the original title.

And to mention another (obvious) example.. would Half-Life had sold as many copies as it did if a little modification called "counterstrike" had never been released?

When are gaming companies going to get wise and learn that modded content is something they should be encouraging as much as possible?

[SteminDemon13]

Well, I would like to see all the bugs worked out for SH4, and then more added to the game, like interactive crew, more stations that you can walk around and interact with, actually seeing the ship taking on water, crews repairing damage, and numerous other things they should be concentrating on than just adding some U boots, which many have said numerous times, we've been playing with for some time now. Give the American boats a chance, that is what the game was made for in the first place. Make the gaming experience better with this mod for what the game was made for. Hopefully they will improve on the things we have been asking for on the bugs/fixes/addons.

Hell, we might as well be able to control the surface ships also....wait there's an idea, interop with the surface ships. SH2/DC was fun for multiplay, maybe that is where the next game should go. SH5/Ship Command. A good Idea for the next sh5 and a new ship command multiplay would be each person would be able to be at a certain station. IE, people like me, Shove me down the hole and I'll run the boilers and turbines....and if anyone would FINALLY design a living breathing engine room. I will help out with the details. Stick someone on the bridge to steer the damn ship, people in the guns, people at the depth charge rails, DC team. And the same for the subs with the different stations. You might as well add the cooks too, hell, make it like cookin with mama thats on the WII.
DAMN IT, I WANT MY ENGINE ROOM!!:damn:

[XanderF]

- US Carriers:
- Essex Class CV (I know why we can't have the Yorktown class, but what about the Essex class? Using the Wasp to fill in for the whole US CV fleet is stretching the imagination).

I agree about Wasp... weird choice, as there was only one ship in the class. But I'm curious... why wouldn't the Yorktown class work?

JD

USS Yorktown (CV-5) was built by Newport News, now 'Northrop Grumman Newport News'. Northrop Grumman refuses to let their 'intellectual propery' be used in commercial titles (http://www.northropgrumman.com/ipm/tmpolicy.html), including PC games (specifically called out by name!), without exorbitant licensing fees. This includes aircraft, ships, etc that the company has made over the years, or have been made by companies now owned by Northrop Grumman.

This policy went into effect just before 'Pacific Fighters' was released, and rumor has it Ubi Soft was hit with a lawsuit they settled for some umpteen-hundreds-of-thousands to prevent having to pull the game from store shelves. This is the reason the IL2 devs won't touch any more US aircraft in the newer patches they have put out since, including being unable to release a flyable P-61 Black Widow model, which was absolutely complete in all detail, and pulled from a patch at the last minute.

[JScones]

Hehe, from 22 May:
You know what, I wouldn't be surprised to see a "Silent Hunter Complete Edition" in the same vane as "IL2 Complete Edition".

In other words, I wouldn't be surprised to see SH3 and SH4 combined in one package at some point. You can see with SH4 that the file structure for SH3 is pretty much preserved.
Perhaps not quite there, but if the leak is correct, then the door will certainly be open for modders to "finish" the job.

I mean, modders are working on porting SH3 over to SH4 now anyway, so it will happen at some point. If the devs intend unlocking the door to make the job a bit easier for the modders, then the outcome can only be better for all subsimmers (to be selfish here, if I can stand on a u-boat bridge and see the SH4 modded environment in action...well...you know what I mean. ;)).

T'would be nice though if they included a capability to add player controlled subs. Then I think everyone would be happy - given short time there'd be the missing US boats plus Dutch, UK *and* Japanese etc etc subs to go 'round. Adding player units can be done in other games with variable ease, why not in SH4? Now *that* would be flexibility. :rock: I'd happily pay for it.

PS: It goes without saying though that I think the devs need to focus on the remaining issues within SH4 first before expanding it. ;)

[Capt. Shark Bait]

might've know it would be krazy:roll: . shoulda made him sign a NDA. if they can add SH3 to 4, why not US boats to the Atlantic? atleast this "addon", if real, isn't like the one for SH3 a coupla yrs ago which was at the expense of modders.

[Kpt. Lehmann]

USS Yorktown (CV-5) was built by Newport News, now 'Northrop Grumman Newport News'. Northrop Grumman refuses to let their 'intellectual propery' be used in commercial titles (http://www.northropgrumman.com/ipm/tmpolicy.html), including PC games (specifically called out by name!), without exorbitant licensing fees.

Well that's a messed up school of thought they have... in about ten different ways.

Seems the extra PR would only help them... albeit indirectly.

I wonder if their statement affects freeware/not-for-profit matters/entities.

Besides, you would think that the ship in question was owned and operated by the U.S. government. (at least during WWII)

You cannot copyright history.

Where there is a will... there is a way.

[XanderF]

USS Yorktown (CV-5) was built by Newport News, now 'Northrop Grumman Newport News'. Northrop Grumman refuses to let their 'intellectual propery' be used in commercial titles (http://www.northropgrumman.com/ipm/tmpolicy.html), including PC games (specifically called out by name!), without exorbitant licensing fees.

Well that's a messed up school of thought they have... in about ten different ways.

Seems the extra PR would only help them... albeit indirectly.

I wonder if their statement affects freeware/not-for-profit matters/entities.

Besides, you would think that the ship in question was owned and operated by the U.S. government. (at least during WWII)

You cannot copyright history.

Where there is a will... there is a way.

The license page linked above SEEMS to cover that obliquely. Maybe. Specific 'free' projects with distribution of less than 5,000 'copies' are okay (books, posters or calendars). Software is mentioned separately, but you could read the license (VERY generously) to provide the same extension to free community-made content.

If you are worried, I would definitely ask them. They do provide contact information on that page. And, they seem to take a 'shoot first, ask questions later' policy towards their IP.

I certainly agree, one would THINK this would be US government/US citizen property, but...unless someone has the cash to challenge them in court, I think they get to have their way with their interpretation of the law. If Ubisoft settled, what chance do you or I have?

[Kpt. Lehmann]

Not worried.

Its just another roadblock to be smashed.

... and the more I think of it the more angry I get at the idea.

It is money-grubbing... pure and simple corporate greed.

Oh well. Back to my U-boat for the moment.

Note taken.

[tater]

It's complicated, and they (ubi) don't like to talk about it. "Corporate greed" is a nice sound bite, but inaccurate I think (besides, it's their duty to the stock holders to be greedy, heck, I probably own their stock in some fund, lol).

The most likely theory I have seen has to do with another ubi product which used the Grumman name without bothering to put ® or © or ™ on the BOX ART when they did so (anyone doing that kind of graphic design who cannot touch type those 3 characters should be fired).

Having done that, they became completely beholden to NG's will. You will do X, Y, and Z, or we will force you to recall all the boxes, and pay damages. They had a legit case, too, it was an idiotic failure not to pass product art on that scale past a lawyer. Also, NG has a requirement to defend their ™s. So maybe they included a stipulation on a license fee in the settlement. What was Ubi to do? They could have easily fought it out of the blue, but with the legit case hanging there, they have no choice. On top of it, NG gets precedence now, too.

tater

[Kpt. Lehmann]

Ahhh good points.

Hope is not lost though.

Our good man Pablo handled a great many communications with a large number of official organizations, museums, and interest groups when constructing the GWX manual. (Including the Pentagon at one point.)

You never know what might shake out.

However, the fact that the game we are modding is by Ubisoft...

Well. One thing at a time LOL.

[tater]

It's a private settlement, strict legaility isn't at issue. Basically NG was actually wronged, and part of their settlement (a private contract) involved the whole fee thing.

Had NG come out of the blue and demanded a fee, ubi could say "take us to court" and they'd very likely win (if it even went that far). It wasn;t about that, though, the ™ WAS violated (I have the box). Having done that, it was recall all of them and start over, or settle.

That's my understanding, anyway.

tater

[Kpt. Lehmann]

Understood. Thanks for the clarification.:up:

Now for some dinner!

[LtCmdrRat]

IMHO that Ubi is making some kind of alternative history subs simuliator. lets imagine that germany sold 50 u-boats to Japan. ;-)
I like it and do not care a lot about historical accuracy ... I m in, if there will be a possibility to play sub vs sub like it was in sh 1.
just in the name of curiosity ... does ubisoft have a programming code of sh1?

[rascal101]

Why is every one getting their knickers in a knot? For those uninterested in playing as UBoats, guess what you get to go on playing for Uncle Sam, for those who are, guess what you now have a new option!

For those of us who would really like to play the Atlantic war, I guess the new 'add on will provide scope for new mods or add on's so, so I guess even they will be happy.

Whats more, thank god UBI has woken up and smelled the roses, I could not give a rats arse who leaked what to whom, what is important is that UBI has seen there is potential for an add on and is willing to put the time and money in to develop it.

My only gripe is please please please UBI, dont stop, go the whole hog, give us what you know we want which is a full Atlantic campaine with full SH4 graphics, so we can play Atlantic or Pacific, to each their own, neither better thaqn the other.

I mean no offence to any one but personally I wish you god speed, I personlly cant wait!!

Rascal

[Rockin Robbins]

I want my conning towers to upgrade when they should! I want the surface sonar to work right. For the AI lookouts on the enemy ships to not have superman's eyes and zero in on my boat WHEN I CAN'T EVEN LOCK THE CROSSHAIRS ON THEIRS!!! I would like the constant ctds to be addressed. It would be nice to have "living ports" to depart from and arrive at.

I would like a patch that does not introduce a new bug (ie the periscopes not operating in the 3d view.)
Conning towers were not production issue. They were the custom product of blowtorches cutting down and sometimes adding ad hoc customizations to individual boats. Sometimes we find a photo of a sub and say, "What the hell is that???" (a thread on that not too long ago, in fact). Individual subs took individual paths and a sim probably can't replicate that. There is no such thing as "when they should."

Japanese lookouts DID have superman's eyes, just read the book on the USS Houston. They had infared glasses and we had periscopes that were useless at night. Why in the world do you think they risked surface attacks? That was the only way they could see their targets! They didn't worry about locking onto targets they couldn't see. You're asking Ubi to change history and they better not do that or they keep you and lose the rest of us.

American sonar, deployed on two heads under the hull did work on the surface. Unlike our game sonar, they had attenuation filters that allowed them to filter out interference from their own boat and hear some noises while surfaced. Read the sonar manual before you complain about real life characteristics.

Constant CTD's are a product of computer components and drivers that aren't up to snuff. My computer is far from state of the art but I have no CTD's at all, and that is the experience of the majority (the VAST majority) of SUBSIM sailors. Nobody can run any piece of software without an adequate computer. Ubi cannot fix your computer, but SUBSIM might if you quit complaining and start asking for help.

"Living ports!" I KNEW you'd find something that would really be cool. Leaving Kiel for the first time in SH3 with GWX was a religious experience. I just wanted to hang out in port taking pictures and forget about the mission! Suddenly a sterile game became human, changing my whole attitude.

One out of four! You'd keep your job if you were a baseball player. And your fourth point is so great:rock: that I don't even care about the first three.

I'm going to ignore the part about periscope animations. If you're in the conning tower looking at periscopes going up and down when you should be setting up a target and avoiding the escorts, you DESERVE to be sunk.:rotfl:

This doesn't feel like waiting for 1.3. The game is great now and we're just waiting for a big box of candy!:up:

[Uber Gruber]

So this is the famous Patch 1.4 that everyone was speculating about.....not really worth waiting for is it. Sure the U-Boat models should help Atlantic Sharks with their mod so thats a plus...but apart from that I see no other interest for me. I'll still be staying with SH3 thanks.

My only gripe is please please please UBI, dont stop, go the whole hog, give us what you know we want which is a full Atlantic campaine with full SH4 graphics,


You'd think it would be pretty obvious to them wouldn't you....oh well, thats organic soup for you:damn:

[Rockin Robbins]

So this is the famous Patch 1.4 that everyone was speculating about.....not really worth waiting for is it.
I wouldn't assume that KrazyFrench(fill in with the epithet of your choice) has the straight dope. If I were Ubi, I'd fill him full of disinformation just to discredit him further than he has done for himself. I detest people with no character, whose greatest thrill is to manipulate others. How many times has that been a disaster for humanity?

Anyway, I'd wait until I see what we get before passing judgement. Remember all the grousing about patch 1.3? Remember how they exceeded all our expectations upon release? It's not time to panic. The world is not ending, it is just changing for the better. Whatever is released, looks like the GWX team is excited and good things happen when they are!

[TDK1044]

[quote=Uber Gruber]So this is the famous Patch 1.4 that everyone was speculating about.....not really worth waiting for is it. Sure the U-Boat models should help Atlantic Sharks with their mod so thats a plus...but apart from that I see no other interest for me. I'll still be staying with SH3 thanks.[quote]


Anybody seen an official release document from Ubisoft yet?... Because I haven't. It might be worth waiting for that before going off on tangents. Everyone is reacting to news leaked by a member of another Forum who has no ethics and no understanding of what he's leaked.

[hyperion2206]

I've thought a while about SH5 taking place in the cold war and I've come up with some ideas how to make such a game more fun:

1. You should able to access the whole sub.
2. You should be able to talk to your crew, it could be done like in Knights Of The Old Republic: You click on your crew, chose the theme you want to talk about and the you'll have different choices how you're saying it (nice or mean etc.)
3. You should be able to do the things the real CO would have done:
-Review and/or correct the roster
-Look at the records of your crew, promote or demote them, recommend them for medals and awards
-talk with your XO about your crew, discuss tactics
-etc.
4.I would love to have a function that you could pick up a merchant and do a battle drill where your crew pretends the ship is a Russian Krivak.

I guess if you could really interact with your crew then people would be playing SH5 although it takes place during a "boring" period of time.
I hope you guys have more ideas how to make SH5 a bestseller.

[Uber Gruber]

Anybody seen an official release document from Ubisoft yet?... Because I haven't. It might be worth waiting for that before going off on tangents. Everyone is reacting to news leaked by a member of another Forum who has no ethics and no understanding of what he's leaked.

Yes, i'm sorry, its all my fault...I should never had read the first post or even dipped my head into the topic. Shame on me :nope:

[mookiemookie]

I think this pretty well sums up Ubisoft's market analysis. They realized that due to historical, cultural and geograhical differences they had a split Subsim market. Those who, like myself , had no interest in simulating U boat operations (and passed on SH II & III) and those who had a strong loyalty to the U boat history (who were not buying SH IV). Despite any outside influence I think this add on has been solely focused on unifying the market to a single product which can be extended - and that is a good thing! Why not simulate historically important INJ submarines? Where is the market interest?

Scenario 1

You have SHIV based upon the same platform that SH3 was based upon
You have all of the technical and background information of U-boats left over from the SH3 project
You have all of the in-game assets like interior models, sounds, animations, etc left over from the SH3 project
You can, with the development tools available, pretty simply drop these assets into the SHIV world with a few mouse clicks and doctor up some of the textures to be up to par on SHIV standards.
You can feasibly do this as U-boats operated close to the operational area of the Pacific War, as well as in the Atlantic. Not only do you open up a new Indian Ocean campaign, you also set up modders to create Atlantic War campaign layers and import Atlantic ships and bring the worlds of SH3 and SHIV together.
You know that Pacific War fans have most likely bought this game, IJN sub fan or not.
You can do all of this with a minimum of capital outlay, both in terms of time and money.Scenario 2

You start from scratch in order to put IJN subs into SHIV
You have to spend man hours (read: $$$) researching IJN submarines, their operation, features, interiors, capabilities, etc
All of the interiors need to be modeled, textured, checked for accuracy. This takes umpteen more hours of work (again, read: $$$$)
You do this knowing that IJN subs operated only in the Pacific, and historically did not have the impact on the war that U.S. or German boats did.
You give modders no opening, or an uphill battle at the very least, in importing U-boats into SHIV, thus losing out on sales of Atlantic War fans who have no interest in the PacificWhich one would you choose?

[The General]

Vote on this Poll and I'll give you the answer:

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?p=669104#post669104

[MONOLITH]

Yes, i'm sorry, its all my fault...I should never had read the first post or even dipped my head into the topic. Shame on me :nope:



I wish I could figure out exactly what causes this sort of thing here.

But it doesn't matter who says it, or why, it should be clear to all subsim members; that this sort of unnecessary attitude and provocation of each other is exactly the thing that casts a dark cloud over this place, and forces the building of fences between sections of Subsim.

Why grown men publically behave this way towards their peers here is beyond me.

[SteamWake]

Why grown men publically behave this way towards their peers here is beyond me.

It is basically that the 'annonimity' of the internet leads to the dissmissal of good judgement. In other words they wont get the snot knocked out of them for being a twerp.

Also consider the sources. Many of which are children or children trapped in an adults body.

[Tieg]

Personally I don't care what they add in the new patch/add on as long as its constructive. If you don't want to play with the u-boats...they are not taking away from the original game. I imagine they are just trying to reach out to the most diverse community they can reach...more customers more money.

Personally, Batfish sank 2 confirmed I-boats and 1 uncomfirmed on one patrol...that is what I miss from the original first SH....the ability to pick up a small contact...have it materialize into a surface transiting Jap sub...and to sink it...or go on the immediate defensive if detected. Historically there was a lot of sub vs sub contact not only in the pacific theatre but also in the atlantic theatre.

Shoot there is one out there where a German sub captain who was ashore heard from locals that a british sub had entangled in nets in the local harbour. He along with some of his crew paddled out in a row boat and dropped small charges and sunk the sub.

Of course now I'm distracting away from my original desire(just thought a cool little sea story and if interested I'll post the name of the book I got the above paragraph from) which is to have some sort of sub vs sub feature in the campaign.

[Bilge_Rat]

I seem to remember a story about a U-boat sunk by a U.S. sub around indonesia in '44. I will have to recheck in Blair's "Silent Victory".

[Rockin Robbins]

I seem to remember a story about a U-boat sunk by a U.S. sub around indonesia in '44. I will have to recheck in Blair's "Silent Victory".
Can we go through that argument about "Silent Victory" not being a valid historical work again? ;)

SLAP! :oops:

[Bilge_Rat]

I seem to remember a story about a U-boat sunk by a U.S. sub around indonesia in '44. I will have to recheck in Blair's "Silent Victory".
Can we go through that argument about "Silent Victory" not being a valid historical work again? ;)

SLAP! :oops:

I must have missed that thread. :hmm:

I have read it twice and his footnotes and research methods seem sound.
Much of his info can also be found in Morrison's "History of U.S. naval operations in WW2" which I also have.

[Uber Gruber]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Uber Gruber
Yes, i'm sorry, its all my fault...I should never had read the first post or even dipped my head into the topic. Shame on me :nope:




I wish I could figure out exactly what causes this sort of thing here.

But it doesn't matter who says it, or why, it should be clear to all subsim members; that this sort of unnecessary attitude and provocation of each other is exactly the thing that casts a dark cloud over this place, and forces the building of fences between sections of Subsim.

Why grown men publically behave this way towards their peers here is beyond me.


Okay, i'm completely confused by this....what is unnecessary in my post ? What is provocative ? What dark cloud am I casting ? What fences am I building...apart from the one out in the back yard ?

You'll have to explain cos I really really don't understand what the problem is. :doh:

[MONOLITH]

I'll be happy to do that with you in PM's, and not make further mess of otherwise good threads.


Cheers.


EDIT: PM Sent.

[Uber Gruber]

PM: Replied.

[jdkbph]

USS Yorktown (CV-5) was built by Newport News, now 'Northrop Grumman Newport News'. Northrop Grumman refuses to let their 'intellectual propery' be used in commercial titles (http://www.northropgrumman.com/ipm/tmpolicy.html), including PC games (specifically called out by name!), without exorbitant licensing fees. This includes aircraft, ships, etc that the company has made over the years, or have been made by companies now owned by Northrop Grumman.

I'm shocked that this is actually enforcable! I'm not expecting an answer here or looking for a debate, but I'm wondering aloud...

Wouldn't the IP rights for the name and likeness of US Government property, or items whose development and manufacture were funded by the US government be held by the US government?

And if not, where would this stop? Where would you draw the line?

This is insane....

JD

[AG124]

Does anyone know if the former Newport News Shipping was actually commissioned to design to Yorktown class, or just to build them? This seems like the kind of thing I should know, but I never actually pay attention to the actual design process of warships.:oops: If they were only contracted to construct the ships, I can't see how they could possibly make a claim to the design - unlike the a/c designs, the Yorktown design should belong exclusively to the US Navy. At least, that's the way it seems to me - I am in my second year of law school now, but I study neither US law nor any form of IP law, so this isn't an area I 'd really know a lot about.

On a chilling side note, I just discovered what some others here probably already know - the USS Ranger, and about half of the Essex and Ticonderoga classes were also constructed by Newport News Shipping.:o I would guess Grumman would now try to claim those designs as its own as well...:nope:

Does anyone know any more about any of this? I don't really want to drift off-topic though, even though this does have something to do with what designs can be used by Ubisoft and which ones can't. Maybe a moderator could split these posts to make a different thread.

[dean_acheson]

I have no interest in roleplaying a u-boat captain. I'll happily SINK u-boats. I didn't ever buy SH3 because as good as it looked, I have no interest in sinking allied shipping. I've been in ww2ol since beta, and I have never spawned german in there, either. Haven't flown ~half the planes in Il-2, either. I love seeing new tanks in there for the germans though---on fire. :arrgh!:

tater

I can't say it, but I sure can respect it.

At some stage, I kinda got uncomfortable sinking allied shipping.

[dean_acheson]

I am willing to spend no more than $100 on an addon :lol: .

10/4 on that one!

[Bilge_Rat]

Does anyone know if the former Newport News Shipping was actually commissioned to design to Yorktown class, or just to build them? This seems like the kind of thing I should know, but I never actually pay attention to the actual design process of warships.:oops: If they were only contracted to construct the ships, I can't see how they could possibly make a claim to the design - unlike the a/c designs, the Yorktown design should belong exclusively to the US Navy. At least, that's the way it seems to me - I am in my second year of law school now, but I study neither US law nor any form of IP law, so this isn't an area I 'd really know a lot about.

On a chilling side note, I just discovered what some others here probably already know - the USS Ranger, and about half of the Essex and Ticonderoga classes were also constructed by Newport News Shipping.:o I would guess Grumman would now try to claim those designs as its own as well...:nope:

Does anyone know any more about any of this? I don't really want to drift off-topic though, even though this does have something to do with what designs can be used by Ubisoft and which ones can't. Maybe a moderator could split these posts to make a different thread.

I'm a lawyer in RL, but not an IP lawyer, but I did discuss this issue with one of my IP partners a few months back. Northrop's claim is just that, a claim, it is not clear they have the IP rights they are claiming, but it is also not clear they do not have them. They most certainly have a copyright in the original design, but it is not clear that this covers any 3d representation of the design.

For example, Porsche has copyright in the design of the 911, but the copyright would probably not extend to a photo I take of the 911. Now if I make a 3d model of a 911 and insert it in a video game, does copyright apply? probably not.

Northrop however is aggressively protecting these claims because: 1) in IP law if you do not enforce your rights, you could be viewed as having abandoned them, and 2) no one knows how much these rights might be worth in the future

So far these restrictions have hit model kit makers and software developers. They have not been willing to fight since they do not have the deep pockets Northrop has to litigate this for years all the way to the Supreme Court, so Northrop wins by default.

This, by the way, is a standard business strategy which is used by every multinational around the world, not just Northrop.

[jdkbph]

Does anyone know if the former Newport News Shipping was actually commissioned to design to Yorktown class, or just to build them? This seems like the kind of thing I should know, but I never actually pay attention to the actual design process of warships.:oops: If they were only contracted to construct the ships, I can't see how they could possibly make a claim to the design - unlike the a/c designs, the Yorktown design should belong exclusively to the US Navy. At least, that's the way it seems to me - I am in my second year of law school now, but I study neither US law nor any form of IP law, so this isn't an area I 'd really know a lot about.

On a chilling side note, I just discovered what some others here probably already know - the USS Ranger, and about half of the Essex and Ticonderoga classes were also constructed by Newport News Shipping.:o I would guess Grumman would now try to claim those designs as its own as well...:nope:

Does anyone know any more about any of this? I don't really want to drift off-topic though, even though this does have something to do with what designs can be used by Ubisoft and which ones can't. Maybe a moderator could split these posts to make a different thread.

From what little I've been able to research on this just now, it appears as if it is unenforcable. However, the legal wrangles that might ensue during a pissing contest between a game maker and a corporate giant like Grumman could easily put the former out of business despite being "in the right". This seems to be a situation where specific legislation may be necessary in order to curtail inappropriate litigation, or the threat of same.

I worked for many years in the US Government contract administration world (NavAir and DLA), and I know, first hand, that there has been some "dispute" over the ownership, and the extent of the rights attached to ownership, with regard to a contractor's commercial use of designs, technology, and other IP, developed under and funded by government contract. (how's that for a run on?)

Anyway, the argument was always over whether the contractor had the right to sell commercial variants of government funded designs (in this case the Sikorsky Blackhawk helicopter).

I moved on to other things before that was finally put to rest (if it was ever put to rest...!) so I don't know what the final resolution was. But as you can see the assumption was that IP ownership was always with the government.

The only exception to this that I can see would be if the design was privately funded. There are examples of this in the aircraft world as late as the 80s... the F-20 Tigershark being privately funded by Northrop.

Aircraft are one thing... there are always potential customers for any but the most specialized designs if it's good enough. I seriously doubt however, that any shipyard (at least as far back as the begining of the ironclad age) would risk the massive investment and effort that goes into major warship design without government contracts and funding.

Even the more recent "Ayatollah" class DDs - produced originally for the Shah of Iran, but confiscated and placed in US service as the Kidd class DDs after the hostage deal - were designed, developed and manufactured by Litton-Ingalls under contract with the US government. The agreement was between Iran and the US Gov't... not Litton-Ingalls.

So what's the bottom line? It's highly likely that the US Gov't actually owns the IP rights to Enterprise (CV-6)... but no one in the private sector is likely to step forward to do battle with Grumman.


JD

[MONOLITH]

The ironic part of this; is you can take a government name like CIA, and make a commercial product PC game out of it, license free, with no hassles; as long as you don't represent yourself to actually be CIA connected.

[tater]

Read posts 128 and 130. I think it has nothing to do with who actually has the right to use virtual images. Ubi absolutely screwed up and printed box art with the Grumman name on it, without permission, without the appropriate ®™© marks when or if needed. Since the box art also says all the usual crap about everything on the box being the property of ubisoft, legally they just hijacked trademarks.

So I think that NG told 'em they'd nuke em in court, and then demanded royalties on top. Ubi had no choice, pay what they wanted, or lose in court on the box issue, have to recall everything AND likely pay damages (plus legal fees). They settled.

So I don't think it's a "who owns a likeness" issue in this case, ubi screwed the pooch, and put themselves in a position where they were made a not so great offer they couldn't refuse.

tater

[mookiemookie]

Hate to break the current train of thought on this thread, but re-reading it has got me all excited all over again.

The world will be our ocean! After all, it was a global conflict. Imagine if you would, all SH3 with the SH4 engine. Years of enjoyment, modding and playing.
"My god...it's full of stars..." :up::rock::arrgh!:

[Rockin Robbins]

Hate to break the current train of thought on this thread, but re-reading it has got me all excited all over again.

The world will be our ocean! After all, it was a global conflict. Imagine if you would, all SH3 with the SH4 engine. Years of enjoyment, modding and playing.
"My god...it's full of stars..." :up::rock::arrgh!:

I'm ready!:up::yep::rock::ping::rock::yep::up:

[Nuc]

If a global simulation is to be the end result we need a Panama Canal


Hate to break the current train of thought on this thread, but re-reading it has got me all excited all over again.

The world will be our ocean! After all, it was a global conflict. Imagine if you would, all SH3 with the SH4 engine. Years of enjoyment, modding and playing.
"My god...it's full of stars..." :up::rock::arrgh!:

I'm ready!:up::yep::rock::ping::rock::yep::up:

[tater]

^^^ that's OK, to properly do the pacific the same technique used to subtract land to make the canal needs to ADD land to make some REEFS. PTO without reefs is like the atlantic without storms.

tater

[Nuc]

What you say is true and you only have to have made winter FBM patrols out of Holy Loch to know it.

^^^ that's OK, to properly do the pacific the same technique used to subtract land to make the canal needs to ADD land to make some REEFS. PTO without reefs is like the atlantic without storms.

tater

[MONOLITH]

I'm ready!:up::yep::rock::ping::rock::yep::up:

Count me in. :yep:

[Kpt. Lehmann]

If a global simulation is to be the end result we need a Panama Canal


No problem. :|\\ We've had the Panama canal modded in The Grey Wolves for ages... among other terrain alterations. (Kiel Canal, Scapa Flow, Suez Canal)

"Full of stars..." Oh yeah. Queue the theme from 2001.:ping:

It will take a lot of time to sort... but it will be done. (Global sim)

[tater]

How do you alter the terrain files?

tater

[THE_MASK]

"global sim" My computer can hardly handle two sampans and a slight breeze , but anyway bring it on .

[THE_MASK]

How do you alter the terrain files?

tater For the love of god please tell Tater how too alter terrain files . He is using sub nets as pseudo reefs and i cannot take much more of the sudden screeching noises .

[tater]

Tell me about it. I tested spawning in a few thousand yards from all of them. the blood still drips from my ears.

:D

tater

[Steeltrap]

Anyway, I'd wait until I see what we get before passing judgement. Remember all the grousing about patch 1.3? Remember how they exceeded all our expectations upon release? It's not time to panic. The world is not ending, it is just changing for the better. Whatever is released, looks like the GWX team is excited and good things happen when they are!

With all due respect, 1.3 may have exceeded your expectations, but it sure didn't exceed mine.

I have no intention of giving Ubi a single $ before they give me a sim that doesn't have so many obvious flaws. Am I being hyper-critical? Well, here's a list of some of my complaints:

* SD radar was A-scope only. It never gave a bearing, only range. To represent it accurately you should get a crew alert "SD radar contact, range xx yards, closing". Anything other than that is bunkum, and smells of them trying to fit SD radar into a platform that doesn't handle it correctly. Without map contacts ON, you can't even check what is going on as there is no screen to look at for SD radar. This really ticks me off as it is so blindingly obviously wrong!!

* Being able to use scopes at night/twilight/dusk in conditions where it is a clearly established fact this was not possible. Again, simply crap in something claiming to be a simulation.

* Not being able to conduct night surface attacks without being spotted (well, that's my experience). People have spoken about 'decks awash' as a "solution", but the simple fact is USA subs attacked at night in normal surface trim. Decks awash is a rationalisation to cover a problem with the sim's sensor system (a carry over from SHIII, although NYGM certainly fixed it and I assume GWX did, too - I've not used GWX, not because I have a problem with it, simply due to d/l restrictions).

* The spotting problems mentioned above somewhat force the ability to use periscopes when you shouldn't be able to. It's a bit like "you can't attack on the surface without being seen, even though you should be able to, so we'll let you use your periscopes in any visibility, even though you shouldn't be able to".

* Horrendous AI. DDs that sink themselves with their own DCs - or sink other DDs with them. Convoys that stop when ambushed. Task forces that travel at 12kts. Etc etc....

* Perverse levels of aircraft. Reading Wahoo and Clear the Bridge make it clear how wrong the current aircraft encounters are.

* Troubles with save games (the "everyone is asleep" upon loading a save is one of my favourites).

* Crew troubles - ending up with a sub full of CPOs and officers, vanishing crew positions for guns etc (I will say I think the rotating watch system is great, a vast improvement over SHIII).

* Sub motion physics. Depth changes are screwy. You can go up and down like an elevator without using compressed air, and forward motion is completely irrelevant. This is a huge problem IMO, as it means you can evade DDs with ease by dropping below the layer in seconds at silent speed, let them rush by, then pop up and blitz a convoy/TF. Any deep dive meant you had a long task getting back to periscope depth without using a lot of compressed air - see the case in Wahoo on the 2nd patrol when they were approaching an important target (Morton was the PCO at that time).

I could continue, although this list contains the "highlights". For anyone who has done much reading on submarine warfare in WWII these issues are manifest and significant. The fact people accept them is due to the relief of having a sim at all. OK, I can accept they feel that way, but I'm of the view that a buggy, error-riddled sim is buggy and error-riddled, no matter how much people try to convince me otherwise. I suspect I'd be better off if I were completely ignorant of WWII sub warfare.

So.....I will not spend $0.01 when I've already spent $99.95 on a sim with these flaws remaining after 3 patches.

Cheers all!

[joea]

Uhhhh....fair enough Steeltrap in fact some of the problems were there in SH3 too, but unless I'm missing something this addon is free isn't it?

[rascal101]

I second everything IBL says, he's hit the nail on the head especially his last paragraph.

R

I have mixed feelings about this. Some of the people at the Ubi forum are understandably upset that U-Boats are going to be modeled i/s of Japanese subs and/or several important American classes.

The implication that Japanese subs did not really have an impact on the war is strange, and slightly offensive IMO. The Japanese fought bravely under a faulty tactical doctrine, and I am sure the survivors of the "Juneau", "Wasp", and "Indianapolis" would have some pretty strong opinions of their own about the Japanese's effectiveness. :roll:

I do appreciate that they are still willing to provide support for the game at this late date, especially since many people consider simulations to be a money losing proposition.

My main hope is that by concentrating on the most important aspects of porting over U-Boats and a Kriegsmarine career, the developers will enable modders from "Atlantic Sharks" and maybe some people from the GWX team to create a fully functional U-Boat campaign using SH4. The main concerns would be adding more Atlantic shipping lanes (easy), porting AI vessels & aircraft (fairly easy), adding any U-Boats and weaponry not included in this upcoming add-on (hard) and making appropriate career/interface screens (fairly hard).

[danlisa]

How do you alter the terrain files?

tater

Sir, you have a PM.:cool:

[kiwi_2005]

Actually I'm a little disappointed that they chose to go with U boats in the Indian Ocean and not Japanese subs. Would have added a massive new dimension to the game. I've read quite a few accounts of encounters with japanese subs and seem to have been a fairly common occurance, plus the threat of enemy units lurking unseen outside US bases would inject a little excitement to some of the more mundane parts of the game.

Yeah, Japanese subs would better in SH4, who needs Uboats, just go load up SH3 for that.

[sergbuto]

How do you alter the terrain files?

tater
There is a program created by ref to do that. Do not remember the details. You need to search SH3 forums for that.

[ref]

How do you alter the terrain files?

tater
There is a program created by ref to do that. Do not remember the details. You need to search SH3 forums for that.

The structure of the terrain files have been changed slightly from sh3, once we finish with the work on GWX I'll make the modifications to the terrain extractor to handle SH4 terrain files.

Ref

[AVGWarhawk]

Hate to break the current train of thought on this thread, but re-reading it has got me all excited all over again.

The world will be our ocean! After all, it was a global conflict. Imagine if you would, all SH3 with the SH4 engine. Years of enjoyment, modding and playing.
"My god...it's full of stars..." :up::rock::arrgh!:
I'm ready!:up::yep::rock::ping::rock::yep::up:


Now imagine sub vs Uboat! All of sudden, I want British boats in the game:o

[Weather-guesser]

After expecting nothing new for SH4, let alone another patch, I will gladly appreciate more put into the game. Thanks DEVS! :up:

[tomoose]

I couldn't care less whether or not there are U-boats patrolling the same waters as my fleet boat. I don't care if I can choose to play germans or americans.

What I care about is the sim getting what it deserves and that is propper programing so all the intended features WORK!!!!!


Bingo! Let's fix the original before adding all the bells and whistles.....and u-boats! i.e. Not much point in adding an expensive stereo to your car if the engine is busted!!

:up:

[jdkbph]

Uhhhh....fair enough Steeltrap in fact some of the problems were there in SH3 too, but unless I'm missing something this addon is free isn't it?
Hmmm....

Traditionally, the term "add-on", when used by a publisher, denotes $$

Aside from semantics however, my guess is that they (UBI) are at a point where they don't feel it's economically feasible to address the remaining issues with a free patch. Continuing to pour development resources into a product that's nearing the end of it's retail shelf life is bad for the quarterly bottom line.

But OTOH, they really don't want to listen to us bitch and moan, or have us running around the internet bad-mouthing their product. Not to mention that many of the remaining defects after 1.3 are quite obvious even without our "help", pointing them out to new customers.

And finally they are well aware how bad the initial release was... and probably have considered the fact that a large percentage of buyers will never hear about or care that they released patches... but simply dismiss them and their products, including future products, as dreck (or schlock... take your pick).

My guess is that they're going to release this last fix as part of a low cost (ie, < $20 US.) "expansion", then repackage SH4 as a "Gold Edition" or something for their next production run.

This is smart because:

a. the original buyers still hanging with the game (ie, us) will be paying for the fix.

b. the new packaging will get them a retail shelf life extension

c. new buyers will be getting a fully patched and (hopefully... finally!!) ready for prime time product.

The rest of the initial buyers... the ones with no patches and intention of buying the add-on?.... already lost. No need worrying about spilt milk.

Yeah, OK... so that's a very cynical view. But I've been buying, playing, and whinging about the state of computer games for 25 years now, and this is what they've done to me! :doh:

I hope I'm wrong.

JD

[mookiemookie]

Those in the know (no, I'm not talking about krazyfrenchman) have eluded to the fact that this will be at no charge.

[Sailor Steve]

Thanks a lot, you guys! I just spent 2/3 of my allowed 1 hour at the library catching up with this one thread!

Seriously, it's a good thread. If all of what you're speculating is true, my heart is going pitter-patter too.:sunny:

[TDK1044]

My guess is that they're going to release this last fix as part of a low cost (ie, < $20 US.) "expansion", then repackage SH4 as a "Gold Edition" or something for their next production run.

This is smart because:

a. the original buyers still hanging with the game (ie, us) will be paying for the fix.

b. the new packaging will get them a retail shelf life extension

c. new buyers will be getting a fully patched and (hopefully... finally!!) ready for prime time product.

The rest of the initial buyers... the ones with no patches and intention of buying the add-on?.... already lost. No need worrying about spilt milk.

Yeah, OK... so that's a very cynical view. But I've been buying, playing, and whinging about the state of computer games for 25 years now, and this is what they've done to me! :doh:

I hope I'm wrong.

JD



This is why I pointed out in an earlier post that Ubisoft have made no official announcement regarding the 'Add On' yet. All we have is leaked information from 'Inspector Clouseau' on the other Forum.

We know that an 'Add On' has been developed and is almost ready for release. We know that it will involve U Boats and Indian Ocean missions. Are they going to give it to us or make us purchase it? I have no idea. There may be differences of opinion within Ubisoft regarding that very subject...who knows.

Let's wait for the press release.

[SteamWake]

Let's wait for the press release.


Why ? When we can have page after page of pointless conjecture and guessing ? :p

[tater]

How do you alter the terrain files?

tater There is a program created by ref to do that. Do not remember the details. You need to search SH3 forums for that.
The structure of the terrain files have been changed slightly from sh3, once we finish with the work on GWX I'll make the modifications to the terrain extractor to handle SH4 terrain files.

Ref

I had forgotten, but my very first attempt at modding anything was trying that terrain extractor on SH4 right after it came out to try and make reefs. Not compatible, sadly.

tater

[MONOLITH]

Inspector Clouseau

:rotfl:




Why ? When we can have page after page of pointless conjecture and guessing ? :p


:rotfl: Again.





Just for the record; I support sub simulation efforts. I'll gladly pay for the add-on.

Not a patch, but an add on; yes.

[bigboywooly]

Is it a Ubi addon or their favourite rip off merchants X1 :hmm:

[TDK1044]

Inspector Clouseau

:rotfl:




Why ? When we can have page after page of pointless conjecture and guessing ? :p


:rotfl: Again.





Just for the record; I support sub simulation efforts. I'll gladly pay for the add-on.

Not a patch, but an add on; yes.




Me too. :D But you'll hear the screaming in Tibet if some folks here and over at Ubi are asked to pay for it. To them, paying for the 'Add On' will be as welcome as a fart in a space suit.

[SteamWake]

Is it a Ubi addon or their favourite rip off merchants X1 :hmm:

:doh:

Actually thats pretty funny.

It is the developers doing the add on and patch. UBI is just a publisher. A creul and wicked task master (whip cracks).

[Weather-guesser]

paying for the 'add On' will be as welcome as a fart in a space suit.

:rotfl: :doh: ... :shifty: ... :-? ...:nope: ...:dead:

[bigboywooly]

Is it a Ubi addon or their favourite rip off merchants X1 :hmm:

:doh:

Actually thats pretty funny.

It is the developers doing the add on and patch. UBI is just a publisher. A creul and wicked task master (whip cracks).

Lets hope so eh
The 2 addons for SH3 by X1 left a HUGE amount to be desired

[jdkbph]

All we have is leaked information from 'Inspector Clouseau' on the other Forum.


Now that's funny.

JD

[longam]

my eyes are bleeding....damn long post.

I still think someone on the other end just blew smoke and it kept away the calls for awhile. But who knows, at least Patch 1.5 will be here sooner :rotfl:

[SteamWake]

my eyes are bleeding....damn long post.

I still think someone on the other end just blew smoke and it kept away the calls for awhile. But who knows, at least Patch 1.5 will be here sooner :rotfl:

Why on earth would this debacle bring the patch any sooner ?

If i was a dev I would be seriously considering holding it back even longer if for no other reason but to make KFM look like an ass. But then again he has already accomplished that for himself.

[MONOLITH]

If i was a dev I would be seriously considering holding it back even longer if for no other reason but to make KFM look like an ass.

Actually, instead of punishing us with a wait; if I was a dev, I'd make a post at the UBI forum that makes KFM look like an idiot.

But, UBI often stipulates tight control on whether or not their devs can post in public forums, as well as what can be posted.

[donut]

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=669836&postcount=170
It will be a cold day, but Christmass is a cold day.:sunny:

[Steeltrap]

Thanks jdkbph, you stated clearly the reasoning I went through to arrive at my post, namely that "patch = free" and "add-on = $$".

The rest of your commentary seems about right to me, too. What do you do when you can't fix the basics? Add more features!!

As far as I'm concerned, they can call a spade a spade and re-name "add-on" as "strap-on": an introduced device by which a person is ********d.

If I seem negative, it's because I do not, and never will, accept that there should be grovelling gratitude for something that was given 'premium pricing' for 'damaged goods' quality.

[jdkbph]

Thanks jdkbph, you stated clearly the reasoning I went through to arrive at my post, namely that "patch = free" and "add-on = $$".

The rest of your commentary seems about right to me, too. What do you do when you can't fix the basics? Add more features!!

As far as I'm concerned, they can call a spade a spade and re-name "add-on" as "strap-on": an introduced device by which a person is ********d.

If I seem negative, it's because I do not, and never will, accept that there should be grovelling gratitude for something that was given 'premium pricing' for 'damaged goods' quality.

Yeah, I hear you... and I respect that.

But I'm pretty much a whore, more concerned with immediate gratification than ethics or principles. I'll prolly buy it.

:-j

JD

[mookiemookie]

I'd buy it, in order to show that there is a market out there that will pay premium pricing for a robust and bug free submarine simulation.

[Sailor Steve]

I cheerfully paid for the SH1 'Patrol Disks'. If the new patch does everything people are speculating it will do, sure, I'll pay for it.

[Captain Vlad]

I might pay for an add-on, though I'd be reluctant to do so for a U-Boat campaign, since it's way off target for this particular simulation, and because most of the stuff is present in my SH IV directory right now. Sorry, you're not getting money from me for activating code.:D

I wouldn't pay for a patch. Sorry. The developers released a product with major problems, it's their responsibility to fix them. Period.

[Laffertytig]

i havent went through all the post but is this expansion for real and if so when is the eta? maybe they're gonna go for a IL2 situation where SH3 and SH4 will be combined into one game, how awesome would that be.

i havent purchased SH4 yet but this expansion might sell it to me

[Weigh-Man]

i havent went through all the post but is this expansion for real and if so when is the eta? maybe they're gonna go for a IL2 situation where SH3 and SH4 will be combined into one game, how awesome would that be.

i havent purchased SH4 yet but this expansion might sell it to me
It's all speculation at this point, there are a few here that are more in the know than others but they are keeping tight lipped until the official UBI announcement.

We know that Patch 1.4 is coming and it may include an add-on, but that's it really, just give it a couple of weeks.

[Anti_Ship_Fella]

cool its gonna be d/l able as a patch?

[mookiemookie]

cool its gonna be d/l able as a patch?

We'll see when Ubi announces it officially. I would imagine so.

[Hitman]

I suppose even if an "Expansion" was to be payware (And I would of course buy it happily) there would be a naked 1.4 pactch with fixes and improvements freely downloadable. Such happened with SH1 Commander's Edition...patch up to 1.31 always was free, however only buying the CE edition gave you the extra goodies :yep:

[pythos]

To the birdman that said that the conning towers were all different, and that my saying "conning towers should up grade when they should", I have to ask? Who did nasty things to your cornflakes?

Your response to my points was like you were responding to a simple minded idiot.

I have read plenty about submarines of this era. Through very techinical books, the actual fleet boat manual (available on line at the Uss pampanito's site), and with reference to works of fiction written with the knowledge of an actual skipper (Mr beach), so I think I have a fair understanding of the subject. (such as, it was in fact quite possible for a boat to maintain depth at zero headway. This was accomplished through setting the boat up daily with trim dives. There is a thorough explanation of this process, in the fleet boat manual.)

The surface sonar was a real thing. The boat could be roaming the surface at slow speed and hear ships many many miles away. This was not the case with any of the German boats, except perhaps the type XXI, but since this boat stayed underwater most of the time, this is not really well known. This ability was seriously erroded by rough seas, and or speed of the boat.

I don't like having a 1939, conning tower late in the war. Boats did get upgraded, often when with the same skipper. S-boats got gun platforms rather early in the war, to defend from aircraft. My Sugar boat lacks any AA weapons, and it is mid 42!!!. It has not been upgraded. This is simply not historically acurate.

Japanese look outs got much better LATE, in the war. Earlier? Not so great. But either way, a sub is a very small, and dark object on a grey ocean. It is not so easily spotted. In the game they spot you BEFORE you spot them. Subs in fact did not spot the hulls of their quarry, but in fact tracked the target by their smoke plumes. SH4 and SH3 do not simulate the thick smoke trails all cargo ships made. So there should be some compensation for this in the programming of the sight ranges of the AI look outs. Infared sights were only on a few vessles, usually of the heavier variety, such as carriers, cruisers, and so on. Not on cargo vessles. Remember Japanese freighters were not viewed in a very positive light, and were not well defended or equipped.

When I am unable to lock onto a target (something that was in fact not a requirement with an actual boat), I am unable to do anything, I can't even fire my Deck gun acurately, while somehow, from miles away, the enemy can nail my relative speck of a ship with shot after shot after shot...and this gun being on the fan tail of a freighter!!!!

Attack periscopes were unusable at night, period. The moon did not provide enought light for the tube of the attack peri, and the observation scope was not connected to the TDC, so attacks could not be conducted with this scope. This made night surface attacks the only way to attack at night.

As far as looking at scopes rising and falling is concerned... before patch 1.3, this feature worked, after the patch, it did not. Why? What did the patch introduce to cause this feature to fail? What else did it introduce? The patch broke something that should not have been broken, or should at least have been included with the readme file associated with the patch. This is an example of incomplete testing on the part of the developer.

The CTD issues are quite common when one looks at the posts here. You somehow have a GOD machine that can run SH4 flawlessly, but most here do not. I have a top line machine that was specifically put together to the recomended upper end specs of the game. But the game crashes so often I save before clicking the bridge icon, due to the fact this button causes crashes to desktops quite often.

To the person that stated that it was more economical to model German subs, due to the existance of models and files from SH3, than it was to model Japanese subs, I say bolloks. If this were the case then why is the type B mini sub, and the Sen toku (I400 class) included in the patch? Though these boats are non-operational for the most part, they were still put together for the game. The B-1 class is really the only japanese boat the fleet boats encountered, so what would be so hard about adding this boat into the sim? There would be no interior stuff done, just exterior, and performance models.

I really would like to have an interactive 3D environment like the one in SH3, and would be quite happy if more attention was given to this.

I am not saying that SH4 is a P.O.S., like some here. I am saying it needs work. I am not saying the Devs are lazy, but I am saying things are not being done with quality in mind, or they are being pressed too hard to push the product out. (the failed 3d scopes are a glaring example of that)

I for one will pay for an addon, if it deffinitly gets this good game to the great stage it was meant to be.

I was shocked when I first ran the game all those months ago, clicked on the bridge Icon, and was greated by a view from the bridge...in near silence. No crowd cheering, no band playing martial tunes, heck no other boat traffic, or sounds of a busy port (like horns or other boats, a feature in SH3 that for some reason was not carried over to the the new sim, like the bands). Then not seconds later a black screen, with a crash to desktop. When I put in the add on, I want those people cheering as they send off my boat and crew, I want the band playing "ancors away", while my boat backs out (that right, backs out) of its slip, and enters a living harbor, with active boats AND other fleet boats, heading in from patrol, or headed out.

Looking at the concept art of the game, this looks like this was a goal, which was curtailed by some peoples.

[Hitman]

The surface sonar was a real thing. The boat could be roaming the surface at slow speed and hear ships many many miles away. This was not the case with any of the German boats, except perhaps the type XXI, but since this boat stayed underwater most of the time, this is not really well known. This ability was seriously erroded by rough seas, and or speed of the boat.


Well yes and no. The germans had already in 1942 the "Balkob Gerät", a more advanced sonar fixed in the front of the keel, which was operational while the U-Boat was surfaced, since the listening device stayed submerged. Of course the deeper, the better (Except when you cross a thermal layer) to avoid surface noise, but it worked.

[Q3ark]

The CTD issues are quite common when one looks at the posts here.

To be honest I haven't seen too many posts regarding ctd's recently. I used to get them regularly myself untill i upgraded my gfx card (now running an MSI GeFource NX8600GT without problems). I installed the latest Trigger Maru around the same time and i believe it fixes a few crashes too:)

[mookiemookie]

To the person that stated that it was more economical to model German subs, due to the existance of models and files from SH3, than it was to model Japanese subs, I say bolloks. If this were the case then why is the type B mini sub, and the Sen toku (I400 class) included in the patch? Though these boats are non-operational for the most part, they were still put together for the game. The B-1 class is really the only japanese boat the fleet boats encountered, so what would be so hard about adding this boat into the sim? There would be no interior stuff done, just exterior, and performance models.
I think you misunderstood my point. I was addressing the people who wanted playable Japanese submarines in the add on. Putting a ship in the game world is a do-able thing. Look at GWX. Putting together a player controlled submarine with the appropriate interior models, equipment and functions is another whole can of worms altogether.

I would love to see Japanese subs as adversaries in the game. It's historically correct. But, from a development standpoint, (and this is my uninformed self talking) you'd have to script an AI routine that would tell the Japanese sub how to behave....when to dive, when to shoot, how deep to go, etc. Setting up AI behavior from scratch on a submarine may have been one of the things that they just didn't have the resources to do.

[Takeda Shingen]

I hope that the members with speedy connections can get it for free. However, I do hope that there is a disk option, even if I would have to pay for it. From the sound of things, I would not be able to get this expansion and patch with my puny dial-up.

[Rockin Robbins]

To the birdman that said that the conning towers were all different, and that my saying "conning towers should up grade when they should", I have to ask? Who did nasty things to your cornflakes?
I can't say, but it seems your cornflakes are similarly altered. Being a bird, I only eat other people's cornflakes, so cannot say what happened to the ones I ate. They were on the ground and appeared to have been stepped on.

Your response to my points was like you were responding to a simple minded idiot.
Holy cow, it's been pages and pages ago. I read for 20 minutes to find out what I said. And when I did I found a post written without use of name calling, belittling remarks, sarcasm, mischaracterization or any of the common tools of ridicule. I am at a loss to find anything referencing "simple minded idiot" or language to make it seem that is what I regarded you. In fact I did not and do not regard you as anything less than a highly intelligent person who has questions about the game, which I attempted to answer. (psssst! That is called helping and is sometimes done by birdmen, who know full well that by doing they subject themselves to mischaracterization) But I have an idea. ANOTHER RIDICULOUS POLL: Did birdman, errr... I mean Rockin Robbins tell pythos he was a simple minded idiot? Possible answers: yes, no, i'm very busy now.

I have read plenty about submarines of this era. Through very techinical books, the actual fleet boat manual (available on line at the Uss pampanito's site), and with reference to works of fiction written with the knowledge of an actual skipper (Mr beach), so I think I have a fair understanding of the subject. (such as, it was in fact quite possible for a boat to maintain depth at zero headway. This was accomplished through setting the boat up daily with trim dives. There is a thorough explanation of this process, in the fleet boat manual.)
Absolutely cool! Too many people pass off good fiction as not being worthy of being a good source of information. Just reading the books by Beach is a graduate course in the practice and strategy of the US fleet boat in WWII. For the benefit of those who have not read these books, there was one section of the boat inspection captain and crew DREADED. That was that they had to maintain precise depth control at all stop, zero speed for a certain amount of time. This was so difficult as to be unpredictably weird, and sometimes very skilled crews would fail this part of the inspection.

When you eject a Mark 14 torpedo, weighing 3820 lbs (1942 weight), what happens to your precise depth control? Now fire 2! Fire 3! You're pretty instantly 11,460 lbs light of neutral bouyancy. At 8 lb/gal (salt water is even heavier than that, varying according to local specific gravity, which is very variable), you have to take 1,432 gallons of water into the perfect mix of ballast tanks to reestablish equilibrium and not broach. Better do that quick because your conning tower is only about 10 feet below the surface. I'll choose to keep some way on and compensate with diving planes until I can get the trim right. This preceding explanation was not for your benefit because you have already read the material. It's for others, especially those who think SH4 models every (or most) aspect(s) of submarining. There's always something that can be added and the omission of such details doesn't make the game faulty SteelTrap! :rotfl:But I'd LOVE to see a game that took into account all that SteelTrap calls attention to. That would be GREAT.

The surface sonar was a real thing. The boat could be roaming the surface at slow speed and hear ships many many miles away.
Thank you for confirming what I said (looking around furitively for some vestage of a disagreement here). In addition the attenuation filters at the sonar listening post allowed the sonar operator to tune out most of the noise from his own boat to listen to noises from other sources. That is a feather SteelTrap missed! Add it to your list alongside the nonfunctioning heads, no ovens to cook celebration cakes and the missing ice cream freezer (only 1 boat had one of those, but what a feature!)

I don't like having a 1939, conning tower late in the war. Boats did get upgraded, often when with the same skipper. S-boats got gun platforms rather early in the war, to defend from aircraft. My Sugar boat lacks any AA weapons, and it is mid 42!!!. It has not been upgraded. This is simply not historically acurate.
Was there no sugar boat after June of 1942 which did not have an AA gun? That is a question, I'm not an expert on conning towers. I have some knowledge but not exhaustive knowledge on that one. I do know from books on various boats that modifications were an ad hoc thing that would be very difficult to model in a game and people would take the history of Tang for instance as evidence that THEIR boat was not historically accurate. Being a game author is hell.

Japanese look outs got much better LATE, in the war. Earlier? Not so great. But either way, a sub is a very small, and dark object on a grey ocean. It is not so easily spotted. In the game they spot you BEFORE you spot them. Subs in fact did not spot the hulls of their quarry, but in fact tracked the target by their smoke plumes...Infared sights were only on a few vessles, usually of the heavier variety, such as carriers, cruisers, and so on. Not on cargo vessles. Remember Japanese freighters were not viewed in a very positive light, and were not well defended or equipped.
Ah, your main problem is with the merchies. I'll grant your point on that one. SteelTrap has gone into that with excruciating detail and I agree that the ability to conduct night surfaced attacks would be the single most thrilling change that could be made to the game. Also light attenuation by the attack scope is not modeled at all and in fact in the game there is no difference between the image in the two periscopes. That is simply not right. Does it spoil the game? Not on my watch it doesn't. Hey, I'm having a blast with the best submarine simulator on the planet.:up:

If you add Reflections on the Water you'll find that tracking the smoke plumes is now possible and it may be the best part of an orgasmic mod. As far as infared glasses and sights, read "Ship of Ghosts, the Story of the USS Houston, FDR's Legiondary Lost Cruiser" and you'll find that Japanese night fighting ability was on an astoundingly high level at the very beginning of the war. On paper the battles between the US/Dutch/British and Japanese navies should have been very close. In practice we were suchi because of the amazing ability of the Japanese Navy to operate unhindered in the dark. Now that's the IJN ships, not the merchies.

When I am unable to lock onto a target (something that was in fact not a requirement with an actual boat), I am unable to do anything, I can't even fire my Deck gun acurately, while somehow, from miles away, the enemy can nail my relative speck of a ship with shot after shot after shot...and this gun being on the fan tail of a freighter!!!!

Attack periscopes were unusable at night, period. The moon did not provide enought light for the tube of the attack peri, and the observation scope was not connected to the TDC, so attacks could not be conducted with this scope. This made night surface attacks the only way to attack at night.

Yup, attack periscopes were junk at night and even twilight times. I disagree with you on submerged attacks with the observation scope but can't back that up right now. I think they were done, I don't know if they could feed the TDC or not. If not, manual TDC entry would make that unnecessary anyway. That was the only way night attacks were made, though, until daring captains began imitating the German practice of night surface attacks. I can produce specific evidence later if required. It is a very interesting topic.

Your statement that if you're unable to lock you can't do anything is wrong. You are now scheduled to attend WASSAT, WernerSobe's Advanced Submarine Attack School, please watch his three videos and then skip to http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=652326&postcount=67, which is a seminar I conducted with Werner's permission on the Dick O'Kane attack method. Note that nowhere during the procedure do we lock the periscope. It also is not necessary during standard TDC/PK attacks. Our manuals are terrible. Very few things in the game work in the way they are described. In this case they work a far sight better than advertised.:up:

As far as looking at scopes rising and falling is concerned... before patch 1.3, this feature worked, after the patch, it did not. Why? What did the patch introduce to cause this feature to fail? What else did it introduce? The patch broke something that should not have been broken, or should at least have been included with the readme file associated with the patch. This is an example of incomplete testing on the part of the developer.
Here I WILL be a little sarcastic, although in a good-natured way. Why? Because in computer programing sometimes the law of unintended consequences bites you in the keister. Official law: For every intended consequence of an action, there are three unintended ones. Two of those are bad. Then to jump from an unfortunate unintended consequence to a conspiracy theory "so it is clear that the wingspan of a xxx jet could not fit into the hole in the Pentagon. What else are they hiding. What even more diobolical schemes are they waiting to spring on a sleeping and defenseless public???!!!!!!" Time to be charitable and say it is what it is, and it is not evidence of any other lurking sabotage of our game. It certainly is irrelevent to any gameplay issues for the reason I humorously pointed out in my previous birdman post of several pages ago. My point was that the scopes were not worthy of being catastrophized over and there were hysterical people out there. I stand by that, although if someone can embarass me suficiently I'll fly over them and let loose a nice glob aimed at their head. I don't think birds or birdmen can do that though and that would be an inaccurate simulation so forget it.

The CTD issues are quite common when one looks at the posts here. You somehow have a GOD machine that can run SH4 flawlessly
I had no idea this would become so tedious! Ok folks my machine is a GOD machine. Actually it is an UBERGOD machine with the following characteristics worthy of worship by all. (I'm having fun here, not being sarcastic, not calling anyone a what was that? Oh yeah, "simple minded idiot.") UBERGOD specs: (please genuflect after each component.) Motherboard: Asus A8N32-SLI deluxe, $149 (oh bodacious motherboard we worship you!), processor: AMD Athlon 3700+ San Diego Socket 939 $89.00 (dual core and quad core processors eat dirt and bow before it!!!), OCZ Platinum 2GB (2x1GB) Dual Channel model OCZ4002048OLDCPE-K $234 (the better to REMEMBER you with my dear!), graphics cards: 2 EVGA 256-P2-N550-T2 GeForce 7600GT PCI Express x 16 video cards $239 apiece (sit down before you pass out from their awesome magnificense!), HD: Western Digital Cariar SE16 WD3200KS 320 gig SATA $89.99 (ok so EVERYTHING isn't worthy of worship). Is it my 120mm blue LED case fans? Beats me! (that was more fun than I thought it would be) But you can see that you can assemble a no-CTD machine out of not at all current components for a nice price!

I had some CTD issues myself. Never sorted them out. Who cares? Here's what I did. I first uninstalled all my mods and moved my MODS directory to the desktop (this may have been stupid if my problem was lurking in a mod). Then in uninstalled SH4, using the option to preserve my savegames. I reinstalled, redownloaded JSGME (should have trashed my MODS directory and redownloaded all of them too) ran JSGME once, copied the MODS directory from the desktop on top of the new empty one JSGME just made, restarted the game and guess what? No CTDs for the last 2 months. What was wrong? Who cares? Just speculating, I most likely uninstalled some mods in a different order than I installed them and got some incompatible glitches in there somewhere. Or it coulda been a curse.

That's all I'm going to cover, but hey guy! Please don't be too quick to take offense, and take it easy on those cornflakes. We're here to have fun and disagree agreeably. We're playing a game. If you're not having fun, you're getting no benefit. Most of all we're here to have FUN! That's an order, gentlemen, from the birdman!

[MONOLITH]

You gotta love this place.

Even the good news announcement of a much wanted patch, previously thought unconfirmed, somehow gets people arguing.


Viva la internet! :smug:

[Munchausen]

As far as looking at scopes rising and falling is concerned... before patch 1.3, this feature worked, after the patch, it did not. Why? What did the patch introduce to cause this feature to fail? What else did it introduce? The patch broke something that should not have been broken, or should at least have been included with the readme file associated with the patch. This is an example of incomplete testing on the part of the developer.

If you install the mod that brings back periscope animation, it might give you a clue. Clicking on the attack scope, while in the up position, takes you to a mid-range view. From there, you can ride the scope back down ... all the way down ... until you're no longer in the conning tower. Or even in the sub.

It's a glitch ... and probably the reason the devs disabled "rising and falling" scopes.

[Rockin Robbins]

Clicking on the attack scope, while in the up position, takes you to a mid-range view. From there, you can ride the scope back down ... all the way down ... until you're no longer in the conning tower. Or even in the sub.

Now THAT sounds like fun! I gotta try that!:rock:

[John Channing]

As I recall it was an unintended consequence of importing some higher resolution graphics for the interiors.

As previously mentioned if anyone here is good enough to forsee every single thing that can possibly go wrong in software design and development I am sure that Microsoft would love to speak to you (as would every other development house in the world).

JCC

[holtzbr]

As I recall it was an unintended consequence of importing some higher resolution graphics for the interiors.

As previously mentioned if anyone here is good enough to forsee every single thing that can possibly go wrong in software design and development I am sure that Microsoft would love to speak to you (as would every other development house in the world).

JCC

Amen to that!

:up:

[simonb1612]

So my question is this. Are the devs intending to incorporate ROW into the new 1.4 patch / add-on / whatever it will be called? It seems to me that with the modders consent they could really turn this sim into a fantastic collaboration piece. ROW shows that the community has the time and skills to produce work that can improve on what is released by the actual software company. I think we can all imagine how good this and other titles could be with such a partnership :D

[Steeltrap]

When you eject a Mark 14 torpedo, weighing 3820 lbs (1942 weight), what happens to your precise depth control? Now fire 2! Fire 3! You're pretty instantly 11,460 lbs light of neutral bouyancy. At 8 lb/gal (salt water is even heavier than that, varying according to local specific gravity, which is very variable), you have to take 1,432 gallons of water into the perfect mix of ballast tanks to reestablish equilibrium and not broach. Better do that quick because your conning tower is only about 10 feet below the surface. I'll choose to keep some way on and compensate with diving planes until I can get the trim right. This preceding explanation was not for your benefit because you have already read the material. It's for others, especially those who think SH4 models every (or most) aspect(s) of submarining. There's always something that can be added and the omission of such details doesn't make the game faulty SteelTrap! :rotfl:But I'd LOVE to see a game that took into account all that SteelTrap calls attention to. That would be GREAT.

I'm well aware of the trim dive et al. Boats were typically trimmed with a small down angle to allow avoiding broaching through an immediate increase in speed (after firing, they were typically diving deep anyway). Either way, they DIDN'T spend much time stationary, and certainly not when attacking, as they DID require forward motion to prevent broaching for the reasons you've stated. Nothing you've written in any way addresses the criticisms I've made about the depth keeping/changing behaviour, or the unfair tactical advantages they provide.

Incidentally, I didn't miss the point about sound heads working on the surface. To be complete, we must acknowledge that performance fell away rapidly with any sort of headway. To be able to detect ships via sound instead of visually while cruising at 12kts in heavy seas is, however, crap. Perhaps that's because the visual range is, itself, screwed. entire nights stationary on the surface, knowing that nothing would get within range before being detected - including submarines. He went so far as to have any manouevres required for station keeping done by the batteries only, the diesels being secured.]

My main criticism is not that it's not perfect - that is unrealistic - but it is so obviously FLAWED in ways that are critical. Yes, you can poke some fun at me being obsessive etc, but I've yet to see anyone argue against the points I listed in any structured, methodical way, explaining why what I consider to be egregious faults are, in fact, not really important. Please, someone, take up that challenge!

If you're having fun, great (I'm pretty sure I've made that point more than once, too). Best sub sim on the planet? I think that's a HUGE stretch. I'd have to give that title to SHIII with NYGM, not least because it has, IMO, addressed many of the issues I've objected to about SHIV.

Cheers

[Rockin Robbins]

My main criticism is not that it's not perfect - that is unrealistic - but it is so obviously FLAWED in ways that are critical. Yes, you can poke some fun at me being obsessive etc, but I've yet to see anyone argue against the points I listed in any structured, methodical way, explaining why what I consider to be egregious faults are, in fact, not really important. Please, someone, take up that challenge!

If you're having fun, great (I'm pretty sure I've made that point more than once, too). Best sub sim on the planet? I think that's a HUGE stretch. I'd have to give that title to SHIII with NYGM, not least because it has, IMO, addressed many of the issues I've objected to about SHIV.

Cheers

I take all your concerns at pointing the way for the next generation of submarine simulators and a glimpse at the possibilities that will be attainable with the more powerful computers of the future. I'm perfectly willing to have fun with what we have, while knowing that it is nowhere near what is ultimately possible.

You can take all my spouting about the weight of the torpedo and the need to keep way on to avoid broaching, and your observation of a slight forward trim to avoid broaching with a sudden burst of speed and throw them out the window with either Silent Hunter, because neither effect is modeled at all!

Since I try to make the way I skipper the sub as authentic as I can, I don't stop the boat during the attack, for the reasons stated. The trim angle can't be done within the game at all.

So I'm not making fun of you, I'm having fun. It does bother me when others catastrophize about a detail that catches their fancy that they think will be the end of the world unless it's fixed, the periscope animations, for instance, which had no impact on gameplay at all. The lack of any effect of the diving planes and forward speed in controlling dive times definitely DOES affect critical issues of gameplay. I just choose to live with it until something better comes along. Could this patch fix it? Somehow I suspect the defect is so fundamental that an entire rewrite would be necessary. How about trim aspects? Definitely, not in these two simulations. We're going to have to wait for the next generation.

[Munchausen]

We're going to have to wait for the next generation.

Somehow I'm not sure that will help. I've been playing sub simulations since Up Periscope on the Commodore 64 and it seems to me that every generation starts from scratch. And either makes the same mistakes or comes up with new ones.

Yes, the graphics are light years better, but the only other difference I see is that now the AI is a bit more complicated ... it's no longer easy to tell if the problem with night surface attacks is a total lack of a needed subroutine written into the game or just bad luck on the part of the player for running into an unusually alert convoy.

For any major improvement, somebody needs to gather the source code of every sub sim ever written, sort out the good parts, combine them, and make improvements where necessary. For instance, some of the early games came with a tactics manual ... very few of the tactics actually worked (due to the limited AI) but, by now, you'd think such tactics would make a good guideline for such things as "detection parameters" in any new generation simulation.

[Steeltrap]

Well, the depth control in SHIII seems far more realistic (in fact all of the subs' interaction with the environment seem better), so why can't that simply be copied?

NYGM seemed to go a long way to fixing surface attacks. You still need to be careful, but presenting a narrow angle at low speed and timing your approach to be as far from escorts as possible all work, and that's as it should be. Again, why not fixed in SHIV?

SD radar seems a no-brainer as the faults are so obvious I should think the solutions might be, too.

Lastly, the AI. That's the last real killer.

If these 4 things were brought to levels that are reasonably realistic I'd find it worth playing. Sure, anyone can come up with more and more to fix, but that has never been my aim. I just happen to find these 4 problems a real immersion killer to the point that I find it no challenge/interest to play (for example, I have never suffered damage from a DD worse than the AA/deck gun being temporarily knocked out, and I've sunk a vast number of ships....and that's using averything on realistic settings!).

There's also something to be said for not going too far in some respects - trim etc - as such things that are fascinating the first few times can soon become a chore, actually detracting from gameplay unless they can be disabled in an options screen.

BTW, just want to make clear I wasn't at all taking any offense at anything you wrote about my comments. On reading my post before this one, I think it sounds a little terse on my part!

Cheers

[Rockin Robbins]

It might be possible to incorporate trim angle without being too tedius by taking the captain's viewpoint. If you could just take the captain's viewpoint and merely give the order, "Planesman, give me 2º down bubble, I don't want to broach when we hit high speed." Actually, according to Edward Beach the preferred practice was to give more down bubble than that to do the speed burst at 100' or so to avoid a wake on the surface from that breakneck 8 knot burst! When resuming speed less than 3 knots they would go back to periscope depth.

Also when diving, down bubbles of up to 45º were used after the war without incident. I'd have to check what they used during the war but they were a lot more conservative than that! Seems like they were on the order of 10º.

I think, as tater has said many times, that torpedo spreads should be handled the same way. The captain gives the order and the details are worked out by the crew, with no manually setting the spread angle on the TDC unless you are a glutton for punishment. Spacing of shots at least 4 seconds apart should then be enforced by the software.

Steeltrap, how you don't play SH4 and yet remain relevent with your observations is beyond me, but you do. Unlike the "nyah, nyah, nyah" SH3 cheerleaders, your stuff is always good and on target.

[mrbeast]

...Steeltrap, how you don't play SH4 and yet remain relevent with your observations is beyond me, but you do. Unlike the "nyah, nyah, nyah" SH3 cheerleaders, your stuff is always good and on target.

Well said.

[Steeltrap]

Steeltrap, how you don't play SH4 and yet remain relevent with your observations is beyond me, but you do. Unlike the "nyah, nyah, nyah" SH3 cheerleaders, your stuff is always good and on target.
Thanks!

I have always read a great deal about military history, and that has included the Pacific sub campaign. I did play SHIV, of course, and did so under 1.3 and loaded TM etc. as I wanted to give it every chance to compete with SHIII and NYGM 2.6. I did multiple patrols and different mission types, and played around with various settings (including mods). Come to think of it, I think I did what a good reviewer should.

Anyway, to my mind it still doesn't compete with maxed-out SHIII. The main reason is AI. Of course some of that is simply because Jap ASW was rubbish compared with the Allies in Atlantic. Add to that the fact that USA subs enjoyed considerable technical advantages - very effective radar being the most notable - and those advantages were pretty much maintained throughout the war (and in some cases extended), and it becomes a real problem maintaining the sort of challenge experienced in SHIII as the war progresses. The main increase in difficulty comes from some escorts getting radar (although not many, often a single escort in a convoy, if that) and the fact that, with so many merchants being sunk, the escort:merchant ratio continued to tip in favour of escorts.

That previous paragraph pretty much sums up why for me the Pacific is never as engrossing a theatre for a sub sim as the Atlantic. Despite that, I do like some things about SHIV (!!), especially the graphics and the crew watch roster system for examples. For me to enjoy it long-term, however, those 4 critical points from my previous post need to be addressed as they, at present, stack the odds even more in favour of the sub, making it something of a turkey shoot!

If I seem hyper-critical it's because (I like to think) I see what could be and get frustrated at what is, when the gaps seem eminently addressable in the critical areas.

Cheers!

[joea]

Steeltrap, I think you make some excellent points however, you must recall that stock SH3 AI was rather rubbish as well. At least not before a LOT of testing and tweaking by modders. At least we would hope that those lessons could be transferred to SH4.

[Steeltrap]

Steeltrap, I think you make some excellent points however, you must recall that stock SH3 AI was rather rubbish as well. At least not before a LOT of testing and tweaking by modders. At least we would hope that those lessons could be transferred to SH4.

I completely understand and agree. Frustration is that the same flaws in SHIII were transported to SHIV (AI, visual ranges etc...). They spent time on the eye candy and some tricky things like the TDC (an absolute must, although that in itself had major flaws when released!!) and seemingly failed to address the underlying factors so crucial to a realistic sim. The really annoying part is that most of these things were addressed by modders for SHIII, yet it was "back to the drawing board" when SHIV was released.

Anyway, let's see if 1.4 addresses them (I hope so) or releases "features" to hide the fact the problems aren't addressed (I fear this).

Cheers!

[Laffertytig]

great news about the patch info bein released but im a bit puzzled to the lack of info about this addon/expansion. i would assume ubi are aiming for the xmas release right? has there been any official word on it or is it just wild rumours?

[TDK1044]

great news about the patch info bein released but im a bit puzzled to the lack of info about this addon/expansion. i would assume ubi are aiming for the xmas release right? has there been any official word on it or is it just wild rumours?


The Add On has been confirmed. The release date has not yet been confirmed, although I think you can safely assume that it will be here before Christmas. :D

[Cap'n Spanky]

on it or is it just wild rumours...



Scuttlebutt we hope not!

[TDK1044]

on it or is it just wild rumours...



Scuttlebutt we hope not!


The guys currently working their asses off debugging certainly hope not! :D

[DeepIron]

Could someone please explain to me the significance of adding U Boats to SH4 even as an add-on package? Sounds more like, "Well we've got some really cool U-Boats from SH3, let's package 'em up and sell 'em as an add-on" kind of marketing...

As a longtime student of the Pacific sub war I realize that the Germans did have a very limited presence in the Pacific/Indian theatres... and that presence had a minimal and rather insignificant overall impact... Of course, as a precursor to WWII, the Germans were working with the Japanese as early as 1928 to not only help design submarines, but actually made several U-Boats available. But these subs did not see any wartime service IIRC...

Personally, I would have like to see the patch include more provisions for Japanese sub operations, see "The Japanese Submarine Force and World War II" by Boyd and Yoshida. Very interesting account of how the Japanese viewed the role of the submarine.

Also Roscoe's "United States Submarine Operations in World War II" documents a fair number of US and Japanese sub contacts/sinkings during the war.

Sub to sub contacts are certainly lacking in the current SH4 version, IMO.

[Laffertytig]

ok im probably clutching at straws now but if its been officially confirmed, is there anything official about whats in it? :D

[Iron Budokan]

For the record, stock SHIII was NOT rubbish.

[MONOLITH]

For the record, stock SHIII was NOT rubbish.

And neither was SH4.

The word rubbish is certainly overkill, but don't let personal disagreement make you turn a blind eye to the fact that there were serious issues with it.

I can, to this day, even after 3 years of mods, load up the SH3 convoy tutorial mission, and have the AI escorts shoot at each other instead of me. :rotfl:

[Kodaita]

I hate how so many people keep comparing SH4 to SH3 with NYGM or GWX. Sheesh, when SH4 has been out as long as SH3 and has a large number of supermods, then we'll compare the end result. Yes SH3 is great, yes it does somethings better. But 80 or 90% of what SH3 does better is because the modders fixed/altered or invented something to fill the gaps. They will do the same with SH4 in time. SH4 has all the potential of SH3 and more (at least in my view). As more and more modders come along and start to work on this game we'll see things that we can't imagine. Till then, lets just enjoy what we have and not stress over every single minor historical fault. Chances are, sooner or later someone will come along and mod a fix for it.

[Rockin Robbins]

OK, I finished my foolish attack on the 10 knot convoy. Turned out not to have any DDs in it for some reason, so seizing my golden opportunity by the cajones, I set torpedo depth for the largest ship. For some reason as they neared the firing position, they decided to do a chinese fire drill and the St Vitus' Dance all at once. I chased at ahead emergency for 15 minutes and got a wonderful couple of shots off at the smallest ship. Unfortunately, I forgot I set my depth for the largest and watched two perfectly aimed and laboriously set up torpedoes pass harmlessly under the keel of my target.

Surfaced and carefully positioning myself to use my victim to mask the guns of the other two boats, proceeded to pump my last 50 shells into his hull in frustration. Naturally, although I set him on fire, I couldn't sink him. Time to head back for the barn. I sent in a contact report and made for Pearl. That was the signal for all three to open up with their deck guns as I was now out of my careful masking position. Dived and slunk away until they were out of range, surfaced and ran for Pearl.

Now I'm in Pearl, got a silver star for running away from three merchants (I'll sell it on eBay). I could only promote one of my crew. Loaded up with torpedoes. Passed on the Mark 18's. Loaded with Mark 14's and four Mark 27's. Might be fun to try them out, remembering that they're only good for 10 knots. So, what do I do now? Load up on the updates of all the mods I have, which were updated while I was at sea. Do I wait for the patch or go out again?

Is this any way to run a Navy?

[Ducimus]

I hate how so many people keep comparing SH4 to SH3 with NYGM or GWX. Sheesh, when SH4 has been out as long as SH3 and has a large number of supermods, then we'll compare the end result.


However long Sh4 has been out now, if you were to compare it to how Sh3 was at the same age, i think one would fine Sh4 is "ahead of the curve" so to speak. Admittidly the more rapid progression is because were not starting entirely from scratch in terms of modding tools, or technical knowledge, but still, it is better off then Sh3 was at the same age.

Sh3, to get where it is now, took a couple years worth of modding. So comparisons are a bit unfair. I think one problem is, is that for most people, they're used to the game being at certain state of being in terms of progression. I don't think too many people remember how SH3 was before GWX and NYGM with all the latest fixes and mods.

[MONOLITH]

I'm becoming a Ducimus fan. :|\\

[Steeltrap]

I hate how so many people keep comparing SH4 to SH3 with NYGM or GWX. Sheesh, when SH4 has been out as long as SH3 and has a large number of supermods, then we'll compare the end result.


However long Sh4 has been out now, if you were to compare it to how Sh3 was at the same age, i think one would fine Sh4 is "ahead of the curve" so to speak. Admittidly the more rapid progression is because were not starting entirely from scratch in terms of modding tools, or technical knowledge, but still, it is better off then Sh3 was at the same age.

Sh3, to get where it is now, took a couple years worth of modding. So comparisons are a bit unfair. I think one problem is, is that for most people, they're used to the game being at certain state of being in terms of progression. I don't think too many people remember how SH3 was before GWX and NYGM with all the latest fixes and mods.

"Comparisons are a bit unfair"?? Firstly, much of the market for SH4 will have SH3, so a comparison is inevitable. Secondly, if the comparison is unflattering, isn't that the fault of those who produced a sim inferior to the current state of the previous sim released by the same publisher on, ostensibly, the same topic (i.e. WWII submarine ops)???

Put another way: why should we pay premium price ($99 in Australia) for a sim that, according to the premise of this post, will take 3 years to reach the levels of a sim released years before it??? :o :o
That's akin to saying that what Ubi really does is publish bare bones for people who know diddly about submarines....if you actually want a pretty realistic sim, wait for 3 years after the release by which time (a) modders will have done the work developers/publishers should do and (b) you'll pay about 20-30% of the initial price. (I'd love to see the Marketers' spin on this)

After SH2 that's what I did. I waited some years after the release of SH3 before purchasing, got it for $25, and had mods to d/l that fixed all the snafu material. :up: :up:

I could argue I'm tired of being told I shouldn't compare SH3 and SH4. I suspect my real irritation, however, is with myself for purchasing SH4 when it was released and then, naturally enough, feeling ripped off vs. what value I got by buying SH3 much later than its release date. :damn: :damn:

[MONOLITH]

3 years [/I]to reach the levels of a sim released years before it???

This is a bit of an unfair spin.

By "reach the levels of SH3", he meant in it's current state, after 2 years of modding. Not in it's state (SH3) when it was first released.

He said SH4 is much further along at this time after it's release, then SH3 was in the similar time frame after it's release.

And that is correct.

And SH4 was 2 years, not 3, after SH3.

[Kodaita]

Ducimus, I totally agree with you

Steeltrap, you said" isn't that the fault of those who produced a sim inferior to the current state of the previous sim released by the same publisher on, ostensibly, the same topic". I'll play along.

So lets take out the mods (since UBI isn't responsible for them) and lets go with the stock game and patches. So stock SH4 with all the patches is inferior to stock SH3 with all patches? I mean if we're going to compare them, lets be fair. Now if we add in mods I can see why you'd be dissappointed. Coming in from SH3 with boatloads of mods and such, to SH4 which has way less. But if your using the mods in your comparisions of the two games, then I think I see why your so upset.

You said you paid "premium price ($99 in Australia) for a sim that, according to the premise of this post, will take 3 years to reach the levels of a sim released years before it" Well actually you didn't. You paid premium price for a game that is a fair bit beyond SH3. Don't forget to leave those mods out now, since you didn't pay for the ones in SH3 either. So at the end of the day, SH4 is a more advanced game than SH3 is. If you disagree, load up stock Sh3 and patch it and play a career or two. No mods. Now try Sh4, patched up and see which is better. That's what you paid for.

All your doing is getting mad because the amount of mods that you had in SH3 isn't yet available for SH4. Well since the fine folks here give us these works of art free, lets give them some time to make them. SH4 is an incredible game, one which I think will surpass SH3 one day. And it will be thanks to the modders that it does, just like it was with SH3.

[Sailor Steve]

After SH2 that's what I did. I waited some years after the release of SH3 before purchasing, got it for $25, and had mods to d/l that fixed all the snafu material. :up: :up:
"Some years"? How many. SH3 has been out 2-1/2 years now. Haven't you bought it yet? Of course you have. How many years is "some"? And how long are you willing to give SH4 before you give it a fair shake?

[Castout]

People are still playing SHIV?:shifty:

I gave up on the game looong time ago.:damn:.

I had to. I still love my sanity.

[mookiemookie]

People are still playing SHIV?:shifty:

I gave up on the game looong time ago.:damn:.

I had to. I still love my sanity.
Your loss. :roll:

Thanks for sharing.

[Kodaita]

People are still playing SHIV?:shifty:

I gave up on the game looong time ago.:damn:.

I had to. I still love my sanity.

It's ok, you don't have to like it. But why bother to come into the forum for a game you dislike so much and bother to post about it? Seems like your time would be better spent on the SH3 forum or out in the atlantic. :hmm: Oh well. As Mookie says, your loss.

[-Pv-]

"..Does seem a bit silly to me to expand on a WWII Pacific Theater submarine game by modelling German U-Boats so we can play out obscure Kriegsmarine operations that had little to no impact on the Pacific or European wars..."

My spin is this is an attempt to satisfy the hundreds of posts we get here to provide a Uboat sim with SHIV's graphic engine and more expansive campaign model (which is improving.) We really don't know all the details of how this will be implemented. Obviously it lets a few people explore this interest at little cost to the developers and gamers don't have to wait years for a new game to be built from scratch. Evidence the marketing people are listening and development money is being spent.

On the subject of the unending debate over the impending demise of simulations, there is evidence web sites like this keep simulations selling for many years because the shear activity, support, mods, interest here raises the visibility of these sims and attracts new purchasers. Falcon4 is still increasing sales going on 15 years mostly pushed by the Web community and modders.
While sims will not compete with FPS among the teenagers, eventually these kids grow up. Frankly, I don't care how many people play what games on how many other platforms. I only care there are games I like to purchase available and these devs have thousands of my dollars. I've been supporting Flight Simulator for over 20 years. Probably the most successful simulation franchise ever created.

The detractors who constantly brag about their lack of interest in the sim accomplish nothing here since this is a fan forum. Kind of like a Hindu preaching in a Christian church. Politely not listening.

When these comments come up I think back to a radio talk show call-in where the caller claimed to be an ex-NASA employee and had the "inside" track and knew technology (as if the rest of us don't know anything) and among many other stupid people claimed we've never landed on the Moon, orbited with the Shuttle, built the space station or any other endeavor in space. His assertion was studies made by his "goup" confirmed the energy needed to place ANYTHING in orbit (including Sputnik) where so high it was impossible to do and could never happen.
Obviously, the Moon landings, Communication satellites, ISS, etc. were not accomplished by people in his group. Likewise the success of any human interest including computer games and entertainment is not hinged on the lack of interest among the detractors, but on the enthusiasm of the supporters. We have a saying in the cable-pulling industry. "An ounce of push is worth a pound of pull."
-Pv-

[Pablo]

Hi!

Well, as you can tell from my sig I spend a lot of time in the Atlantic :), but I've been cautious about investing in SH4; however, I'll be happy to give SH4 a shot if it turns out the V1.4 patch plus add-on(s) go a long ways towards fixing the issues about which I've been reading. The Trigger Maru mod certainly looks enticing! :yep:

If the rumored SH4 U-boats prove to be player-controlled rather than just submarine targets then work on a combined U-boat/Pacific submarine campaign using the SH4 engine might not be out of the question, seeing as U.S. Gato boats served in the Atlantic for the first year or so of the war (SubRon 50) hunting for German blockade runners and commerce raiders in the Bay of Biscay and assisting in Operation Torch.

Think sub vs. sub (U-boat vs. Gato)! :D

Pablo

[Powerthighs]

On the subject of the unending debate over the impending demise of simulations, there is evidence web sites like this keep simulations selling for many years because the shear activity, support, mods, interest here raises the visibility of these sims and attracts new purchasers. Falcon4 is still increasing sales going on 15 years mostly pushed by the Web community and modders.

That is true. I played Silent Service, Sub Battle Simulator, and later SH1 in my youth. I didn't play any simulations for ten years, then I was bored at work, stumbled across subsim, found out about SH4, and the rest is history.

[Rockin Robbins]

People are still playing SHIV?:shifty:

I gave up on the game looong time ago.:damn:.

I had to. I still love my sanity.
A guy like him is why I enjoy SH4 purchased for half price when it was still selling for full price everywhere. Somebody buy his copy!!!! No game as great as SH4 belongs in the garbage. Save the orphaned game disks!:up: