If Sonalysts made a new game...

[Takeda Shingen]

Originally Posted by zakarpatska

Hi Keltso01, What is this "Climb mount Niitaka" IJN campaign? I clicked on the link, but it just took me to imageshack. Thanks, Zakarpatska

Click on the link underneath. It will take you to all of his mods. He's done a nice job with the IJN stuff.

[Guynumber7]

IF they made a Fleet command style game, which i would love...

1. Graphics
2. Realism and many platforms and loadouts, kind of like NWP, and different eras.

If a simulator

1. More platforms, including AEGIS and Slava/Kirov and or Sov. Also Oscar.

Really my only qualm with DW was the limited platforms. I would LOVE an AEGIS sim.

[tonibamestre]

I think SCS has quite good reference concerning the type of game the community would like.Improved graphics and effects,plus or minus controllable platforms(given that new and more complex ones can be developed later on),etc.
But a feature SCS needs to blowout in my opinnion are the limited maps.We need a Global environment,being able to depart from Norfolk and sail till the Mediterranean,this in agreement with a number of major detailed ports worldwide (think that they can be modeled also as an addon or built from good community moders) if the game allows it.

[OneShot]

Well, personally I cant understand the fuzz about being able to sail the world continously after all this isnt a ww2 sim. Nowadays you get your mission which will happen within a more or less large area of operation ( horn of africa for example comes to mind ) and do your job there. The maps of DW are ok for smaller AOs, id say increase the size to 1000x1000 nm and thats plenty enough.

But thats just my 2cts

[TLAM Strike]

Originally Posted by OneShot

Well, personally I cant understand the fuzz about being able to sail the world continously after all this isnt a ww2 sim. Nowadays you get your mission which will happen within a more or less large area of operation ( horn of africa for example comes to mind ) and do your job there. The maps of DW are ok for smaller AOs, id say increase the size to 1000x1000 nm and thats plenty enough.

But thats just my 2cts

I agree with OneShot. DW is a Tactical Sim, it simulates individual battles. Leaving and entering port is not really necessary and with the low time compression settings found in DW it can get quite boring.

Increase the size of the AO but a full world map is not necessary.

[Kaye T. Bai]

Functioning ports would be nice, but a full world map isn't really that necessary.

[TLAM Strike]

If they gave the users/modders the ability to import bathymetry data like mission files now would be great. they we can add high detail maps of areas we want to use and not clog up the game with high detail maps of the mid Atlantic ridge.

[Takeda Shingen]

Originally Posted by Kaye T. Bai

Functioning ports would be nice, but a full world map isn't really that necessary.

That's not even that important to me. If we get real-world survey maps with accurate depths and elevations, we can construct our own ports.

Originally Posted by Takeda Shingen

That's not even that important to me. If we get real-world survey maps with accurate depths and elevations, we can construct our own ports.

Well still to receive simply exact mathematical modeling.

Now, the entering into a database of exact parameters of the weapon (weight, speed, etc...) - simply causes failure of this weapon.

It puts under doubt - that this game is named simulator.

[timmyg00]

Originally Posted by Molon Labe

Timmah!!!!! How the hell are you!?!?!


I was actually thinking about the Cold War database issue and I thought of something. Instead of having separate DBs for different time periods (e.g., Naval Warfare Project), you could have a DB where every entity in the sim had two new fields: year of commissioning and decomm. You can leave them blank if you want. But if those limits are imposed, then the scenario designer just picks a year, and the scenario editor will only list those platforms that are either not limited or are inside that year range.

You could even easily modify ships that get upgrades just by copying the DB entry, making the adjustments, and setting the years as appropriate.

It'll get big, but that's what SCS has guys like TLAM and I around for.

I have been designing just such a DB (actually in a CSV format to start with) that includes layup/shipyard periods and general ship configs (fleetboat, guppy, SSR, etc). Due to personal time limitations , I am on a hiatus from it right now though... just starting with US fleetboats of WWII at first, to make sure it works. I wanted to expand it to include config details such as bridge configurations, radars, sonars... just don't have enough time to do it all myself and still play at least one game, which happens to be SH4 right now. When I get tired of sinking merchies i will probably come back to DW...

Real life really cuts in to my subsimming!!!

TG

[Takeda Shingen]

Originally Posted by -GrayOwl-

Well still to receive simply exact mathematical modeling.

Now, the entering into a database of exact parameters of the weapon (weight, speed, etc...) - simply causes failure of this weapon.

It puts under doubt - that this game is named simulator.

Well, in fairness, we don't even know what it is or even if it exists, so we can't say how realistic or ficticious it will be.

[Molon Labe]

On the world map issue...

We don't know if the next sim will be tactical... it might be strategic. I wouldn't mind something the size of the whole pacific (or the whole world) being playable at once if that's the scope. Even in a tactical sim like DW the maps are too small to account for OTH radars and ASBMs.

[oscar19681]

Whatever they do , please give me a fully modeled 688 la class with dive planes on the sail. Forget the navy,s modern attack subs. Give me the old school USS Dallas from the hunt for the red october. I think it would give us some much more interesting scenarios as well. But i must admit some other platforms would be interesting if done well. Maybe the best things would be 1 sub and 1 controlable surface platform for blue and 1 sub and 1 controlable surface platform for red . This would also make online play interesting. But in DW i always got the idea that there was just to much development time spraid over all the playable platforms to really make it a award winning game. Also get rid of the 2-d panels ,there boring as hell. Let us walk around the platform in 3-d or at least give us a detailed control room in 3-d . I never got the feeling of being there with just the 2-d panels and whenever i wanted to ""stretch my legs" in the game i was always presented with a 2-d panel. Esspecially with sub or u-boat games which can take a long time to get to the action it really does help to have a fully modeled interieur like in sh-5 because it immerses you. I realize there proably wont be a fully modeled la-class for example . but at least give us a control room , captains courters and something else where we cam dwell.

what i would like to see is

* 688 la class with dive planes on sail (flight one or two)
* at least 3-d controll room and maybe a captains courters (for looking up crew files or something)and some third station in 3-d
* dynamic campain please
* maybe a couple of playable surface platforms as well
* give us some kind of reward for sinking enemy ships and sub insted of only a score or mission complete, let the game keep track of this.
* detailed realistic harbours
* detailed realistic oceans
* detailed grafics at leasts as advanced as sh-4
* mission start and end in port (no more mission complete mission over )
* 3-d crew , i mean comeon! even sega,s 688 attack sub had some 2-d crew. and sh-3 had 3-d crew a long time ago.

I think if it would be some kind of a modern submarine sh-4 or something it could sell pretty well! and even more so if it had a couple of more platforms were released as addon later. Just get it right this time. When i bought DW it was interessting but the learning curve was way to steep and unclear. lack of tutorials etc etc was very frustrating. when i did get everything to work in my faver i lost intest very very fast because hte lack of immersion , unrewarding linear campaign and the outdated grafics. Some mods revived it a couple of times and i wont deny that i might give a couple of go,s in the future. However for now its collecting dust for quite some time. So again please do it right this time.

[oscar19681]

Originally Posted by fatty

A CV as a future paid DLC would be cool. Have any of you guys ever played Starshatter? Although sci-fi, the way they handled carriers in that game was good. You controlled the basic manoeuvring of the ship and its task group, and had a special screen for assigning aircraft to packages and sending them on a variety of missions like scouting, strike, escort, etc. etc.

I could see this translating very well into a DW-like interface. Like in Starshatter, you'd have basic control over where the task group goes, and could sortie your AI-controlled planes for whatever you wanted.

yeah there are a couple of sci-fi carrier sims out there. Just dont know why its always centered on space carriers insted of a good solid naval carrier sim.

[Takeda Shingen]

Originally Posted by oscar19681

When i bought DW it was interessting but the learning curve was way to steep and unclear. lack of tutorials etc etc was very frustrating. when i did get everything to work in my faver i lost intest very very fast because hte lack of immersion , unrewarding linear campaign and the outdated grafics. Some mods revived it a couple of times and i wont deny that i might give a couple of go,s in the future. However for now its collecting dust for quite some time. So again please do it right this time.

My copy of DW came with a 300-page spiral bound manual, so I thought things were pretty clear. Later editions also came with a 300-page PDF manual. Also, I am fine with minimal graphics and a linear campaign so long as the mission editor is still there. I don't really miss the gamey elements of the SH series when playing SCS software.