View Full Version : Silent Hunter 4: Wolves of the Pacific U-Boat Mission Gamespot QA
V.C. Sniper
11-16-07, 09:32 PM
http://www.gamespot.com/pc/sim/silenthunterwolvesofthepacificuboatmissions/news.html?sid=6183021&om_act=convert&om_clk=multimodule&tag=multimodule;picks;title;2
Feast, you filthy U-Boat bilge rats. :P
SteamWake
11-16-07, 09:36 PM
Gasp.... :o
Looks awsome..
Uber scoop OP... nice :up:
Ducimus
11-16-07, 09:43 PM
Arrrhhh, matey's, we've sailed to the lands end of historical, and be entering the waters of fanciful fairytales .. Type 21's in the indian ocean, and logistical support that wasn't really there for everyone, pass em around me hardies! I can't wait to be spinning yarns about a type 21's sailing from penang, sinking hundreds upon thousands of tons with angels on their wings!
On the otherhand, i'll bet it makes em some money! Mo'money for them means more sub sims for us later! :up:
SteveW1
11-16-07, 09:45 PM
I like the part about how they left it open so Enterprising Modders can add the Strategic side of the add-on to the Allies.
Ducimus
11-16-07, 09:47 PM
USS Enterprise left my harbor weeks ago. :rotfl:
leovampire
11-16-07, 10:00 PM
No doubt it will open the game up to a lot more than has ever been seen or used in any of the SH releases over the years.
I am impressed with the new work and idea's big time!
Rockin Robbins
11-16-07, 10:11 PM
No doubt it will open the game up to a lot more than has ever been seen or used in any of the SH releases over the years.
I am impressed with the new work and idea's big time!
When Ducimus gets his dander up something good's bound to happen!:arrgh!:
SteveW1
11-17-07, 12:50 AM
USS Enterprise left my harbor weeks ago. :rotfl:
I can see you getting CTD again after it is released and just wanting to use the strategic side in your own game so therefore making a Mod that everyone will probably thank you for (TM v2.1 probably by that stage)
You do just such good work Ducimus, Thankyou for TM
Cool! So what new ships (other than submarines) can be identified from those pics?
rodan54
11-17-07, 03:26 AM
A part from that Deutschland class, nothing as far as I can tell.
And dare I say that sometimes forgoing realism, even while sticking to a historical context, every once in a while isn't a bad idea. I know I'm definitely looking forward to these new strategic features, and their possibilities. :)
waldopbarnstormer
11-17-07, 04:58 AM
Like it says it the interview there is no reason why you can't use it historically. We all know that it the real war many different assets where used to search for enemy and they all fed information to each other, all that I see changing is that instead of radio reports from command telling you about convoys and ships etc you can control some of those assets yourself. Yes it may be ahistorical in that they are controled by the submarine commander but you just have to use a little imagination. Pretend that you are an Admiral relaying orders to the submarine.
rascal101
11-17-07, 05:04 AM
Yup looks like bucket loads of a-historical drivell, except, Yay Oh YAy think of the modding possibilities.
Any one seen that there fabled 1.4 patch
Arrrhhh, matey's, we've sailed to the lands end of historical, and be entering the waters of fanciful fairytales .. Type 21's in the indian ocean, and logistical support that wasn't really there for everyone, pass em around me hardies! I can't wait to be spinning yarns about a type 21's sailing from penang, sinking hundreds upon thousands of tons with angels on their wings!
On the otherhand, i'll bet it makes em some money! Mo'money for them means more sub sims for us later! :up:
mrbeast
11-17-07, 03:54 PM
Think my fears have been confirmed. I haven't got the foggiest idea why they have to waste their time with 'strategic options'.
Its completely a-historical and I think they could have better spent their time creating more ships and adding historical details to the existing game rather than making up new ones.
Hartmann
11-17-07, 05:07 PM
:up:
I like what are devs saying about modding, they give the "how to" to the community ,and iīm sure that moders will mod it as historic or use parts of it for other things.
Also could be interesting how they do the XXI boat (XVI ?) and if it have things fixed respect the sh3 version, like creep engines, correct battery, and other things.
it opens a full array of possibilities like sh3 with sh4 engine, and others.
A great future for sh4 :rock:
THE_MASK
11-17-07, 07:21 PM
This is exactly what we need . We can mod it to be historical or leave it as is and it will be so fun to play . There is just something missing in SH4 . This will add that missing piece . Its the perfect idea .
kiwi_2005
11-17-07, 09:00 PM
:rock:I can't wait for this addon to come out, is it due early 2008?
John Channing
11-17-07, 09:19 PM
Think my fears have been confirmed. I haven't got the foggiest idea why they have to waste their time with 'strategic options'.
Fun?
JCC
DD: As of now, the strategic-support features are available only for the new German campaign in U-Boat Missions. However, there is nothing stopping enterprising modders from adding it to the U.S. campaign.
I think this is a bit slack TBH. Leaving it for the modders to do is not the right way to be thinking. They know adding the stregic-support to the original campaign would be a great idea yet they don't do it.
I'm still looking out for it but now I know i'll have to wait for someone to put the new features into the US fleet, thanks in advance to whoever that will be.
/shrug
I wish that they would make it an AXIS edition and input I Boats with the superior Japanese torpedoes - imagine having to set and launch a plane....Be pretty cool - a Type 21 in the Pac? Figure the odds. I know the Germans gave the Japanese a couple of U-Boats in which the Japanese did operate but HOPEFULLY we can see something really new vice something retooled.
What I would like to know is if the expansion will also be some kind of 1.5 patch, i.e. if it will solve bugs or correct problems that still appear after patch 1.4 or if it will be just a contents addition no matter what bugs are still there after 1.4 :hmm: If it's the first case, I hope that stock SH4 users get a 1.5 patch that puts them in terms of game stability on par with the expansion users :ping:
ReallyDedPoet
11-18-07, 12:09 PM
To me the add-on and 1.4 are a bonus, I am enjoying the hell out of SH4 right now.
RDP
tomoose
11-18-07, 12:18 PM
....even got the 1.4 patch and the original sorted out yet!:nope:
....even got the 1.4 patch and the original sorted out yet!:nope:
And your point is...?
tonibamestre
11-18-07, 12:48 PM
Great news of course but,what about if after the U boat addon they continue releasing some expansions more? They could give us control over the US Task Forces,command over the Enterprise,Hornet,Yorktown and Lex,so as to some destroyers,cruisers and battleships.
Great news of course but,what about if after the U boat addon they continue releasing some expansions more? They could give us control over the US Task Forces,command over the Enterprise,Hornet,Yorktown and Lex,so as to some destroyers,cruisers and battleships.
We will never see any of the three Yorktown class CVs (Yorktown, Enterprise, and Hornet) added to the game, either as playable or AI units, because of the Ubisoft-Grumman fiasco.:nope: But I see your point in regards to this being the door to commandable surface ships in general.:hmm: And even if Ubisoft does not expand this feature beyond the new German surface vessels, I'm sure the modding community will have a look at the keys which have been handed to them...:cool: More and more, I'm seeing this expansion as an invitation to modders to expand the game beyond its current borders.:yep:
What I would like to know is if the expansion will also be some kind of 1.5 patch, i.e. if it will solve bugs or correct problems that still appear after patch 1.4 or if it will be just a contents addition no matter what bugs are still there after 1.4 :hmm: If it's the first case, I hope that stock SH4 users get a 1.5 patch that puts them in terms of game stability on par with the expansion users :ping:
Here's a quote from another interview- The minimal requirements have remained unchanged, because we have optimized the engine quite a little bit from release. Loading times are much shorter and memory usage is lower.
(emphasis added by me)
This is very cool.
Also
No doubt it will open the game up to a lot more than has ever been seen or used in any of the SH releases over the years.
I am impressed with the new work and idea's big time! This is exactly what we need . We can mod it to be historical or leave it as is and it will be so fun to play . There is just something missing in SH4 . This will add that missing piece . Its the perfect idea .
I think Leo and Sober have it right. Too many sims have struggled from focusing only on historical accuracy. The idea of opening it up so people can be historical fanatics or just have fun is a GOOD idea. Strategic elements will attract wargamers and other's that like games like command & conquer. This means more money for more addons (like a british sub release including the med and pacific)
I'll go even farther and utter an "ultimate heresy". There should be a "Hollywood" option that gives you a super boat with deadlier torpedos and guns, more damage points, lots of target opportunity, strategic command of fleets, and automatic patrol routes with waypoints like a flight sim that takes you from one action to another. Definitely NOT something a hard core gamer would like, but something my son's in their 20's would find lots of fun. Especially if they could become "Fleet Admiral high and mighty" while still commanding their sub.
Again this would be an OPTION that would increase marketability, still allow historical accuracy by not selecting it, and once again, bring in more money.
Flight sims caught on to this a long time ago. It's why they have arcade like play when all the realism options are turned off. Naval sims need to catch up (to the devs- hint hint)
mrbeast
11-18-07, 04:39 PM
I might be being a bit pessimistic but this sounds like the thin end of a wedge to me.
They start by adding in things like strategic options and before you know it the only things available are 'accessable' arcade 'simulations' like Battle Stations Midway or Pacific Storm bye bye credible historic simulations.
IMO the simulation is largely a dying genre I can remember about 10yrs ago when there was a new sim out every month. I'm not being nostalgic, many of those simulations were only so so but its an example how far the genre has fallen. Few devs and publishers bother.
I think its a mistake to think that you need to 'water down' (no pun intended there :D ) simulations in order to attract more people to playing them. This does not mean that simulations have to be a mystery to all but the realism fanatics, scaleable opitions are a very desirable thing, turning them down is one of the best ways to learn how to play a game. The problem is I think its very tempting for publishers to just stick with the arcade options bcause its cheaper and they can market big explosions and huge guns to teenage boys more easily. By attempting to be all things to all people my fear is they will please none very much.
Kapitan_Phillips
11-18-07, 04:53 PM
I can see what mrbeast is saying. Sometimes the best simulation games include the tediousness of what it was really like. I can understand why these new features were included, but I was kind of hoping they'd also include some things to improve immersion even further.
tomoose
11-18-07, 07:27 PM
As some wise person once said; "finish what you started before moving on to something else". That's my point. That and Mrbeasts post.
Regardless the ethical dimension of leaving things to the modders, think about it: who has done a better job at making SH3 and SH4 some of the best games out there? Ubi or the modders? Adding to the engine the bones of what modders will help flesh out will get us the best of both worlds, imho. I look forward to seeing this.
As for "the door towards commanding surface vessels"... if a Destroyer Command is released with the SH4 engine I will buy it four or five times and never come out of my house again.
maerean_m
11-19-07, 12:21 AM
What I would like to know is if the expansion will also be some kind of 1.5 patch, i.e. if it will solve bugs or correct problems that still appear after patch 1.4 or if it will be just a contents addition no matter what bugs are still there after 1.4 :hmm: If it's the first case, I hope that stock SH4 users get a 1.5 patch that puts them in terms of game stability on par with the expansion users
The add-on is the 1.5 patch and includes the 1.4 patch.
THE_MASK
11-19-07, 12:29 AM
thankyou thankyou thankyou
leovampire
11-19-07, 12:31 AM
What I would like to know is if the expansion will also be some kind of 1.5 patch, i.e. if it will solve bugs or correct problems that still appear after patch 1.4 or if it will be just a contents addition no matter what bugs are still there after 1.4 :hmm: If it's the first case, I hope that stock SH4 users get a 1.5 patch that puts them in terms of game stability on par with the expansion users
The add-on is the 1.5 patch and includes the 1.4 patch.
You guy's are the best!
Want a new worker to help you out?! :rotfl:
Honestly I think you would be better off with Anvart he has better programs and experience with doing everything. I wish I had the talent's you all have and the knowledge.
IMO the simulation is largely a dying genre I can remember about 10yrs ago when there was a new sim out every month. I'm not being nostalgic, many of those simulations were only so so but its an example how far the genre has fallen. Few devs and publishers bother.
It's very simple why this has happened- economics.
Hard core sims do not give a good return on the time it takes to develop them. The target market is small and has decreased. Tis why I uttered the "ultimate heresy".
Ya wanna have more sims - devs you need more money- so you have to broaden your market appeal- so you have to put in some arcade type play to broaden the appeal
Hard core simmers hollering to keep arcade type play out of the sims and publicly looking down their noses at those that just want to blow s**t up are killing their own genre. (Same thing is happening in model railroading because of the "rivet counters"). Ya gotta be like the old proverb that a willow tree bends with the wind in order to stay standing. As long as the user can choose between historically accurate or "fun" and it brings in money to keep the sims alive, why bemoan the approach.
Such a change is needed because many younger users think of games like Call of Duty and Medal of Honor as sims. So when they encounter a true sim where they can't go on a rampage, they lose interest. Yet through playing a simple version after a while, it leads some of them to want to play the game with historical settings. Now you're building the user base instead of losing it.
tomoose
11-19-07, 07:37 AM
Nicely put. It does eventually boil down to $$$. I agree, games have to appeal to the mass market and unfortunately that mass market is the juvenile lads who love to "shoot 'em up" aka the console crowd. It's got to be difficult to please both the true simmers and the pure gamers and let's face it the true simmers will never be completely happy as the purists will always find something to be picky about! ;)
I love the concept of giving orders to other units it would be a nice change from lining up for the shot, dive and evade. As far as historical goes, I rarely think about that as much as just damn good game play, but at the same time understand how some players love that aspect of the game.
Sitting back and watching your commands being implemented in attacks would be a cool as heck, then joining in the hunt. :up:
Arrrhhh, matey's, we've sailed to the lands end of historical, and be entering the waters of fanciful fairytales .. Type 21's in the indian ocean, and logistical support that wasn't really there for everyone, pass em around me hardies! I can't wait to be spinning yarns about a type 21's sailing from penang, sinking hundreds upon thousands of tons with angels on their wings!
On the otherhand, i'll bet it makes em some money! Mo'money for them means more sub sims for us later! :up:
saying that ive sunk 500k tons of japanese shipping in a gato over 2 years, i doubt somehow historical accuracy even factors for the stock sh4 game either.. :rotfl:
100% realism.
Rockin Robbins
11-19-07, 11:57 AM
<munches popcorn and sips his Coke> This is fun! I'll just watch the ensuing carnage. <munch, munch, munch>:-j
DeepIron
11-19-07, 12:01 PM
The modding possibilities are interesting... I'm sure the SH4 modding community will find some way to tweak, bend or pervert the new game capabilities into something the 'hardcore' SH4 player will enjoy...
I wonder if this might lead to controlling the movements and tactics of PTO wolfpacks? That would be cool as it was historically correct...
Col_Klink
11-19-07, 12:15 PM
Here is my take. From a moron who is still listed as Nub with all of 11 or 12 total posts since 2001. I do not know how much I really like an addon (for sale)advertised before the original sim works 100%. It kinda, sorta, rubs me the wrong way. Don't get me wrong, I'll be one the first to buy it as I've looked forward to every version. I kind of compare it to buying a new car and having a crapload of repair issues even though they are all covered under warranty. Maybe I get a little PO'd since I've shelved SH4 until they come out with the next patch and revisited SH3 and GWX, been having a blast too. Just my own personal opinion. But I'm weird.
Wilhelm
kylesplanet
11-19-07, 02:32 PM
Well I'm not really interested in the Atlantic at all and don't like SH3 so I guess I'm somewhat disappointed that the add-on is not for the PTO but if it will lead to the SH4 modders being able to enhance the PTO gameplay, then I will probably support it and buy it.
Wolfgang Guber
11-19-07, 04:43 PM
Well the Dev's have done the images all wrong, on some of the maps the captials are all wrong with Names and the right settings of where the islands and shipping line where.
Five Australian Cents to the one that and see the issue with the Captials.
http://www.members.optusnet.com.au/gober17/943866_20071116_screen0031.jpg
Well the Dev's have done the images all wrong, on some of the maps the captials are all wrong with Names and the right settings of where the islands and shipping line where.
Five Australian Cents to the one that and see the issue with the Captials.
Ho Chi Minh City for one...unless we're modeling the Gulf of Tonkin Incident. :D
As some wise person once said; "finish what you started before moving on to something else". That's my point. That and Mrbeasts post.
And patch 1.4 is still coming. The world will not come to an end.
Torplexed
11-19-07, 08:49 PM
Well the Dev's have done the images all wrong, on some of the maps the captials are all wrong with Names and the right settings of where the islands and shipping line where.
Five Australian Cents to the one that and see the issue with the Captials.
That's a painfully modern map. Sri Lanka was Ceylon in 1941. Thailand was better know as Siam. Geez. :down:
gimpy117
11-19-07, 10:36 PM
sombody, put the models in sh3...NOW!! imigine modeled vent holes instead of drawn ones!!!
sombody, put the models in sh3...NOW!! imigine modeled vent holes instead of drawn ones!!!
Imagine all the other graphics put into SH3 as well, it would be like playing SH4!!!
:yep:
DeepIron
11-19-07, 10:47 PM
"Japanese Navy and Air Force will provide assistance on call"? :rotfl:
It's funny how people complained about a lack of wolfpacks before and complain about the presence of a device that could potentially lead to VERY functional AI wolfpacks now :hmm:
Personally I've already decided from when it was first announced that I'll get this one! SHIV has been quite good to me so far and I will support this addon provided it works as advertised.
Seriously, this "I already paid 50 bucks and blahblahblah" thing has gotta stop! While I respect Ducimius doing that (he put in more than 50 bucks into this baby, if you know what I mean), for others - oh for shame, you certainly got more out of this game if you're still playing it months after release than the value of $50! If this add-on is add-on priced, it'd be more than worth the value.
Anyway, customer choice there though...
Ducimus
11-19-07, 11:03 PM
If i hadn't have already purchsed SH4 twice, (not to mention alot of midnight oil) . I would probably consider buying this add on- if only to dismantel it and find useful things in it to put into the pacific game. But as i am now, all im concerned with is finishing up TMaru.
Wolfgang Guber
11-20-07, 02:10 AM
Well the Dev's have done the images all wrong, on some of the maps the captials are all wrong with Names and the right settings of where the islands and shipping line where.
Five Australian Cents to the one that and see the issue with the Captials.
That's a painfully modern map. Sri Lanka was Ceylon in 1941. Thailand was better know as Siam. Geez. :down:
LukeFF (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/member.php?u=215531) and Torplexed are right on those two...
like whos designing the maps 3rd grade ... sorry to all the 3rd grade gamers.
Torplexed
11-20-07, 02:48 AM
Well the Dev's have done the images all wrong, on some of the maps the captials are all wrong with Names and the right settings of where the islands and shipping line where.
Five Australian Cents to the one that and see the issue with the Captials.
That's a painfully modern map. Sri Lanka was Ceylon in 1941. Thailand was better know as Siam. Geez. :down:
LukeFF (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/member.php?u=215531) and Torplexed are right on those two...
like whos designing the maps 3rd grade ... sorry to all the 3rd grade gamers.
After looking at it again I'm kinda wondering at this point if that map isn't just a temporary stand-in for a more contemporary map later. After all how many maps from the 1940s showed the topography of the sea bed with mid-oceanic ridges and trenches and such? ;)
By expansion, I take it to mean we will need the original SH4?
Not a stand alone expansion like COH OF or Dark Crusade?
I really hope it's not a stand-alone! I would have serious reservations buying that, unless it happened to come with a fully-updated Atlantic campaign as well :hmm:
But it does say "Expansion" so far...
As for the map - eh, errors happen! Mind you, I'm sure Ubi licenses some kind of earth-mapping software for its games and it's probably based on current-day satellite imagery. I've previously noticed some features on the coastlines which coincide with various artificial development that didn't exist in the 1940s (there's a bunch that could be easily seen in Tokyo Bay for example).
And eh, typos and other small snafus in development are always possible. The same team brought us "Torpedo Momber" as a (unused) plane class in SHIII, and an unavoidable crash on pressing the "A" key in SHIV v1.1. All were fixed :)
DeepSix
11-20-07, 03:51 AM
...like whos designing the maps 3rd grade ... sorry to all the 3rd grade gamers.
You know, on that note, I'm looking at the screenshots and I keep thinking, "what exactly is the market for this thing?" Not the 'hardcore simmers' obviously. But everything nowadays has a target market - danged if I can figure out what the target for this is. Looks like an idea hatched by corporate HQ and sent down to programmers for "packaging."
I still think that a release like this is good, in the long run, for encouraging mods and continued interest, but out of the box it's looking like.... I dunno, Beyond Wolfenstein. It's certainly about as historical.
THE_MASK
11-20-07, 06:45 AM
By expansion, I take it to mean we will need the original SH4?
Not a stand alone expansion like COH OF or Dark Crusade?
A dev has already said it is basically patch 1.5
AngusJS
11-20-07, 07:12 AM
Would "deathmatches" be feasible between the American and German subs? The XXI had active sonar and acoustic homing torpedoes, right? Did any US subs have comparable capabilities?
I know it's silly and ahistorical, but still.
Zoomer96
11-20-07, 08:04 AM
Correct me if I'm wrong. The U-Boat Add On is the 1.4 Patch?
Correct me if I'm wrong. The U-Boat Add On is the 1.4 Patch?
Sorry if it has been stated otherwise somewhere, but I'd think there will be the expansion and a patch separately for those who dont buy the expansion. Then again, it's Ubisoft, anything can happen. :p J/k! Dont shoot me! :up:
Correct me if I'm wrong. The U-Boat Add On is the 1.4 Patch?
No the 1.4 patch is a seperate download. The U-boat add on, as stated earlier in this thread, will upgrade your install to version 1.5
DeepIron
11-20-07, 02:54 PM
No the 1.4 patch is a seperate download. The U-boat add on, as stated earlier in this thread, will upgrade your install to version 1.5 Which is totally ludicrious IMO... A patch is a patch... It makes sense for 1.4 to be released separately, this is how it's normally done...
If Ubi are going to make further changes to the game core code, call it patch 1.5 and require it to be purchased as part of some "fantasy add-on"... that's silly, lousy marketing or just an unfortunate naming convention...
John Channing
11-20-07, 03:39 PM
This was an unofficial comment on an unofficial website made in an unofficial manner in response to an unofficial question.
Good Lord... it is amazing to me that the Developers post at all!
JCC
DeepIron
11-20-07, 04:20 PM
No worries John, it's an "unofficial opinion"... ;)
Hopefully, the devs would look at some of the opinions/critisisms expressed in these and other forums and consider their validity... After all, it's a niche market at best and this kind of candid dialogue is the stuff "marketers dreams are made of"... Marketing depts pay good money for this kind of info/cr*p/opinion/drek... lol....:up:
John Channing
11-20-07, 06:06 PM
No worries John, it's an "unofficial opinion"... ;)
Hopefully, the devs would look at some of the opinions/critisisms expressed in these and other forums and consider their validity... After all, it's a niche market at best and this kind of candid dialogue is the stuff "marketers dreams are made of"... Marketing depts pay good money for this kind of info/cr*p/opinion/drek... lol....:up:
They always have in the past. I see no reason for it to change.
JCC
AVGWarhawk
11-20-07, 07:23 PM
A patch is exactly that, a patch. It fixes a game that was purchased. Patches are free because they are repair a broken game. Sometimes you get some bonus material.
Add-on is a totally different ball of wax. Sometimes free as seen with IL2 and sometimes out there for purchase, also seen with IL2.
A patch is exactly that, a patch. It fixes a game that was purchased. Patches are free because they are repair a broken game. Sometimes you get some bonus material.
Add-on is a totally different ball of wax. Sometimes free as seen with IL2 and sometimes out there for purchase, also seen with IL2.
Indeed, the content difference is pretty big. Otherwise you're confusing "version number" and "patch" here. It's the same way IL-2 went through many version numbers, even though technically many of these versions had actually been commercial add-ons and you could only get have that version or above if you had the said add-on in your install. It's just a convenient way to label things, that's all.
This by the way also confirms that the add-on is definitely an add-on and not a stand-alone, which should be a relief actually. Means that it's probably gonna be priced accordingly.
Ducimus
11-20-07, 07:38 PM
Would "deathmatches" be feasible between the American and German subs? The XXI had active sonar and acoustic homing torpedoes, right? Did any US subs have comparable capabilities?
I know it's silly and ahistorical, but still.
Unlike Hunt for red october or U-571, the only way a sub vs sub action could occur, is if one caught the other on the surface, unawares. Submerged action would be impossible. Where are you going to get your torpedo solution from? Certainly not active sonar. Both did have homing torpedo's, at least i know the allies did in the from of the "cutie" air dropped torpedo. Quite nasty, shame they didnt model that in Sh3.
There were a few recorded instances of sub vs sub action - submerged. One case was towards the end of the war when a Brit detected, fired on and sank a submerged U-Boat. This was obviously very rare but in fact did happen. How they did it was to plot bearings over a course of time and developed a solution much like today's TMA techniques. Using a spread of six fiish solved for inaccuracies in the solution. What was hard though was guessing the depth, which the Brits did manage to do.
There were a few recorded instances of sub vs sub action - submerged. One case was towards the end of the war when a Brit detected, fired on and sank a submerged U-Boat. This was obviously very rare but in fact did happen. How they did it was to plot bearings over a course of time and developed a solution much like today's TMA techniques. Using a spread of six fiish solved for inaccuracies in the solution. What was hard though was guessing the depth, which the Brits did manage to do.
Actually this particular case was also visual - as I recall, the Germans' "terrible periscope drill" was quoted. The sub was at periscope depth when it was struck, which would not have been very difficult to do. I suppose the brits had enough to go by from the periscope sightings and the sound bearings. I think the attack also took place in a fairly confined area just off Bergen, and the Brits knew the sub was coming after being aleterted by intelligence. So it was certainly more of a pre-planned ambush on an unsuspecting U-boat than a sub to sub battle as such.
THE_MASK
11-20-07, 09:37 PM
If you can call in search planes then i would hope that i can also call in a resupply tender .
If you can call in search planes then i would hope that i can also call in a resupply tender .
Maybe you can call in resupply planes - they drop crates and oil barrels on you. And then you have to pick them up the same way you pick up downed pilots in SHIV :rotfl:
Here is the link courtesy of the Ubaot.net. Yes it is an the isolated incident but in fact did occur. I saw it also on the History Channel I think.
http://uboat.net/boats/u864.htm
U-864
Type
IXD2 (http://uboat.net/types/ixd.htm)
Laid down15 Oct, 1942AG Weser, Bremen (http://uboat.net/technical/shipyards/ag-weser.htm)Commissioned9 Dec, 1943Korvkpt. Ralf-Reimar WolframCommanders9 Dec, 1943 - 9 Feb, 1945 KrvKpt. Ralf-Reimar WolframCareer1 patrol9 Dec, 1943 - 31 Oct, 1944 4. Flottille (http://uboat.net/flotillas/4flo.htm) (training)
1 Nov, 1944 - 9 Feb, 1945 33. Flottille (http://uboat.net/flotillas/33flo.htm) (front boat)
SuccessesNo ships sunk or damagedFateSunk 9 Feb, 1945 in the North Sea west of Bergen, Norway, in position 60.46N, 04.35E, by torpedoes from the British submarine HMS Venturer (http://uboat.net/allies/warships/ship/3585.html). 73 dead (all hands lost).
On 9 Feb, 1945 the British submarine HMS Venturer, commanded by James S. Launders, torpedoed and sank this boat. This is the only known incident in all of naval warfare in which one submarine sinks another while both are submerged.
Schnorchel-fitted U-boat
This boat was fitted with a Schnorchel underwater-breathing apparatus in October 1944. Read more about the Schnorchel (http://uboat.net/technical/schorchel.htm) and see list of fitted boats (http://uboat.net/technical/schorchel_fitted.htm).
Annoucements related to this boat
U-864 not fully located yet? (http://uboat.net/announce.html?story=56) (3 Mar, 2007)
U-864 in the news again (http://uboat.net/announce.html?story=55) (21 Dec, 2006)
U-864 off Norway - wreck photos! (http://uboat.net/announce.html?story=52) (6 Oct, 2005)
U-864 possibly raised off Norway (http://uboat.net/announce.html?story=50) (9 Jun, 2005)
U-864 recovery plans due on May 20th (http://uboat.net/announce.html?story=47) (5 Mar, 2005)
U-864 discovered by Norwegian vessel KNM Tyr (http://uboat.net/announce.html?story=42) (21 Oct, 2003)
Yes, that's the one I meant - I just forgot the number :)
Mind you, so far as I can recall, my description of the accident is otherwise accurate. It's really more a case of a prepared ambush than a sub vs. sub battle as such - I think what most people want would be not so much ambushing but fighting each other, dodging torpedoes etc, which was hardly possible.
Besides the fact that the U-864 was at periscope depth, the attack otherwise fits the pattern of the very effective ASW operations that the British (uniquely among WWII nations, I think) conducted with their submarines. The British accounted for most of the submarine on submarine kills that have been made to date - but again, this is a matter of ambush attacks, not "knife fights" :yep:
mrbeast
11-21-07, 03:27 AM
If you can call in search planes then i would hope that i can also call in a resupply tender .
Maybe you can call in resupply planes - they drop crates and oil barrels on you. And then you have to pick them up the same way you pick up downed pilots in SHIV :rotfl:
Maybe they could leave power ups floating on the sea so all you have to do is sail over them and.....POW!....more fuel....BAM.....double strength torpedos etc etc kinda Super Mario stylee! :rotfl: :roll:
Julhelm
11-22-07, 05:50 PM
Perhaps some of the historical accuracy freaks should think back to sometime in the mid 80's when we all started out with Silent Service and think about how advanced and realistic it really was?
To me, this addon sounds like a lot of fun given the what-if possibilities.
the_belgian
11-23-07, 12:02 PM
Cool! So what new ships (other than submarines) can be identified from those pics?
GS: Does the expansion add any new units to the strategic game?
DD: Units available to command include the recon plane (from land bases), the German auxiliary cruiser, the German heavy cruiser, the Japanese carrier group (call recon plane), the Japanese cruiser group, and Japanese taskforce units.
from http://www.gamespot.com/pc/sim/silenthunterwolvesofthepacificuboatmissions/news.html?sid=6183021
btw i cant wait to leave port like this in sh4...
http://img229.imageshack.us/img229/7352/92697220071031screen007tu5.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
Blah, blah, blah...
I can control IJN cruisers.
I can control IJN carriers.
I can control IJN auxiliaries...
Dammit! Where is my IJN I-Class submarine with Long Lance torpedoes and Sieren floatplanes?!
John Channing
11-25-07, 08:02 AM
I don't believe that the Longlance was a submarine weapon.
JCC
I don't believe that the Longlance was a submarine weapon.
JCC
From:Imperial Japanese Navy: Combined Fleet website.
(An outstanding website BTW...)
http://www.combinedfleet.com/ss.htm
Japanese submarines employed the best torpedoes available during the Second World War. The Type 95 torpedo used pure oxygen to burn kerosene, instead of the compressed air and alcohol used in other nation's torpedoes. This gave them about three times the range of their Allied counterparts, and also reduced their wake, making them harder to notice and avoid. The Type 95 also had by far the largest warhead of any submarine torpedo, initially 893 pounds (405 kg), increased to 1210 pounds (550 kg) late in the war. All Japanese torpedoes made during the war used Japanese Type 97 explosive, a mixture of 60% TNT and 40% hexanitrodiphenylamine. Most importantly, the Type 95 used a simple contact exploder, and was therefore far more reliable than its American counterpart, the Mark 14, until the latter was improved in late-1943. Japan also developed and used an electric torpedo, the Type 92. This weapon had modest performance compared to the Type 95, but emitted no exhaust and, therefore, left no wake to reveal its presence. Similar electric torpedoes were used by several nations.
http://www.combinedfleet.com/images/aichi_m6.gif
http://www.combinedfleet.com/images/sen_toku.gif
rodan54
11-25-07, 10:36 PM
It wasn't the true type 93 "Long Lance" though, which was only employed by Japan's surface navy. Thats not to say that the type 95 wasn't an impressive weapon, however it still lacked the explosive force and incredible range of its big brother.
Because it was a 24 inch torp vice a 21 inch torp. The IJN came up with a Submarine version of it to fit the smaller diameter tubes. The only Submarines that I am aware of the field larger than the traditional size torpedo tubes are some Russian SSN/SSGN's, USA Seawolf and that is it (I think).
quitefrankly
11-26-07, 01:29 AM
I am very underwealmed. By the looks of it, a lot of people have already said the things I wanted to say though, which I am glad about.
I appreciate someone taking the time to link the article for people here. And I am looking forward to this expansion. But I am not impressed so far, and I am very disappointed with the way it is all handled. First off, they get an (exclusive?) Q and A with one of the biggest gaming websites in the world, Gamespot, and yet there are only about half a dozen questions posed... most of which are exactly the same, just worded differently?
The entire thing makes it sound like this is an expansion that will add just a german u-boat campaign, and a bunch of tactical aids. If the expansion is extremely cheap, then it is maybe worthwhile, but to me it sounds bad, and that kind of thing should have just been added by a modder or a patch - not a full blown expansion that you expect people to pay for.
I am not particularly interested in playing as a Nazi either. They wanted to kill me and everyone else.. so I don't particularly want to roleplay one of them. But more importantly, I bet the campaign won't even be any good anyway. That is the main concern I have. The campaign in the main game is not good, which I have tried to explain in another thread. So if this is just a Nazi equivalent of those same few missions that got repeated over and over... I will be very disappointed. "Transport this spy". "Take a photograph of this harbor". "Disrupt Shipping". Bleh..
The tactical aids sound fun to me, and I really like that idea. But that should be one small part of the expansion, and I suspect that instead, it will actually be one of the main key features in the game, and that is just not enough, and this Q + A makes it sound like that is the case. I was also disappointed at him saying about the enterprising modders will add it to the allied campaign. That is cheap and lazy. They should do that themselves, and infact, they should be making a whole new allied campaign to make up for the poor original one. The fact is, in a good flight sim, you can play lots of player made campaigns. Some of which are as good as the original or better.. So in this game, they are expecting me to pay for another campaign? And not only that, it is just ONE new campaign? And not only that, its german only? And the only other significant feature, is this tactical aid idea?
As much as I like the idea, it is just not enough.
When you think small, you will be small. This game is never going to reach a wider audience than the few armchair submarine fanatics who play it currently, unless it is turned into a proper simulation/game. LOMAC struggled with unit sales compared to FPS's and RPG's etc... and yet LOMAC offers a lot more than this game. I want more.
elanaiba
11-26-07, 04:53 AM
Trying to judge this as "objective" as I can, I'd say that if you think that one campaign (keep in mind what one campaign means in "Silent Hunter") is not enough for the amount of money requested (any idea what the price is yet? I think not), then you shouldn't buy it.
I am not particularly interested in playing as a Nazi either. They wanted to kill me and everyone else.. so I don't particularly want to roleplay one of them.Then don't...I, and a good many others, have no problem with it.
But more importantly, I bet the campaign won't even be any good anyway. That is the main concern I have. The campaign in the main game is not good, which I have tried to explain in another thread. So if this is just a Nazi equivalent of those same few missions that got repeated over and over... I will be very disappointed. "Transport this spy". "Take a photograph of this harbor". "Disrupt Shipping". Bleh..You do understand what happened in WWII, don't you?
They should do that themselves, and infact, they should be making a whole new allied campaign to make up for the poor original one. The fact is, in a good flight sim, you can play lots of player made campaigns. Some of which are as good as the original or better.. So in this game, they are expecting me to pay for another campaign? And not only that, it is just ONE new campaign?The 'poor original one' campaign is the whole of WWII! What do you want the developers to do?
quitefrankly
11-26-07, 09:34 AM
Trying to judge this as "objective" as I can, I'd say that if you think that one campaign is not enough for the amount of money requested then you shouldn't buy it.Genius. Thank you for that excellent advice. :huh:
Then don't...Another ****ing fanboy. "Go away! Stop saying mean things about my precious game wahh!!!!". Look, if everyone goes away, there will only be a few dozen of you jackasses who will buy this expansion. And you know what that means? Of course you don't... It means there won't be any more, because they will barely break even. If you weren't such idiots, it would convince the devolopers to actually get off their laurels and do more. The more they do, the more they sell, and the more money they make, and the more financial clout they have when making Silent Hunter 5.
But no... keep telling them everything is perfect, and keep telling everyone who wants more to go away, and we'll see how far you get. Probably another V:SOH.
You do understand what happened in WWII, don't you?
Uhhhh no.. I haev no edeucashun! U r so clevor comaired 2 me!!! For someone who considers themselves so superior, you are pretty ****ing thick to not see the point I was making.
The 'poor original one' campaign is the whole of WWII! What do you want the developers to do?You want my to hear my ideas? Are you actually asking me to explain how the original campaign could have been better? Here is how..... **** you. You could have a forum with an actual suggestions section where people post endless ideas. I have seen other games do that. But they are succesful games, and games with friendly, welcoming, mature communities. This is not like that. Its a bunch of fanboy retards, and the saddest thing of all, is that I suspect most of you are old. Just keep on kissing that ass.
Digital_Trucker
11-26-07, 09:41 AM
:roll: :nope: :roll: :nope: :roll: :nope:
basti107
11-26-07, 10:01 AM
canīt believe this is in-game http://image.com.com/gamespot/images/2007/303/926972_20071031_screen002.jpg
quitefrankly
11-26-07, 10:05 AM
Maybe it's falsified like most of this game's screenshots.
elanaiba
11-26-07, 10:06 AM
Thats not in game thats a render. Falsified is a very bad word, its just a marketing "mood" picture.
ReallyDedPoet
11-26-07, 10:27 AM
Nice attitude quitefrankly, real classy :yep::nope: Do us a favor and go for a walk or something, come back here when you want to be a little more constructive.
RDP
quitefrankly
11-26-07, 10:33 AM
Thats not in game thats a render. Falsified is a very bad word, its just a marketing "mood" picture.True. I do think they need to be careful though, because they do that a lot with this game, and I've seen a lot of people confuse them with real screenshots.
Nice attitude quitefrankly, real classy :yep::nope: Do us a favor and go for a walk or something, come back here when you want to be a little more constructive.
RDPPiss off. I've been constructive. I made my own thread for that and gave lots of constructive suggestions. It didn't make any difference to you people.
ReallyDedPoet
11-26-07, 10:35 AM
Nice attitude quitefrankly, real classy :yep::nope: Do us a favor and go for a walk or something, come back here when you want to be a little more constructive.
RDPPiss off. I've been constructive. I made my own thread for that and gave lots of constructive suggestions. It didn't make any difference to you people.
Take my advice and go for that walk :yep:
RDP
AVGWarhawk
11-26-07, 10:37 AM
Trying to judge this as "objective" as I can, I'd say that if you think that one campaign is not enough for the amount of money requested then you shouldn't buy it.Genius. Thank you for that excellent advice. :huh:
Then don't...Another ****ing fanboy. "Go away! Stop saying mean things about my precious game wahh!!!!". Look, if everyone goes away, there will only be a few dozen of you jackasses who will buy this expansion. And you know what that means? Of course you don't... It means there won't be any more, because they will barely break even. If you weren't such idiots, it would convince the devolopers to actually get off their laurels and do more. The more they do, the more they sell, and the more money they make, and the more financial clout they have when making Silent Hunter 5.
But no... keep telling them everything is perfect, and keep telling everyone who wants more to go away, and we'll see how far you get. Probably another V:SOH.
You do understand what happened in WWII, don't you?
Uhhhh no.. I haev no edeucashun! U r so clevor comaired 2 me!!! For someone who considers themselves so superior, you are pretty ****ing thick to not see the point I was making.
The 'poor original one' campaign is the whole of WWII! What do you want the developers to do?You want my to hear my ideas? Are you actually asking me to explain how the original campaign could have been better? Here is how..... **** you. You could have a forum with an actual suggestions section where people post endless ideas. I have seen other games do that. But they are succesful games, and games with friendly, welcoming, mature communities. This is not like that. Its a bunch of fanboy retards, and the saddest thing of all, is that I suspect most of you are old. Just keep on kissing that ass.
Thanks for showing up Quitefrankly but quite frankly posts of this nature need not be here.
Thread locked so the flame war keyboard beating does not commence.
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.