100% realism: Manual charting?

[Safe-Keeper]

This is an interesting idea I've been thinking about for Silent Hunter IV. Basically, in short terms:


Add options for "Manual charting" and "Navigation Officer Assistance".
You know how you've got that tiny little submarine icon on the F5 and F6 charts? When you activate the "Manual Charting" option, it's gone.
You can use stars, sextants (they used those in World War II, right?), the sun, your compass, visible land, etc. to pinpoint your location, and the manual comes with detailed information on how to do so. The Naval Academy also gives you detailed information in the form of a tutorial and video.
If "Navigation Officer Assistance" is enabled, you can order your Navigation Officer to estimate your position on the map.
Drifting is enabled, meaning that in storms you'll get thrown off course (as in Das Boot).


Thoughts? I think it'd be downright awesome if it could be made relatively easy (the same way the information gathering for torpedo runs is pretty realistic, but still simplified). Learning how to use a sextant in a computer game would be one thing a lot of people would love.

Also see: http://www.mat.uc.pt/~helios/Mestre/Novemb00/H61iflan.htm

[LukeFF]

Agreed, this is something I really want to see implemented. The current GPS-style navigation in SH3 is too gamey for me.

[oche]

Sounds good, as long as it remains optional, it would be a real plus for navigation freaks as meself, we would have real navigation challenges using sextants, takins sun sight, etc. Another thing to keep in mind would be the experience of the navigator in estimating your position. In B-17 Flying fortress 2, the navigator would estimate your position, you could manually aid him by eyeballing the surroundings for landmarks ang guessing the position.

[THE_MASK]

This would make it the greatest sim game ever made :cool:

[Safe-Keeper]

Sounds good, as long as it remains optional
I agree, it has to be something beginners can disable so that they/we aren't scared away.

Another thing to keep in mind would be the experience of the navigator in estimating your position.
Good idea.

[finchOU]

I agree....this is something that has been missing for a long time...this would truely put this into new waters as far as naval sims go.

Taking away the moving "GPS" map would also make the current mode of Manualy ploting targets more difficult. I still say add a manvuering board into the sub!

[Sailor Steve]

I completely agree. Of course being lazy I would like an easy version in which everything is done by the Navigator, but he wouldn't always be perfect, and every day the sky was overcast would make it worse.

[Threadfin]

Hi. I've also thought of this, but I wonder how long I'd want to do it. I was thinking it would be nice to have realistic navigation. But I would also like to see a mode that is somewhere in between 'GPS' style and full manual.

The idea is that the player's boat still appears on the map, but if using the 'in between' mode, the accuracy of the position is affected by things like navigator experience level and length of time with overcast or stormy sky that prevents virtual star or sunsights. Just a thought.

[Immacolata]

The kind of realism you descript here sounds more like a realism fetish than an actual boon to the gameplay. I'd love to have more involving plotting options. In SH3 the ability to plot targets manually were greatly subdued. Many tools were made so you could do more manual plotting better.

Id like to see in SH4 that you can get tools to measure speed on chart lines plot. A function that makes navigator assistant "plot" when you yell out distance and bearing. Then you can take observations and he can do the plotting, then you check after 5 minutes on the map if it can make a straight line.

All these things were ALMOST possible in SH3, but I think the designers really didn't know how much you could do for plotting. They almost got it right, I hope they fix it for SH4. It was a great fun part of SH3 and I wish it was done better then.

But general purpose manual plotting and charting sounds like its not fun at all and would probably attract 1% of the paying customers.

[LukeFF]

But general purpose manual plotting and charting sounds like its not fun at all and would probably attract 1% of the paying customers.

No, it worked perfectly fine in B-17II, and there were few complaints about the way it was implemented. Besides, it was a player-side option as whether they wanted to use it.

[Trout]

Agreed.

I already dead recon in SH3 using a paper map. A couple times a day I'll take a sun/star sighting (ie: check the game map!) to fix my location, but only if its not overcast.

There are some real fun aspects of navigation like this, such as:

1) You need to pay way more attention when navigating closer to shores, especially at night and in bad weather. It really affects your choice in hunting grounds.

2) convoy interception is more challenging as is finding your home port!

3) Your stress level starts to build up after a few cloudy days. The game world seems so huge and menacing when you think you are lost.

Trout

[finchOU]

Agreed.

I already dead recon in SH3 using a paper map. A couple times a day I'll take a sun/star sighting (ie: check the game map!) to fix my location, but only if its not overcast.

There are some real fun aspects of navigation like this, such as:

1) You need to pay way more attention when navigating closer to shores, especially at night and in bad weather. It really affects your choice in hunting grounds.

2) convoy interception is more challenging as is finding your home port!

3) Your stress level starts to build up after a few cloudy days. The game world seems so huge and menacing when you think you are lost.

Trout

Great post! And what does this add to the game.....immersion!!!! Play it like it was......that is what I'm all about!

[Caborico06]

I agree it's a great idea as an optional level of difficulty. Along the lines of navigation reality I think adding Nav aids such as buoys and lighthouses to the mission editor would be another awesome feature especially in restricted visibility. :ping:

[Safe-Keeper]

I feel SH3 isn't really realistic enough. Sure, it's challenging, sure it's immersive, sure it's awesome, and sure it's ground-breaking.

But it can be made even more realistic for the truly hard-core players. The notepad is about as challenging as I want it, but it'd be nice to have an option that forced you to use the dials in the F6 screen to manually setup everything before firing.

Same with navigation. Something like
- GPS style, as it is now.
- Manual á la the torpedo notepad system, with Navigator assistance (like you can ask the WO to find bearing, speed, and distance for you in SHIII).
- Manual á la the torpedo notepad system, without Navigator assistance.
- 100% manual. Do the calculations, etc. by yourself.

[Immacolata]

I dont find that realistic. Because a real uboat crew split the work. One took bearings, another did timing, some did chart plotting, and some controlled the firing computer. It was a team effort.

A feasible way would be if you as capn on the uzo could GIVE those informations and have calculations done for you with some accuracu but not laser sight.

What I lacked most was the ability to get assisted target plotting. When ever I marked range and bearing, I wanted a tick or circle on my chart. But to do everything yourself is not realistic, you are under too much pressure to realistically handle a job of 6 men.

[Abraham]

I used to have a sig:
Dev team take the GPS off my boat.

It would be great to be able to fulfill the navigation task ourselves, just as we can fire the gun or the torpedoes.
And if we would rely upon the assistance of our navigator, it would be nice if he was sometimes making mistakes in his calculations, due to poor training, lack of experience or exhaustion.
And of course after a day underwater or a few days with overcast, there should be a growing margin of error around our indicated position...

[CCIP]

Given development time constraints - if we can't get a fully-instrumented manual navigation, than it could be a simple as...

-Removing the real-time-updated "GPS map"
-Adding an option to the Nav officer's menu which would be something like "Get nav fix", which would only be available in clear conditions, surfaced. If the conditions aren't right - then you're on your own to guess where you are based on your last known position.

By the way, SHIII's storms already cause some speed reductions and drifts (if you don't have the U-boat set to following a course). It could easily be improved.

[DeepSix]

I completely agree. Of course being lazy I would like an easy version in which everything is done by the Navigator, but he wouldn't always be perfect, and every day the sky was overcast would make it worse.

Same here. I like the idea of introducing some uncertainty to add to the realism, but at the same time I'd like to be able to delegate the job so I can concentrate on playing the game.

[don1reed]

Wouldn't it be neat if the Devs created a split-image observation Kollmorgan scope that could be doubled as a sextant for celestial nav?

I guess, first thing, would be to have an accurate celestial canopy...something like 'StarryNight'.

...or, a mouse device that allowed you to click on the horizon and drag a degree protractor to the heavenly body that allowed one to make accurate angle measurements from the bridge.

Cheers,

[Montbrun]

Sounds good, but as an option only.

1) I'm a Licensed Professional Land Surveyor - I don't want to "work" when I'm supposed to be playing a game.
2) I also own my own business. As a business owner, not unlike the Captain of a U-Boat, you must delegate tasks. This is why I like to let the Weapons Officer compute firing solutions, and would like to see a "Take Position Sighting" command for the Navigator. The accuracy af this positional computation can be based on the Navigator's rank, experience, etc. I think that a +/- 2 km error would be about right. Later in the war, radio positional detection through triangulation and signal beams would reduce this error...

Just my 2 cents.

Montbrun

[DeepSix]

...
I guess, first thing, would be to have an accurate celestial canopy...something like 'StarryNight'.
...


Yeah, that would look really sharp, and would be accurate, too - I've got StarryNight and love it, but I would think (only a guess here) that something so accurate might kill the frame rate. But maybe not, since you wouldn't be using zoom functions of SN (e.g., viewing the earth from Mars or the Moon).

Neat idea.

[Etienne]

Sounds good, but as an option only.

1) I'm a Licensed Professional Land Surveyor - I don't want to "work" when I'm supposed to be playing a game.
2) I also own my own business. As a business owner, not unlike the Captain of a U-Boat, you must delegate tasks. This is why I like to let the Weapons Officer compute firing solutions, and would like to see a "Take Position Sighting" command for the Navigator. The accuracy af this positional computation can be based on the Navigator's rank, experience, etc. I think that a +/- 2 km error would be about right. Later in the war, radio positional detection through triangulation and signal beams would reduce this error...

I've said it before, but I agree with Montbrun. Captains get to delegate. And working a sight... Well, let's just say it's not something I'd attempt willfully without a calculator, a copy of the Nories, and some spare time. I'm supposing that, to achieve full realism, trig tables and slide rulers should be used.

Celestial navigation, while a fun and rewarding experience, is a complex and involved affair. Look up a copy of the American Practical Navigator (It's available free online from the US government) to get an idea. It's about a hundred page out of the book, and that's excluding the chartwork and basic navigation requirements. It's about 140 pages in the Admiralty Manual of Navigation, Vol II.

We're talking about three pages of calculation for a single fix, folks. Forget about TC! :)

The navigator in B-17 2 was great. Loved the way it worked (And I was way better than that idiot!). A simillar option in SHIV, for coastal navigation, would be great. And kuddos to whoever proposed the "Navigator, plot fix!" order. That'd be great, if his experience, weather and other factors are brought in!

But I'd rather have the programmers working on something else than setting up a cel nav practice program. Give us that ship-spotting proto-helicopter thingy before bothering with cel nav!

[finchOU]

Sounds good, but as an option only.

1) I'm a Licensed Professional Land Surveyor - I don't want to "work" when I'm supposed to be playing a game.
2) I also own my own business. As a business owner, not unlike the Captain of a U-Boat, you must delegate tasks. This is why I like to let the Weapons Officer compute firing solutions, and would like to see a "Take Position Sighting" command for the Navigator. The accuracy af this positional computation can be based on the Navigator's rank, experience, etc. I think that a +/- 2 km error would be about right. Later in the war, radio positional detection through triangulation and signal beams would reduce this error...

Just my 2 cents.

Montbrun

jee then why do anything at all? you could just sleep in your rack and let your crew do everything!

my point is even as a Captain you need to be able to do all of the tasks even though you want delegate them. That is especially true on a close kit command on an sub. What fun would that be if your success as a crew was based soley on nothing you did as a captain??? Even if options are given in SH4 to delegate most everything on the sub.....there absolutly should be the option of doing it yourself.

I personally like doing most everything, it makes the kills that much more rewarding (and i still think they are some what too easy to kill). I really would like to decode messages. and of course manual charting and ploting of targets without the "GPS" map. What you describe as "Work" could for me described as factors to increase the immersion of the sim. while I am at it.....Crew management...it could be WAY better....running drills for every compartment increases effectivness of crew or keeps effectiveness high (not doing drills makes them slow and or unable unable to do duty in a pressure cooker situation). The REAL navy...that is all they do is Drills every day all day. Setting watch schedules and combat watch schedules (more rotation for high stress times). Crew get experiance on particular field based on what compartment they work on(drill on). okay I"m done with the wants!

I am also one of those Realism nutz would scarfice Graphics *GASP!* for a better simulation. Notice I said SIMULATION and not game. But I'm also a realist and know that the only way to make everyone happy is to have options (like realism options) to make it as gamey as possilbe or as Simmy as possible.

[DeepSix]

"As on surface ships, the exec played an important role in administration, being in charge of most paperwork, ordinary discipline, navigation, morale, and a hundred other day-to-day details. During attacks, he served as assistant approach officer. A good exec enabled his skipper to remain aloof from routine problems so that he could concentrate on the objective of the mission."

That's from Blair's Silent Victory (p. 108). There's no reason why the skip can't take over any of these things from time to time, but if he gets overly engrossed in one detail, he winds up ignoring many other details that are equally (or more) important.

As I said before, introducing some of the uncertainty of navigation into the game makes perfect sense, but I'd rather not do the work of it myself. Having that as an option would be ok, but GEEZ that's a lot of development time and money spent on an option.

I dunno. I just hope my boat will have an XO.

[SilentOtto]

I think including uncertainty in actual position due to bad weather is a must.
As many of you stated, sub sims tend to get too easy in a few weeks for advanced players (that's most of us!) so no doubt it would add tension to the gaming experience.

As for the navigation being manual or auto, I think the logical thing is to make you find star fixes (in game this translates to getting some good weather) or land fixes (go _carefully_ find some known island or coast).

We have talked about this one so much that it would be a big disappointment if its finally not included!

[MadMike]

The black out map mod in SH2 was great, had to rely on a chart near land masses. One thing that I really enjoyed in SH2 was the readout giving the longitude and latitude when the mouse was passed over your boat icon. Nothing like that in SH3. :(

Yours, Mike

[Sixpack]

Here is my vote for a realistic navigation mode ! :up:

[Fab]

. . . it worked perfectly fine in B-17II, and there were few complaints about the way it was implemented. Besides, it was a player-side option as whether they wanted to use it.

Yes, it did. I loved navigation in B-17 II. The computer (navigator) would continue to move the plane in the direction it was last known to be, but every once in a while you could take a peek down below and try to match up rivers and roads and shorelines and towns with what you saw on the map. Then you could simply grab and slide the B-17 icon to where you really were. As your navigator got better, error became less and less an issue.

It would be nice in SH if a navigator's increased skill actually had an effect (like less of an error). The only problem is in B-17 II anybody could take a sighting below and see the terrain and provided you're not WAY off course, see something on the map to match it and correct for it. In Silent Hunter, you'd have to use tools to take a sun sighting, check the stars, and so on, which is a magnitude of difficulty higher than, "The coast line looks like a hook with a little bay . . . ahh, here we are!"

[THE_MASK]

I hope this is incorporated as a toggle on or off anytime feature .

[Trout]

Fishou gave me an idea,

What if your crew got some sort of performance bonus (ie, they do their job quicker and better with less error), if you, as the captain, periodically do a specific task that captains don’t normally do on the boat.

So if the captain periodically (even just once per patrol) plots his own attack, does a navigational fix, dives the boat, whatever, his crew learn from his example and are motivated to do better?

In this way, none of the specific tasks become burdens for the captain as he still delegates them. But he has an incentive once in a while to do it himself.

Believe it or not there are guys out there who would like to really get hands on in these boats, much the same way that with Microsoft Flight Sim, you can actually USE all the controls in the cockpit if you want to (even just turning on the heat!)

If SH4 had a usable radio where you had to dial in frequencies and filter out noise, calculate atmospheric conditions ect., there would be guys who would do it. Same thing with navigation, or with using all the mechanical controls to dive and trim the boat (which IRL is quite challenging and would kinda be fun!)

Provided you don’t have to do this if you don’t want to, nor do them all the time, don’t you think it would be cool to get hands on once in a while, especially if it improved crew performance?

So who wants to drive and fight a fully modeled submarine, raise yer hand!

Trout

[Abraham]

I think one of the 'problems' with SH III was that 100% realism was confused with 100% difficulty.
A captain who is firing the Flak or deck gun is not very realistic, but fun and more difficult that firing on 'auto'.
A captain who is working without his team is also not realistic, but - sometimes fun and therefor more difficult.
So there should actually two scales, one of realism without an on/off toggle, and one of difficulty for the player, with an on/off toggle.

[pilotxxl]

I think one of the 'problems' with SH III was that 100% realism was confused with 100% difficulty.
A captain who is firing the Flak or deck gun is not very realistic, but fun and more difficult that firing on 'auto'.
A captain who is working without his team is also not realistic, but - sometimes fun and therefor more difficult.
So there should actually two scales, one of realism without an on/off toggle, and one of difficulty for the player, with an on/off toggle.

I agree with Abraham, but it would be interesting when a captain perform a task due to an sailor or petty officer his status benefit from the performance of the task executed.

[Trout]

agreed. But we still need a mechanism to motivate captains to do more than just issue orders all the time. I would like to simulate a captain who has worked his way up throught the boats and knows every job on board (kinda like a Jack Aubrey). Maybe only once per voyage he does an navigational fix, or trims the boat, or dials in a radio message, but he does them to make a point to his crew.

I think one of the 'problems' with SH III was that 100% realism was confused with 100% difficulty.
A captain who is firing the Flak or deck gun is not very realistic, but fun and more difficult that firing on 'auto'.
A captain who is working without his team is also not realistic, but - sometimes fun and therefor more difficult.
So there should actually two scales, one of realism without an on/off toggle, and one of difficulty for the player, with an on/off toggle.

[toryu]

I've commented before on this topic, elsewhere. My two cents is this:

Q:
What's the point of realistic navigation in a naval sim?

A:
[ ] That you have to learn to use a simulated sextant?
[x] That you shouldn't have a spy satellite attached to your map.

What's navigational realism? Not knowing exactly where you are on the water at all times, in all weathers, in the dark, with 1940s technology. How could you make this work? Introduce an error margin as a difficulty option. When the weather's clear and you have an opportunity to shoot an azimuth, you can plot your location with great accuracy. Your position on the map is marked solid. When the weather's bad, or you're submerged, or you don't have the chance to tell your navigator to find the boat's location, your position on the map could be marked by a circle. You're somewhere within that circle, but you don't know exactly where. Until you can get a proper fix, either from the weather, or from spotting a landmark.

Or, if things are really bad, your position on the map could change to "last known position". And if your navigator is unable to get a proper location, all he can give you is an estimated location, which could be represented by the circle I mentioned above.

You just have to keep in mind what the point is. It's not to turn a game into a click-fest. A flat computer screen doesn't lend itself to that anyway. It WON'T be realistic. I think you have to bear in mind what the effect of realistic navigation is. Not always knowing where you are. Guesswork. Risk. Maybe being lost in a storm. Are we going to run aground hunting for barges in the narrows between islands? That sort of stuff.

[don1reed]

Q:
What's the point of realistic navigation in a naval sim?


What I think the point is, toryu, is adding as much 'reinactment realism' to the sim as possible for those who would want to play the game at a different level. I realize that not everyone would want to do that, thats why it and all other perceived 'hard stuff' should be optional. We're just saying that it would be neat if all these 'wish-list' options were available.

Being able to act one day as the skipper, or navigator, or XO, or gunner, or Approach officer, or swab-jocky on any particular day or virtual patrol are 'role playing' options that brings out the Walter Middy in all of us. To me at least, the 'make believe' is why I keep coming back to Subsims...or any game for that matter. I've learned more about history and math through playing these sims over the years--not to mention meeting all the talented modders and players who keep the dream alive.

The point is to have fun.

best rgds,

[DeepSix]

...'role playing' options that brings out the Walter Middy in all of us. ...

:rotfl: Exactly! I love complicated machines full of wires and dials. Just hope coreopsis doesn't set in.... ;)

[Abraham]

...
You just have to keep in mind what the point is. It's not to turn a game into a click-fest. A flat computer screen doesn't lend itself to that anyway. It WON'T be realistic. I think you have to bear in mind what the effect of realistic navigation is. Not always knowing where you are. Guesswork. Risk. Maybe being lost in a storm. Are we going to run aground hunting for barges in the narrows between islands? That sort of stuff.
Good point!
:up:
The question also is: "Where the hell is that convoy at XXXX?"

[Safe-Keeper]

1) I'm a Licensed Professional Land Surveyor - I don't want to "work" when I'm supposed to be playing a game.
I'm a submarine skipper (OK, not really) - I don't want to "work" when I'm supposed to be playing a game. Stop the production of Silent hunter III altogether!

You get my point :P .

We're talking about three pages of calculation for a single fix, folks. Forget about TC!
Fine, so make it simplified like torpedo firing.

I think one of the 'problems' with SH III was that 100% realism was confused with 100% difficulty.
True, that. 100% realism was not exactly 100% realistic (torpedo firing being an example).

I agree with you. Split the options into two coloumns: Realism and Difficulty. Such a tiny thing as a change in format and wording making such a difference :yep: .

[joea]

Yes, to am option and to the idea of experience and weather in changing the accuracy of your navigator.

[don1reed]

Great points everyone:up:

Ok, how about this---

as an OPTION


For the chart screen--Allow the player to turn on or turn off the visible marker that shows where your boat is in real time.

By just using the nav tools to click 'n drag a line of position, the player who chooses a more difficult gameplay, can have the added feature of never really knowing if their boat is in the enemy's convoy lanes--as happened in reality back in the '40s.

So, without seeing the little black dot that represents 'the boat', the chart is just a chart. The player would be able to add the "dots" and connect them...including enemy targets provided by radio.

SH1 had a Nautical Mile meter in the 'gauges' room, remember? You could use something like that, rather than Cel Nav, if push comes to shove, to navigate. Just some thoughts...

edit: It just occurred to me that if the player was on the bridge and could visually see celestial bodies, his chosen options would then allow him to click on an icon of a sextant and would automatically place a fix on the chart for him. In this way the player could update his location. But, if overcast...that option could not be played or used, like what SH3 does with the deckguns in foul weather.


cheers,

[Immacolata]

jee then why do anything at all? you could just sleep in your rack and let your crew do everything!

my point is even as a Captain you need to be able to do all of the tasks even though you want delegate them. That is especially true on a close kit command on an sub. What fun would that be if your success as a crew was based soley on nothing you did as a captain??? Even if options are given in SH4 to delegate most everything on the sub.....there absolutly should be the option of doing it yourself.

I personally like doing most everything, it makes the kills that much more rewarding (and i still think they are some what too easy to kill). I really would like to decode messages. and of course manual charting and ploting of targets without the "GPS" map. What you describe as "Work" could for me described as factors to increase the immersion of the sim. while I am at it.....Crew management...it could be WAY better....running drills for every compartment increases effectivness of crew or keeps effectiveness high (not doing drills makes them slow and or unable unable to do duty in a pressure cooker situation). The REAL navy...that is all they do is Drills every day all day. Setting watch schedules and combat watch schedules (more rotation for high stress times). Crew get experiance on particular field based on what compartment they work on(drill on). okay I"m done with the wants!


You know, drills would kill the game off immediately. It would be fun 5 times, then 97% of the players would start hating it. I can see some idea in having a better and more involved plotting function, I myself would like it, but I don't want it to become bizarre like what you suggest.