Destroyer Command 2/Surface Sim Addon [Merged]

[difool2]

We've all seen how much the various modders have been able to do to get playable surface ships working in both SH 3 & 4, despite the sims not being designed to do so. And there seems to be a definite interest on the part of many of us bystanders in such mods. Ubi/the devs have to be paying some attention to this, so do you think such an addon could ever be in the cards? Or do you feel that such would detract from their main mission, building sub sims? You'd think Joe Gamer would have a definite interest, as on the surface (pun intended :D) it would appear that driving around a BB would be quite a bit easier than mastering all the intricacies of a sub-not to mention the Big Guns! (but to be sure there should be hardcore settings for the grogs too, like having to use rangefinders and such), thus making such an effort easily marketable.

[Sailor Steve]

Surface warfare is cool. One thing about "hardcore settings": The captain of a surface ship does even less than the captain of a submarine, action-wise. A real hardcore setting would never use the rangefinders, or anything else for that matter. He would just give orders.

On the other hand I always manned the main rangefinder when I played Destroyer Command. The guns were always popping off one at a time, when in reality the Fire-Control Officer would fire them all as a unit. To make that happen I had to do it myself. Fun, but hardly realistic.

I doubt there will be a surface version right away, but it could concieveably happen. I'd love to see a new version of DC, at least with corvettes and destroyers. Big ships could come later. They might actually get me to multiplay with something like that.

[PL_Andrev]

SH3 is very popular, stable game. It is strange but SH3 in my opinion is more popular than SH4 especially for multiplayer games.

Unfortunately, dev team had almost perfect environment but then didn't public dedicated mods for other uboats (allied submarines) or playable surface ships.
They chose other way and did revolution - a new engine (still bugged) new graphic. That's true it was tragedy. But what do the dev team to help his opinion? Playable ships add-on? Not - add-on changes sides.
They return to the tested way: german uboats
With more locked environment for modders.

OK. What next? SH5? Fine.
Now UBI knows SH4 was mistake. But do they know why?
They return to source - they do step back.
Again ONLY German uboats. No other.
Single mission / campaign for allied submarines ? other axis sides?
Adversarial mode in SH4 was fatal? OK, delete it!
Forget about it.

UBI forgot about one thing:
At 2005 wasn't good sub simulator. SH3 was big news!
In SH3 was almost perfect environment with high interaction with player (bad visibility, rain). Players want news.
And how long can you go inside submarine? Real-time day? Two days? At the rest time the "captain" will sit on central room "and play with SH3".

Conclusion:
If SH5 will be good "climatic like SH3" game, without many bugs, opened for modders and multiplayers (try to play via UBI on multi? try it you will understand what I mean) the DEV team add new one...
"Playable surface ships"? or "Return to the Pacific" as US or Japan ?

One thing (for dev team):
If the core game is singleplayer, why the piracy protection is added for multigames? (result: kill this mode because connection problems?)
Use piracy protection for patches not for multi...

[Snestorm]

I think perfecting the subs is challenging enough.

The learning experience never ends.

The more one learns, the more one realizes how much more there is to learn.
Only the beginner "knows" it all.

[IanC]

The more one learns, the more one realizes how much more there is to learn.
Only the beginner "knows" it all.

So true! "The greater the knowledge, the greater the doubt." - Goethe
Now if only my brother-in-law could read this...

[ivank]

I think with good 3d models, and a good damage model, my team and I can do the rest. I just want the above, 3D models and damage!

[JScones]

On the other hand I always manned the main rangefinder when I played Destroyer Command. The guns were always popping off one at a time, when in reality the Fire-Control Officer would fire them all as a unit. To make that happen I had to do it myself. Fun, but hardly realistic.
Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm sure I read recently (wish I could remember where) that (during WWII at least) the USN fired their ship guns in unison but the RN fired theirs in alternate, for aiming purposes.

[PL_Andrev]

I think with good 3d models, and a good damage model, my team and I can do the rest. I just want the above, 3D models and damage!

Maybe you right about campaign for single player, but the SH3/4 environment is too close to best game like DD vs DD (or other surface class) or DD vs SUB for multiplayers.

Of course is possible to play 4 vs 4 with manual recognition of target (enemy? or my friend?) but internet connections problem (piracy protection) kill multiplayers game. Better environment is SH3...

[Skanner]

I remember the beautiful battle between subs and destroyers, in "silent hunter II" and "destroyer commands".

Maybe someone have to notice that if they produce Silent Hunter 5, he can sell Destroyer commands to all the players who buy silent hunter 5.

Help me to make this possible.

thank you
Skanner

[JU_88]

I remember the beautiful battle between subs and destroyers, in "silent hunter II" and "destroyer commands".

Maybe someone have to notice that if they produce Silent Hunter 5, he can sell Destroyer commands to all the players who buy silent hunter 5.

Help me to make this possible.

thank you
Skanner

Dunno about ALL players, it dont interest everyone - but most people, yes.
DC2 could be nice addon for SHV if they decide to make an addon at all that is.... (depends on SHVs sales)

P.S there is already a thread for this here.
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=157374

[W_clear]

I very much miss the "silent hunter II" and "destroyer commands" days.:cry:

http://i34.tinypic.com/1f8jdl.jpg

[Carotio]

It's not that I personally would play DC2, but I would love to play multiplayer against someone playing DC2 instead of a fellow wolfpack SH5 player.

And vice versa, I think some of those who prefer surface naval games would find it more amusing to play against a human uboat/submarine player.

Ubi should consider creating it.

[Platapus]

I would be very interested in a high fidelity destroyer anti-submarine simulator. DC1 was a good start, but there is plenty of room for improvements concerning sonar tracking.

I would buy a high fidelity anti-submarine simulator. :yeah:

[Takeda Shingen]

Actually, the SH II/DC interop was a real duck. Also, Destroyer Command did not sell, which is why you have not seen a new one since. Also, the quality of the SH series increased greatly once interoperability was abandoned, resulting in a vastly superior gaming experience. For those reasons, a return to SH/DC multiplay would be one of the last things I would want to see.

[Redeagle]

Then have a look at Chinese's WSM-mod and you'll see how many people would buy a DC2.
I played DC and i had trouble with it. Play SH2 and you get showered in depthcharges. Play DC and you can only drop a few and run out before finding the correct depth. Maybe it's my fault, but it wasn't fun.

WMS IS fun and would be even better, if the AI would be trained in surface combat (adding smoke-screen and DD torpedo-attacks) and maybe even launching planes from a CV if a capital-ship feature is added.
Also have a look at the thousands of Navyfield-palyers. Imagine a full 3D Navyfield :sunny:

[Seeadler]

Play DC and you can only drop a few and run out before finding the correct depth. Maybe it's my fault, but it wasn't fun.

There was a way with DC, to determine the depth mathematically. You had need only two or three good sonar signals in turn and perform a calculation based on Pythagoras. When the sub has not changed dramatically the depth until you drop your depth-charges, you have taken it (sometimes with a hit directly onto the tower:D).

I still remember the outcry of online sub players as in the Eagle-League forum this procedure was announced and practiced it in online training sessions for the members.:woot::wah:

[Webster]

maybe a destroyer command would work as an ad-on for sh5 because it would bring in revenue and i think if its done as an ad-on it would make life a lot easier on them to make a DC2 using the sh5 engine.

[Stormfly]

There was a way with DC, to determine the depth mathematically. You had need only two or three good sonar signals in turn and perform a calculation based on Pythagoras. When the sub has not changed dramatically the depth until you drop your depth-charges, you have taken it (sometimes with a hit directly onto the tower:D).

I still remember the outcry of online sub players as in the Eagle-League forum this procedure was announced and practiced it in online training sessions for the members.:woot::wah:

Yes, i liked it !

it enabled us using original Hunter Killer Tactics...

...as active sonar was modelled like the real beam and its limitations (also limited down angle). So you only needed someone who tracks the sub from a good active side angle (high profile). He than slowly came closer and closer, rdy to note, at which distance active sonar was breaking up. After getting this distance, we only needed to compare this data with a predefined table, in which we found the regarding dept for the distance. As reporting enemy dept to your mates, make shure to update also subs position, by sending contact report via radio. DD´s than deptcharged the hell of a carpet arround estimated subs position, to cover possible evading maneovers and so on.

...it was a real pleasure, as you had to do teamwork with good communication and discipline to sink a skilled Kaleunt. Also take in account, got hunted by humans make a real difference regarding admosphere and immersion especially for the mate below the surface.

This realy is, what your buddys are missing in a single or coop game... a real hunter / hunted fever :arrgh!:

[Sailor Steve]

I too miss the DC/SH2 days. But I also miss Destroyer Command itself. I would love to see a companion game with a full-blown career of escorting convoys in anything from a corvette to a destroyer, complete with crew and interiors, and hopefully British voices.

But I realize that it will probably never happen, and as a substitute I too would settle for a multiplayer-only escort add-on that let us fight it out.

[mapuc]

I too miss the DC/SH2 days. But I also miss Destroyer Command itself. I would love to see a companion game with a full-blown career of escorting convoys in anything from a corvette to a destroyer, complete with crew and interiors, and hopefully British voices.

But I realize that it will probably never happen, and as a substitute I too would settle for a multiplayer-only escort add-on that let us fight it out.

To mind same thought
I told almost the same to the Devteam at the subsim meeting.
In an another way offcourse.

Markus

[nattydread]

They said that if SH3 sold enough they might consider a DC2...SH3 was a sleeper hit, sold more than they would have ever thought(though still not as much as they would have wanted)...but DC2 never even came up. I just dont see DC2 being anything even close to bein on their radar.

[Redeagle]

I also posted that idea on Ubi-forums nearly exactly a year ago. The answer was

"Geschrieben am 17.10.2008 01:18 17.10.2008 01:18
Gar nicht einfach....ich trag das mal weiter


Carsten"


translation (more or less ;)) Not that easy...i will talk about it.

[java`s revenge]

I think that we have patience with the Chinese's WSM-mod.

Sooner or later we have dc2 by that great modder.

[PL_Andrev]

I think that we have patience with the Chinese's WSM-mod.

...or say "Good Bye" to Ubi and wait for next Battlestations, more open and more adapted for SH2/DC players...

[Sonarman]

Our best bet for a surface sim may actually not be Ubisoft who are obviously basing their development purely on the sales of the Silent Hunter series but rather in Akella taking the PT-Boats engine up to the destroyer level or alternatively petitioning Jutland developers Storm Eagle to add simulation features to a future Task Force 1942 like WW2 Solomons/Guadalcanal game etc. As for Battlestations Pacific it is a good game but definitely not a realistic simulation, not very moddable and Eidos support for the game once released has been a total joke. Also lets not forget also that our old friend EAST may comeup with something in the near future, he is still plotting and planning a new game (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=155618).

As for Ubi It really is a shame that they have so far chosen not to pursue a DC2 when they already have a prebuilt world, models and some weapon/sensor systems ready to go from SH3/4/5. I think the main problem was the original DC was released far too soon and in poor shape to damning reviews and poor sales. With a little foresight and faith and an SHIII style revamp I'm sure a DC2 could be a big hit for them. Perhaps its up to the community to make it's demand known?

[GlobalExplorer]

OP: Could you please learn how to make new topics? Destroyer Command 2 !!!! makes every one thinks it's an announcement. I clicked on it, but I did not want to go through another DC2 circlejerk.

[martes86]

If any of you guys haven't voted yet, here's a little poll for ya:

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=156571&page=3

Cheers :DL

[Webster]

If any of you guys haven't voted yet, here's a little poll for ya:


please dont spam somone elses thread to redirect them to your own :down:

its not polite :salute:

[Webster]

OP: Could you please learn how to make new topics? Destroyer Command 2 !!!! makes every one thinks it's an announcement. I clicked on it, but I did not want to go through another DC2 circlejerk.


no need to be harsh just because the topic is a source of frustration for you, we have all made poorly worded thread titles before. :yep:

i guess it is a little missleading so i'll send him a PM and offer to edit it if he wants me to :salute:

[Sailor Steve]

Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm sure I read recently (wish I could remember where) that (during WWII at least) the USN fired their ship guns in unison but the RN fired theirs in alternate, for aiming purposes.
During ranging a single shot might be fired to judge the range, or a ladder of shells spaced a known distance apart (only the Germans fired ladders in WW1, but by the second war everyone was doing it).

Once the range was confirmed battleships fired salvos: the left barrels of each turret fired, then the right, then the middle if they had one. Full broadsides were rare.

On ships with single guns in each turret the salvo of necessity was also a broadside. It was easiest for the Fire Control Officer to line them up and press the button (or blow in the tube in the Germans' case). That way the shells all arrived in a group and the FCO could judge how close they were by the grouped splashes.

[mookiemookie]

It was easiest for the Fire Control Officer to line them up and press the button (or blow in the tube in the Germans' case).

Wait, what? The Germans fired their guns by blowing in a tube?

[Méo]

Could the devs give us an official surface warfare addon? Should they?.

No they should not. To me they should focus on creating a u-boat sim that is as immersive as possible.

Personally i see very little interest in taking command of a destroyer and chasing an enemy that you hardly or never see at all!

The only cool thing i can imagine would be to catch a u-boat in deep fog with early radar and ram it at full speed. :arrgh!:

And i would be surprised if Joe the gamer would have any interest with playing a simulation, no offence.

[Safe-Keeper]

What I want to see is SH5 focusing entirely on submarines - no driving a surface ship, no commanding a surface ship, no walking around in a surface ship. This lets the devs pump as much detail into sub driving as they possibly can, making the experience as realistic as possible.

How then do we get to drive destroyers, cruisers, torpedo boats and cargo vessels, or for that matter aircraft?? Make a second stand-alone game, or games, in which you focus 100% on surface ships. Then simply let them use the same engine, so that they can be played together, as if the second game was an expansion pack.

A bit like Dangerous Waters, only as separate games.

Wait, what? The Germans fired their guns by blowing in a tube? The blow pipe principle was dominant on all German warships in WWII, yes. This concept saved countless tonnes of explosives to propel the shells out of their tubes, and was {stupid modern fad} All-Natural {/stupid modern fad}. The problem was that many shells weighed a lot, so while machine guns could easily be fired by a single person, firing a big run required the lung capacity of a dedicated Blow Team.

Seriously, though, I'd like to know more about these blow tubes, too.

[Takeda Shingen]

Merged.

Try to keep the topical content in one place. Failing to do so makes the forum a very sloppy thing to read.

The Management

[AOTD_MadMax]

UBI must be complete stupid when they didnt work out an DC as an Upgrade for SH5.

Battles against other human player are the basics of an good selled game.
The biggest thrill you got in any kind of game is the fight against other human player cause the way the AI interacts got an limit, an coded limit that every good player knows after some sessions.

So in my eyes UBI should work out an interesting DC to make SH5 to an more popular game as an singleplayer based subsim normaly could be.

Greets

Maddy

[Méo]

The biggest thrill you got in any kind of game is the fight against other human player cause the way the AI interacts got an limit, an coded limit that every good player knows after some sessions.

Of course it would be cool, but i really wonder how would you manage time compression in multiplayer games. :hmmm:

[martes86]

please dont spam somone elses thread to redirect them to your own :down:

its not polite :salute:


No spam at all. Actually, I provide it as a tool to be heard. I don't intend the thread to deflect from one place to another, I just want people to cast their vote (which they can't do in this thread), specially those that'd like to have a DC2, which I guess is the reason why the threads (the 2 merged) were created. :)

Otherwise anyone can keep posting here if they want to do so. :rock:

Cheers

[Greenhornet]

I've been around since the SH2 days and owned a copy of DC. I loved it! There could have been a few tweaks on it and it would have been a great game, the only thing that killed it was the interop between SH2 and DC, it crashed badly and was a drag to play. When interop did work it was a blast! I was surface most of the time and really enjoyed nailing subs.

Lets just hope that there might be a chance for a good DC and SH5 to work. Lets get the skimmers out there again!

Hey, where is Cpt. Kirk? maybe he can get sunk by his own torpedo again!. He got so scared when he saw my Sumner DD that he sunk himself!

[THE_MASK]

Like my 15 yr old son said "just playing a sub would be boring , they need to make it so you can use ships and planes as well " . Thats just a 15 yr olds view on silent hunter 5 , not necesarily mine .

[Redeagle]

What I want to see is SH5 focusing entirely on submarines - no driving a surface ship, no commanding a surface ship, no walking around in a surface ship. This lets the devs pump as much detail into sub driving as they possibly can, making the experience as realistic as possible.

How then do we get to drive destroyers, cruisers, torpedo boats and cargo vessels, or for that matter aircraft?? Make a second stand-alone game, or games, in which you focus 100% on surface ships. Then simply let them use the same engine, so that they can be played together, as if the second game was an expansion pack.



What i have in mind is 2 standalone games which are compatible. Flying planes would not be an option (complete different physics, input and so on...), but having the option to choose surface ships adding a promoting system from frigate over DD to cruisers and battleships would be great. Adding carriers to that list would be awesome; and there come in the planes: you order what planes in what numbers to launch and where to patrol. I guess that adds some players ;)
Driving cargo? I guess thats not funny; buy Ship-Simulator, driving around for hours and add trying to evade shells/torps.:timeout:

[Sailor Steve]

Wait, what? The Germans fired their guns by blowing in a tube?
According to this source they did: http://www.amazon.com/German-Destroyers-World-War-Two/dp/1557503028/ref=sr_1_5?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1256593635&sr=1-5

I'll try to remember to get an exact quote for you.

[Dargo]

There was a way with DC, to determine the depth mathematically. You had need only two or three good sonar signals in turn and perform a calculation based on Pythagoras. When the sub has not changed dramatically the depth until you drop your depth-charges, you have taken it (sometimes with a hit directly onto the tower:D).

I still remember the outcry of online sub players as in the Eagle-League forum this procedure was announced and practiced it in online training sessions for the members.:woot::wah:

You mean this from Von Spike:

Determining depth by SONAR

This method requires practice on the part of the destroyer Capt. In order to become comfortable with the procedure. However it is the only method that is available!
It is important to keep some things in mind when attempting to determine the depth of a U-Boat using your sonar, the most important of these is that the SONAR measures distance. The height of the “ping” being displayed is a measure of signal quality only, a smaller spike means that the signal being returned to the SONAR unit is of lesser quality, not that the U-Boat is deeper or shallower.
The physics of the SONAR are such that a “cone” of sound is projected from the sound head at a predetermined angle for each “ping”, and then the SONAR listens for an echo of that sound impulse. If an echo is received, it is displayed on the SONAR screen as a spike wave. The method used to determine the depth of the U-Boat is to determine its distance from the destroyer when it passes beneath the cone of sound.

The angle of the SONAR sound head is such that at 100 yards from the sound head, the bottom of the sound cone is 100 feet deep, at 200 yards the bottom is 200 feet, etc.
These measurements are probably a rough approximation of actual SONAR physics but can be used for determining depth in a battle.

[kptn_kaiserhof]

well wait and see

[hellfish6]

I'd like a surface warfare sim, maybe as a DLC or addon for SH5. I like subs just fine, but my real interest is in surface ships (which means, basically, I'm stuck with mods for SH3 and SH4 to get my fix).

My idea would be to start it out kinda scaled - join as a lieutenant or lieutenant commander in command of a sloop or corvette, then you can 'unlock' more ships as you complete patrols and increase in rank (i.e. once you make commander you can captain a destroyer, etc). Things like number of u-boats sunk or percentage of ships in your convoy that survive would help you increase in rank/renown. Eventually maybe you can become a convoy commander and manage 4-5 escorts.

Just thoughts. I don't expect any kind of surface ship game for SH5.

It does boggle my mind, though, that some people seem to think a sub sim and a surface sim are mutually exclusive. Everything you do to enhance the realism of subs can translate directly into a surface ship game.

FWIW, I'd much rather be able to crew a destroyer than watch 3d figures load torpedoes into a tube. I spend 90% of my time in SH3 or SH4 looking at my navigation map, 5% looking through a periscope and 5% on the conning tower or deck gun. I'll watch my crew load a torpedo once or twice, say 'that's cool' and never look at it again.

[DES_SNIPER]

I would love to hunt down a U-boat in a Flower class or maybe a Black Swan, working our way up to some of the late war Z class DD. I wouldnt mind playing as Commonweatlh, at least at the start of the game '39. and starting in mid '41 as American as the USN was in an undeclared war with Germany at this time. (We escorted convoys as far as Iceland before the RN took over escort.)
Just going to keep my fingers crossed on this!

[looney]

I think you will be bored to hell doing convoy duty... specially with a wolfpack in the area...

BOOOOM merchant down. huh... what... where... a that Uboat must be around there, race to the presumed firing point of the Uboat drop a series of DC... wait. Nope nothin.. race back to convoy.. BOOM 2nd merchant other side of convoy down.

Rinse repeat, in xx mins several merchants down. no clue how many Uboats and where they are. Rescue the merchant crews in the water. and race back to the convoy. Prey the uboat lost sight of the convoy else it's gonna be a long trip to home. That was life of many DD's during the early part of war. Later in war they simply didn't see a sub at all.

Hunter killer might be more fun. But even then the HK group needed to find a sub 1st..

I think best fun to be had, as a game is pacific theatre DD's participating in large scale surface warfare.

But I rather have a good Schnellboot or MTB (torpedo) or MGB (gunboat variant) addon/game. Then you could join in an attack on german shipping in the channel... close to home :)

[Akula4745]

Just gimmie some AI destroyer escorts for my Admiral Scheer... then I'll be a happy skipper.

[DES_SNIPER]

Here is a list of things I would like in a DC2:

If focused in the Atlantic, would allow you to play as Royal Navy, or Royal Canadian Navy or US Navy.

More realistic AA guns. In DC1 you started the war with 20mm Orleikons and 40mm Bofors. Alot of ships were just recently fitted with these guns. Most ships, especially the old flush deckers, started with .50's and 1.1 Chicago Piano's. If allowed to play as RN, it would be nice to start with quad .303's and 2pounder pom-pom's. If the game has an "what If" the 3" 50 cal duals would be a great addition since these were planned to replace the bofors.

AA directors for later in the war. During the War the USN developed and introduced optical and later radar guided control for the 40mm.

VVT proximity fuses as introduced.

ASW weapons. DC1 used just depth charges, Pretty sure they were just the ash cans. How about the quick sinking DC's? Hedgehog (both trainable and fixed), mouse trap, and "what if" weapon alpha (program started in '44 to be used against XXI u-boats), and MK27 cutie as a "what if" since the USN did test the use of the mk27 from surface ships (pretty sure with safety measure in place to prevent backtracking the lauching ship). If RN, the Squid or Limbo ASW.

Mine laying and clearing would be a nice mission or two, as well as landing support with more targeting options other than bunkers repeatedly. E-boats to play a large treat during the Normandy landings as well.

The use of Foxer, and later fanfare for use against German homing torpedos.

[Apocal]

You mean this from Von Spike:

Determining depth by SONAR

This method requires practice on the part of the destroyer Capt. In order to become comfortable with the procedure. However it is the only method that is available!
It is important to keep some things in mind when attempting to determine the depth of a U-Boat using your sonar, the most important of these is that the SONAR measures distance. The height of the “ping” being displayed is a measure of signal quality only, a smaller spike means that the signal being returned to the SONAR unit is of lesser quality, not that the U-Boat is deeper or shallower.
The physics of the SONAR are such that a “cone” of sound is projected from the sound head at a predetermined angle for each “ping”, and then the SONAR listens for an echo of that sound impulse. If an echo is received, it is displayed on the SONAR screen as a spike wave. The method used to determine the depth of the U-Boat is to determine its distance from the destroyer when it passes beneath the cone of sound.

The angle of the SONAR sound head is such that at 100 yards from the sound head, the bottom of the sound cone is 100 feet deep, at 200 yards the bottom is 200 feet, etc.
These measurements are probably a rough approximation of actual SONAR physics but can be used for determining depth in a battle.

Sweet, been looking for this for awhile, had trouble finding it. Do you happen to have a link to the original chart he'd put together?

I'd like a surface warfare sim, maybe as a DLC or addon for SH5. I like subs just fine, but my real interest is in surface ships (which means, basically, I'm stuck with mods for SH3 and SH4 to get my fix).

Yeah, for the good longest the best we've had is Enigma: Rising Tide and Dangerous Waters. E:RT has it's moments but not really for me, Dangerous Waters is pretty awesome but it's modern so there is a different flavor to the tactical problems presented.

My idea would be to start it out kinda scaled - join as a lieutenant or lieutenant commander in command of a sloop or corvette, then you can 'unlock' more ships as you complete patrols and increase in rank (i.e. once you make commander you can captain a destroyer, etc). Things like number of u-boats sunk or percentage of ships in your convoy that survive would help you increase in rank/renown. Eventually maybe you can become a convoy commander and manage 4-5 escorts.

I mostly agree, although I'm more partial to the Pacific for a hypothetical DC2 since it's more a full-spectrum theater, you had ASW, you had plenty of varied surface actions, you had air attacks, you had amphibious operations and you stay relevant pretty much right up until the very end.

Of course the Atlantic and Med have most of those as well, and I suppose as long as the campaign is still dynamic, it'll be cool either way. Dynamic within context of course. You still get tasking assigned from on high, but the whole thing would play out before you. That's one thing I really disliked about Destroyer Command, the campaigns: the mission format was such a fantastic way of jarring me out of the "you are there" feeling.

Plus, why stop at destroyers? Why not let the player command stuff like cruisers, especially if it involves the USN, since I recall at least one cruiser-class, the Atlantas, had torpedoes, depth charges and sonar installed.

It does boggle my mind, though, that some people seem to think a sub sim and a surface sim are mutually exclusive. Everything you do to enhance the realism of subs can translate directly into a surface ship game.

Exactly. You build a high-fidelity sonar model, radar model, visual model, etc. and it cuts both ways and gives a more satisfying experience. Plus adversial play would be far more interesting, even if the ratio was skewed in the submariner's favor. There are, admittedly, a lot of ways for MP balance to be done real life vs. RPS and it could be a source of discontent, but really the community can probably hash that out themselves and probably leans towards RL anyway.

FWIW, I'd much rather be able to crew a destroyer than watch 3d figures load torpedoes into a tube. I spend 90% of my time in SH3 or SH4 looking at my navigation map, 5% looking through a periscope and 5% on the conning tower or deck gun. I'll watch my crew load a torpedo once or twice, say 'that's cool' and never look at it again.

Hmm not so much I agree here, people talk about caring more for gameplay than graphics, but then you see the sales figures for games with fantastic gameplay, but only middling graphics and they compare poorly to those with 'good enough' gameplay and WOW factor. Of course, they never actually say "graphics", because that's a dirty word for any true sim fan, but they do use words and phrases like "immersion" and "it feels like I'm actually there."

I see where graphics and other such eye candy plays it's own part and I appreciate it for what it does, even if I'm like you and send ninety plus percent of my time staring at a 2D map. Otherwise, I'd have to argue about the necessity for 1X time when I spend most of my time in some form of time compression to cut down on the wait.

[Dargo]

Sweet, been looking for this for awhile, had trouble finding it. Do you happen to have a link to the original chart he'd put together?
I have the doc pm me you mail addy and I send it to you

[Dargo]

My only request would be the control over several classes of Destroyer's

A sonar room where you have to determine the depth of the sub you want to sink
Depth charge room to set the explosion depth of the depth-charges
Radar room
Radio room
Bridge

[Dargo]

ASW weapons. DC1 used just depth charges, Pretty sure they were just the ash cans. How about the quick sinking DC's? Hedgehog (both trainable and fixed)

There where usable Hedgehog in DC1.

[ichso]

What I would like even better than another DC game would be a sim like the old DOS based Burning Steel series. Commanding a fleet of ships from any of those ship's bridge and and/or taking on a more wide ranged and tactical perspective.

Regarding Destroyer Command:
What would such a game be like: based on a dynamic campaign like in SH3/4 or mission based like SH2 ? I mean, wouldn't most destroyer patrols be deprived of spotting enemies across the Atlantic in a 'realistic' dynamic campaign ?

[Torplexed]

I think best fun to be had, as a game is pacific theatre DD's participating in large scale surface warfare.

Yeah! I'd love to see a Destroyer Command 2 with a Guadalcanal/Tokyo Express dynamic campaign included where you could play either the US or Japanese side. :up:

[PL_Andrev]

The problem with "dynamic campaign" is that you cannot hide yourself under surface. So you cannot swim with your BB around Japan, becouse there are thousand of enemy planes, enemy submarines or warships.

I want to play DC2 but I think that it be possible only as add-on for 'DC' single missions and multiplayer games (this same story with campaign on both Battlestations games).

Sorry.

[Apocal]

Regarding Destroyer Command:
What would such a game be like: based on a dynamic campaign like in SH3/4 or mission based like SH2 ? I mean, wouldn't most destroyer patrols be deprived of spotting enemies across the Atlantic in a 'realistic' dynamic campaign ?

Depends, really, apparently there were quite a few false contacts generated and acted upon, which may be a good gameplay element to introduce. Or it could be too frustrating and/or simply repetitive to cross the Atlantic and respond to flaming datum.

Which is why I said that Pacific was probably a better idea, if only for it's depth and breadth and the fact that the flavor of the campaign was constantly shifting; from early tactical blundering to the varied actions around the Solomons, then late-war battles for survival against an increasingly desperate opponent.

Yeah! I'd love to see a Destroyer Command 2 with a Guadalcanal/Tokyo Express dynamic campaign included where you could play either the US or Japanese side. :up:

That would get my dollar.

[Sailor Steve]

My only request would be the control over several classes of Destroyer's
I agree, but I would only want to directly control one at a time.
1. A sonar room where you have to determine the depth of the sub you want to sink
I loved that in DC, but it's not really accurate.

2. Depth charge room to set the explosion depth of the depth-charges
Same thing. I want to do that, but the captain never did.

3. Radar room
Again, a place the captain visits, but he doesn't really work there. That said, I loved going to the radar screen in SH1 (haven't played SH4 enough to get one) and wouldn't complain if I could do it in a new DC.

4. Radio room
I was a radioman, and it's a lot more likely to have an RM come to the captain than the other way around. He visited us maybe once a week. I like the way SH4 does it, with messages being 'handed to you' wherever you are.

5. Bridge

Where the captain lives.

[Apocal]

I agree, but I would only want to directly control one at a time.

I wouldn't mind something like command of a division or two of destroyers and cruisers. Playing Commodore could be cool if done right, plus in quite a few surface actions individual captains weren't making a terribly interesting number of tactical decisions. Surface warfare is a team sport even past the ship level.

I loved that in DC, but it's not really accurate.

Determing depth? Or the fact that the player has to do it manually? In the case of the first, I'm not sure if it's historically accurate or even practically possible with sonar gear of the time. For the second, I was a bit disappointed that there wasn't a crew simulated that could do this for me, obviously with a experience playing a role in how accurate his 'fix' would be.

On the other hand, you have Silent Hunter where the player is doing almost everything an entire tracking party would be doing; I understand most hardcore guys like this, but it isn't reality. Instead of calling out "Bearing - mark!" and having the periscope assistant call out the degrees or "Target speed - twenty-five knots!" and having the TDC operator repeatback the target speed setting, the player is doing all that.

So there is certainly a precedent for doing that in games/sims/whatever.

Where the captain lives.

Unfortunately, TC don't go high enough for me to stay there.