Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Bewolf
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Rockin Robbins
That the Brits were the great ASW force in the first half of the war. It wasn't until the US jeep carrier hunter-killer groups came around that we Americans could claim any better abilities. To make 1943 American destroyers have the same characteristics as the British ones in the Atlantik would be wrong.
Depth sounder is controllable manually in SH4. Charting tools are all there too.
Hey, you don't belong anywhere near Midway. If you don't stick to finishing your objectives you'll get a little SH4 surprise. We don't have a free-form do whatever you want world here. If you don't complete your objectives you can sink your 100,000 tons and be removed from command! THAT's a welcome change.
I still think SH3 and SH4 are fatally flawed in simulating a U-Boat war that was so dependent on wolfpacks when you are the only U-Boat in the ocean. In that regard, SH4 on the American side is far superior, as American boats acted singly, even in "wolfpacks."
Can't wait for the GWXers to attack SH4UBM! If we can keep them and Ducimus in their respective spheres of operation we'll all be in heaven. I don't think that will be a problem.  |
Wow, quite a hostile entry. I thought subsim was not as ignorant and nationalistic based as the UBI forums? Figured ppl here were a more mature bunch and might like to have more variety in the game and see a big part of the community becoming as happy as the Pacifictionados? Was a bit wrong maybe.
The U-Boat war was not as dependant on wolfpack tactics as you may think. wolfpacks were only one part of many aspects of the u boat war. It's a great shame it has not been implemented, and played it's part for a time.
But it's not an urgent requirement for a successful and mostly realistic u-boat campaign. |
Wow! Instead of logically discussing simple statements of facts, throwing around disparaging terms (ignorant, nationalistic, hostile, Pacifictionados, "figured ppl here were a more mature bunch") substitues for rational thought. I can defend my statements, which are not based on the characteristics implied in parentheses, but there is no defense for rudeness. Let me ignore that and explain one point only.
U-Boats did not carry enough torpedoes to make a meaningful impact on convoys of dozens of ships, if operating alone. Winning the Battle of the Atlantic depended on wolfpacks bringing enough torpedoes to the party to decimate the convoy. Donitz' entire default attack plan was that one U-Boat locates the convoy and shadows, radioing for help. BdU sends it and only after a sufficient number of subs are collected does the attack take place.
For success, the U-Boat war depended on wolfpacks and centralized control. In SH3 there is no centralized control at all, just a free for all, go where you please. This is most unrealistic and simulates nothing beyond single boat handling skills. It is interesting that I've had several nice conversations with Kpt Lehmann where we were in agreement on this point. (we didn't even call each other names!)
The vital function of the wolfpack was to overwhelm the escorts to take out the merchies. No aspect of that takes place when you are a single U-Boat attacking a convoy guarded by 4 to 6 escorts.
SH4UBM fixes half of that by giving you actual missions, sent to you by ComSubPac (that's BdU in pig latin
). You are to complete the mission and not go off willy-nilly doing whatever you please or the admiralty relieves you of command. That is a meaningful improvement. I should add that going with an Indian Ocean instead of Atlantic campaign also minimizes the impact of the no wolfpacks problem because any operations there could not collect enough U-Boats to constitute a wolfpack. Imagine! An unrealistic campaign results in more realistic gameplay! Single U-Boat operations actually make sense there.
Please scan your list of perjoratives and either defend their use or abandon them.
Those who know me laugh with me.