Cold-War Era SH5 [Archive] - Page 2 - SUBSIM Radio Room Forums

Julhelm

10-02-07, 02:54 PM

DW, being the de-facto simulator it is, is much too technically complex and dare I say, realistic to be much fun even with a dynamic campaign. Now the optimal cold-war subsim in my opinion would be something like Fast Attack meets Red Storm Rising with SH4-grade visuals.

Fast Attack manages to be very realistic and accurate whilst at the same time having enough furious action so as not to make you bored, while on the other hand RSR's strength lies in it's setting and excellent dynamic campaign where updates are made in a stylish CNN-style newsreport that I for one feel really helps the atmosphere convey the fact there's a war brewing. It also had a much better selection of subs than any of the Sonalysts sims, going all the way from the Permit to Seawolf.

So to sum things up:

FA had accuracy and realism along with stylish (Imagine the FA cutscenes done with the SH4 engine in a dynamic realtime world instead of being prerendered!) action while RSR has a great campaign, good selection of subs and soviet units, great setting and stylish atmosphere - All of which DW lacks in favor of slavishly sterile technical accuracy.

For all intents and purposes, the hypothetical conventional WW3 in the atlantic between NATO and WP is the ultimate "what-if" and would surely make a good game.

U-96

10-02-07, 03:49 PM

Hmmmmm, An interesting idea, but the problem with the cold war was that it was all exercises and spy missions there was no open hostility. Also the subs of the time were more complex but also boring. As the combat (If there was any) would be all by computer.

That's what makes the WWII era so successful for simulators. It was the right mix of simplicity and technology. There were no computers (At least any with a CPU) and also there were open hostilities so shots were fired, offense action was taken, etc.

I for one prefer the simplicity of the time of WWII, And staying there would be alot more interesting then moving towards a more modern setting. It was the pinnacle of warfare. Technologically significant yet still somewhat basic. (You needed to see your enemy at least in order to kill him) As opposed to it all being blips on a screen and a red button to make it go away. Also there is a certain charm with Diesel subs, being able to be submerged 24/7 from start to finish seems rather boring to me.

What would be interesting for SHV would be sailing under the Japanese flag this time, (The forgotten power of WWII it seems)

Julhelm

10-02-07, 04:17 PM

Hmmmmm, An interesting idea, but the problem with the cold war was that it was all exercises and spy missions there was no open hostility.
But that's the greatness of the what-if cold war-gone-hot setting! Historical accuracy in itself is no prerequisite for realism whatsoever. Also, keep in mind that sometimes it can be more rewarding to explore that which never happened but could have compared to that which did and where we already know the outcome.

For all intents and purposes, any game set in a real conflict such as ww2 (with the possible exception of SWOTL) is essentially a canned scenario where you have exactly zero chances to change the eventual outcome. In essence the only way for you to lose is to die and even if you do, your side wins by default anyway.

A WW3 in the atlantic scenario on the other hand, such as the one described in Red Storm Rising, avoids this obvious limitation to gameplay completely by virtue of being very open-ended as to who wins the overall conflict. In fact, one of the really great things about Sid Meier's design was that simply surviving in itself wouldn't result in automatic victory, compelling you to go that extra bit above and beyond to make a real difference. And RSR is only one possible scenario that is plausible.

Also the subs of the time were more complex but also boring. As the combat (If there was any) would be all by computer.
Aircraft of the time were also more complex than their WW2 counterparts as well, but would anyone say the combat was more boring and done all by computer?

Ask any pilot from the Vietnam or Falklands wars about their opinions.

The technology is only there to assist the man; it doesn't make his decisions for him. Therefore it has been, is and always will be the man who has to make the decisions and face the consequences thereof.

frigokar

12-13-07, 12:17 PM

They could say that the USA and Soviet Union developed SDI lasers and Anti Ballistic Missile capabilities so we can play as an attack sub or boomer. If we play with boomer the objective is to get close and fire nukes at US/Soviet cities and if we play as an attack sub to objective is to prevent the enemy to get close.
I personaly think it would be great. Lots of tension and apocalyptic atmosphere :rock:

tonibamestre

12-14-07, 06:00 AM

That would be ok,to be able to command a boomer and a fast attack submarine from each side.An online H24 dedicated server would be nice also,just like VATSIM or IVAO networks do with FS.
Further addons and expansions could complete the fleets and bring systems and weapons updated to the upcoming years,decades.

odjig292

12-14-07, 02:09 PM

I'm coming into this forum late, but I think you have overlooked the excitement of playing for the Russian side. Everyone has assumed that we would be playing for countries like Britian or the US with submarines that work. No, no! You don't have to go around pretending to be a hole in the water with an Akula or even an Oscar II. You have other things to keep you busy.

Think of the fun of trying to sneak up on a US Carrier group with a noisy reactor that can be picked up five miles away. Fortunately they only drop grenades over the side when they get you in their sights, but the mods might add the fun of trying to avoid a MK-52 to add some lively maneuvres to make the scenarios more exciting.

Imagine the fun of playing "Crazy Ivan" while being tracked as soon as you leave harbor. Add the excitement of having the reactor going critical and having to send men in to re-route the drinking water to be used for make-up water for the reactor. The graphics of watching the crew's skin peel off because of the radiation would be really unique. You usually only get good stuff like that in FPS's.!

Another scenario is being on an Oscar II and testing the new rocket powered torpedo. SH4 finally has the graphics to show the fireball blowing out the doors as it explodes from the torpedo room into the sixth compartment. Then you have the fun of being one of the 32 survivors that make it into the stern and wait for Uncle Ivan to save you. You can't use TC in this part of the game, and have to sit in the dark for three days to get the full realism of the game.

Somehow, I don't think it will be a best seller.

Zachstar

12-15-07, 08:57 AM

To be honest I am quite disappointed with how this topic seems to be going and the mindset of quite a few posters here.

It is QUITE obvious that a historically accurate early-mid Cold War era navy simulator will completely fail due to the simple reason of no real action whatsoever. Yet people still want to bring it up. Why? Because the thought of moving away from 4 simulations and mods of World War 2 is too much? YES you have to throw historacally accurate right out the window.

It is time for new ideas. People are tired of choosing either WW2 or Modern with subpar graphics. The whole idea of the industry is to provide new and interesting software for people to entertain themselves with.

World War 1 is NOT enough. The only difference is that the hard difficulty will be extreme and you stand a greater chance of being blasted by what you thought was a transport.

Cold War era offers a chance of blending the experimental tech (Homing torpedoes) of SH3 and SH4 and offering other new technologies without having to plunge headfirst into modern day naval action. Such a phase in the development of the modern Navy offers a COMPLETELY new gameplay style that tests the nerves of even the biggest vets of SH3 and SH4.

A repost from a topic a bit ago.

-------

My thoughts on this have been settled for QUITE some time.

Silent Hunter 5 has a small nitch it can cover with the 50's Sub simulation being totally nonused.

Im thinking give a few years for the postwar era stuff to go then suddenly in 1952 a conflict starts in the pacific or atlantic and a massive naval conventional war ensues between the United States and Soviet Union.
So between 1952 and 1958 you have this conflict that uses newly captured or developed technologies in a deadly war to deny access to the sea.

Light Submarine combat with the use of new homing torpedoes that may or may not work.

Light missile use. Mostly against aircraft.

Soviet XXI conversions such as Whiskey and Zulu for early war

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whiskey_class_submarine
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zulu_class_submarine

For the Americans you have your choice of GUPPY classes for early war leading to better designed subs later on.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater..._Power_Program (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_Underwater_Propulsion_Power_Program)

By 1955 I think its safe to start seeing large number of teardrop shape submarines to start the hunt. Such as http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Barbel_%28SS-580%29

-----------

The point of this is to still be able to basicly maintain the art of Silent Hunter and yet change the style somewhat without going to Nuke powered monsters with uber missiles and Mach 1 torpedoes. You can hunt other submarines underwater and try to engage with homing torpedoes.. etc.

------------

Zachstar

12-15-07, 09:24 AM

Moving on to a new post to prevent wall of test effect.

Obviously my repost did not highlight the scope of such a form of naval warfare.

Homing torpedoes were just coming into play. Both sides with captured german technology and plans. New and better aircraft starting to use jet engines.

The scene was set for a terrifying conventional naval war. Think about it.

A week after the war starts you take your Guppy enhanced submarine into the pacific to hunt killer soviet XXI enhanced submarines. To use radar will alert the sub to your presence allowing him to sit and wait for you. So it is he who can hear the other charging his batteries that is granted the initial offensive.

This time you have lost...

The submarine dives deep with batteries mostly full. He cuts the electric motors and makes his boat completely silent. Waiting to hear you approach. He is rewarded when he hears the light hum of your craft granting him time to calculate his initial shot. By the time you hear the torpedo fire you are too late. You quickly snapshot a homing torpedo his way to drive him off and dive. Deploying as many tactics as you can to avoid the torpedo that only spares you because its trigger has failed. Sending a jarring scream throughout your boat as it passes.

There is no stealth here. Both subs are far too close to hope the silent treatment will work on their WW2 style hulls. A fierce exchange starts with both subs having to move fast, desperate to move out of range of the homing torpedoes and the death they spell. Finally one of your torpedoes has found its mark sending the killer soviet submarine to the bottom where it will no longer pose a threat to the pacific fleet.

Your batteries are at half and you need to rise to charge them. Just as you prepare to start the engines you detect soviet radar. There is no rest as the soviet destroyer bears down on you with accurate depth charges and homing torpedoes.

Without nuclear power SH5 becomes a game of survival and not just another sim that requires a college course for realism sake. SH5 is about terror of major proportions as you now have to deal with deadlier threats that do not let up and usually require destruction to save yourself. There is no "Black-Hole" of old Hydrophones or the Kilo class of the 90s. SH5 is about sudden actions and trying to damage the enemy under extreme conditions.

There is nothing boring about Alt History cold war sim.

Torps

12-15-07, 01:59 PM

At this point the best thing would be SH5 World at war, WWII, Incorporating naval warfare (Great Naval Battles, Janes etc ship vs ship etc) and subs into one giant WWII sim. You can command a sub or a battleship or whatever you want, it would be great for a large audience. You could be the Japanese, Brits, Germans, Americans whoever and that would not only sell but it would be a nice climax for SH series to go into the Cold War era. That would prodice a great sim not just for us sub guys but for those seeking naval warfare aswell.

scrag

12-15-07, 02:22 PM

The idea of Silent Hunter series is to be guess what - you command a submarine. No matter what we think the games do a fairly good job at this. Incorporating the ability to command slimmers and bugs (planes) significantly alters the whole precept of the game - and we could call it Harpoon or Semi Dangerous Waters.

- A Hot War Sub sim is not really feasible (accuracy wise) - playing the Russians are a must - the single biggest issue is that so far imho is - that all the previous games that dealt with the topic are extremely inaccurate and really SUCK. Name it - they all are so wrong that it would be better to play battleship. Not sure how to get around it simply put there is not enough unclass info to make a decent go at it.
It would be cool though if there was - pretty sure that this fan base would enjoy it alot. Imagine getting targeting data and coordinating an attack with Naval Air and the Red Banner Northern Fleet with you in charge of an OSCAR II SSGN??? Be cool - maybe in 20 years.

Charlielima

12-15-07, 05:18 PM

I think it would be splendid to patrol a choke point in a Guppy, Barbel, or Tango boat in this sim in the cold war and get the word to go weapons free. V/R, CL :lurk:

Zachstar

12-15-07, 05:28 PM

Why do people assume that SH5-Cold War automatically means 70-90s? That is what DW is for.

50-60 is where you get the rapid progression. The lack of more advanced sensor equipment. And the more World War II like fights. (Except with homing torpedoes)

Anything later means nucs and the DW like stuff.

----------

scrag

12-15-07, 06:37 PM

Time line for discussion (yes I left off US/NATO SS, UK and US SS)
In this time line some significant events happen:
SSG/SSGN - is no longer a one off it is operational using ASCM's between 180 - 300 NM
SSBN - Subs become capital ships
Nuclear Weapons - yep every one thought Nuclear ASW was cool and worse still very feasible at sea - so add ASROC, Nuclear torps, ASCM as well as MPA dropped ordinance. If you do not think a war at sea in this era would not go nuclear you are wrong - it would and was planned to do so. Remember the point of this was to protect Europe from the Reds - to do this we had to resupply Europe the Russians knew this and to win the had to prevent it - you figure it out from there.
Sensors???? Radar see some improvements, Sonar as well but not as significant as you might think - this time frame was revolutionary from a Propulsion and Weapon standpoint - so if the balloon goes up in say 57 we are going to kill Soviets like nuts driving around blind at 25 knots waiting for a nuke to go off. Remember Nautilus totally dominated any exercise that she participated in against the skimmers - even today we hamstring our boats so bad that reality leaves the building - it so bad that the limit the depth, speed and often force the boats to do things that they will not do in a real fight - simply to offer a chance to the skimmers and bugs to make them feel better about themselves - it is that lopsided. There has NEVER been an exercise that said Gloves off let see what you bring to the table and have it single elimination - no "regen".
So a game in this time frame would be significantly different than you might think.
Nautilus - 1954
Seawolf - 1957
Skate Class - 1957 -59
Triton - 1959
Skipjack 1959 - 1961
Halibut - 1960
Tulibee - 1960
Permit - 1962 - 1967
Sturgeon 1967 - 1975
The George Washington was 1959 and the rest of the 41 for freedom in the same era.
The Soviets
Whiskey 1951 - 1957
Quebec 1954 - 1957
November 1959 - 1964
Echo I SSGN - 1960 - 1962
Echo II SSGN - 1962 - 1967
Hotel SSBN - 1959 - 1962 (K-19)
Victor I 1967 - 1974

Zachstar

12-16-07, 01:14 AM

Wrong. The cold war proved that not even the most hard line soviets were willing to outright attempt nuclear attacks on anything. Nobody was going to use the Nuc torps. They may carry them for last ditch protection, However there is no chance anyone could have gotten outright authorization to use them. And even incidents involving nut captains whould have resulted in only electrons traveling to the red phone.

There was plenty of chance for both sides to settle the several conflicts with nuclear or dirty bomb attacks. Nobody was willing to risk the chain of events leading to the destruction of the human race. No the Soviets were not crazy enough to wipe out the human race by letting loose an official nuclear torpedo in anger.

And even so. The "Nuclear" question serves no purpose in such a game. This is Alt history not "Simulation of duck and cover for your entertainment" "Includes foil blanket"

Realism comes from the way a situation is played out. Not in the history scripts. There is no requirement for historical realism in the big picture.

scrag

12-16-07, 04:17 AM

Interesting response - so let us compare backgrounds and see if you are more likely to be correct or if I am - if you are willing to prove your point.
STSCS(SS) - USN Active Duty All serving on Attack submarines - I have rode over 35 different submarines over 22 years of continuing service. I am currently working in a very unique and demanding field in which I am dedicated to knowing the tactics, doctrine (theory and actual), weapon load outs, class characteristics and capabilities, tactics (exercise and non exercise) of all current and past threat Naval platforms that the US faces. This also includes a complete historical background of the Soviet Navy in which I have conducted a number of briefs, background papers and am considered an expert in my profession. I proudly wear Dolphins and have punched more holes in water and places that you read about and likely more time in places you can never know about. So please do not lecture me about Soviet Naval tactics and Doctrine - unless you have a better background in this material than I do - which I doubt, so please do me the courtesy of putting Mr Clancy back on the shelf as he is wrong more often than he is right.

Zachstar

12-16-07, 04:36 AM

While I thank you for your survice to our country. Pulling the background card or the military card is not a way you win an arguement with me. Sorry man!

If you truly believe that any side would have actually deployed any kind of nuclear device in a tactical situation (Rather than flaunting it with test fires) then that is your view based on your views and experience. I am here to say that they would not have.

The fact remains that they did not. The only way we could know for sure is to ask god when we get up there. Till then I am saying that is is next to impossible to realistically say that the nuclear torpedoes would have been fired in anger. Take is as you will because it bears no signinicances to SH5.

Nobody wants a sim where you are on the run from nuclear torpedoes every hour. Nobody wants a sim where such exchanges quickly grow to massive nuclear war. Nobody wants to see the last days of their virtual crew due to massive amounts of radioactive material in the atmosphere from such an exchange growing to End of Human Race levels.

SH5 needs not simulate the deployment of nucs. SH5 needs to keep to a realistic alt history without the silly nuclear question being addressed.

scrag

12-16-07, 05:50 AM

I asked you for your background and I got an opinion. I told you mine and hence have proved my point. Further the difference is yours is just that an opinion - while mine is based on a careers worth of research and experience. Is it crazy that both sides were this close - yes. Was it crazy that the US and Soviets both marched troops immediately into post nuclear detentions just to see what effects there would be - yes. It was a time full of invention and a thorough lack of knowledge of how bad this stuff really was. Dr Strangelove was not to far off the mark it seems. How each side viewed these weapons is key to understanding how they would employ them. There can be no accurate SH5 SIM for the era you describe for if you sink a submarine - which carries nuclear weapons you may have crossed the line you can not come back from. As part of the doctrine of the USSR was that ALL submarines carried at least 2 nuclear torpedo's. Proof of this was revealed when the Soviet Whiskey went aground of Sweden's largest Navy Base. The measured her outer-doors (she was that far out of the water) and had hard evidence that the Soviets had these on-board. Want further evidence of the mind set - look at the Cuban Missile Crisis, Release authorization WAS already passed by Khrushchev to the on scene commander. When communications were lost temporarily the control of the Tactical Nuclear SCUD launchers were also lost for a time. The plan was for the Soviets to fire on an invasion force with nuclear missiles to prevent there landing. This is all historical fact. You can believe what you want. Fact is Soviet and US Doctrine both believed that Tactical Nuclear USW was not only possible but would be utilized - why? Because generally speaking the weapons while extremely powerful where would not likely to release a significant amount of radiological material in the atmosphere - the sea would deal with it. These were not sane times and it is fool hearty to believe it so. That there use would not necessarily lead to an escalation on land (later the US reveled that it planned on using low yield tactical Nuclear Weapon in the field should the Soviets use ANY chem or Bio rounds again fact). It is no wonder that today's youth have no idea about how close the cold war was to going hot. I guess you can say it was mad that M.A.D. actually worked and kept both countries from obliterating each other. But those are strategic and not tactical weapons - separate theories and doctrine.
Bottom line - you can not hope to have a decent game based on some historical fact without addressing the issues of the weapons and the advent of Nuclear Power in the mid 50's.

Idaeus

12-16-07, 06:15 AM

poll is closed for some reason... Anyways I really wanna play in ww2 europe! I know that happened in sh3 but I haven't played it and I think it would be dissapointing to play it after having played sh4 first. So I think that sh5 should be in europe.

Zachstar

12-16-07, 06:36 AM

scrag, What part of Alt history is not getting through.

The wall of text (Tho I have a moral obligation to atleast read peoples viewpoints so I endured it. Means nothing to what I am talking about.

The whole idea is to move AWAY from strict interpretation and wonder about a what if scenerio. Yes one convinently clean of nuclear weapons but regardless clean and fit for people under 18 while providing a new gameplay oppertunity.

Or I can put it simple and just say. WTF RU postin dud3?

scrag

12-16-07, 02:40 PM

The series of games so far are modeled after real submarines and there opponents with what was available for the time. No opinion that is a fact. You stated that I was wrong in my statement (also based on debriefs of Soviet Naval Officers and materials from that time period as well as statements made by those directly in charge of the forces involved) and not the load you are puffing on. So I have asked you to state what your background is so that I will understand what your expertise is; for you to please prove your point (you have not). What you want is a nice submarine game that while it would be okay to kill each other in a tidy sort of way in a very stupid and messy time. Essentially you want a frickin Star Trek sort of game but with era specific submarines with unhistorical load outs. The funny part is in later years a number of these weapons were pulled offline (80-90's) because they were getting too old and were extremely hot. A few people on these forums likely remember handling SUBROC - not fun. So before you pass unilateral judgment and state someone is wrong get your frickin facts straight. Unlimited Submarine warfare in the 50-early 70's would have resulted in a lot more than you want to believe or obviously understand.

Zachstar

12-16-07, 04:33 PM

Why the background talk? What does it matter other than ego? Please be aware that I could care less if you were on a sub or a manager in a store in this case. Hence the ALT History. Had I actually wanted SH5 to SIMULATE the real life history then your background is obviously much more important.

My points stand. There is little reason to continue this stupid debate when it has little in the effect of gameplay.

I have made my views clear Ubisoft. If people want to continue to try to torpedo this then that is what they will try to do and it is up to you to decide here. Please keep in mind the general public who does not spend time on sub forums.

scrag

12-16-07, 07:15 PM

Yep you proved yourself to me and anyone who reads history that you:
A) are a student of liberal and revisionist history
B) have no clue what you are talking about
C) Further discussion or participation in this thread is pointless (see A and B)
Though as a PARTICIPANT in the later years of the COLD WAR and as a Student of such topic I find your lack of knowledge and attitude towards the subject and topic to be asinine. Yes I realize that this thread is about SH5. This thread spiraled out of control when you claimed I was "Wrong" - I asked you to validate yourself and your argument to that end you have not. In the future if you claim someone is wrong back up your point or shut up.
I would recommend that you put the defogger in your stomach on full so you can see out the window in your stomach - just becareful when you sit down as you may jam your head further up your opinion hole.
However should the term "Sim" be used with this fantasy you seek I will endeavor to point out why it is a fantasy based and BS - anytime and anywhere.
Merry Christmas

Oh and stop whinning nub

John Channing

12-16-07, 09:43 PM

And this would seem to be my cue to put forth my credentials...

That being, among other, lesser acomplishments, a Subsim Moderator for longer than I care to remember. Once with a low tolerance for personal attacks.

So lets all calm down and get back on topic, lest this thread have to vanish.

Thanks

JCC

Mush Martin

12-16-07, 10:29 PM

For me any sub in any decade past present or future.
as long as its done in great detail and released with a full SDK

:hmm:possibly with the exception of the British Kalamity K's
wait a high speed surface raider sub ......... thats silly:|\\

M

Zachstar

12-17-07, 04:30 AM

Well now that a mod finally got things away from that debate. Thank you.

I had a thought about expanding this ALT history a bit. The cold war did last for a bit and there were different "eras" to chooose from when it comes to submarine warfare.

I have already established that in "THIS" Alt history timeline there is no deployment of nuclear torpedoes. Just wanted to clear that point right now. "Nuc Torps" have no place in this game. Yet that is no reason to ignore such a varried group of eras.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternate_history Here is a quick look at what ALT history is for those here who sadly seem not to understand what wonderful fiction ALT history is. Please keep in mind that ALT history is fiction.

If ubisoft made SH5 into a LARGE project that involves an initial box. "46-54" Somewhere in there. Then they can make addons later that cover the changes and starts of the conventional war.

So say the main install dealt with basicly slightly upgraded WW2 boats converting into their upgraded selves through the early Guppy prgrams and other advancements. Accelerated of course during the conflict with the Soviet Union.

Then say 3-6 months later they deploy a full addon that covers a war starting in 1955 and lasting through the rest of the decade. There you get more of the advancements that change underwater warfare.

So on and so forth. Addons could be full development projects generating cash flow to ubisoft and getting rid of this huge lack of early cold war gaming.

goldorak

12-17-07, 04:41 AM

Zachstar

12-17-07, 04:54 AM

Indeed! :up: Nice post!

The only thing about moving away from World War 1 and 2 as a general topic for navy simulations is that you usually have to go with Alt History to have any kind of action in the game.

Dangerous Waters with it's huge amounts of realism still has a fictional storyline because in real life there is little action to simulate.

Early cold war needs to have quite a bit of Alt History because of some of the aspects not leading to good wholesome gameplay. Like you need to not be able to load nuclear torpedoes. No "I win" buttons need to be in the game. Also you might need to accelerate Soviet naval technology by a tad bit.

Even a 47-49 war will be interesting enough because of some of the advancements gained from captured german U-Boats. It will still be about attacking convoys but this time the convoys will have ALOT of teeth. (Packing homing torpedo launchers and advanced anti sub equipment.)

It needs to simulate both US and Soviet submarines.

Hartmann

12-17-07, 04:01 PM

Microprose Red Storm Rising is one of the finest modern naval subsims ever (taking into account the time when it was released).
No one ever complained that is was less than an outstanding subsim because it didn't allow for historical col war scenario. It was based on "what-if" scenario.
Ubisoft doing a SH 5 based on what-if cold war scenario gets my vote. :up:
Zachstar is right, the game market (I don't consider niche simulations such as DW) needs new blood, we've had enough of ww 2 subsims, sh1-sh2-sh3-sh4 stop. I'm burned out on WW2 things, subsims, flight simulators, fps the only historical era the software houses seeem to have interest is WW2. :nope:
And it has been like this for the last 8 years, enough is enough.
Its time to rediscover the joys of the cold war even through a fictional historical settings.

Agree :up:

this sim with a sh4 graphics could be the ultimate modern submarine simulator.

i played a lot with this old game... the boomer bastion in the ice cap..very dangerous encounters with diesel submarines , convoy attacks. resupply, and all in a 1,4 MB disk.

i chased a soviet submarine using the radar at periscope depth
waiting until they launched the missiles, pointing the position in the map with the radar , and launching a sealance to the enemy sub .
:arrgh!:

Charlielima

12-17-07, 05:12 PM

scrag

12-17-07, 05:14 PM

No worrys using the Alt History or what if scenario or a limited falkland style conflict - my blood gets hot when someone (anyone) trys to re-write history. One thing not well examined is a limited scenario - ie how far would NATO go to defend say a small yet strategic island group in a land grab scenario. Just for discussion sake do you know how many differnet versions of the Whiskey SS there are?

Zachstar

12-17-07, 05:28 PM

I can hardly believe someone can truely get mad over fictionalized history if it isnt declared to be 100 percent historical.

And why get hot about it? Kind of silly to get worked up over Alt history talk when you likely have to deal with more serious issues in your real life supposedly.

Zachstar

12-17-07, 05:38 PM

Sweet, and real scenario Iron. My only next need would be to get the radio message to engage the target. Has the cold war gone hot? Or is this just another day in the silent sevice in the 1960s or 70s ? I've read some posts that the cold war is boring. It wasn't for me. The thot of patroling the California coast in an albacore hull diesel severly turns my screws. The SSNs are all away, out escorting SSBNs or carrier battle groups. P2Vs and STFs are dropping sonobouy patterns. The bouys are getting washed over badly. There is an echo II boat out there with orders to engage something. Who is at the pointed end of the spear here? I say Its that diesel boat. V/R, CL

Cold war at sea is historically boring unless you want to simulate some of the horrid accidents that happened during the era.

You want a background of a supposed declared conventional war and authority to engage any forces of the enemy so that it is less of the political crap and more into listen, fire, and destroy. A tad unrealistic, but you diddn't have to deal with political crap before except the usual leave hospital and neutral craft alone. Why now?

Before jumping directly into late 50's-70s style combat. Maybe it is best to start off with a 47-52 somewhere timeline so that they do not have to add in insane amounts of work right off the back? Perhaps add in eras with addons later. A way to make money and not totally change Silent Hunter just yet.

Charlielima

12-17-07, 05:49 PM

I don't like to think of it is fictionalication but what if. How much of our military we would have if we weren't in the what if mind set. We don't have a hot war so we don't need submarines. I bet that concept would be very popular here (Sarcasm). V/R,CL

Zachstar

12-17-07, 05:57 PM

Do you speak of what if in terms of a divergence in events today leading to a difference in the future?

I speak about ALT history simply for fun. It is fiction and needs to be declared as such. I am not calling for people to actually believe that is what really happened.

Charlielima

12-17-07, 06:51 PM

Excuse me Zack but I came here to drive the boats and shoot the torps. High ranking successful naval officers do think globaly and politicly. So you think we should do the 40s and 50s first. Splendid. Does that mean the 60s and 70s are irrelevant? Yah the politics and policy at the top of executive branch of government has alot to do with
Boby Bubbleheadeds' life. I hope you were comfortable and having fun in the 70s and 80s, Alot of us were spending up our youth in a big steel vessel. We knew that us at sea and Joe Sierra on the beach were only one incident away from the next war. I kissed my girlfriend goodbye before a cruise. She asked me if there is a war will you go? I said Nancy we will be there before it starts, before you heard it happened, and the last to come back. There is plenty of situations between 1945 and today that would be prime incidents for our favorite diesel boat sim here. Between WW2 and today, government policies will not prevent war, insurrection, incidents at sea, and such. If one chooses to utilize the military for any means, peace or war, national defense or aggression. War declared or not. The submarine will be there. Correction was there before and relieved on station. CL

Zachstar

12-17-07, 07:01 PM

Interesting post. Love the top line tho I have to make a small correction.

Its Zach not Zack :ping:

What I mean is that I feel that "Starting" SH5 in the late 40s and advancing through the Alt History cold war through paid additions is a wonderful way to keep things fresh and keep the money flow to ubisoft. Sort of like the "Episodes" of Half Life 2.

So then eventually you can take out your red white and blue Kilo mama (Albacore) developed as a paid addon and not a rush job when they would have to do many playable vessels at once for both sides.

(Don't have a heart attack about the Kilo joke please)

scrag

12-18-07, 04:37 AM

Okay to be clear - my angst was over you decidingly saying that I was wrong and then not proving anything about this, then asking for intervention when it became clear that you had been called on the table. Enough said on that. I think the issue here is that you desire a "Red Storm Rising" style scenario that involves early Cold War weapons. To support this you will have to draw somewhat from history. You face a couple of issues:
1) The Soviet Navy was struggling to be built - a number of large capitol ships and virtually all the plans were scrapped due to the winds of change in Moscow. Stalin initially wanted a Navy like the US and UK. However the USSR lacked warm water ports to support it and the cost was enormous. He knew that the USSR would never stand toe to toe with the US in a Naval oriented fight. After his death Khrushchev scrapped virtually all plans - called for a draw down and reshaped the Navy into a smaller vessel and small submarine style Navy. He through the bulk of the money at building the Strategic Missile forces and Long Range Bombing Arm in order to strike at the US. The centerpiece of Soviet Defense was atomic weapons. Okay so that is one issue - early subs were very crappy copies of German technology that the Soviets had a hard time getting to work. Why? - Germans - great with technology and intricate details. Soviets well not so great. This results in a lot of do nothing eye candy. Yes the missile systems worked (read money) but the subs not so much (shoestring budget).
2nd - The Red Navy Sub force was Extremely inexperienced - to the point of blowing subs and weapons up, sinking boats by operational accidents and having no tactics at all. They all admired the US and how successful the Sub force was at breaking the back of there most dreaded enemy - but operationally speaking there submarine force (experience wise) was pathetic (this explains the whole nuclear torpedo option as being practical in there mindset). Please remember that the Soviet strategy was based on first strike and immolation of an enemy. I know the alt time line theory but it is harder than it looks. That is also why a lot of sims that have come out deal with the later years vice early (besides the cool factor of driving an AKULA). The concept then becomes less of a sim and more of a Tom Clancy game.

Zachstar

12-18-07, 09:35 AM

Nothing wrong with that. I never said it was going to be easy. Obviously the soviet conventional Navy operations have to be advanced by years and numbers to balance the game.

Yes I know this is sounding like more of a kludge of historical reasoning and fantasy elements. However, It IS time to move away from the eras of the world wars and the only other alternatives are pre world war (Turtle and Hunley with Batteries with perhaps a steam power generation system if you are lucky) and Post Cold War (Dangerous Waters)

What I am feeling here is that Ubisoft really ought to take a chance with this Alt History deal. Other games have successfully deployed Alt History stories with usually positive results. And as long as you keep the weapon and submarine models themselves realistic with the additions ALT history gives I think it can serve the Navy lover as well.

Call it an experiment if you want. If SH5 suddenly fails at the start. 46-51 etc... Then there will be no need to continue on with the addons meaning that Ubisoft dosent spend a great amount of money (As it is basicly SH4 with lots of additions and changes) and stands to gain a great amount. There is not yet the need to write a new game engine. That I feel needs to be reserved for SH6

With that in work (Lets say it is mid 2009) Ubisoft needs to start SH 6 and 7

Silent Hunter 6 in my view needs to be a part of a series of games that are designed to work together to provide a massive World War 2 experience.

Submarines of the Allies and Axis powers including midgets and special purpose.
Next Version of Destroyer Command as part of the package. Now sports Carrier and Battleship, Cruiser, etc. Operations.

A flight simulation aspect (Perhaps Storm of War) to round out the package.

----------

Silent Hunter 7 ought to be in my view the shining crown of the merging in of SCS and their "Dangerous Waters" work. (Or just Ubisoft's own Modern Sim) This modern Navy simulation sports all that has been learned throughout the years and ought to be THE standard of public Submarine and Modern Navy simulation.

DavyJonesFootlocker

12-18-07, 11:40 AM

Historical accuracy would be thrown out with a Cold-War era SH. No battles actually took place between the USSR and USA. I think they should re-make SH3 with all the eye candy of SH4. Or remake MiG Alley ( OK kill me I'm a flight simmer, too!):rock:

Zachstar

12-18-07, 12:25 PM

What? You want to buy SH3 like gameplay with SH4 graphics? Not very innovative now is it?

I have already expressed how surprising it is for some here to want ANOTHER U-boat sim. Is GWX truely not enough? Why not just enjoy it and see what it is like to do underwater battle with an ALT history cold war with homing torpedoes? With those torpedoes being slung on the rails of destroyers and aircraft as well as submarines.

If ANYTHING atleast call for them to Simulate World War 1 U-boats.

PLEASE not ANOTHER U-boat sim!

---------------

Some may be asking why not just do the big WW2 navy simulation I mentioned with SH6 now?

Sure it is up to Ubisoft. However, think about what you are asking and the timeframe (2008-2009) you are asking it in.

If you have been keeping up with the technology development news you may have been noticing some key technologies in development that will give computers ALOT more power and ability around the 2010-2011 timeframe.

So add in software advances and you got the ability to make a a VERY large World War 2 Navy simulation with extremely high detail.

So while it is a good idea to begin the thinking about it now. Actuall development should not start until these new powerful technologies hit the public at reasonable prices.

SH5 being a cold war ALT history game is a wonderful way to pass the time while experimenting with a potentially greatly profitable idea. Addon packs will keep the development team at full speed until the day comes that it is time to start on SH6.

If it is profitable enough then perhaps even 2 teams can be formed. One to continue SH5 (Hopefully the addon pack will be covering the early to late 60s by then) and the other to start on this massive project.

Sounds like a win win to me.

DavyJonesFootlocker

12-18-07, 12:55 PM

I disagree. The SH series were based on historical events. An alt-history type sim just don't cut it for me personally. Yes, it's nice to play around with new stuff, but look at what Oleg Maddox did with Il-2 Sturmovik when he made 1946 with experimental Luftwaffe jets. Anyway that's just my personal opinion. In reality subs had it's exciting times between WW1 and WW2.

Zachstar

12-18-07, 01:19 PM

I think 1946 was a wonderful addition to IL-2. The new aircraft are well made and fun to use. The ALT history part did nothing but to make it more fun.

LeafsFan

12-18-07, 02:05 PM

I think a WW I SH5 would be fantastic.

HB

mrbeast

12-18-07, 02:45 PM

I think a WW I SH5 would be fantastic.

HB

I agree with that LeafsFan.:up:

I think a WWI Silent Hunter would be the best way to go for the series. Some might sniff at WWI subs but I think there is plenty of interesting material to exploit and not just in the North Sea either. The ships of the era are great too, just think of the Dreadnougt BBs and BCs and the dazzle camoflaged merchants. The subs are interesting some fairly unusual types and designs with new weapons and technologies coming on stream throughout the war.

Plus there is no need to turn to alternative histories;)

AVGWarhawk

12-18-07, 03:00 PM

I think a WW I SH5 would be fantastic.

HB
I agree with that LeafsFan.:up:

I think a WWI Silent Hunter would be the best way to go for the series. Some might sniff at WWI subs but I think there is plenty of interesting material to exploit and not just in the North Sea either. The ships of the era are great too, just think of the Dreadnougt BBs and BCs and the dazzle camoflaged merchants. The subs are interesting some fairly unusual types and designs with new weapons and technologies coming on stream throughout the war.

Plus there is no need to turn to alternative histories;)

Second the motion:know:

Zachstar

12-18-07, 09:50 PM

There is plenty of need to go alt history. However ill leave that for a bit.

If you want World War 1 then you need to make it damn clear about what you want. State the U-boat types you want NOW rather than waiting for them to pull another S-boat trick.

And you need to call for another surface warfare game (Destroyer Command ) to go along with it. I care little for the U-boats but more for the giant Navy battles of WW1.

Min spec.

4 core at 3.0 GHZ
2 GB ram over XP
20 GB HD space.
Direct X 9.0C Over a powerful card (8800 GTS possibly)

Yes this is pre those advancements because if you want to continue the world war series then ill be requesting SH6 to be massive cold war like I was doing earlier. Or modern.. Whatever works...

Oh and this time call for a damn SDK please.

ReallyDedPoet

12-18-07, 09:59 PM

Plus there is no need to turn to alternative histories;)

Leave that to the Enigma series :roll:, I like Silent Hunter either in WWII or agree with posters here, try WWI :yep::up: There is still lots of game in these eras.

RDP

Zachstar

12-19-07, 03:00 AM

There is no more game in WW2 unless you are willing to actually simulate a dyamic worldwide WW2. It is pointless to return to the atlantic or the pacific. And the market for a British Submarine force SH5 is low at best.

I truely think it is TIME to head into new ground. WW1 was new for about 2 mins before another game got it. Yes SH5 could do it a hell of alot better but you are asking for ALOT here. Because WW1 is more about giant guns on surface ships. U-Boats had little to fear once they stopped with the proper warning crap. Hydrophones and Depth Charges worked marginally at best. And there was basically no effective Air cover. On top of that you had plenty of warning and time to knock down a WW1 aircraft.

So if you want WW1 simulation you want both submarines and surface craft with emphasis on the later. You want to be able to do battle with large guns.

To be honest I'd rather them spend their effort on the surface warfare part and call it a different game. Atleast you could attempt the difficult task of sinking a WW1 Uboat or put a large hole in it with a Battlecruiser.

It is MUCH less work for them to do a late 40's early 50s time with ALT history becuase they can base the work on what they have done on SH3 and SH4. Therefore they can have the initial installment out much earlier and see if people are really interested in the later years for addon packs.

The homing torpedoes used during this era were not all that great and use of pattern torpedoes and fast runners will still be one of the primary parts against convoys and large lumbering ships. The fun will be trying to get away from their homing torpedoes once you have made your attack.

JAKE

12-19-07, 07:30 AM

I agree with alot of people here SH5 based in WW1 would be the better option as there could be convoy battles at sea that were historically acurate unlike the very little that happened in the cold war. Although it would lack aircraft it could still include things like Q-ships and U-boats which often sank ships on the surface with deck guns.

Zachstar

12-19-07, 07:38 AM

Think for a moment how fun that really is.

You surface and catch the ship off guard. Two shots later and the crew hops into the boats. Some shots later and she sinks...

Q-ships. They worked because the U-Boat had no idea they could do that. So you will dive and use a torpedo attack instead.

WW1 is extremely boring if you limit it to submarines. Call for a surface warfare sim if anything.

mrbeast

12-19-07, 07:58 AM

Zackstar, there is no need to go to alternative history at all.

You seem very dismissive of WWI as a submarine sim scenario. WWI was not all about big gun dreadnoughts at all and the U boat campaign was not a marginal side show, indeed it almost suceeded on a couple of occasions. The subs of the era were still in the early stages of their development, the diesel/electric standard had not been reached yet so you can have widely differing experiances with the different classes, its not just a case of different external sub skins. There were many more surface attacks carried out, plus stopping and searching a vessel would be interesting, new game experiance. Imagine sending the crew off to board in a dingy; wondering if the ship will attempt to resist; The radioman monitoring the airwaves to make sure the merchant does not report you. Is the vessel really a Q ship? It wasn't all plain sailing for the U boats.

There is so much more than just Jutland.

I don't see the need to call for surface vessels to be playable either, thats another game. In fact I'd rather that UbI concentrated on the subs and did them right rather than squeezing too many ship types in to please everyone, and end up with an arcade game mascarading as a simulation. I'm not bothered about flying an aircraft, then jumping to a BB and then a submarine and back again, because games like that generally fall short of the mark in terms of simulation.

I agree that WWII, has for the time being, been exposed enough. But I don't think that its a totally dead mine of material. You seem to suggest that WWII has now been done because we have SH3/4? In that case we could have just stayed with AOTD and SH1 and not bothered with anymore subsims because they cover the same territory as SH3/4; and thats WWII wrapped up!

There is always room to improve in so many areas, graphics, dynamic campaign and period emersion, numbers of ships, AI, environmental effects......imagine if tides and currents were properly simulated? I could go on. Certainly if SH5 was just SH3 but with SH4 graphics I think I'd feel a little short changed.

WWI as a scenario is still largely virgin territory as far as sub sims go. Sure there is 1914 SOF but I think few would argue that it could not be massively improved upon. Also there is at least one indie WWI subsim in development, but other than that there is nothing out there. Its an open market for UBI.

IMHO a 40's/50's Cold War SH would basically be SH4 but with the Soviets instead of the Japanese and more homing torpedoes. Is this all you expect from SH5?

As to asking a lot, well basically I'm asking for a new game how much more or less should SH5 be?

Zachstar

12-19-07, 08:28 AM

Geez do stupid pills go cheap these days? Its ZACHSTAR not Zack or Zackstar.

Lots of your post simply dosent make sence. You want ubisoft to do all that work (And yes it is a hell of alot more than an 46-51 scn) to make a new game experience of searching vessels? Etc..

Don't just accept boring elements to just have another subsim with pretty graphics.

Also surface vessels being simulated properly isn't arcade. When you compare the realism of SH3 to GWX you could consider it arcade in comparason yet people dont make such.

Surface vessels being simulated is THE way to handle WW1. The roaring of guns and the battles easily beats out Sub captains learning they don't have to be gentlemen about their kills the hard way. (Searching vessels? youve got to be kidding me)

Yes WW2 isnt totally dead overall but it is totally dead for a sole submarine experience. If you want to do WW2 again you need to have a series of games across an interconnected platform to simulate WW2 navy warfare as completely as possible. SH3 with SH4 graphics wont cut it. Submarines from Britian wont cut it. Submarines from Japan wont cut it. You need all that plus the surface action AND aircraft action. Otherwise the SH series is getting old really fast.

As for your Cold War point. Partially yes. The attack methods will only change slightly and your sub will be better equipped. The problem is that the enemy is now packing homing torpedoes on his craft. And enemy submarines can take you down just as fast.

However its just the start of a gradual development showcasing combat gradually evolving. To the phaseout of Pattern running and basic torpedoes. To nuclear power, To jet aircraft, to helicopter anti-submarine platforms. Etc... That is what the addon packs are for.

SH5 alone will basicly be SH4 with early improvements (Global coverage) and above mentioned changes in anti-submarine warfare. I think the major addition needs to be enemy submarines hunting you and AI wolfpacks with homing torpedoes able to attack a heavily defended battlegroup.

RollingRock

12-19-07, 10:22 AM

personally i'd like to see SH5 stay in the WW2 era but come with a much deeper campaign. think dynamic campaign in Falcon 4.

i'd also like to see a improved AI that you can communicate with and form true wolfpacks.

basically i love the gameplay of SH4 and would now like to see it applied in a much deeper world around your sub. :yep:

scrag

12-19-07, 01:47 PM

Disagree with "Yes WW2 isnt totally dead overall but it is totally dead for a sole submarine experience. If you want to do WW2 again you need to have a series of games across an interconnected platform to simulate WW2 navy warfare as completely as possible. SH3 with SH4 graphics wont cut it. Submarines from Britian wont cut it. Submarines from Japan wont cut it. You need all that plus the surface action AND aircraft action. Otherwise the SH series is getting old really fast." - It is SILENT HUNTER i.e. a submarine sim. Sure a skimmer spin off would be fun but there has been other WII surface sims and fun for what a while. You are mutating the game into something else entirely - not a mod and not a logical course in the series. Submarines from Japan - this IS the next logical step as it has NEVER been done before and would make for a fun mod or add on. Better torps and the ability to launch KAITAN or other unique weapons would be a significant NEW twist - not ever done with a subsim before. WWI and Q-ships? These ended up being unsuccessful in the long term so the U-Boat menace long stayed in the minds of Royal Navy - to such an extent that even after the end of the was they sought out a defense against them.
I also think you really overstate the capabilities of post WWII era submarines and particularly the torpedoes. Submarine Vs Submarine ASW became more predominate in the mid 60's than in the time you talk about. There was no significant naval presence for the Soviet Union until the late 50's and that was nothing compared to what NATO operated at the time. You seem very unwilling to take any ideas other than your own - particularly if they are totally different or oppose you, your version of history is skewed and you are very confrontational - how old are you if I may ask?

Charlielima

12-19-07, 04:17 PM

Ok Group. How about this?:
SH gold. World war 2, All theatres, includes all countries with Subs.
SH Classic, WW 1.
SH 5, Our diesel boat sim is only kicked up one step in everything. Post WW2. Snorkels, next generation hulls, homing torps, sensors, and such. Threats are also upgraded or modernized. Very little "WHAT IF" needed to deliver swimmers, Get chased by 3rd world countries that think they own the sea 200 nms from thier beech, and keeping the seas and oceans of the world free one torpedo launch at a time. This sim is about a weapon system That we enjoy operating. I bet everyone here wants more. V/R ALL! CL

mrbeast

12-19-07, 06:02 PM

Geez do stupid pills go cheap these days? Its ZACHSTAR not Zack or Zackstar.

Sorry about the typo ZACHSTAR, but stupid pills where on at half price down the shops and I couldn't resist stocking up for Xmas!;)

Lots of your post simply dosent make sence. You want ubisoft to do all that work (And yes it is a hell of alot more than an 46-51 scn) to make a new game experience of searching vessels? Etc..

I find your objection to Ubisoft doing 'all that work' a little strange. What is the problem with Ubisoft developing new games. I thought that was the business that Ubisoft was in? In suggesting a SH5 why should we as a simming comunity approach Ubisoft and its developers with a 'please sir I want some more' attitude. Don't get me wrong I'm greatful for the work that Ubisoft and its developers have put into the SH series. No doubt Ubi could build upon the work that it has already done with the SH series.

Also surface vessels being simulated properly isn't arcade. When you compare the realism of SH3 to GWX you could consider it arcade in comparason yet people dont make such.

I've never said that surface vessels being simulated is automatically arcade, what I said was Ubi should leave them out of SH because, as scrag points out also, SH is a submarine simulation, not a surface vessel simulation. My fear is that by adding in too much to the game it dilutes it until you are left wit Battle Stations Midway or Enigma. SH is a sub game and should remain so IMO. Thats not to say I wouldn't love to sea a surface naval sim, something in the mold of Task Force 1942 would be fantastic.

Surface vessels being simulated is THE way to handle WW1. The roaring of guns and the battles easily beats out Sub captains learning they don't have to be gentlemen about their kills the hard way. (Searching vessels? youve got to be kidding me)

Where is this written? In the Bible? Maybe you should do some background reading on WWI naval campaigns. But the same thing could be said about SH4 or SH3 for that matter. Why bother with subs when you've got the roaring of guns around the Solomons, Yamato at Leyte Gulf, the Sinking of the Bismarck, The Battle of the Rver Plate etc etc. Plus for someone who is desparate to remove extra work from Ubisoft's shoulders, adding in a whole new layer of playable surface vessels etc would seem to be at odds with this.

Yes WW2 isnt totally dead overall but it is totally dead for a sole submarine experience. If you want to do WW2 again you need to have a series of games across an interconnected platform to simulate WW2 navy warfare as completely as possible. SH3 with SH4 graphics wont cut it.

Again I don't see where the logic is in this, why will WWII sims have to model the war in some sort of multi platform all encompasing dynamic war to be viable? Just because you say so? SH3 and SH4 are both remarkable games/simulations but who is to say that they are definative of the WWII subsim genre? Why can they not be radically improved upon within the bounds of their own terms.

Submarines from Britian wont cut it. Submarines from Japan wont cut it. You need all that plus the surface action AND aircraft action. Otherwise the SH series is getting old really fast

So a bunch of stuff that has never been done before, completely new, inovative, won't cut it. But a bunch of stuff that already has been done will? Before you say the Cold War has never been done consider SH4 for the earlier part and 688i/Sub Command and DW for the latter. Again SH IS a submarine simulation first and foremost not a generic naval sim.

As for your Cold War point. Partially yes. The attack methods will only change slightly and your sub will be better equipped. The problem is that the enemy is now packing homing torpedoes on his craft. And enemy submarines can take you down just as fast.

However its just the start of a gradual development showcasing combat gradually evolving. To the phaseout of Pattern running and basic torpedoes. To nuclear power, To jet aircraft, to helicopter anti-submarine platforms. Etc... That is what the addon packs are for.

SH5 alone will basicly be SH4 with early improvements (Global coverage) and above mentioned changes in anti-submarine warfare. I think the major addition needs to be enemy submarines hunting you and AI wolfpacks with homing torpedoes able to attack a heavily defended battlegroup.

So basically I play SH4 but with homing torpedoes 'alternaive' history and Russians instead of Japanese until I find myself playing Sub Command or DW? Inovative:up: :nope:

Zachstar

12-19-07, 06:16 PM

scrag you obviously have no idea what alternative history (And no it isn't revisionist it's fiction for petes sake) is so you attack my knowlege of history. Then you continue the egotistical comparason questions. I no longer wish to respond to such tripe. Continue the normal debate and we will debate Good day

-----

mrbeast I don't have the time to make a large reply topic but yes. Innovation in the form of addon packs and spaced out development parts equaling more game in the end.

scrag

12-19-07, 07:02 PM

I re-read your post and saw that I missed one interesting part and will agree that a multi platform - multi player game in a WWII format with a level of detail similar to what we see in the Silent Hunter series would be very interesting and fun. So I agree there. Alt History is speculative and so subject to the whims who is altering it. For the most part you would use a SH IV style format and diverge from the mainstream and build a scenario based on what ever is deemed appropriate for the time. I guess the only exception to all this is the preception that the style of combat is simply not firing homing torpedos at each other (some version of this ASW) using WWII upgraded SS. This is essentially BS and not anywhere near accurate. My opinion on your comments regarding using other than the US and German WII submarine (ie IJN, UK, Italian and French) is valid. It would make for interesting game play to surface and conduct a aerial recon of Pearl or to launch the Mini Sub on Dec 7 or conduct the first Kaitan attack on a harbor. Controversial? Certainly but it imagine how WWII would have changed if the Japanese used the I Boat as effectively as the German's or US used their respective sub forces - Japan would have still fallen but it would have been a longer struggle perhaps going into 1946. Read up on the poor positioning and poor utilization of the I Boats and will become aware how fortunate we were in there miss use.

Zachstar

12-19-07, 09:47 PM

I doubt they could have done better considering our effective pacific fleet at the time.

That is besides the point however.

Here to bring it back on topic. Please describe the average US submarine in 1947. And please note what year the soviets developed a sub able to match it.

12-19-07, 10:02 PM

I'm not keen on the alt history approach.

I think the cold war thing can work, but modern boats are already covered by the 688I-Sub Command-Dangerous Waters scene.

Subsims I would like to see, and I think others would also would be:

1. Cold war 1945-1960 - Skippering boats like the Guppy conversions on stealth missions and maybe a few non-attributed "deniable" sinkings, right up to the early nukes, but stopping before the era of "computer systems surrounded by submersible hardware" that modern boats are. I have to agree with those that say that the cold war can offer plenty of excitement. Just because you can't shoot doesn't meean the other side can't shoot at you, especially if they find you deep inside their territorial waters where you are not supposed to be.

2. WWII - The Other Nations - Skippering RN Submarines in the Atlantic and Pacific, Italian boats in the Med, Japanese boats in Pacific, Russian subs against the Kriegsmarine in the Arctic Ocean and North Sea, etc. No one has done this before in any serious way, and I think it would carry a lot of appeal to what is in fact a very international subsim community. If they modelled two boats from each of those 4 countries, and added in special missions including mide laying, we would have a great sub sim.

3. WWI - The Major Nations - I think that WWI offers a lot of potential that Shells of Fury has not really tapped (from the reviews I've read anyway). Working with straight running torpoedoes without a TDC, limited boat performance, etc would all make for new and interesting challenges.

Hartmann

12-19-07, 10:11 PM

http://www.combinedfleet.com/ss.htm

"Given their size, range, speed, and torpedoes, Japanese submarines achieved surprisingly little. This was because they were mainly employed against warships, which were fast, maneuverable, and well-defended when compared to merchant ships. Japanese naval doctrine was built around the concept of fighting a single decisive battle, as they had done at Tsushima 40 years earlier. They thought of their submarines as scouts, whose main role was to locate, shadow, and attack Allied naval task forces. This approach gave a significant return in 1942 when they sank two fleet carriers, one cruiser, and a few destroyers and other warships, and also damaged two battleships, one fleet carrier (twice), and a cruiser. However, as Allied intelligence, technologies, methods, and numbers improved, the Japanese submarines were never again able to achieve this frequency of success. For this reason, many argue that the Japanese submarine force would have been better used against merchant ships, patrolling Allied shipping lanes instead of lurking outside naval bases. Bagnasco credits the Japanese submarine fleet with sinking 184 merchant ships of 907,000 GRT. This figure is far less than achieved by the Germans (2,840 ships of 14.3 million GRT), the Americans (1,079 ships of 4.65 million tons), and the British (493 ships of 1.52 million tons). It seems reasonable that an all-out blitz of the American west coast, the Panama Canal, and the approaches to Hawaii, New Zealand, Australia and India would have caused the Allies more difficulty than did the naval deprivations that were actually achieved. Losing a significant number of merchant ships, and also needing to spread meager defenses even more thinly along two coasts, would surely have had some substantial consequences for the United States in 1942"

Reaves

12-20-07, 12:05 AM

Cold war has no interest for me as you'll be killing targets from a very long distance with little threat.

Boaring....

SH5 should be huge. Playable RN, IJN, USN and German boats!

Zachstar

12-20-07, 01:06 AM

Define very long distance. In 1947

scrag

12-20-07, 04:14 AM

US Submarine development:
The US (and UK) examined and did extensive testing on a few XXI boats as well as some of the Hydrogen Peroxide Walther designs attempting to adopt some of the technology for use. The Hydrogen Peroxide boats developed by all navies resulted in some form of casualty which resulted in at least heavy damage or loss of the boat itself. Essentially in this time frame the Guppy I conversions took place and in 47-48 the Guppy II conversions (and in 5 new boats while they were being built) of the Balao and Gato class boats. The German Balkon Sonar system was being tested (NATO/USSR) and in the 49 the first attempted Sub Vs Sub ASW exercise took place in the Greenland Norwegian Sea as well as the fringes of the Barents Sea. A new design of Sonar called the BQR-2 which later incorporated more BALKON technology would spin off the first ASW capable Sonar System called the BQR-4 with a reported range of 20k against a Snorkeling Submarine. The plan during this time was to attack and sink the enemy submarine on the Surface or Snorting. Submerged attack against a sub on the Batt was still not feasible due to limitations in the sonar systems. (BTW - this holds true somewhat today as well - a front line SS on the Batt is a real bitch to find under the right circumstance). Weapon technology showed some experimentation in improving homing torpedo seekers from both the captured stuff and what was already in place. We also see the first Radar Picket Subs and the design of a new SSK class which incorporates the larger array of the BQR-4 sonar system.
Russia - same stuff with regards to XXI testing, though the Soviets suffered a setback when the German Carrier Graff Zeppelin was overloaded with captured materials (including tooling for some of the German equipment for advanced underwater designs) and subsequently capsized in the Baltic. The Soviets boats for this period included S/Shch ; K classes with the Whiskey Zulu and Quebec classes following in the early 50's. The Soviet Navy really was a coastal force with extremely limited capabilities - patrolling areas primarily in the Barents and Baltic Seas. They also were working on there version of the BALKON system which would be known in the west as Pike Jaw and Trout Cheek aka Feniks.

With regard to the Japanese Employment of I Boats I would recommend reading "I-BOAT CAPTAIN" by Zenji Orita with Joseph Harrington. The book details operations as the author recalls and during his numerous debriefs is credited with clarification of US claims as well as those of the IJN. While what you describe is largely true (long range scouting and restricted use against Warships) they also wasted a number of boat in resupply operations as well as normally disregarding inputs from the Submarine Component in large scale operations (i.e.MIDWAY). Had Yamamoto and company been as forth coming in submarine use as they attempted to be in Carriers then they would have heeded the recommendation not to use a number of very dated classes of submarines and used some of the newer boats with improved reliability. As it was a number of these older boats failed to make it on station or were extremely slow in arriving on time. Had they done so there search area would have covered the posits of the US Carrier Battle Group. This potentially would have been a disaster for the US.