Captain's Cabin??

[Captain_Jack]

I know they are not including a Radio Room in SHIV, but what about a Captain's Cabin?

I have seen screenhots of the control room and the conning tower. Any screenies of a Captain's Cabin out there?

[flintlock]

Haven't seen any, and I think I recall reading somewhere that it wasn't going to be modelled within SH4 (though I may be mistaken).

[FIREWALL]

GOOD !:yep:

[trenken]

I think that's correct that there will be no captains quarter. I read recently they said it was that if they worried about something like that, it would either delay the game, which Ubi wont allow, or they would have to spend less time on important functionality. I'd rather have functionality than seperate rooms that technically aren't needed anyway. Their nice to have but gameplay is far more important.

It's just a shame that choice even needs to be made. But I know everything hinges on time and budget so I guess this is where the business keeps games from being as good as they could be.

[flintlock]

GOOD !:yep:
If it was modelled, it's not as though anyone would be forcing you to spend any time in there.

[Captain_Jack]

GOOD !:yep:

No reason to be arrogant.

Just use External View the whole time..then you dont have to have any compartments.

[Schultzy]

That's a shame if it's not in.
When i'm reading my book with TC on x1, I like to get away from my LI leering at me (It gets a bit creepy after a while, you all know the stare!)
Hmm, I understand the arguement, better to have DD's that can do their job, rather than have somewhere nice to sit etc but still... :)

[boatfull]

The only time I saw the Captain's Cabin in SHIII, was when I accidently walked into it.:lol:

[kylania]

That's a shame, immersion is a huge part of a simulation which SHIV should be as opposed to a arcade shooter which would have no reason for modeled compartments.

[Hartmann]

In sh3 is part of the sonar compartment but not in Sh4 , is great for inmersion but is useless for gameplay, except if they would include some extra information, like charts, books, or moon efemerids

[Gildor]

I like the idea of being in the cabin reading when playing 1xTC. (However i don't play at that)

What about going full immersive and have card games or chess with the crew. Sittin at the table picking the mold off your bread/fruit/leg..

Seriously, I think chess, checkers, backgammon, cards with crew AI would be cool. Getting interrupted by a sighting would be scary as you make your way to the bridge.

Could a game mod be added?

[BH]

While there is really no use of the captain bed, it adds to the simulation if the game and I have been reading this board for awhile and months ago we were talking about perhaps having a full 3d sub, now we have even less compartments then SH3… but better graphics.

[Torplexed]

I've been reading this whole compartment debate for a while now. I think more compartments are great from a sub interiors reference material point of view...but without a fully interactive crew they just became dull stagework rather quickly for me. Even in the control room in SH3 I feel like I'm stuck in a film loop as the mute crewmen go through their limited repetitive routines over and over again. Now, if the crew members were doing spontaneous and non-repetitive things that would breathe a lot of life into things...but that is probably another generation of sims away, if ever.

[flintlock]

While I'm all for a complete sub interior modelled, I agree that having an interactive crew would add immeasurably to the entire experience.

[Gildor]

Cue the "short arm" inspection photo....

[LukeFF]

Personally, I'm glad they didn't model extra rooms that really don't add any functionality to the game. While we all think it'd be "great" to have a fully modeled interior, the cost/benefit ratio does not justify it at all. Having a captain's cabin in SH3 was perfectly justified, given the compartments directly adjacent to it. I'm not totally up on U.S. submarine architecture, but if the captain's cabin was completely separate from gameplay-essential rooms, what is the point in modeling it? The people who play at 1x time compression and "use" the cabin are a select few - little wonder then that Ubi elected to not model it this time around.

[GSpector]

I can't remember which Sim it was but there was 1 many years ago that used the Captains Quarters (and in F15 Strike Eagle III, it was the bunks) to save your missions when you clicked on the bed. Some Flight Sims used Officers Quarters for many other things like if you opened a cupboard, upi could review your records or a display case with Awards. It was neat when the rooms were funtional. I missed this in SH3 and now nothing.

I understand not modeling every compartment because if they did, they would have to model the entire crew. That I would like to see. Yes even the sleeping crewmen but that would be asking way to much.:roll:

[Capt. D]

I think that's correct that there will be no captains quarter. I read recently they said it was that if they worried about something like that, it would either delay the game, which Ubi wont allow, or they would have to spend less time on important functionality. I'd rather have functionality than seperate rooms that technically aren't needed anyway. Their nice to have but gameplay is far more important.

It's just a shame that choice even needs to be made. But I know everything hinges on time and budget so I guess this is where the business keeps games from being as good as they could be.
and from LukeFF
Personally, I'm glad they didn't model extra rooms that really don't add any functionality to the game. While we all think it'd be "great" to have a fully modeled interior, the cost/benefit ratio does not justify it at all. Having a captain's cabin in SH3 was perfectly justified, given the compartments directly adjacent to it. I'm not totally up on U.S. submarine architecture, but if the captain's cabin was completely separate from gameplay-essential rooms, what is the point in modeling it? The people who play at 1x time compression and "use" the cabin are a select few - little wonder then that Ubi elected to not model it this time around.
There have been many pros and cons on this discussion for some time. I think the functionality to the game issue has been brought up from time to time. As I must agree that only X amount of space is avaliable in a game/sim and that one must look at the functionality of what will be part of the sim - some things that will be part of the game - e.g. camera views or "birds eye view" as I call them - do add to the overall "sight" of the game but what functionality do they bring?

Before I get "drowned" out - let me say that I would be the first to want to see my boat's periscope shears break the surface and then see the bow and gradually the rest of my boat come to the surface with water streaming off the superstructure. It would be very neat to see the torpedo tubes open and see the torpedos fired from my boat and then watch them travel to the target and see the huge holes in that ship after the torpedo struck! However what functionality does that really bring to the game itself - other than knowing we did do damage - which was a guessing game in real time as one only saw what we could from the scope or TBT if on the surface.

However - if I am to understand we will be given "special" missions - how could functionality not be add to the game if the Captain is given an Ultra Message by his radio operator - in the radio room - and then proceeds to his Captains Quarters to unlock his safe and take out the code book for Ultras and actually de-code the message from Comsubpac to learn what his new orders were. Then call for his senior officers and proceed to the Wardroom and look at the charts that represent the area in question and develope a patrol pattern?

Unfortunatly there are many points to this issue. Bottom line is we will have an ultimate game to play. As what happened with the original Silent Hunter - two patrol disc additions - maybe we will also have an opportunity to have those additions with SH IV that will lend to the extras that some of us feel is still important. Maybe not all compartments but a radio room, captains quarters, and wardroom with the functionality I have mentioned.

Happy Hunting:ping:

[Payoff]

Great points Capt. D. I for one can do without the "Hollywood Cam" or whatever its called, in exchange for a functional Captains quarters. I hope this gamey trend doesnt continue to erode our simulations.

[squigian]

If they do bring them back, why not add a little functionality to Captain's Quarters? Charts, reference manuals (maybe store 'How to...' things there - calculating AoB, speed, setting up a shot etc.), pictures (would be great to be able to take screenshots you made and stick them over your bunk), a journal (write whatever you want down for each day), chessboard + cards (vs. crewmen or play solo) and a bunk that you can sleep on (could 'warp' your sub along, if you hate waiting - still chance of encounters though). As you can see, the Captain's Quarters has the potential to be the personal hub of your operations

[Captain Krunch]

However - if I am to understand we will be given "special" missions - how could functionality not be add to the game if the Captain is given an Ultra Message by his radio operator - in the radio room - and then proceeds to his Captains Quarters to unlock his safe and take out the code book for Ultras and actually de-code the message from Comsubpac to learn what his new orders were.
Just a slight correction to this, as I believe it was usually the XO or communications officer who decoded the encrypted message, not the captain. The captain was usually a pretty busy guy, so many of these types of tasks were delegated down to the other officers. Heck, even the writing of the patrol report was usually done primarily by the XO.

[Captain_Jack]

However - if I am to understand we will be given "special" missions - how could functionality not be add to the game if the Captain is given an Ultra Message by his radio operator - in the radio room - and then proceeds to his Captains Quarters to unlock his safe and take out the code book for Ultras and actually de-code the message from Comsubpac to learn what his new orders were.
Just a slight correction to this, as I believe it was usually the XO or communications officer who decoded the encrypted message, not the captain. The captain was usually a pretty busy guy, so many of these types of tasks were delegated down to the other officers. Heck, even the writing of the patrol report was usually done primarily by the XO.

From what I've read these were the officers: (Clay Blair's Silent Victory)

1. The Captain
2. Executive Officer (also served as Navigator)
3. Engineer and Diving Officer
4. Communications and Commissary Officer
5. Torpedo and Gunnery Officer

[Tigrone]

All the obsession with Yamato, battleships, aircraft, and major surface actions makes me a little wary of the devs interest in subs. I've seen more screens of the Battle off Samar and Taffy III than of subs in action. OK, enough ranting against BB's.

We are going to get 2 large and very detailed compartments in place of the several small cabins we had in SH3. Everyone, who's actually seen it, has been very reluctant to mention what stations are modeled in these 2 compartments (Conning Tower & Control Room). Ubi staff have refused to say, even when directly asked. Looking very closely at the screens so far, I guess that we will have about 5 stations instead of the 11 that we had in SH3. So, that is about half as many interior spaces.

I believe I've seen 5 distinct modeled spaces:

Main control room
Dive Planes Station in control room
Auxilary Helm in control room
Conning Tower
Radar Station in conning Tower

I have the impression that SH4 uses the free roam camera much more to move around and to reach controls and instruments, rather than clicking on crew (Nav, Weapons, Engineer/Dive Officer, Sonar man, Radio/Radar operator) to enter their specific interactive spaces.

Does anyone know what interior spaces are modeled and if the list of the 5 above is even close to being accurate?

[jafergon]

In the original Silent Hunter the captain's cabin was pretty useful. It had a calendar pinned to a wall with information about the times of sunrise, sunset, moonrise, moonset and the moon phases. This information is very important when planning a night attack.

[Captain Krunch]

In the original Silent Hunter the captain's cabin was pretty useful. It had a calendar pinned to a wall with information about the times of sunrise, sunset, moonrise, moonset and the moon phases. This information is very important when planning a night attack.
I agree that the data was useful, but it didn't necessarily have to be located in the captain's cabin. I played SH1 last night via DosBox, and having to go to the cabin to check what time the sun set and the moon rose was, well, a bit silly. The information could have been placed on another screen, such as the chart screen. So for SH4, I would think that a more logical place would be having a calendar hanging in the control room or conning tower. That way, as soon as you get the contact information, you can call up the sun/moon data ASAP. I guess what I'm saying is, I would prefer efficiency over emersion when accessing this data.

[dean_acheson]

I like having a capt's cabin.

I can put the game at 1x, set my guy in there, and read a book.

It was cool in SH1 checking your log and having a calander, but I've discussed this before.

[Kapitan_Phillips]

Lets be fair, considering what GWX did for SH3 without the SDK, imagine what would be possible with it!

[Rilder]

I like the idea of the Chess or something, would be a good way to wittle down the time during slow periods, especialy while your being death charged. :rotfl:

[Kapitan_Phillips]

If they do bring them back, why not add a little functionality to Captain's Quarters? Charts, reference manuals (maybe store 'How to...' things there - calculating AoB, speed, setting up a shot etc.), pictures (would be great to be able to take screenshots you made and stick them over your bunk), a journal (write whatever you want down for each day), chessboard + cards (vs. crewmen or play solo) and a bunk that you can sleep on (could 'warp' your sub along, if you hate waiting - still chance of encounters though). As you can see, the Captain's Quarters has the potential to be the personal hub of your operations


I think these are some great arguments for the case of adding a captains bunk. I have said before in one of the numerous wish-threads that there was reading material on board for doing things manually that'd help pass the time, instead of using the internet which lacks in realism. I like the games idea too, nothing like a game of Texas Hold Em aboard the USS Stingray :rock:

[PAW]

I signed up JUST so i could say this...

What a great idea! I "know" this is a simulation but the idea of a mini game (like decoding messages) is often forgotten in the serious world of simulation. I like this decoding idea. Mayb one day we will have the option of decoding the "for captain's eyes only messages".

[Sailor Steve]

Well, all I can say to that is:


WELCOME ABOARD!

[Hartmann]

If they do bring them back, why not add a little functionality to Captain's Quarters? Charts, reference manuals (maybe store 'How to...' things there - calculating AoB, speed, setting up a shot etc.), pictures (would be great to be able to take screenshots you made and stick them over your bunk), a journal (write whatever you want down for each day), chessboard + cards (vs. crewmen or play solo) and a bunk that you can sleep on (could 'warp' your sub along, if you hate waiting - still chance of encounters though). As you can see, the Captain's Quarters has the potential to be the personal hub of your operations


Very good points. :yep: it could serve as an administrative station in the sub,
with a safe with radio codes and secret operations missions only opened when you received a doble coded radio , data about your crew men.. .
in this case it could be very useful.

But a empty cabin withouth any funcionality don´t improve gameplay

[dean_acheson]

We might be losing the captains cabin, but in a sense, we are gaining the control room. In SH3 the room is basically worthless, but in SH4 our attacks will take place there, and with the sonar and radar operators there, it will be a busy place....

[joea]

I like the idea of the Chess or something, would be a good way to wittle down the time during slow periods, especialy while your being death charged. :rotfl:

I think you mean "depth charged." Ummmm I hope you meant that. :doh:

[Rilder]

I like the idea of the Chess or something, would be a good way to wittle down the time during slow periods, especialy while your being death charged. :rotfl:

I think you mean "depth charged." Ummmm I hope you meant that. :doh:

Uh yea I meant that...

*remembers that time a a battleship charged at him while he was 75 feet under*

[Ducimus]

All i can say, is we'd better be able to manually use the hydrophones.

I could care less about staring at an empty bed, but i HAVE to be able to do my soundchecks myself.

[Captain_Jack]

We might be losing the captains cabin, but in a sense, we are gaining the control room. In SH3 the room is basically worthless, but in SH4 our attacks will take place there, and with the sonar and radar operators there, it will be a busy place....


On US SUbs the attack station was in the conning tower. Scopes, radar, sonar, and TDC were all there. The captain and his fire control team were all crowded in there.

[geetrue]

I read somewhere that SH4 was going to have a lot of music and maybe even Tokyo Rose ... Now where would you listen to that at?

How about a wardroom or even a crew's mess ... :hmm:

[codmander]

hmm leavin these details out turning the sim into just eye candy ? and more of a game?? than a sim? 1x playin cpt quaters in sh3 is a spot for when im readin a book while playin and to be -into- the sh3 SIMULATOR little details? or huge mistakes?

[dean_acheson]

We might be losing the captains cabin, but in a sense, we are gaining the control room. In SH3 the room is basically worthless, but in SH4 our attacks will take place there, and with the sonar and radar operators there, it will be a busy place....


On US SUbs the attack station was in the conning tower. Scopes, radar, sonar, and TDC were all there. The captain and his fire control team were all crowded in there.

Capt. Jack, excuse me for a stupid typo. That is what I meant. In SH3, it never made sense to use the conning tower, since there were no instruments there, outside of the attack scope, and all controls were in the control room. Now, in SH4, the conning tower, there will be plenty of action... which means, to me, in a way, we are gaining a room.

[Capt. D]

However - if I am to understand we will be given "special" missions - how could functionality not be add to the game if the Captain is given an Ultra Message by his radio operator - in the radio room - and then proceeds to his Captains Quarters to unlock his safe and take out the code book for Ultras and actually de-code the message from Comsubpac to learn what his new orders were.
Just a slight correction to this, as I believe it was usually the XO or communications officer who decoded the encrypted message, not the captain. The captain was usually a pretty busy guy, so many of these types of tasks were delegated down to the other officers. Heck, even the writing of the patrol report was usually done primarily by the XO.

It was my understanding - though I may be wrong - that Ultra messages were given to the Captain to decode as these were a code within a code and only he had the information to decode that type of mesage. More for the security of the Ultra code then anything else. Now that said, there may have been Captains who gave that information to their XOs to use so they did not have to. Bottom line - whether in the Capts Quarters or Wardroom - the ability to get the code to use with an Ultra message and decode it would definately add to the game. As mentioned further in this thread the addition of a "real" conning tower with all the equipment is a major plus!

Happy Hunting :ping:

[Henchman]

I am extremely dissapointed that the captain's cabin and the radio room was left out... Angry in fact... Almost to a point where I'm considering holding off on SH4 until these important features are modded in there. I was seriously looking forward to being able to relax in my cabin with a good book listening to the radio while transporting myself back to the 40's. I can't count the number of times that I have literally fallen asleep in my bunk in SH3 - the soothing engine sounds and the creaking hull put's me in a state of peace unmatched by any other game before it.

Simply jumping from action to action is way too arcade-ish for my taste, and not to mention unsuitable for a serious simulation. Slowing things down a bit and allowing yourself to experience some of the everyday submariner "boredom" by wandering around the decks, or relaxing in the captains cabin is IMO a critical feature when it comes to immersion. Instead it looks like we are going to be limited to experience the pacific war as a swivelling head stuck in a single location of the control room with an option to instantly jump into the conning tower where we can sulk all by our lonesome... OR we can play the game like a console gamer and do it all in external view...:nope:

I'm very saddened by the news in this thread. :cry:

[nvdrifter]

I am extremely dissapointed that the captain's cabin and the radio room was left out... Angry in fact... Almost to a point where I'm considering holding off on SH4 until these important features are modded in there. I was seriously looking forward to being able to relax in my cabin with a good book listening to the radio while transporting myself back to the 40's. I can't count the number of times that I have literally fallen asleep in my bunk in SH3 - the soothing engine sounds and the creaking hull put's me in a state of peace unmatched by any other game before it.

Simply jumping from action to action is way too arcade-ish for my taste, and not to mention unsuitable for a serious simulation. Slowing things down a bit and allowing yourself to experience some of the everyday submariner "boredom" by wandering around the decks, or relaxing in the captains cabin is IMO a critical feature when it comes to immersion. Instead it looks like we are going to be limited to experience the pacific war as a swivelling head stuck in a single location of the control room with an option to instantly jump into the conning tower where we can sulk all by our lonesome... OR we can play the game like a console gamer and do it all in external view...:nope:

I'm very saddened by the news in this thread. :cry:
I think while you are waiting for extra compartments to be modded into SH4 (isn't going to happen unless they release the SDK), you should go ahead and mod your house into a submarine. Then you can pretend you are on a submarine 24 hours a day. Or better yet, get out of your house more often and enjoy real life for a change. :huh:

[Captain_Jack]

I am extremely dissapointed that the captain's cabin and the radio room was left out... Angry in fact... Almost to a point where I'm considering holding off on SH4 until these important features are modded in there. I was seriously looking forward to being able to relax in my cabin with a good book listening to the radio while transporting myself back to the 40's. I can't count the number of times that I have literally fallen asleep in my bunk in SH3 - the soothing engine sounds and the creaking hull put's me in a state of peace unmatched by any other game before it.

Simply jumping from action to action is way too arcade-ish for my taste, and not to mention unsuitable for a serious simulation. Slowing things down a bit and allowing yourself to experience some of the everyday submariner "boredom" by wandering around the decks, or relaxing in the captains cabin is IMO a critical feature when it comes to immersion. Instead it looks like we are going to be limited to experience the pacific war as a swivelling head stuck in a single location of the control room with an option to instantly jump into the conning tower where we can sulk all by our lonesome... OR we can play the game like a console gamer and do it all in external view...:nope:

I'm very saddened by the news in this thread. :cry:
I think while you are waiting for extra compartments to be modded into SH4 (isn't going to happen unless they release the SDK), you should go ahead and mod your house into a submarine. Then you can pretend you are on a submarine 24 hours a day. Or better yet, get out of your house more often and enjoy real life for a change. :huh:

So Nvdrifter what exactly is your point? Do you have some dislike of those of us who like immersion and "living history"? People can play the game as they choose. They dont need your approval.

This poster simply stated why he enjoys a captain's cabin, yet you riddicule him.

[nvdrifter]

I am extremely dissapointed that the captain's cabin and the radio room was left out... Angry in fact... Almost to a point where I'm considering holding off on SH4 until these important features are modded in there. I was seriously looking forward to being able to relax in my cabin with a good book listening to the radio while transporting myself back to the 40's. I can't count the number of times that I have literally fallen asleep in my bunk in SH3 - the soothing engine sounds and the creaking hull put's me in a state of peace unmatched by any other game before it.

Simply jumping from action to action is way too arcade-ish for my taste, and not to mention unsuitable for a serious simulation. Slowing things down a bit and allowing yourself to experience some of the everyday submariner "boredom" by wandering around the decks, or relaxing in the captains cabin is IMO a critical feature when it comes to immersion. Instead it looks like we are going to be limited to experience the pacific war as a swivelling head stuck in a single location of the control room with an option to instantly jump into the conning tower where we can sulk all by our lonesome... OR we can play the game like a console gamer and do it all in external view...:nope:

I'm very saddened by the news in this thread. :cry:
I think while you are waiting for extra compartments to be modded into SH4 (isn't going to happen unless they release the SDK), you should go ahead and mod your house into a submarine. Then you can pretend you are on a submarine 24 hours a day. Or better yet, get out of your house more often and enjoy real life for a change. :huh:
So Nvdrifter what exactly is your point? Do you have some dislike of those of us who like immersion and "living history"? People can play the game as they choose. They dont need your approval.

This poster simply stated why he enjoys a captain's cabin, yet you riddicule him.

I was just being sarcastic. ;) No offense intended. It's just hard to take some of the things you said seriously. It's just a computer game, not real life... really.

[Barkhorn1x]

I was just being sarcastic. ;) No offense intended. It's just hard to take some of the things you said seriously. It's just a computer game, not real life... really.

Blasphemer! :nope:

[Snowman999]

I was just being sarcastic. ;) No offense intended. It's just hard to take some of the things you said seriously. It's just a computer game, not real life... really.


I agree with the poster you're being "sarcastic" with. I HAVE experienced real submarine patrols and I agree that the (unrealistic) emphasis in every sim to date has been on attack-attack-attack. WWII sub COs had lives far richer than merely being Approach Officers. They had to mold their crews into fighting machines, manage morale and boredom, logistics and materiel conditions. Anything that adds RPG elements to these sims I'm in favor of. Great graphics, sea-states, etc. are fine, and welcome, but no sim as yet come anywhere close to being a true sim. The market wants slam-bang and I understand that pressure, but someday I hope to have a "real" boat, with all compartments, and duties at sea beyond damage control, watch-list design, and attacks.

[Captain Krunch]

It sounds like what you guys want is a holodeck! But I'm not sure if you're going to get anything like that in our lifetimes.

[Tigrone]

It sounds like what you guys want is a holodeck! But I'm not sure if you're going to get anything like that in our lifetimes.

We are just surprised that there is so much less. It looks like the moldeled interior areas will be almost exactly one half of what there was in Silent Hunter 3. No one asked for a holodeck, we just hoped we would not lose a sense of being in the boat. I hoped that the sexy BB, DD, and Aircraft elements would not be invested in at such expense to the submarine itself.

[gronbek]

I am extremely dissapointed that the captain's cabin and the radio room was left out... Angry in fact... Almost to a point where I'm considering holding off on SH4 until these important features are modded in there. I was seriously looking forward to being able to relax in my cabin with a good book listening to the radio while transporting myself back to the 40's. I can't count the number of times that I have literally fallen asleep in my bunk in SH3 - the soothing engine sounds and the creaking hull put's me in a state of peace unmatched by any other game before it.

Simply jumping from action to action is way too arcade-ish for my taste, and not to mention unsuitable for a serious simulation. Slowing things down a bit and allowing yourself to experience some of the everyday submariner "boredom" by wandering around the decks, or relaxing in the captains cabin is IMO a critical feature when it comes to immersion. Instead it looks like we are going to be limited to experience the pacific war as a swivelling head stuck in a single location of the control room with an option to instantly jump into the conning tower where we can sulk all by our lonesome... OR we can play the game like a console gamer and do it all in external view...:nope:

I'm very saddened by the news in this thread. :cry:

I agree completely with you my friend. I am hesitating to buy it when I heard about the missing compartments. Its a simulation after all. Being stuck in one compartment is not a good simulation experience. I would rather wait an additional couple of months for the cabin and radio room. I dont like it when the interior of the sub in SH4 even less matches the real sub compared to SH3.

BR Anders

[LukeFF]

I agree with the poster you're being "sarcastic" with. I HAVE experienced real submarine patrols and I agree that the (unrealistic) emphasis in every sim to date has been on attack-attack-attack. WWII sub COs had lives far richer than merely being Approach Officers. They had to mold their crews into fighting machines, manage morale and boredom, logistics and materiel conditions. Anything that adds RPG elements to these sims I'm in favor of. Great graphics, sea-states, etc. are fine, and welcome, but no sim as yet come anywhere close to being a true sim. The market wants slam-bang and I understand that pressure, but someday I hope to have a "real" boat, with all compartments, and duties at sea beyond damage control, watch-list design, and attacks.
We can go around and around on this all day, but, in the end, it comes down to the cost invested versus the gain returned. Yes, I'm sure the purist in all of us would love to have fully modeled sub interiors, with fully functioning crews, etc. However, in the world of computer software development there comes a point where further development cuts into financial returns. The more rooms modeled, the more time and money has to be spent on research, building the wireframe models, creating the animations, etc., not to mention bug-testing all of this. The end result of all that is, in today's market, having extras like engine and torpedo rooms is just likely not to happen. They are not essential to the core mission of the game, which is to engage and to sink enemy shipping. Until Ubi or someone else pours more money and time in to the game, this is what we have to work with.

It's not as if the development team has some hidden agenda or sinister plot in mind by not modeling the entire interiors of these subs. They're enthusiasts like us, and what they've delivered so far has been nothing short of excellent. I've no doubt SH4 will continue that trend.

[Snowman999]

We can go around and around on this all day, but, in the end, it comes down to the cost invested versus the gain returned.

Sure, I know. I've done product development.

But the fact remains that much of SH4's code has already been paid for in SH3, and even SH1 on an historical research basis. SH4 is a glorified add-on to SH3, code-wise.

And I'm not even considering wholesale/retail pricing models that could completely change the volume-profit mix.

Yes, I'm sure the purist in all of us would love to have fully modeled sub interiors, with fully functioning crews, etc. However, in the world of computer software development there comes a point where further development cuts into financial returns.

It's supposed to be a sim, not an arcade game. It's a weapons platform where the player will spend months on a single mission. It's different than a flight sim. Perhaps the analogy might be to design a flight sim where the player could access rudder but not ailerons. Even with photo-realistic terrain players would howl. Why? Because they know planes need ailerons. Well, I know a sub CO's job is more than sinking targets. It's a very interesting, challenging job, but we've never had a chance to play a simulation of it.

Most of the development dollars appear to have been put into superior exterior graphics, more multi-player, and . . . what? As others have said, items present in previous generations have been taken out (it remains to be seen how good DC is this time.)

The more rooms modeled, the more time and money has to be spent on research, building the wireframe models, creating the animations, etc., not to mention bug-testing all of this.

Again, true. I'm not calling for more investment, simply different focus. I'd rather have more chance to be an actual CO rather than an attack machine. If that means giving up some of the cloud modeling so be it.

Adding interiors is also functionally simpler than AI code or water modeling. Photos and museum boats are available. The interiors need be only minimally functional--collision detection mostly. Some animation on main engines, etc., but not a lot of logic code. As for the rest of a CO's duties, much of it could be semi-spreadsheet mode; most of what COs do in real life is resource management and trade-off decisions. For some that would remove the aura of "reality", but it could be made optional.

The end result of all that is, in today's market, having extras like engine and torpedo rooms is just likely not to happen. They are not essential to the core mission of the game, which is to engage and to sink enemy shipping.

This is where I fundamentally disagree. If it's a WWII submarine sim, that ISN'T the "core mission" of the game. The core mission is to simulate being a submarine CO. I've been buying sub sims, both WWII and modern, for 25 years, and SH4 will be my last unless the next is more than an attack trainer. The hardware is capable now; it wasn't in 1984.

I'll play SH4 and enjoy it for awhile, but making approach after approach gets old. It got old in SH3 as well. I know they think this is the only way to maintain the volume base, but the posts here (thousands of them!) demonstrate that there is a large, highly-informed world-wide audience for sub sims. Maybe someday we'll get one. If we do those happy with attack trainers will understand what they've been missing.


Until Ubi or someone else pours more money and time in to the game, this is what we have to work with.


Same money, different feature set.



It's not as if the development team has some hidden agenda or sinister plot in mind by not modeling the entire interiors of these subs. They're enthusiasts like us, and what they've delivered so far has been nothing short of excellent. I've no doubt SH4 will continue that trend.


I don't blame them; they're not masters of their own destiny. From what I've read they'd gladly develop what I have in mind. It's the suits at Ubi that want a glorified arcade game. A very pretty arcade game to be sure, but not a sim.

[nvdrifter]

I think that maybe it would have been wiser for the developers to focus on the inside of the sub and include all of compartments instead of focusing so much on the outside of the sub. Did anyone see the detailed sea floor? Players will be spending a large amount of time on the inside.

[joea]

I think that maybe it would have been wiser for the developers to focus on the inside of the sub and include all of compartments instead of focusing so much on the outside of the sub. Did anyone see the detailed sea floor? Players will be spending a large amount of time on the inside.

One of the stupider decisions, and a waste of time and resources IMHO. :nope:

[It762]

I think if you would include all day-to-day works included into that game it would become... you guess boring after a while.

I do not want to plan the menu for the kitchen every day or check how many decks of cards are left so the crew is happy in calm times. And iam sure a majority of players would skip day-to-day tasks -like who is scrubbing the deck etc. after a while.

Also I think I would prefer high physics, well thought out crew management and good campaigns over crew-compartments that serve little functions.

Of course more interiors is a big plus but optional and not mandatory.
And day-to-day tasks would become boring soon so you should have an option to have them automated.

I want to have some action and not wait 50 hours until i meet a convoy. I do not have the time to wait that long because I also have other things to do (work, friends etc.)

Just my opinion :)

[U56]

I think that maybe it would have been wiser for the developers to focus on the inside of the sub and include all of compartments instead of focusing so much on the outside of the sub. Did anyone see the detailed sea floor? Players will be spending a large amount of time on the inside.

One of the stupider decisions, and a waste of time and resources IMHO. :nope:


I dunno.....I might be spending more time looking at that sea floor than I anticipated!! :88)

[Captain Krunch]

My goodness, it seems you guys don't want a Silent Hunter game; rather, you want either a Silent Sub Interior or Silent Resource Manager game. LukeFF is right, the core mission of this game is to sink enemy ships, not to sit in your cabin and decide how to handle a captain's mast. If you want that game, you either need to contact Will Wright and have him design Sim Sub Captain, or you need to join a WWII reenactor's club. Otherwise, gain some perspective; this is a PC game, not a virtual reality device. It distills down the essential elements of the experience into a representative whole; it does not intend to duplicate every facet of the experience as a high-fidelity simulation. Why people can't accept that is beyond me.

And as someone who reads every book on WWII American submarines, I know exactly what I might be missing by not having these features, yet I will be very, very happy with an "attack trainer"....

[John Channing]

Silent Hunter III was the first Sub Sim to feature any type of crew management (or any type of crew at all for that matter).

Silent Hunter IV builds nicely on that.

If the Captain wishes he will have a great deal more to do other than hang around the control room all day.

Why don't we hold our complaints until we actually see the thing?

JCC

[Drebbel]

No captains cabin ??? Then where will they put the beer ?

http://img226.imageshack.us/img226/6566/eebecks3mo.jpg

[Buggins]

My goodness, it seems you guys don't want a Silent Hunter game; rather, you want either a Silent Sub Interior or Silent Resource Manager game. LukeFF is right, the core mission of this game is to sink enemy ships, not to sit in your cabin and decide how to handle a captain's mast.
Thank you so much.

I too would like a fully modelled submarine interior and freedom of movement at my whim to walk around in it, but realistically given the choice between that and a more interactive campaign, missions, better AI, bug fixing and actual game mechanism affecting content then you can bet I'll be taking the latter.

I've never been able to see the Doom guy's legs either, you know what? It doesn't matter.

[Iron Budokan]

I was just being sarcastic. ;) No offense intended. It's just hard to take some of the things you said seriously. It's just a computer game, not real life... really.


I agree with the poster you're being "sarcastic" with. I HAVE experienced real submarine patrols and I agree that the (unrealistic) emphasis in every sim to date has been on attack-attack-attack. WWII sub COs had lives far richer than merely being Approach Officers. They had to mold their crews into fighting machines, manage morale and boredom, logistics and materiel conditions. Anything that adds RPG elements to these sims I'm in favor of. Great graphics, sea-states, etc. are fine, and welcome, but no sim as yet come anywhere close to being a true sim. The market wants slam-bang and I understand that pressure, but someday I hope to have a "real" boat, with all compartments, and duties at sea beyond damage control, watch-list design, and attacks.

I would like to see this kind of sim, too. Perhaps some day....

[Rykaird]

I agree with the poster you're being "sarcastic" with. I HAVE experienced real submarine patrols and I agree that the (unrealistic) emphasis in every sim to date has been on attack-attack-attack. WWII sub COs had lives far richer than merely being Approach Officers. They had to mold their crews into fighting machines, manage morale and boredom, logistics and materiel conditions. Anything that adds RPG elements to these sims I'm in favor of. Great graphics, sea-states, etc. are fine, and welcome, but no sim as yet come anywhere close to being a true sim. The market wants slam-bang and I understand that pressure, but someday I hope to have a "real" boat, with all compartments, and duties at sea beyond damage control, watch-list design, and attacks.

Excellent post. I couldn't agree more. I approach SHIII like an RPG anyway. The single best moments in SHIII are when I have to make decisions based on a tactical situation - I'm not wrestling with gameplay mechanics, but real tactics. That's immersion. Most games it's just about tricking the computer.

Anything that expands the scope of that responsibility and immersion is a good thing.

[Rykaird]

I think while you are waiting for extra compartments to be modded into SH4 (isn't going to happen unless they release the SDK), you should go ahead and mod your house into a submarine. Then you can pretend you are on a submarine 24 hours a day. Or better yet, get out of your house more often and enjoy real life for a change. :huh:

Everyone enjoys different aspects of the game. Usually folks around here respect that. I guess not this time.

BTW, here's a great video of a guy who's built a complete, full-size, radio room mock up of a Type IXB - extremely realistic.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6eqcDMMH_pc

[Mikkow]

I think while you are waiting for extra compartments to be modded into SH4 (isn't going to happen unless they release the SDK), you should go ahead and mod your house into a submarine. Then you can pretend you are on a submarine 24 hours a day. Or better yet, get out of your house more often and enjoy real life for a change. :huh:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma

[LukeFF]

But the fact remains that much of SH4's code has already been paid for in SH3, and even SH1 on an historical research basis. SH4 is a glorified add-on to SH3, code-wise.
How do you know that? One of the developers has stated (on the official site, no less), "The game had a lot of old code that had to be sand blasted, repaired and repainted."

It's supposed to be a sim, not an arcade game. It's a weapons platform where the player will spend months on a single mission. It's different than a flight sim. Perhaps the analogy might be to design a flight sim where the player could access rudder but not ailerons. Even with photo-realistic terrain players would howl. Why? Because they know planes need ailerons. Well, I know a sub CO's job is more than sinking targets. It's a very interesting, challenging job, but we've never had a chance to play a simulation of it.
I fail to see how it's an arcade game. I spend a lot of time in SH3 setting up my attack run, figuring out the best course of approach, etc. My torpedoes may or may not hit the target, due to a multitude of factors. That doesn't sound like an arcade game to me.

As for the flight sim analogy, I fail to see the relevance of your argument. In IL-2, for instance, the relevant stations for each plane are modeled, in keeping with the coding of the engine. The engine does not model navigational errors or in-flight map plotting, so the navigator's station isn't modeled. Everything else is there, though - cockpits, bomb sights, defensive guns, etc. The same can be said of SH3 and 4: the core stations are being modeled that achieve the end means of the game, to sink enemy shipping. How does having a pretty captain's cabin a couple doors down help me sink that merchant lined up in my periscope?

Most of the development dollars appear to have been put into superior exterior graphics, more multi-player, and . . . what? As others have said, items present in previous generations have been taken out (it remains to be seen how good DC is this time.)
What, in terms of functionality, has been taken out? The captain's cabin was modeled in SH3 because it occupied the same space as the sonar and radio station. I guarantee you it wouldn't have been modeled if it was situated somewhere else in the boat. I find it funny as well that you clamor for more detailed and graphically pleasing compartments yet in the same breath claim most of SH4's development has been put into, among other things, better graphics.

Adding interiors is also functionally simpler than AI code or water modeling. Photos and museum boats are available. The interiors need be only minimally functional--collision detection mostly. Some animation on main engines, etc., but not a lot of logic code. As for the rest of a CO's duties, much of it could be semi-spreadsheet mode; most of what COs do in real life is resource management and trade-off decisions. For some that would remove the aura of "reality", but it could be made optional.
Have you ever done 3D modeling? All of that takes time and effort to model right. Getting those photos and visting those museum boats is an enormous investment in time and money - things which aren't always in ample supply.

The rest of my reply has been covered by others already, so I'll keep it at that.

[Captain_Jack]

But the fact remains that much of SH4's code has already been paid for in SH3, and even SH1 on an historical research basis. SH4 is a glorified add-on to SH3, code-wise.
How do you know that? One of the developers has stated (on the official site, no less), "The game had a lot of old code that had to be sand blasted, repaired and repainted."

It's supposed to be a sim, not an arcade game. It's a weapons platform where the player will spend months on a single mission. It's different than a flight sim. Perhaps the analogy might be to design a flight sim where the player could access rudder but not ailerons. Even with photo-realistic terrain players would howl. Why? Because they know planes need ailerons. Well, I know a sub CO's job is more than sinking targets. It's a very interesting, challenging job, but we've never had a chance to play a simulation of it.
I fail to see how it's an arcade game. I spend a lot of time in SH3 setting up my attack run, figuring out the best course of approach, etc. My torpedoes may or may not hit the target, due to a multitude of factors. That doesn't sound like an arcade game to me.

As for the flight sim analogy, I fail to see the relevance of your argument. In IL-2, for instance, the relevant stations for each plane are modeled, in keeping with the coding of the engine. The engine does not model navigational errors or in-flight map plotting, so the navigator's station isn't modeled. Everything else is there, though - cockpits, bomb sights, defensive guns, etc. The same can be said of SH3 and 4: the core stations are being modeled that achieve the end means of the game, to sink enemy shipping. How does having a pretty captain's cabin a couple doors down help me sink that merchant lined up in my periscope?

Most of the development dollars appear to have been put into superior exterior graphics, more multi-player, and . . . what? As others have said, items present in previous generations have been taken out (it remains to be seen how good DC is this time.)
What, in terms of functionality, has been taken out? The captain's cabin was modeled in SH3 because it occupied the same space as the sonar and radio station. I guarantee you it wouldn't have been modeled if it was situated somewhere else in the boat. I find it funny as well that you clamor for more detailed and graphically pleasing compartments yet in the same breath claim most of SH4's development has been put into, among other things, better graphics.

Adding interiors is also functionally simpler than AI code or water modeling. Photos and museum boats are available. The interiors need be only minimally functional--collision detection mostly. Some animation on main engines, etc., but not a lot of logic code. As for the rest of a CO's duties, much of it could be semi-spreadsheet mode; most of what COs do in real life is resource management and trade-off decisions. For some that would remove the aura of "reality", but it could be made optional.
Have you ever done 3D modeling? All of that takes time and effort to model right. Getting those photos and visting those museum boats is an enormous investment in time and money - things which aren't always in ample supply.

The rest of my reply has been covered by others already, so I'll keep it at that.

Ahhhh..well if they traveled to a sub to get a photo of the control room it wouldn't be too hard to also get a shot of the Captain's Cabin...ya just kind of turn around, take a few steps and there it is....probably not too much of an additional travel expense.....:rotfl: :rotfl:

But how did they manage to get an accurate photo of the bottom of the Pacific?

[LukeFF]

Ahhhh..well if they traveled to a sub to get a photo of the control room it wouldn't be too hard to also get a shot of the Captain's Cabin...ya just kind of turn around, take a few steps and there it is....probably not too much of an additional travel expense.....:rotfl: :rotfl:

:roll:

Researching and creating an accurate sub interior (and aircraft cockpits, for that matter), is more than just taking pretty pictures. Ever hear of blueprints? They're pretty much the difference between doing a good modeling job and pulling something out of one's rear end.

[Rilder]

They should of at least modeled a torpedo tube to sleep in... "BERNARD!!!!"

[Snowman999]

I do not want to plan the menu for the kitchen every day or check how many decks of cards are left so the crew is happy in calm times. And iam sure a majority of players would skip day-to-day tasks -like who is scrubbing the deck etc. after a while.


I think if you think this is what I'm talking about you have a failure of imagination.

Look, a "submarine" isn't the machinery--it's the crew. The crew is the weapon. Skippers had equal hardware, equal chances to draw good sailors and losers from the traiing pipeline. They got the same patrol areas (mostly) in the same eras. They got the same crappy fish early on. So why were actual results different by orders of magnitude? (In the U-boats as well.) The ability of the CO to mold a fighting machine, to motivate, to lead, to train, and to keep tired, scared men fighting when they wanted to quit. Tha'ts what I'm talking about modeling.

The Commissary Officer made the menus BTW.


Of course more interiors is a big plus but optional and not mandatory.
And day-to-day tasks would become boring soon so you should have an option to have them automated.


I said this in my other post. If a player wants an arcade experience it should be available.


Just my opinion :)


Sure, no problem. They differ. I'm sure SH4 will be a commercial success, but it could be so much more for very little investment.

[Snowman999]

I approach SHIII like an RPG anyway.

Me too. I wonder how those who dis my idea square their love of SH3Commander. You know, the portrait, the career dossier, the external world info added in the nightclub? Sure seems like an attempt to add some RPG elements.


The single best moments in SHIII are when I have to make decisions based on a tactical situation - I'm not wrestling with gameplay mechanics, but real tactics. That's immersion. Most games it's just about tricking the computer.

Anything that expands the scope of that responsibility and immersion is a good thing.


Yep.

I think it's useful to separate the call for more interior modeling from what I call "leadership modeling". The Silent Hunter series has always been about making decisions--tactical decisions for the most part, approach angles, end-around trade-offs, etc. I'm just asking for more CO decisions that impact gameplay.

An example that ties directly into the SH4 world. One of the single biggest decisions a USN skipper had to make was when to bag the patrol and come home with fish in the tubes. In SH3 this was solely a function of fuel, and that's a biggie to be sure. But SH3 allowed the game to be gamed. Many times I went to my assigned patrol area, went to 1 knot or All Stop, cranked up TC and waited. Weeks sometimes, while I did something else. Eventually a target wold appear. Realistic? No! Crews need water, and water takes fuel to make. An interesting CO decision in SH4 might be, "Do I go to restricted water hours and buy four more fuel-days off Saipan?" If I do my crew's response times, data accuracy, lookout effectiveness, morale, etc. declines at some rate I have only a rough measurement of. If I go back "safely" I suffer the commodore's wrath and maybe am relieved. What do I do? Provide me a range of options with only somewhat understood consequences and you're starting to have a sim.

Sid Meier (sp?), a pretty good game designer, once said (paraphrasing): "A good game presents the player with a series of interesting decisions that have downstrwam consequences." That's all I'm asking for. So, an interesting decision would not be "What's for dinner?" But it might be "Which of LT Jones and LT Smith would make a better Chief Engineer, and which a better Weapons Officer, given their service records and nothing else?" Because until you see them in action that CO has no idea.

[Snowman999]

[quote=Snowman999]But the fact remains that much of SH4's code has already been paid for in SH3, and even SH1 on an historical research basis. SH4 is a glorified add-on to SH3, code-wise.
How do you know that? One of the developers has stated (on the official site, no less), "The game had a lot of old code that had to be sand blasted, repaired and repainted."


Your quote proves my assertion. Functions are the same--dials read out, torpedo geometry is calculated, sound files are called, reload times are tracked, etc. etc. Basic routines modified to fit, not from-bare-metal engine design.


I fail to see how it's an arcade game. I spend a lot of time in SH3 setting up my attack run, figuring out the best course of approach, etc. My torpedoes may or may not hit the target, due to a multitude of factors. That doesn't sound like an arcade game to me.


Ironically, I played an arcade game in 1971 in a KOA Kampground that did exactly that--electromechanically.

As for the flight sim analogy, I fail to see the relevance of your argument.

I probably didn't make it very well. What I was trying to say was that a flight sim has it far easier because the player/pilot acts directly on the platform, perhaps with a co-pilot but most often not. A submarine has a crew with scores of men and a CO's job is functionaly different than in other weapons platforms. He fights THROUGH his crew, not through the machine. So long as that's not modeled in a way where I can influence that crew's development and behavior it's not a sim.

That said I know the crew management routines have been deepened from SH3's first attempt. I hope I'm surprised.

The same can be said of SH3 and 4: the core stations are being modeled that achieve the end means of the game, to sink enemy shipping.

Well, we agree this is the mission of the game, but we disagree that it ought to be if the game is to be a sim.

What, in terms of functionality, has been taken out?

I don't stipulate that the issue is functionality; to me it's immersion and command decision-making. Others as well.

That said, if it were a sim the ability of the CO to walk his vessel and see what's going on is every bit about simming. CO's DO walk the boat, several times a day. My CO required every on-going OOD to also walk the boat from bow to stern and every off-going OOD to do the same and to make their observations part of the formal after-watch report to him. It's how you keep up with morale, cleanliness, materiel condition--more sets of eyes. In a fully-modeled SH4 a walk through an after TR that hadn't been cleaned might be an indication of morale or fatigue, presented visually.

Have you ever done 3D modeling?

No. Have you?


All of that takes time and effort to model right. Getting those photos and visting those museum boats is an enormous investment in time and money - things which aren't always in ample supply.


This month's "Computer Games" magazine contains a preview of the game wherein it is reported in some detail that the developers did in fact fly over to the Bay Area for press and visited a museum sub as well as the USS Hornet.

Everything costs money. It's how you allocate that matters.

[LukeFF]

Snowman, I agree with you that it's all about how the development team allocates its resources. WRT SH4 the team was obviously given a shorter timespan to complete the game, given that it was based on SH3's engine. Again, I believe all of us here would love to have a fully modeled interior. It's just that it takes more time and resources to model such things. Give the team 6 more months to develop the game, and we'd probably have extras like radio rooms and such.

To answer your question: yes, I have done 3D modeling for the Forgotten Battles flight sim (the He 162 cockpit). A large chunk of my development time was simply spent on collecting and analyzing resources. When those resources show conflicting information, it takes even longer to model it to the historically correct standard.

Now, here's a better analogy that works when it comes to comparing flight sims to submarine interiors: many people in the Forgotten Battles community have complained about certain bomber cockpits not being modeled. The bottom line is that bombers take a long time to develop due to the multiple crew stations and the myriad of functions needed to be coded. That's not to say FB lacks for flyable bombers, but they take a back seat to fighters because the development time for the latter is much less. It's the same way with SH4 - in the time it takes to build those extra rooms, the developers could be refining the AI code, ship damage modeling, etc. Again, it all comes down to the core mission of the game. Get the core mission of the game functioning properly, and then think about those extras like radio rooms.

Otherwise, I like your ideas about water rationing and such. Something like that and a limited supply of food would add immensely to the game experience, IMO. Who knows, maybe one of the patches to the game will feature such a thing?

[Snowman999]

Snowman, I agree with you that it's all about how the development team allocates its resources. WRT SH4 the team was obviously given a shorter timespan to complete the game, given that it was based on SH3's engine. Again, I believe all of us here would love to have a fully modeled interior. It's just that it takes more time and resources to model such things. Give the team 6 more months to develop the game, and we'd probably have extras like radio rooms and such.


I understand the resource issues and have read about Ubi's funding practices, etc. One ironic thing is the SH4 budget was probably set from SH3 volumes that were artificially depressed due to Ubi's misguided decision re Starforce, but . . .

I don't want to give the impression that I think the dev team did a bad job given their funding and time schedule. Everything I've seen of the game says they've done a great job within their charge, but that charge was to create, yet again, a tactical trainer mostly concerned with attacks. I'm nearly 50-YO; I'm running out of time to play a real WWII sub sim . . .

On the interior issue, I'd like to say again that it is a separate issue to me from the "CO decision-simming" stuff. I'd like more interiors for immersion. I don't need it interactive, I don't need animations of compartment evolutions (the CO wouldn't be in the TR during a reload in action for example.) I don't need to see DC either. USN proceedures send the XO to the scene of a major casualty, not the CO. (XOs are expendable.)


To answer your question: yes, I have done 3D modeling for the Forgotten Battles flight sim (the He 162 cockpit). A large chunk of my development time was simply spent on collecting and analyzing resources. When those resources show conflicting information, it takes even longer to model it to the historically correct standard.


I'm impressed you have real-world experience with this stuff. Really, I am. But I think a flight sim cockpit is a different kettle of fish. Those controls have to be detailed and operable. A sub interior there for atmosphere could be generalized from photos and manuals available on-line (the 1946 manuals frequently discussed here have loads of photos and drawings.) If museum trips would break the budget I'm also sure fans would be glad to e-mail thousands of photos to Romania of US museum boats in any level of detail. There are lots and lots of museum boats too; I don't know how many He 162s are around. <g>


Otherwise, I like your ideas about water rationing and such. Something like that and a limited supply of food would add immensely to the game experience, IMO. Who knows, maybe one of the patches to the game will feature such a thing?


This thread has made me take a trip down memory lane. In the late 1990s I did a lot on this very topic on Usenet. I debated some names I recognize here (Drebbel?), and even Neal a few times (I think it was "our" Neal.) This continued through the SH1 era, the 688i and Sub Command period, into the SH2 era (a game I did not buy.) Ten years ago I was asking for these same types of content and I was getting the same objections. We're several attack trainers down the road now and the sub sim community seems stuck. Maybe it always will be.

Anyway, with Neal's indulgence for length, I Googled a Usenet post I made ten years ago this May. It's great that a lot of the beefs I had about SH1's graphics not giving sufficient tactical feedback have been addressed--and super-addressed--by SH3 and SH4's enviro modeling. WE now pilot in and out of port. But sadly, a lot of the rest has not been taken up. These are all my words:

"I'm coming to the thread late, but as I've had discussions with JD
before I think I can agree with what was probably in earlier portions
that have rolled off my server. I too think there has never been a sub
sim that even modeled 20% of what really takes place at sea (yes, been
there, done that.) However, where JD normally keys on tactical reality
(decent plots, data collection, fog of war, etc.), my interests for
reality go in different directions, more toward a role-playing
element.
Let me explain. Unlike in a flight sim, WWII patrols were not a couple
of hours with a copilot. They were multi-month trips with a crew of
nearly a hundred. As CO, there are vastly more decisions to be made to
tune your weapon for battle than have ever been simulated. All sub
sims default to become mere tactical trainers, but the experience was
much more than that. Current flight sims, if made analogous, would
dump you into the cockpit five seconds before the bomb run, with only
four dials to monitor, and rip you out five seconds after the last
weapon hit the ground. No systems, no personal interaction with
wingmen, no landing/take-off, no squadron records--nothing to immerse
you in the flying experience. You'd just be a weapon-delivery
platform.

For starters in a WWII sub sim I'd like:

1. Piloting. Getting underway and making landings at the pier.
Navigating out of the harbor.
2. A crew. With faces. Service records. Personalities. Strenths and
weaknesses. Model this at the division level if necessary, but make me
take people into account when I make decisions. If I have a slow bunch
of TMs, penalize me unless I allocate training time for them (of
course that forces my diving party to get fewer drills--a trade-off,
like in real life.) Is my cook any good? If not, torch my morale
rating. Is my COB ineffective? Lower total crew effectiveness unless I
spend political capital with squadron to get rid of him. How
experienced is my wardroom (might depend on year of the war). Let this
impact materiel readiness, approaches and attacks (lags in gaining a
solution), communications, etc. People make a boat go, not hardware.
3. Logistics, beyond fuel and fish. Spare parts. Specific gear lists
more detailed than "radio is bad". Engineering readiness is a huge
part of the CO's job. Make me decide to abort or risk going on if
things crap out. Do I have parts to fix it? Do I have to be surfaced
to do the work? It's an historical fact that a number of our boats had
criminally poor diesels--throw that into the class specs. You get the
idea.
4. Real weather. Sea state. Squalls. Biologics on the sound track.
Ship control effects of operating on, in, under the layer. No one who
designs these games realizes how much real bubbleheads EMBRACE their
environment. Skimmers and and flyers pass through or over their
medium; sub guys wrap themselves in it. EVERY tactical decision has an
environmnental component. SH's greatest realism lag IMO is the lack of
simple sea state visual cues that AOD had. Much more could be modeled.
5. An off-crew R&R. Where's the Royal Hawaiian?
6. A conection to the larger war effort. Microprose did this in crude
form seven years ago in Silent Service II. Music from the period.
Tokyo Rose. Mail call.
7. Back internal to the boat, more chrome. Give me drawings of at
least the wardroom, the engine room and the torpedo room where I can
go to gather data. Give me an XO who does admin (fuel-oil-water
reports, noon positions, personnel transfer requests, men earning
their dolphins (tie to #2 above), etc.) Give me some flavor. Give me a
deck log, day by day, that saves to a .txt file for patrol reports,
and both auto updates for canned events, and lets me type in my own
comments. More "you are there" details so I can immerse myself a bit
more.
8. Advance bases as the war progresses with tenders (my dad served in
USS ORION in 1970, but she was right there nesting fleet boats at Guam
in 1944.)
9. More options for ship control, especially trim and drain systems.
Show how hard controlling the boat was (and teach people what "blow
negative to the mark!" meant) This is a nice to do, but could be neat.

There's more, but you get the idea. Some of this would take a lot of
programming, while some could be done on spreadsheets, or from a
library of phrases, templates (log book), and photos on the CD (crew
mugs.) But it would give a game legs beyond the old "find a target,
shoot, find another" that all sims have shown. There's more to flying
than the fighting and the same goes for subs.

Economically, if the game were good enough, I'd even pay for one-year
modules if offered seperately. What I mean is, design the engine, and
put out a "Sub War-1942" game, then sell 1943, 44, and 45 as new
modules, adding new classes/hardware/displays, patrol areas, but
running on the same basic framework. Or you could do the same thing by
class and sell even more modules. It makes business sense to me, and
could amortize the engine development investment across more volume. I
think the readers of this ng would go for it if the engine was good
enough.

Anyway, that's my beef. I too am waiting for 688I, and I'm sure the
displays, sensors, weapons, etc will be accurate, but I doubt any of
the rest of the factors that make submarines neat will be there.

Comments?

[cappy70]

YES,,the beer, the beer ,,where???:rotfl: :rotfl::arrgh!:

Well,,I think they could put in some "Oblivion" NPC AI , that would be fun,,go up to Cap. and ask him about something or him yell at me to do my job...LOL.

These "mute" crew mates ( though the mods helped some ) have been more of a little annoyance than the Cap's cabin "to-be-or-not-to-be".

Now over to something completly different...these flags waving in the "wind" under water...:rotfl: :arrgh!:

[vonBimmell]

Achieving true imersion in a submarine sim is a hard thing to realize, no matter what compartments are modelled. I found that I hardly spent any time in the 3d stations in SH3.

It was a mild novelty at first, but it wore off very quickly. I just didn't feel like I was in a submarine. It felt about the same as being in a cargo bay of a transport aircraft in a flight sim. No discredit to the developers though, as they did a great job visually.

To truly feel like you are in a submarine, you need to have the reek of diesal, intense body odour, smelly feet, insane heat or cold, a consistently damp environment, and hydraulic oil everywhere. Without all of this, it is just like you are in a dark regular room without windows.

If compartments that are modelled have completely functionality, then that would be different. It would be a bit closer to realism, or at least as close as would be possible until smell o vision is invented.

All of this said, I have no problem with people who liked the Captains Cabin, and think it should have been included in SH4.