Next SH.....as WE want it.

[kv29]

I really hope UBISOFT will listen, and listen carefully about many thing we expect to see in the next installment, things that are important to us, the people who will continue to support this series....

care to take a little time and dream with me?... dream on then...

- ALL SIDES & WAR THEATERS: german, american and japanese sides to play. All subs, all seas.

- REAL NAVIGATION: no more GPS maps that magically shows your sub position. we need real tools to calculate our position (sextant, another clock, and true stars).

- MORE ACCURATE PHYSIC: no more hitpoints please, we want to see a ship sink as it should be (pay attention to wernersobe work!). No more "flying" subs either please.

- REAL GUNS: yes, you know what Im talking about, no stabilized guns! (DG or AA) and full dg crew animations (gun loading & shells handling)

- BETTER ENVIROMENT: fully 3d rendered clouds, more stars, better storms, no jelly water :p

- NO BULLETPROOF CREW: yes, we want to see dead people!

- FULL SUBS: the ability to walk (yes, walk) between all compartments. and of course, we would like to get more of them.


... anything else? is up to you now. :up:

[The WosMan]

I can't help but think how awesome a game with graphics and an entire world mapped like Silent Hunter merged with Dangerous Waters or Sub Command. Start off in your LA/Seawold/VA class sub at a US naval base and steam under nuclear power on missions. I don't care if they have to create fictional situations........it would be fun if designed right. Throw us in the Persian Gulf to take on the Iranian diesel sub menace. Track and sink N. Korean ships carrying nuclear materials to Libya or Syria. Imagine having the little SH event window following 12 tomahawk cruise missiles headed for Hugo's palace. It would be fun.

[Rockin Robbins]

It's a good goal for the next generation of computers, or maybe 10 years down the road. It wouldn't be possible now, as we are stretching the capabilities of all but high-end systems. In order to produce a profit, and selling video games has to be conducted as a business with all the slimey compromises that implies, a game has to be runnable on a large number of available machines.

Ubi obviously had to dispense with some of the interactive goodies of SH3 to make SH4 playable on enough machines to give it a chance to be profitable. This will not always be true.

Compare SH4 to Silent Service II. That is how SH4 will compare to the next generation of subsims. However, to finance the next generation we have to be willing to pay for this one. And this one is pretty good. I'm having more fun than I should be allowed to have, thanks in part to the descendent of your real deck gun.:up:

[Ducimus]

I want to be able to control each engine seperatly. If i want to put all 4 on the line, let me do it. If i want to put 3 on the charge and 1 on the line, let me do it.

I want seperate propeller control. If i want ahead full on the port propeller, and all back full on the starbard propeller, let me do it.

I also want full throttle and rheostate control. If i want to push the engines or E Motors to 105%- 110% of their maxmum, let me do it.

I want full control on the dive planes. If i want as few as 5 degrees down on the planes, or 25 degrees down on the planes, let me distinguish which.

I want more control of my boyancy. I want to be able to control things like the saftey tank and negative tank. Not to mention just how fast the main ballast tank floods. Trim tanks would be nice too, but i woudlnt ask for THAT much.

[CDR Resser]

I want to be able to control each engine seperatly. If i want to put all 4 on the line, let me do it. If i want to put 3 on the charge and 1 on the line, let me do it.

I want seperate propeller control. If i want ahead full on the port propeller, and all back full on the starbard propeller, let me do it.

I also want full throttle and rheostate control. If i want to push the engines or E Motors to 105%- 110% of their maxmum, let me do it.

I want full control on the dive planes. If i want as few as 5 degrees down on the planes, or 25 degrees down on the planes, let me distinguish which.

I want more control of my boyancy. I want to be able to control things like the saftey tank and negative tank. Not to mention just how fast the main ballast tank floods. Trim tanks would be nice too, but i woudlnt ask for THAT much.

These are huge points. Reading everything that is available, these items are critical to controlling and maneuvering the submarine, both in and outside the harbor. Determining the number of engines on charge and propulsion is critical to determining the endurance of the submarine.
Independent propeller control affects the maneuverability of the ship.
Ballast control is critical. What is the default bouyancy state in the game. Is safety flooded as it ordinarily would. Is negative ever "blown to the mark". Are daily trim dives needed to correct compensation for stores used. Is there a stability penalty or decrease in diving performance for not doing trim dives.
Many times captains asked their engineers to push their diesels and motors beyond their specs to catch a ship.
All of these would add much to the immersion factor of the game.

Respectfully Submitted;
CDR Resser

[Penta]

Um...playability, guys. You lose a lot of people if SH becomes the Falcon 4 of sub sims, needing a 600pg manual.

[LobsterBoy]

I would like to see more features that force you, as the CO, to make decisions. I'd like to see weather affect decisions (seeing some of Kriller2's work on the new PE2 screenshots is amazing, especially the fog). The engine and shaft separation that Ducimus mentioned would give the CO many more options on how to run the boat. Imagine random failures in an engine and using three to balance your boat's needs. Do you go back to base? What about increased noise from your boat if you've taken damage? What about wounded crew that may only survive if you return to base in a timely manner?

For my money it's all about the decisions

[difool2]

Weather and the sky are my big things; the samey partly cloudy skies constantly remind me that I'm in a simulation. Planets, Milky Way, most of the brightest nebulas; at least 10 different cloud types, ranging from light high cirrus to a "mackerel" sky, puffy summer cumulus to massive thunderheads, occ. waterspouts, massive typhoon-driven waves. Yeah I can dream can't I? :know:

[peabody]

Um...playability, guys. You lose a lot of people if SH becomes the Falcon 4 of sub sims, needing a 600pg manual.

Don't mean to be rude, but do you have any idea how many people play Falcon4. There are online squadrons everywhere. There are 5 versions of the game. 4 modded and one commercail product. Falcon4:Allied Force. The game is only available because when the original Developers dropped support for it the community took over and kept improving the game. And that is how Lead Pursuit ended up with it, there were so many people playing it they made a deal and bought it and put out a new version.
So, making a Sim more 'real' does not scare the diehards away. But, I will admit that they would sell less copies if they didn't have the "easy" mode and different levels of difficulty like SH4 has. Manual targeting or not, dud torps or not, unlimited fuel or not. As long as you make it playable for the ones who don't want to learn how to run a "real" sub, it will sell.
And as long as you have people like the ones here that will help you out when you don't understand something. I can show you pages and pages of tutorials from when I was learning Falcon, now i'm a "Full Bird" Colonel with 3 Distinguished Flying Crosses and 8 Air Medals and 9 Campaign Medals and I started Falcon just like SH4, didn't know squat. And I can show you a lot of tutorials on SH4, right here at subsim!!
So, don't say they won't sell, like I commented as long as you leave in the "easy" choices then people can advance at there own pace. If they never get past the automatic targeting so what, they still are having fun and still have to get away from the damn DDs. Could you put "Stupid DDs" on the list of must haves?

But adding some of the things asked for would make a great game. I would give anything to have forward on one screw and back on the other, cause frankly this thing turns like a ....well, like a submarine. I can eat lunch before it goes 180 degrees.

Peabody

[Charlie901]

I bet the next SH game, if Published again by UBI, will be heavy on pretty graphics, even shorter on features, buggy as all hell, and completely unfinished, requiring at least a year's worth of patches to be even playable...

Anyone care to disagree!!!!

[maerean_m]

- ALL SIDES & WAR THEATERS: german, american and japanese sides to play. All subs, all seas.
* Can be done but it will take a lot of time and will cost a lot. I preffer doing one or two sides and allow for completely new sides to be added later.

- REAL NAVIGATION: no more GPS maps that magically shows your sub position. we need real tools to calculate our position (sextant, another clock, and true stars).
* Nice and not so hard to do
* "GPS maps" must exist for low realism settings.

- MORE ACCURATE PHYSIC: no more hitpoints please, we want to see a ship sink as it should be (pay attention to wernersobe work!). No more "flying" subs either please.
* Hit points and physics are not the same thing, but I see what you mean.

- REAL GUNS: yes, you know what Im talking about, no stabilized guns! (DG or AA) and full dg crew animations (gun loading & shells handling)
* stabilized views must exist for lower realism settings.
* why not?

- BETTER ENVIROMENT: fully 3d rendered clouds, more stars, better storms, no jelly water :p
* very computational intensive (the water), without adding something to the gameplay.

- NO BULLETPROOF CREW: yes, we want to see dead people!
* dead people were not implemented because of the age rating of the game

- FULL SUBS: the ability to walk (yes, walk) between all compartments. and of course, we would like to get more of them.
* nice to have and maybe there is gameplay in that too

[Blood_splat]

I'd also would like to see internal damage like flooding and broken equipment, fires with smoke all over.:D

I remember playing B17 II and having to order a crew member to put out a fire. Damn that game was ahead of its time.

[Rockin Robbins]

Everybody has great suggestions, but have patience. All these things will come with time. In the meantime, we should enjoy what we have, which is darned great!

I don't see any problems with all the details, so long as there is a heirarchy of options to let you phase in the use of real navigation, engine options, ballast tank management, fuel tank management, sonars individually accessable and useable (there were at least 3 on American subs), radar realism, radio coding and decoding, MoBo or something very like it should be incorporated into the game for realistic plotting.

But these need to be options that don't lock the casual player out of the game. If you don't have fun from the first startup of the game, it will sit on the shelf. Realism doesn't have to be at the expense of playability.

And finally, actual schools where you learn all this stuff in the game with an instructor in real life training situations.

Folks, you're looking a minimum of five years before anything like this is possible. You're looking at ten years before it gets installed on a single user computer. It will foster a whole new generation of complainers just as bad as this one.:doh:

[Dowly]

I remember playing B17 II and having to order a crew member to put out a fire. Damn that game was ahead of its time.

Great game! :up: Too bad about all the bugs and stability problems it had/has. But really gave you the 'I'm there' immersion. :yep:

[Navarre]

An AAA graphics engine (if the game is again marketed as a AAA game), that deserves the triple A.;)
meaning:
- Light sources behind non-transparent objects should not be this visible through these objects
- shadow rendering as in other AAA graphic engines
- no longer transparent sailors due to incorrect environment/shaders development

[Sonarman]

I and many others, judging by my recent Subsim poll (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=130782) ,its counterpart on the Ubi Forum (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/6421019045/m/3431062336/showpollresults/Y) & the huge populartity of the SHIII schnellboot mod, I suspect would actually prefer to have a surface command game next time in the style of "Destroyer Command" or the great old Microprose title "Task Force 1942".

If the devs/ Ubisoft ever think about going down that road they should check out this fantastic 9 page article (http://www.simhq.com/_naval/naval_005a.html) from simHQ, written by a former naval officer about the strengths and weaknesses of the original "Destroyer Command" game and his thoughts on what would a good sequel would contain.

[Alex]

- NO BULLETPROOF CREW: yes, we want to see dead people!
* dead people were not implemented because of the age rating of the game
That's good to know, Sir. :)
Certainly not all of us want to see dead people in game... SH is not Unreal Tournament. :roll:
Don't know about the others, but I take the SH serie to heart... And knowing that a member of the crew is agonizing onboard would be hard to handle.
I strongly refuse to see this in SH later. :huh:

[XLjedi]

- NO BULLETPROOF CREW: yes, we want to see dead people!
* dead people were not implemented because of the age rating of the game
That's good to know, Sir. :)
Certainly not all of us want to see dead people in game... SH is not Unreal Tournament. :roll:
Don't know about the others, but I take the SH serie to heart... And knowing that a member of the crew is agonizing onboard would be hard to handle.
I strongly refuse to see this in SH later. :huh:

Just need to include the disclaimer...

"No actual Sims were harmed during the filming of this gaming sequence. All Sim deaths are performed by highly trained stunt Sims. Do not attempt to recreate Silent Hunter action with your own Sims." http://www.xl-logic.com/emoticon/rambo.gif:dead:


I don't mind a guy or two droppin; or a few rag-doll explosions... I don't think anyone's calling for exploding heads.

[DavyJonesFootlocker]

I agree with most but you forgot some glaring stuff like wind direction in relation to smoke stacks and fluttering flags and airbase markers on nav maps. I'm not that hardcore I like to see my boat on the map.

[elanaiba]

the smoke blows in the wind direction ;)

[tomoose]

....they finish the existing game before moving on to another.

"unfinished" issues (that I'm aware of);
- "flying" submarines (relative to wave action), it took some modders to try and correct this.
- dive plane graphics screwing up
- incorrect collision noise for a rubber raft (uses the same collision noise as a ship)
- "Italian" parachutists from shot down planes
- clouds moving at incredible speeds (again, modders had to tweak this)
- vehicles at base moving at incredible speeds (noone seems to have mentioned this)
- crew remaining at station for a while after diving
- three settings at torpedo station but you can only use two
- inability to "write" on nav map (manual says you can)

Just a few things off the top of my head, not sure if 1.5 addresses these.
Don't get me wrong, I am a fan of the game but these little overlooked things really bug me.
Charlie109 is probably right anyway.
:smug:

[Penta]

If I might add some stuff? (Keep in mind, I'm mostly focused on immersion)

Losing your sub should not -necessarily- mean death. Allow us to abandon ship, potentially get rescued (or captured). Or, heck, if we're near neutral harbors, get interned.

Provisions. You can economize on fuel, on O2, on ammo...Provisions would definitively limit patrols.

...Get the copyrights sorted out. It shouldn't require a mod to have real medals/aircraft/whatever.

Wolf packs. Let us see wolf packs of subs. Yes, the Americans used them. Not as extensively as the Germans, but they used them.

[elanaiba]

- REAL NAVIGATION: no more GPS maps that magically shows your sub position. we need real tools to calculate our position (sextant, another clock, and true stars).

The biggest problem here is the need to create a real map, which in turn raises the question of what map projection system you'll use? Lots and lots of problems with physics, AI, etc if you need to redo that part of a game, and for little gains related to captain work. Not against it at all, just very difficult. Trust me.


- MORE ACCURATE PHYSIC: no more hitpoints please, we want to see a ship sink as it should be (pay attention to wernersobe work!). No more "flying" subs either please.


As I said before, and without putting down the excellent work by wernersobe, our system is not hitpoints only and his system is not without hitpoints. Hitpoints are just a means to approximate some part of the physics system, and he has chosen a different path than we have (though one I considered during SH3 development but was vetoed).

But its a path in the same system ;)

[TDK1044]

I really hope UBISOFT will listen, and listen carefully about many thing we expect to see in the next installment.


Next installment? We're a year after release, and there's no news on sales figures or if or when a new subsim will emerge....or indeed where or when it would be set.

No harm in dreaming though.

[AVGWarhawk]

Personally I would like to see SH4 grow from here. The addon was nice and for $10.00, I feel I got a lot of goodies. I have no issue laying out some cash for more addons and upgrades of all the things mentioned in the first post. SH4 has a good root system and has great potential to grow into a mighty oak.

[mookiemookie]

I'd like to be able to do some of the things I read about skippers like O'Kane and Fluckey doing. Getting right up into a convoy on batteries and mixing it up on the surface, escaping in the resulting confusion of torpedo explosions. A cloud of exhaust smoke masking my escape as I ring up all four diesels and hightail it on out of there. Destroyers that act like destroyers...none of this firing on me from 5000 yards away, or manning deck guns in typhoon weather.

The ability to set up standing orders like "sweep once with the SJ radar every 10 minutes".

Maybe better fuel consumption modelling? I'm not sure what it is, but it just doesn't feel right.

[M. Sarsfield]

I'd like to see them learn from their mistakes and not repeat them with each title. The problem is that when they decide to do SH5 in 2010 or whenever, you end up with a new dev team and the steep learning curve starts all over again. The modified SH3 and SH4 games are great foundations to improve upon. If they aren't wasting their time trying to refix old mistakes, more time can be put into the improved content mentioned above.

[TDK1044]

I think this part of a recent Ubisoft press release shows us the direction they are heading:

Paris, FRANCE – 20 March 2008 – Today, Ubisoft, one of the world’s largest video game publishers, announces that it has concluded an agreement with Mr. Tom Clancy to acquire all intellectual property rights to the Tom Clancy name, on a perpetual basis and free of all related future royalty payments, for use in video games and ancillary products including related books, movies and merchandising products.

[howler93]

Personally, I'd love to see more crew decisions and interaction, much like the SH3 Commander mod. I felt that really brought the immersion level up, and the variety kept things interesting and on your toes. Really felt like you were commanding a real boat, with actual other LIVING crew :up: Anyway...just my .02

Cheers,
Howler :arrgh!:

[elanaiba]

I think this part of a recent Ubisoft press release shows us the direction they are heading:

Paris, FRANCE – 20 March 2008 – Today, Ubisoft, one of the world’s largest video game publishers, announces that it has concluded an agreement with Mr. Tom Clancy to acquire all intellectual property rights to the Tom Clancy name, on a perpetual basis and free of all related future royalty payments, for use in video games and ancillary products including related books, movies and merchandising products.


I think you're jumping to conclusions.

[M. Sarsfield]

Paris, FRANCE – 20 March 2008 – Today, Ubisoft, one of the world’s largest video game publishers, announces that it has concluded an agreement with Mr. Tom Clancy to acquire all intellectual property rights to the Tom Clancy name, on a perpetual basis and free of all related future royalty payments, for use in video games and ancillary products including related books, movies and merchandising products.

Red Storm Rising or Hunt for Red October?

[CinC Battleforce]

I would love to see Ubi do another installment of the old SSN game based on Clancy's book SSN......

That was a great book and a great game.

[TDK1044]

I think this part of a recent Ubisoft press release shows us the direction they are heading:

Paris, FRANCE – 20 March 2008 – Today, Ubisoft, one of the world’s largest video game publishers, announces that it has concluded an agreement with Mr. Tom Clancy to acquire all intellectual property rights to the Tom Clancy name, on a perpetual basis and free of all related future royalty payments, for use in video games and ancillary products including related books, movies and merchandising products.


I think you're jumping to conclusions.


Fun though. :D

[Rockin Robbins]

Fact of life #1: there is one team of programmers who have successfully produced the best and most successful World War II sub franchise in history. This is the Romanian dev crew. Before we get crude "third world" criticism let me remind you that they dragged success out of a failed SH2 by American "elite first world" programmers. The Romanians are the best in the world and that makes them first world. There is no second place. They are by far the best.

Fact of life #2: They seem to have established a methodology of evolution, not revolution. There are plenty of good reasons for this. In order to build on lessons learned you have to retain the people who learned the lessons in the first place. Otherwise you have to begin at ground level all over again with the next "revolutionary" sub sim. I shouldn't have to go into the consequences of that bonehead move. Evolutionary development keeps our devs in work so they are able to make these improvements happen. Let's support add-ons as they come out, knowing that each one is a step toward a more all-encompassing sim.

Fact of life #3: There are player limitations that constrict the possibilities that can be realized. It may mean that if we want more photorealistic imaging with high enough frame rates on modest computers we give up crew interaction. That seems to have been one of the compromises going from SH3 to SH4. So in the short run it might be give up one thing to achieve another. Even that is worthwhile because once computer capabilities improve the devs know how to do the function they deleted and have proved it in action.

Players are limited in the amount of reality they can tolerate all in one dose. Read the Fleet Boat Operations Manual, NAVPERS 16160 (http://www.maritime.org/fleetsub/index.htm), to get a feel for all the possible realms of reality a subsim could get into. Could YOU tolerate all that in one dose? Reality options need to be individually selectable and customizable. The sonar, for instance was really three different sonars with three different control consoles full of adjustments, attenuators, filters, modes of operation, etc. To realistically simulate sonar operation alone would be a monumental task for programmers and players. Assuming the programming end is a given, players need many levels of reality to phase in new aspects of sonar operation as they are ready. Right now we have just a generic sonar, mostly the above deck sonar head modeled for our use.

That's it for the facts of life. You gotta be careful what you ask for. It might be something nobody wants!:rotfl:But if done carefully in an evolutionary way, we can slowly approach more and more accurate submarine simulation by the only dev team in the world with the demonstrated ability to get the job done.:up:

[TDK1044]

Great points, RR. I too hope that Ubisoft will continue to expand Silent Hunter 4 so that we end up with a superb game that offers both a full WWII Pacific experience and a full WWII Atlantic experience. I think how well the current Add On sells will determine the ongoing level of support for the game.

[longam]

The option of every station in 2D panels.

The radar and sonar 3D panels are nice, but for function I prefer a 2D panel. Even in flight sims the 3D panels are just eye candy to me.

[Seeadler]

The times for real hardcore sims or at least sim games which can be configured to hardcore level, are gone. None of the publishers today take the risk of such development, profits and shares are more important.
Therefore, I expect nothing of a SH successor.:|\\

[tater]

- NO BULLETPROOF CREW: yes, we want to see dead people!
* dead people were not implemented because of the age rating of the game

It's not seeing the hurt crew! It's having hurt deck crew BE POSSIBLE. Forget the "gore." I want the crew to simply die/get hurt and disappear. It is not possible right now.

Right now, you can park next to a ship covered with 20mm AA guns, and it can fire continuously at you until the sub sinks. Only right before sinking do ANY of the crew get injured. Test this. You only hear "Medic!" right before the sub sinks. (should be "doc!" BTW, no medics in the USN)

I tested this a great deal. Machine guns and AAA (including 40mm) have virtually ZERO EFFECT on the deck watch.

I tried modding it to be more effective, but then the deck crew died during DC attack.

The deck watch and deck/AA gunners should be EXTREMELY vulnerable to even machine guns. Fighting an armed sampan should be DANGEROUS. No, it won't sink the sub, but it could very easily kill crew members.

One 20mm hitting one of the deck watch should grievously injure him if not kill him outright.

This, combined with the gyro-stabilized guns on the sub makes surface actions totally unrealistic. You have zero fear of losing crew, because they are invulnerable until the compartment fails, and you can shoot and hit at flank speed in poor seas because the guns magically counter the roll and pitch of the boat.

tater

[tater]

I'd add that one factor tracked by the game is some sort of crew morale, partially based on crew losses, right?

It is VERY hard to have a patrol where you actually lose crew, but don't sink.

Fixing this would be critical, IMO. A skipper who routinely calls for surface actions without careful planning would have deck crew killed all the time.

Having vulnerable deck crew would also mean that strafing aircraft would actually pose the threat they did in RL. One fighter could slaughter the deck crew. This is totally impossible in SH.

[FIREWALL]

:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

[DavyJonesFootlocker]

Oh, yeah forgot about the wind direction. I stand corrected. But the fluttering flags still stands. I WANT MY MONEY BACK!:lol:

[Blood_splat]

I wish we could see the crews on the ship from further away with our scopes.:arrgh!:

[Sonarman]

The times for real hardcore sims or at least sim games which can be configured to hardcore level, are gone. None of the publishers today take the risk of such development, profits and shares are more important.
Therefore, I expect nothing of a SH successor.:|\\

How about "Steel Beasts Pro" & "Dangerous Waters" I agree that for large publishers your statement is probably true although Ubi has Silent Hunter & even Microsoft & EA have their respective rail sims. I think the future for sims lies with the smaller independent studios. Unfortunately as DW has proved it's difficult to survive with such a complex product and no-one can fault the marketing Sonalysts did, the numbers for the game were just not there.

I think you are a bit harsh with your "I expect nothing of a SH successor" statement as Dan and the team have already added a whole new layer of depth with the strategic options in U_boat missions.

I think also that it is good to have a slightly restrictive devteam who cherry pick ideas, whilst it sounds great to have a team that would add all of our ideas into the mix I have seen this happen in Ports of Call XXL and in my opinion it has hurt the game quite badly, whilst it's far from unplayable, the game has become bloated and unfocussed and is not as much fun as the original as a result.

Game fun/complexity is a tricky balance, remember the original crew management in SH3 if you need proof! The legendary Sid Meier when working on the early Microprose sims said "where fun and realism collide, fun wins"and his original games are still admired by many here today over 20 years since their release.

[DavyJonesFootlocker]

I'm not a hardcore sub simmer and don't see the need to do everything. What do you think you have a crew for, huh? For Weight and Balance Distribution only? Although it's a fun challenge to do manual targeting but not for me. if I want hardcore realism I'll join the Navy thank you very much. So, playabilty in any difficulty settings is a must.

[tater]

The depth of strategic options isn't terrible useful/realistic, however. Once AI subs were around, that functionality WOULD be useful to control boats in a wolfpack, however.

Another basic change that is needed is to change to the player as captain paradigm. At least for the attack party.

Player works the scope. If I select a target (we're talking manual targeting, here), the bearing gets plotted on the map for me, and a mark that it is "target 1." In fact, I should have to (to borrow the L key from SH4) mark each target explicitly. "l1, l2," and so forth. If I mix up 2 contacts in the next observation, my solution is FUBAR. Tough.

If I take a range, then that gets added to the plot. Minus this, nothing shows up on the map, it's like the 100% we have now.

My plotting officer generates a track on the map. It does NOT move in real time. Every X minutes he updates the plot with a straight line drawn on the map based on the projected data, NOT based on what the ship actually does.

tater

[Charlie901]

....they finish the existing game before moving on to another.

"unfinished" issues (that I'm aware of);
- "flying" submarines (relative to wave action), it took some modders to try and correct this.
- dive plane graphics screwing up
- incorrect collision noise for a rubber raft (uses the same collision noise as a ship)
- "Italian" parachutists from shot down planes
- clouds moving at incredible speeds (again, modders had to tweak this)
- vehicles at base moving at incredible speeds (noone seems to have mentioned this)
- crew remaining at station for a while after diving
- three settings at torpedo station but you can only use two
- inability to "write" on nav map (manual says you can)

Just a few things off the top of my head, not sure if 1.5 addresses these.
Don't get me wrong, I am a fan of the game but these little overlooked things really bug me.
Charlie109 is probably right anyway.
:smug:



AGREED!!! :up:

[Charlie901]

Personally I would like to see SH4 grow from here. The addon was nice and for $10.00, I feel I got a lot of goodies. I have no issue laying out some cash for more addons and upgrades of all the things mentioned in the first post. SH4 has a good root system and has great potential to grow into a mighty oak.


Also Agreed!!!!

[Seeadler]

How about "Steel Beasts Pro" & "Dangerous Waters" I agree that for large publishers your statement is probably true although Ubi has Silent Hunter & even Microsoft & EA have their respective rail sims. I think the future for sims lies with the smaller independent studios. Sure I own both games and both are on the level of harcore I prefer when I'm in the mood to play a combat sim game. On beside of this I am also play "quick an dirty" MP games like UT, BF etc. and I like them much.

But for simulations also the graphical presentation has the the same priorirty for me as the technical side of the gameplay. If Dangerous Waters has the same graphical presentation like SH4 it would be my all favoured game so far.:up:

[Sonarman]

I'd love to see what the Steel Beasts guys could do with a WW2 naval Task Force sim!

[Alex]

I wish we could see the crews on the ship from further away with our scopes.:arrgh!:
A good request, in my humble opinion. SH4 ships are enough beautiful... Now it would be nice to see the panic onboard any ship, people escaping from any compartment (is it called that way on ships ? :roll:) that has been hit by a torpedo, the number of people always depending on the kind of ship hit... :hmm:

http://img405.imageshack.us/img405/3117/hein05sm7.gif

:p

[DeepIron]

The times for real hardcore sims or at least sim games which can be configured to hardcore level, are gone. Quite possibly true if you're only addressing the commercial efforts.

None of the publishers today take the risk of such development, profits and shares are more important.
Pity... The bean counters run/ruin everything don't they?

Therefore, I expect nothing of a SH successor. Well, for starters, growing SH4 would benefit from adding new vessels and equipment...
The rest of the sim is so moddable that it could remain playable for a long, long time IF Ubi would consider releasing the geometry exporter...

[Egan]

Um...playability, guys. You lose a lot of people if SH becomes the Falcon 4 of sub sims, needing a 600pg manual.
Thats a risk I'm willing to take! :up:

:rotfl:

"In order to save the village we had to destroy it."

[swdw]

I wish we could see the crews on the ship from further away with our scopes.:arrgh!:
A good request, in my humble opinion. SH4 ships are enough beautiful... Now it would be nice to see the panic onboard any ship, people escaping from any compartment (is it called that way on ships ? :roll:) that has been hit by a torpedo, the number of people always depending on the kind of ship hit... :hmm:

http://img405.imageshack.us/img405/3117/hein05sm7.gif

:p

Only problem is the possibility of this being a frame rate killer when engaging a task force or comparitively large convoy. (Not sure if it would, but it is possible as you'd be adding a bunch more polys AND animation.)

[swdw]

BTW, they can make it arcadish if they want, as long as . . .

1. They proveide a description of the files and parameters for modders
2. give the modders a beta to work with so the mods shortly follow the release.

Those 2 things would make life much easier.

[elanaiba]

I don't remember anyone in Ubi saying anything about the next game being arcadish?

[tater]

Would be nice to have a "no IFF" option so that the only way to have a ship appear as friendly would be to ID it as such with the rec manual. Planes, too.

That means contacts are contacts until PROVED friendly by the player. Perhaps within some short range IFF comes into play (X miles).

[V.C. Sniper]

I really hope UBISOFT will listen, and listen carefully about many thing we expect to see in the next installment, things that are important to us, the people who will continue to support this series....

care to take a little time and dream with me?... dream on then...

- ALL SIDES & WAR THEATERS: german, american and japanese sides to play. All subs, all seas.

- REAL NAVIGATION: no more GPS maps that magically shows your sub position. we need real tools to calculate our position (sextant, another clock, and true stars).

- MORE ACCURATE PHYSIC: no more hitpoints please, we want to see a ship sink as it should be (pay attention to wernersobe work!). No more "flying" subs either please.

- REAL GUNS: yes, you know what Im talking about, no stabilized guns! (DG or AA) and full dg crew animations (gun loading & shells handling)

- BETTER ENVIROMENT: fully 3d rendered clouds, more stars, better storms, no jelly water :p

- NO BULLETPROOF CREW: yes, we want to see dead people!

- FULL SUBS: the ability to walk (yes, walk) between all compartments. and of course, we would like to get more of them.


... anything else? is up to you now. :up:I keep having day dreams and dreams about being able to play this "perfect" Silent Hunter which you've just described! With you 500%!!!:up: :up:

[Ducimus]

The stuff im asking for isn't really that hardcore and can be simplified.

I want to be able to control each engine seperatly. If i want to put all 4 on the line, let me do it. If i want to put 3 on the charge and 1 on the line, let me do it.

This could be accomplished by a simple Dial Labeled "Battery recharge, with a 4 position switch. 1 / 1-2 / 1-2-3 / OFF. The more engines i put on the battery recharge, the faster its done, but the slower i go.


I want seperate propeller control. If i want ahead full on the port propeller, and all back full on the starbard propeller, let me do it.


Take your current engine telegraph, and duplicate it, assign each one to port or starboard. A simple Lock on it to control both at once, or unlock them and click on each telegraph as you like.

I also want full throttle and rheostate control. If i want to push the engines or E Motors to 105%- 110% of their maxmum, let me do it.

A simple dial can do this quite nicely. All you really need to do is add in a telegraph setting that is "beyond flank" that puts the load at 105% or 110%. The trick in this, is coding in a function that makes doing this risky for the increase in speed.

I want full control on the dive planes. If i want as few as 5 degrees down on the planes, or 25 degrees down on the planes, let me distinguish which.

This could be simplified with three dive planes settings.
- dive planes set to shallow dive
- dive planes set to normal dive
- dive planes set to maximum dive

The overall point here is to give the player more control over the up and down angle of the sub.


I want more control of my boyancy. I want to be able to control things like the saftey tank and negative tank. Not to mention just how fast the main ballast tank floods. Trim tanks would be nice too, but i woudlnt ask for THAT much.

Trim tanks would be asking too much. Saftey and negative tanks, no. I think we need those. Having these would allow you to reduce your draft and gain an increase surface speed for a sacrafice of a slower dive time as a result. OR, a deeper draft, slower speed, faster dive time. Depending if the tanks are flooded or blow dry.


All of the above would greatly add to immersion.

Edit: BUt i would give up All of the above.. IF.....

THE GAME ACUTALLY USED COMPRESSED AIR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

In both SH3, and SH4, compressed air is a total non factor.

Want to surface? NOOO problem, Compressed air isnt used to blow tanks dry, you just come up when you want.

Want to launch umpteen torpedos?! Noooooo problem, shoot as many as you like, the tubes are magic, and no compressed air is involved when firing torpedos.

But i degress one point, if the game does use compressed air, the usage ratio is so abysmally low, as to have totally negated the point for coding it into the sim in the first place. (my apologies if this is sounding harsh).

[kv29]

wow, thanks for sharing your thoughts, guys :cool:

and since we caught "someone" attention....whose nickname begins with E :p .... keep it going!

btw, mr E, stop running away from me and bring the help you promised on the deck gun issue :p

[joegrundman]

- REAL NAVIGATION: no more GPS maps that magically shows your sub position. we need real tools to calculate our position (sextant, another clock, and true stars).

The biggest problem here is the need to create a real map, which in turn raises the question of what map projection system you'll use? Lots and lots of problems with physics, AI, etc if you need to redo that part of a game, and for little gains related to captain work. Not against it at all, just very difficult. Trust me.


Just out of curiosity, why is it so difficult to create a spherical game world?

If that's not the problem, rather it's a matter of how it is presented on the map screen, well you could have multiple charts, with different projections for where you are in the world.

joe

[LukeFF]

My list of things I want to see improved:

-A contact plotting model like the one tater has described
-The ability to select any sonar contact and tell the sonarman to follow it until he loses track of it. The current system only allows the sonarman to follow the nearest contact or warship contact.
-Radar reports that tell you what type of contact is being reported. E.g., "SJ, surface contact, bearing 3-2-0, 10,000 yards."
-For radar equipment that couldn't give a bearing (e.g., the SD radar), then don't have the radarman report a bearing.
-The ability to send radar bearing and range info to the TDC.
-Radar displays for all radar systems.
-Better animation for the deck gun and AA guns: sailors passing shells to the loader at the breech, AA gunners changing out magazines, AA gunners that progressivly crouch lower as the elevation of the gun increases, and AA gunners that actually look at the target they're shooting at, instead of standing there and rotating around like a wooden indian. :lol:
-Allow the AI AA gunners to target surface ships.
-Disallow torpedo loading if the angle of the sub goes past a certain degree.
-A first-person model for the player that allows him to walk around the compartments, climb up and down ladders, etc.
-Desabilized deck guns and AA guns.

and, most importantly...

-I want to hear the bridge watch call out "Smoke on the horizon, captain!" when they spot, well, smoke on the horizon. ;) AOD players will recall this feature with fond memories. :)

[Ducimus]

>>
-I want to hear the bridge watch call out "Smoke on the horizon, captain!" when they spot, well, smoke on the horizon. AOD players will recall this feature with fond memories
>>


I still remember the pseudo german accent to this day. :lol:

[swdw]

I don't remember anyone in Ubi saying anything about the next game being arcadish?

I never said that anyone at ubisoft was saying that. I brought it up because that's what the hard core simmers hint at.

To restate in a different way- as long as it makes it easier to create the "type" of game modders want. Ubi can release a game that appeals to a wider audience by making it a little less realistic, but ti would be nice if they gave some descriptions of some of the settings. That way we don't have to figure out what a setting does by changing numbers to see what happens, so we can figure it out for ourselves.

BTW, the deck gun coding and submarine collision coding does need some rework

[elanaiba]

and since we caught "someone" attention....whose nickname begins with E :p .... keep it going!

btw, mr E, stop running away from me and bring the help you promised on the deck gun issue :p



I know, I know :( I wish I knew the answer though.

My attention is pretty much constantly on these forums (and the Ubi forum, for that matter).

Re: arcadish, it should be noted that generally speaking, Ubi (as in other than the dev team) believes SH to be in a good spot (realistic, deep, rewarding) but with trouble on the package. As I stated before, the trick is not to dumb down the game, but to make the same game (or actually, a better, deeper version of that game) more accessible, easy to get into.

[stabiz]

I agree, if its accessible for the X-Box-generation at the lower settings, but at the same time a full sim its a win-win situation. I just hope they dont do to Silent Hunter what was done to, say, Rainbow Six. My great fear is Silent Hunter 5: Grand Theft Uboat with narration by 50 Cent.















:cool:

[AVGWarhawk]

Mr. E:

Re: arcadish, it should be noted that generally speaking, Ubi (as in other than the dev team) believes SH to be in a good spot (realistic, deep, rewarding) but with trouble on the package. As I stated before, the trick is not to dumb down the game, but to make the same game (or actually, a better, deeper version of that game) more accessible, easy to get into.

I like the fact that the game can be arcadish out of the box. It looks arcadish to me. But, I also like the fact that it can be manipulated via the options screen and modding to make it far from arcadish. Accessiblity to modding the files is definitely key. Lets face it, I played SH3 unmodded for 3 months and shelved it. It got boring really. Then GW 1.1 was available and I played the games for months on end. So, yes, dumbing down the game is not the way to go. Offer it up in a easy version as SH3/4 are via the options screen, but also open the door to make the game as much as it can be.

[XLjedi]

Multi-Monitor Support!!

[mookiemookie]

Ooh, ooh! Periscope mounted ST radar! :up:

[LaughingSwordfish]

-AI subs that can dive and launch torpedoes -> wolfpacks and British subs in the Bay of Biscay
-Provosions limit the amount of time you can spend on patrol.
-Both the Pacific and Atlantic theaters

[DeepIron]

AI to control other US subs in wolfpack operations... :up:

[Seeadler]

My great fear is Silent Hunter 5: Grand Theft Uboat with narration by 50 Cent.
or something like this, found in the German Ubisoft forum:rotfl:
http://img527.imageshack.us/img527/1451/nemoedition2bkopiejj0.jpg

[AVGWarhawk]

My great fear is Silent Hunter 5: Grand Theft Uboat with narration by 50 Cent.


Now that is just friggin funny :rotfl:

[kv29]

and since we caught "someone" attention....whose nickname begins with E :p .... keep it going!


btw, mr E, stop running away from me and bring the help you promised on the deck gun issue :p



I know, I know :( I wish I knew the answer though.
My attention is pretty much constantly on these forums (and the Ubi forum, for that matter).


No problem, as long as you promise to include this feature in the next SH game (yes, we are all counting on a next incarnation)

And listen to DeepIron too.... WOLFPACKS

[mookiemookie]

And listen to DeepIron too.... WOLFPACKS

:yep:

[WernerSobe]

1. i want to cook my meal
2. i want to wash my socks
3. and damn i want a bog with all the buttons working!

No i mean common guys. How much does it have to be "real". After all - this game is not about to simulate everything. You are in a role of a comander. And the comander does not care about dive planes or exact buyauncy managment and trim control. And he does not have to navigate by stars. This is what the crew is good for.

So ask yourself. Do you want a sub comander simulation - or do you want just an empty sub where you have to do every thing on yourself?

what this game is realy missing is better AI, wulfpacks and being able to take part in historical operations.

[Blood_splat]

Well radar I think should have been researched a little more. I think there was an instrument that gave you the range. Oh yeah life boats blowing up like they have a ton of tnt on them lol.:damn:

Basicly all the things LukeFF said:D

[joegrundman]

1. i want to cook my meal
2. i want to wash my socks
3. and damn i want a bog with all the buttons working!

No i mean common guys. How much does it have to be "real". After all - this game is not about to simulate everything. You are in a role of a comander. And the comander does not care about dive planes or exact buyauncy managment and trim control. And he does not have to navigate by stars. This is what the crew is good for.

So ask yourself. Do you want a sub comander simulation - or do you want just an empty sub where you have to do every thing on yourself?

what this game is realy missing is better AI, wulfpacks and being able to take part in historical operations.

While i think that this sort of argument has some weight to it, on the other hand i think a complete simulation should enable you to have multiple settings.

Take navigation - there should be three settings for players to accept the difficulty they want

a) current style GPS
b) asking your officer to get a fix by celestial navigation - the accuracy of this should be weather dependent as well as on the experience/exhaustion of the crewmen, and still there should be inherent inaccuracy in your position.
c) do it yourself.

In addition you ought to get an idea of location by fixing on the bearing to Radio Honolulu for example.

In addition the effects of current and wind could be better slimulated. You should still be able to hold a course, while external effects bring a deflection on your course, rather than the present effect of causing a change to your rudder, although i guess there is some effect on that too.

But if one was to imply that the GPS is the only sensible solution, that would be silly. The GPS wasn't invented until the 90s. Even in the 70s and 80s, nuke boats had to fix their position through celestial nav using the observation scope. - and only one person was looking through the scope to do it, so it might as well be you if you want to.

Another thing i'd like is an authentic bearing plotting system. Putting in your own plots is laborious. If you could send bearing, time, aob and range as you calculate them to be direct to be plotted on a map and/or in-game maneuvering board, without having to mess around with labouriously doing it yourself - this would be great and marvellously simluate the relationship between the guy at teh periscope (you) and the lads in the tracking party.

It would look like the actual US examples in this post here:

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=776526&postcount=13

joe

[DeepIron]

One of the best sims ever IMO... 1996 Jane's Ah-64 Longbow.
What made it a great sim? Details, man, details. You really had to have your kit together not only to fly the AH-64 and it's armament, but to understand the intel, rules of engagement and battle plans... You had control over almost every aspect of the sim. Portions of the manual came directly from Jane's Military database.

Coming back from a successful mission was a very gratifying experience if you lived...

I'd love to see an incarnation of SH that had that kind of detail. The modders are getting there, but the AI, Wolfpacking and some other aspects are in the core code and not reachable by mods.

[CaptHawkeye]

I and many others, judging by my recent Subsim poll (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=130782) ,its counterpart on the Ubi Forum (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/6421019045/m/3431062336/showpollresults/Y) & the huge populartity of the SHIII schnellboot mod, I suspect would actually prefer to have a surface command game next time in the style of "Destroyer Command" or the great old Microprose title "Task Force 1942".

OH how I hope they're paying attention to these. I keep hearing complaints about a surface action game akin to "player can't act on his own!" and "no stealthz, always on the run from teh planz". But in all honesty, that's just making excuses. Where would we get if just sat on our thumbs crying into our beer about challenges in gameplay design? Off the top of my head I can already think of numerous ways of dealing with the outlined problems.

If the devs/ Ubisoft ever think about going down that road they should check out this fantastic 9 page article (http://www.simhq.com/_naval/naval_005a.html) from simHQ, written by a former naval officer about the strengths and weaknesses of the original "Destroyer Command" game and his thoughts on what would a good sequel would contain.

I liked his article but occasionally thought he was nitpicking. I like a realistic sim, but I ALSO like a sim to be intuitive. I want a realistic game, but I ALSO want developers to acknowledge that no matter what they dream of, it IS a video game. The only way the player can interact with the world is through a screen, keyboard, and mouse. Maybe a joystick if he's lucky. Voice input if he's in good standing with God or something. But none of this equates to the efficiency of real world control.

That's why I get annoyed at games like Red Orchestra that tout themselves as "uber realistic". In RO they actually expect the player to take into account the WEIGHT OF THE GUN as he fires it! Since the changing center of balance will actually change the aimpoint of the gun on the sight! This is just insane. I'm not ACTUALLY HOLDING THE GUN. So why punish the player for something totally out of his control or even influence? Let the avatar "handle" things like that. You can't tell me a trained or experienced soldier wouldn't subconsiously know to compensate for something like that.

Or RO's tanks. They again claim "ultra realism" because they force players to use multi crew. But again, it's not realistic, it's just annoying. A real tank crew, one with experience and TRAINING, would act as a single entity. That's why if you were to ask me who's tanks were more realistic in that aspect, Forgotten Hope's or Red Orchestra's, i'd say FH. A good sim is both realistic AND intuitive. A sim that is diffcult to control or unwieldy is ironically not realistic.

[gimpy117]

how bout WWI??

[LukeFF]

That's why I get annoyed at games like Red Orchestra that tout themselves as "uber realistic". In RO they actually expect the player to take into account the WEIGHT OF THE GUN as he fires it! Since the changing center of balance will actually change the aimpoint of the gun on the sight! This is just insane. I'm not ACTUALLY HOLDING THE GUN. So why punish the player for something totally out of his control or even influence? Let the avatar "handle" things like that. You can't tell me a trained or experienced soldier wouldn't subconsiously know to compensate for something like that.

Ever try to hold a WWII rifle longer than say, 30 seconds? Your arms will tire and your aim will start to sway.

And yes, I'm a real-world soldier.

[Kptlt. Neuerburg]

What I'd like to see in the next SH game if there ever will be one is full emersion. Walk around from bow to stern, climbing up the ladder to the con tower, watching crew running from the stern to the bow during a crash dive and see the watch crew come sliding down the ladders! And some wild life other than stupid seagulls, like some fish!!! More overall control over the sub. Better AI, as in no more Bernards!! Realistic weather. You know in winter I'd like to see snow falling and not just on the ground. Being able to hide on the bottom. Just throwing out some ideas.

[maerean_m]

What I'd like to see in the next SH game if there ever will be one is full emersion. Walk around from bow to stern, climbing up the ladder to the con tower, watching crew running from the stern to the bow during a crash dive and see the watch crew come sliding down the ladders! And some wild life other than stupid seagulls, like some fish!!! More overall control over the sub. Better AI, as in no more Bernards!! Realistic weather. You know in winter I'd like to see snow falling and not just on the ground. Being able to hide on the bottom. Just throwing out some ideas.
All that is nice, but you have to bring some gameplay to that. You'll get bored after two walks from bow to stern and looking at the fishes.

[maerean_m]

How about this ones:

* Actually rotating 1/3 of the crew when docking and using your renown to keep some of them. And not to get repetitive, the player is asked if he wants to keep just one of the officers that were picked to leave (if any).

* On the long patrols, actually playing chess with one of the officers, in 3D (Ubisoft owns Chessmaster, you know http://us.i1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/emoticons7/1.gif (and is being done in Romania too)).


* When sinking a ship, to be able to rescue some of the men in the boats and gain renown for it. Or even, in one of a hundred cases, learn about an enemy secret (ship routes or whatever).

[joegrundman]

:rock: Those ideas rock! Could be the only way to play chess there is!:arrgh!:

[maerean_m]

I like the third idea too, but gaining some intel would be even better if the campaign is fully dynamic and (slightly) influenced by the player's actions (hint).
doh... http://us.i1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/emoticons7/1.gif (translation: obviously)

[LukeFF]

How about this ones:

* Actually rotating 1/3 of the crew when docking and using your renown to keep some of them. And not to get repetitive, the player is asked if he wants to keep just one of the officers that were picked to leave (if any).

* On the long patrols, actually playing chess with one of the officers, in 3D (Ubisoft owns Chessmaster, you know http://us.i1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/emoticons7/1.gif (and is being done in Romania too)).


* When sinking a ship, to be able to rescue some of the men in the boats and gain renown for it. Or even, in one of a hundred cases, learn about an enemy secret (ship routes or whatever).

Yes, yes, and yes!

Also, for the crew, the crew number limits should be split up between the officers and the CPOs, instead of lumping them together like they are now.

[Takeda Shingen]

* On the long patrols, actually playing chess with one of the officers, in 3D (Ubisoft owns Chessmaster, you know http://us.i1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/emoticons7/1.gif (and is being done in Romania too)).

A proper algorithmic chess program is going to be very memory-intensive. I would prefer that they use that space for submarine-related developments. Personally, I would rather have a proper sound model, a la Dangerous Waters, in order to have the simulation aspect match the graphics. You should also have to trim dive daily, as salinity should affect the bouyancy of your boat.

[Sonarman]

All that is nice, but you have to bring some gameplay to that. You'll get bored after two walks from bow to stern and looking at the fishes.
here are some suggestions for gameplay additions...

In The Sound Room
It would be great if more sounds were added to the hydrophone to confuse the issue, also if the light was removed that shows when a contact is being received (makes things a bit too easy), sound detections should be more difficult, biologic noises (whales etc) and more random noise should be introduced. These were included in the ancient SSN21 Seawolf game from EA and were very atmospheric.

In the Radio Room
More functionality should be added to the radio room the player could tune the 3d radio to a certain frequency at a time specified in a code book to recieve operational data/instructions, then have the ability to code/decode messages, nothing too intensive, a routine perhaps similar to that found in the old Mindscape/360 game "Das Boot" would be great.

In The Engine Room.
Some form of engine management game, the ability to monitor oil/air pressure ,dump fuel, check fresh water level, set speed, put engines on/offline etc. Perhaps a circuit based on a generatior/ switchboard arrangement a diagram allowing the rerouting of power functions to restore functionality, connecting cables etc when a generator goes out etc, Start & stop pumps to pump out flooded or counterflood areas.

In the Ward Room
Whilst chess may be too computationally intensive perhaps officers could indulge in poker or blackjack, chequers, or battleship! or click on books on a shelf to study tech/id manuals, read (out of copyright) novels on sub warfare (loaded as txt files) into a template etc

Some more external gameplay ideas for making the world feel a bit more realistic...
Berthing
Berthings should be come more risky, the player must berth, at a specific place inside a "difficult" dock, turning and manouvering his ship in close quarters very carefully to avoid damage, using ropes and spring lines to pull her into place/leave dock, the nautical equivalent of a landing in flight sim.

IceField Navigation
When navigating iceberg areas small growler bergs should be introduced floating around influenced by wind direction, current etc increasing the risk of damage/sinking.

[Platapus]

I would like to see the next generation of sub sims to be more in depth into the operation of the submarine itself.

Design it so you can play the game from different crew positions.

Currently we have the player taking the role of Captain but giving them the chance to temporarily play other crew stations. It has to be temporary as there is no Captain but the player.

I would love to have a sub sim (either US or German) where not only do you have the option of playing Captain but also have the option of playing one of the other crew members and have the AI take over as Captain.

Diving officer is one such interest with me. Instead of just hitting "C" for crash dive, as the subs diving officer I would be responsible for the actual controlled submergence of the sub where I would be in control of all the vents and such. There could be a variance in realism so that the player can actually learn how to dive and surface a sub. There will come a point where the player is doing it at 100%

The plot is another station I would like to immerse myself in. The computer AI gives me the observations and I have to manually make the plot using only the tools available and only using the data given me. Like the diving officer there would be a variance in realism for educational purposes, but ultimately the goal is to be 100%

Most other positions would not be suitable for a game type simulator but these are just a few.

An interesting twist would be that the player would have to qualify for command by moving up from diving officer/plot to Captain.

Be a cooleo way to learn the tradecraft.

[DeepIron]

How about this ones:

* Actually rotating 1/3 of the crew when docking and using your renown to keep some of them. And not to get repetitive, the player is asked if he wants to keep just one of the officers that were picked to leave (if any).

* On the long patrols, actually playing chess with one of the officers, in 3D (Ubisoft owns Chessmaster, you know http://us.i1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/emoticons7/1.gif (and is being done in Romania too)).


* When sinking a ship, to be able to rescue some of the men in the boats and gain renown for it. Or even, in one of a hundred cases, learn about an enemy secret (ship routes or whatever).

1. I don't know about 1/3 of the crew, but some rotation was done. Approx 10% would be more realistic with 1 or 2 of the officers transferring. This was especially true of the Exec who could be assigned his own boat as PCO (Prospective Commanding Officer) before becoming the skipper of the boat.
You might consider a bit of renown for the COB (Chief of the Boat). Next to having a great skipper, the COB was the guy who managed the crew at the enlisted level and many were the sailor who took a berth on a US sub because of the COB.

2. The game of choice on US subs was Cribbage and Ship, Captain and Crew... But chess would be cool for those long 1x missions... :up:

3. This was a historical reality (maritime sailors, not IJN) were picked up and some intel was had.

I still would like to see better AI, wolfpacking and a better, more user friendly Mission Editor!

[CaptHawkeye]

Ever try to hold a WWII rifle longer than say, 30 seconds? Your arms will tire and your aim will start to sway.

Let me explain it better, I fully expect and intend to compensate for something like exhaustion in gameplay. I actually believe that games that don't take it into account are not paying enough attention to detail and are failing to be a simulation outright.

But in RO, they take into account the weapon's changing center of gravity as the magazine empties. According to them, (regardless of the weapon's actual weight) the placement of the bullets according to the position of the iron sight changes on the sight because of this. But this is insane, such a minor detail would be handled subconsciously by the soldier using the weapon.

And yes, I'm a real-world soldier.

Ok?

[swdw]

I'll throw in some suggestions on improved physics here. I actually like the way most of the stuff in the game has been simplified to make it easy to work with, but there a re a couple of things missing or that need upgrading:

1. To enable better physics modeling- multiprocessor support!

2. Propeller drag- when you reduce the number of turns in relation to your current speed or stop the engines, the braking effect of the props occurs. Even a simple ratio based or look up table version of this would be great. Make the base drag used in the table/ratio an entry in the sim file that is adjustable

3. Riding the waves. I understand the very simplistic way the boat rides the waves was initially influenced by reducing calculations because of the common CPU's in use at the time of SH3 development. However, times have changed. The video cards now handle a greater part of the load with their GPU's and multiple processors are becoming very common..

The boat needs to have more reference points for the waves to act upon. These can be mass centers that each are acted upon by the wave action and even flooding. Plus, instead of averaging the wave height and only allowing pitch within a specific band, actually try to follow the waves, but use a mass/inertia effect that will cause large waves to wash over the top while staying in the water in a trough. A boat broaching because of large waves is fine, but flying over the trough between waves because of averaging? C'mon now.

I have a hard time believing this is too much after having been exposed and worked on the open plane physics engine. In 1999, the engine was doing things with real time mass and CG calculations with multiple aircraft in the air that even military simulators didn't do- and this was on a 200-400 MHZ CPU. It even did those kind of calcs with individual bullets.

3. Entries in the sim file for rudder angle on surface ships.

4. Oh yeah propeller slippage during acceleration. This can again be a simple ratio of amount of applied thrust/HP vs difference in current speed and actual speed.

For example if you ring up 8 knots from 6 only 70% of the thrust is available initially and it ramps up to 100% at 8 knots. If you were to ring up 8 knots from 2 knots, you may start with only 50% of the thrust/hp available which ramps up as speed increases. This would greatly reduce the speedboat effect.

Place a "max slippage" number in the sim file. Why?, because the amount a propeller slips partially depends on the type of propeller (blades, pitch, etc), and the mass of the ship you're trying to push. It would be easier to make this a simple calculation that can be adjusted than try to figure out exactly what it should be for every ship based on their props, shaft angle, etc.

An alternate, but at least workable alternative would be an rpm/min accelaration rate so the props don't instantly jump to the desired speed when a speed change is ordered. Would like this adjustable too. Although not totally realistic, the end result would be similar to prop slippage.

Just a couple of thoughts.

[swdw]

2. The game of choice on US subs was Cribbage and Ship, Captain and Crew... But chess would be cool for those long 1x missions... :up:
Actually pinochle was as popular as cribbage:yep: . . . but you'd need multiple players:-? And it is a rather weird game.

[DeepIron]

Actually pinochle was as popular as cribbage:yep:
That's true... Ironic, too. I learned pinochle while I was in the Navy... ;)

[Takeda Shingen]

I'll throw in some suggestions on improved physics here. I actually like the way most of the stuff in the game has been simplified to make it easy to work with, but there a re a couple of things missing or that need upgrading:

1. To enable better physics modeling- multiprocessor support!

2. Propeller drag- when you reduce the number of turns in relation to your current speed or stop the engines, the braking effect of the props occurs. Even a simple ratio based or look up table version of this would be great. Make the base drag used in the table/ratio an entry in the sim file that is adjustable

3. Riding the waves. I understand the very simplistic way the boat rides the waves was initially influenced by reducing calculations because of the common CPU's in use at the time of SH3 development. However, times have changed. The video cards now handle a greater part of the load with their GPU's and multiple processors are becoming very common..

The boat needs to have more reference points for the waves to act upon. These can be mass centers that each are acted upon by the wave action and even flooding. Plus, instead of averaging the wave height and only allowing pitch within a specific band, actually try to follow the waves, but use a mass/inertia effect that will cause large waves to wash over the top while staying in the water in a trough. A boat broaching because of large waves is fine, but flying over the trough between waves because of averaging? C'mon now.

I have a hard time believing this is too much after having been exposed and worked on the open plane physics engine. In 1999, the engine was doing things with real time mass and CG calculations with multiple aircraft in the air that even military simulators didn't do- and this was on a 200-400 MHZ CPU. It even did those kind of calcs with individual bullets.

3. Entries in the sim file for rudder angle on surface ships.

4. Oh yeah propeller slippage during acceleration. This can again be a simple ratio of amount of applied thrust/HP vs difference in current speed and actual speed.

For example if you ring up 8 knots from 6 only 70% of the thrust is available initially and it ramps up to 100% at 8 knots. If you were to ring up 8 knots from 2 knots, you may start with only 50% of the thrust/hp available which ramps up as speed increases. This would greatly reduce the speedboat effect.

Place a "max slippage" number in the sim file. Why?, because the amount a propeller slips partially depends on the type of propeller (blades, pitch, etc), and the mass of the ship you're trying to push. It would be easier to make this a simple calculation that can be adjusted than try to figure out exactly what it should be for every ship based on their props, shaft angle, etc.

An alternate, but at least workable alternative would be an rpm/min accelaration rate so the props don't instantly jump to the desired speed when a speed change is ordered. Would like this adjustable too. Although not totally realistic, the end result would be similar to prop slippage.

Just a couple of thoughts.

In short, we need a vastly improved physics model. I am with you on that, but would also expand this to include underwater hydrodynamic forces. My large and underpowered fleet boat responds to course and depth changes far too readily.

[mookiemookie]

2. The game of choice on US subs was Cribbage and Ship, Captain and Crew... But chess would be cool for those long 1x missions... :up:
Actually pinochle was as popular as cribbage:yep: . . . but you'd need multiple players:-? And it is a rather weird game.

I heard acey ducey was quite popular too.

But anyways, great ideas Mihai. Would love to see these too.

[tater]

In addition to the plotting aspects I posted above, in terms of physics, while there is a lot of minutiae that could be modeled, something currently lacking and alluded to by Ducimus is depth keeping.

Broaching the boat was a risk, and it would be very nice to have some attention to depth keeping. The crew quality should matter, too. A random chance of the wrong correction, etc. When you read accounts, attacks get aborted and the boat has to go deep on quite a few occasions due to the boat broaching.

On a simple level, give the mission builders some more control. I'd like to be able to "lock" the scope on land objects, for example, to take pictures since all photo recon missions were of land facilities, NOT shipping targets.

[Blood_splat]

I remember using a mod for depth keeping for silent hunter III. One mod would cause you to sink and the other mod would cause you to rise if you didn't maintain 1 or 2 knots.

[LukeFF]

All that is nice, but you have to bring some gameplay to that. You'll get bored after two walks from bow to stern and looking at the fishes.

The big advantage with being able to walk around would be while on the bridge. Instead of having a fixed camera view and having to clip out objects in order to allow the player to see what's around him, the player can simply walk around the bridge in order to gain a better vantage point. That would be the big benefit of having such a feature.

[elanaiba]

Yep.

[TDK1044]

These ideas are very cool, but I'm intrigued as to how such ideas would actually be implemented. With SH4 now offering U Boats, and with a U Boat Atlantic campaign a modding probability within 6 months, it would make no marketing sense at all for Ubisoft to make a new WWII subsim as their next offering.

So are we taliking about possibly more patches/Add Ons for SH4? Are we talking about a Cold War scenario with these new features? Or is this just a "wouldn't it be nice" thread that two of the Devs are contributing to?

Interesting...:D

[CaptHawkeye]

Am I the only one who has never liked the idea of Silent Hunter going modern? I like some modern war games but more often than not i've found that any kind of conflict after the 1950s gets progressively more and more boring because their isn't really a "fight" to be had. You're either hiding or shooting. And the shooting part is over fast because as it turns out modern war is ultra high lethality. :)

LOMAC is a good game, but I got tired of it, like any other modern war flight sim, because it just gets predictable. Beep beep beep you're dead! Missile Lock = 99% chance you will die. Torpedo on the way? Consider yourself more or less boned. Dangerous Waters got boring fast for the same reason. Spend 2 hours staring at a radar screen? Only to fire a single torpedo with a high percentage of kill in one shot? No thanks. How about we hook up an old sonar and go dump some depth charges overboard? Exciting and a hell of a lot more challenging than "lock contact, click kill button".

Then again, maybe the early Cold War didn't suffer from all of the boring radar screen battle bull? :)

[DeepIron]

Then again, maybe the early Cold War didn't suffer from all of the boring radar screen battle bull?Probably the coolest thing about post-WWII sub op were was the inclusion of diesel subs into covert actions. "Blind Man's Bluff" is a great book about the period. But...

While the intrique level was high, the "blow 'em out of the water" aspect was nil...

So, really, the last period in which we "purposely" shot at anyone with subs was WWII...

Looking over the suggestions in this thread, if the devs implemented even 20% of the suggestions, SH would be phenomenal for gameplay...

[Sailor Steve]

I remember using a mod for depth keeping for silent hunter III. One mod would cause you to sink and the other mod would cause you to rise if you didn't maintain 1 or 2 knots.
The one that sinks is NYGM. The one that rises is GWX (disabled in the newer versions).

The big advantage with being able to walk around would be while on the bridge. Instead of having a fixed camera view and having to clip out objects in order to allow the player to see what's around him, the player can simply walk around the bridge in order to gain a better vantage point. That would be the big benefit of having such a feature.
This is something already available in SH3 via Sergbuto's Camera Mod. He destabilized the binoculars, made the crew visible in Binocular view and made it so you can move around to get a better view. Should only be a matter of time before someone does it for SH4.

Am I the only one who has never liked the idea of Silent Hunter going modern?
No. I think the community needs a good updated modern sub sim, and a lot of people want it. I just don't like the idea of it carrying the Silent Hunter name. There's no good reason for it, it's just the way I feel.

[scrapser]

I seriously doubt we will ever see another company attempt a WW2 submarine simulation for the PC. Most people want instant gratification (launch game and start shooting or swinging a sword) which they get with consoles. People who like to use strategy and think about what they're doing are the minority. We all know where the money is.

In the past software was not so complicated and the hardware was much less diverse, so developing a simulation was not expensive. Starting around the mid-90's, things started to change dramatically and we have seen the result. SH3 and SH4 were valiant attempts at delivering a realistic submarine simulation but the developers were choked by the publisher putting a cap on development costs.

I think the above paragraph pretty much tells the whole story without all the nuts and bolts details.

In any case, if any company ever does decide to produce an accurate WW2 submarine simulation again, I for one would like to see them make an honest commitment to finish what they start or not do it at all. If not that, then at least make the critical areas open source so people can fix it later on. It's extremely frustrating to see a product that obviously was intended to include all the realism possible only to have it knee-capped 75% through development because the publisher could only afford to spend X amount of dollars.

[CaptHawkeye]

I seriously doubt we will ever see another company attempt a WW2 submarine simulation for the PC. Most people want instant gratification (launch game and start shooting or swinging a sword) which they get with consoles. People who like to use strategy and think about what they're doing are the minority. We all know where the money is.

Well, it would help if sim developers stopped trying to re invent the wheel every time they made a new sim and worked with an engine or technology already available like the bunny-reproductive FPS genre does. Their seems to be this pervasive notion amongst sim developers that we come to their games for the pretty graphics when we obviously don't. That's the drunken frat dude Halo fanboys. And their is no point in even TRYING to appeal to them.

In the past software was not so complicated and the hardware was much less diverse, so developing a simulation was not expensive. Starting around the mid-90's, things started to change dramatically and we have seen the result.

Yeah, it was called the GPU. And all of gaming suffers from the belief that uber graphix = the best game. This drives up production costs and development times. Thankfully, we're starting to get to a point where graphical development is at a wall.

SH3 and SH4 were valiant attempts at delivering a realistic submarine simulation but the developers were choked by the publisher putting a cap on development costs.

Of which could be met more easily if the developers stopped wasting time trying to program 6 extra polygons in that sailor's nose.


In any case, if any company ever does decide to produce an accurate WW2 submarine simulation again, I for one would like to see them make an honest commitment to finish what they start or not do it at all.

Agreed. The problem is when developers get confused as to what kind of game they are developing. Silent Hunter or Halo: Combat Submerged

If not that, then at least make the critical areas open source so people can fix it later on. It's extremely frustrating to see a product that obviously was intended to include all the realism possible only to have it knee-capped 75% through development because the publisher could only afford to spend X amount of dollars.

It is, especially when you play the game and notice that the developers went out of their way to render every sailor's nose hairs. While bugs make the game unplayable.

I love it when sim developers try to "expand their audience". You can immedietely tell what's about to happen because they apparently decided to shut off their brains for a few years. Hint: When you try to add pretty graphics to your sim to "expand' the audience, it doesn't do anything. The only people buying your sim are the fans you already have, and they will be the ONLY ONES looking to buy. Counter Strike fanboy number 3582 is not going to look at your naval sim and say "well the ship hulls look shiny so i'll buy it!" He's going to say "lolz where is ma hedshotz". So don't spend money on what clearly isn't going to work.

[mookiemookie]

Good points, but I think trying to appeal to players who haven't ever played a subsim is a good idea. You're right, you're not going to get the Halo players, but that's not the point. I think the point is getting the people who are open to the genre but don't know know where to start. They have to walk before they can run. This is why I like the idea of scalable difficulty.

For example, I'd love to not have a GPS nav map and have some system of dead reckoning/star shots for plotting position, whether its something I do myself or have the game do for me with some kind of crew skill. But that's obviously tedium for someone who just wants to get in and play. So I think the option to turn that part off, much like we have now with limited fuel, O2, reload times, etc would be a good idea. Same with flooding tanks. I'd love to have that level of control over my ship, but have an option for the game to manage it for you if you don't want to do it. My uninformed opinion is that I don't think that would be too difficult from a development standpoint.

But I agree 100% with you on graphics. Too much time spent on those means less time spent on areas of the game that appeal to the subsimmer. I think most of us would agree that cutting edge graphics are not a "must have" for a great submarine sim experience. Sure, they're nice icing on the cake, but graphics don't sell games alone. At least not to me.

[Sonarman]

I've bumped my "If I was Ubisoft" poll back up since we are talking about the next game again, please vote for your favourite option here (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=130782)

[scrapser]

The companies that have the resources to develop simulations need to recognize they are not instant gratification games and the people who buy them are not interested in such. Yet to be fair, they need to make them scaleable to bring in newcomers who will eventually graduate to seasoned simulation veterans. This helps expand the market while at the same time providing the simulation we as a community are looking for.

They should also realize the formula for developing and publishing simulation software is not the same formula used for Doom, Quake, World of Warcraft, etc.; so they should stop using it!

[Rockin Robbins]

The same game can be Halo: Combat Submerged and a realistic simulator. Take Silent Hunter 4, for instance. Along with the "realistic" mods there has been a persistent undercurrent of uber-boote mods that make the submarine more potent beyond the realm of possibility.

I've been guilty myself, making a Mark 14 Torpedo mod with an explosion that vaporizes aircraft carriers. It's fun!

The most important characteristic of a good simulation is the amount of cash it garners. The sales income of a game is the only unbiased measure of success, as people tend to vote their disposable income honestly. Time after time, market research proves that people lie when they tell you what they want. You spend all that money asking the public, you spend more money to tailor the product to what the study says people are willing to spend x amount of cash for and the product languishes. It's an old story.

The answer to that is to make the sim as versatile as possible so different groups of people are all happy. It works for Excel, why not a game?

[DeepIron]

If I were Ubisoft I would:

1. Incorporate most of the really cools mods again, like they did in v1.5. The work is already mosty done and I'm pretty sure the modders wouldn't mind seeing their handiwork included.
2. Poll the community on what players consider the most important bugs or omissions that need fixing and get 'em fixed.
3. If the bug fixing wasn't a terrible strain on Ubi's resources, I would look at the huge number of "new feature requests" that have been posted and then again, poll the community on what they would like to see the most and incorporate them.

AND I STILL WANT THE MODEL EXPORTER! :lol!
As a adjunct, I would select a number of subsim members to "BETA TEST" the new patch and additions to make sure no new bugs slipped through before releasing it!

[mookiemookie]

The answer to that is to make the sim as versitile as possible so different groups of people are all happy. It works for Excel, why not a game?

Give that man a beer!

Scalability and mod-ability are the keys to keeping everyone happy.

[CaptHawkeye]

You're damn right scalability is paramount in any simulation game. And most of the time, developers understand this. That's what grinds me about action game sales vs. sim sales. Any sim can be an action game just by turning down the realism options. But an action game cannot be a sim no matter how hard it tries.


(Notice how I said turning down the realism options, I favor incremental realism settings more than "lawl realistic torps on/off".)

[DeepIron]

Any sim can be an action game just by turning down the realism options. Like this guy wants to do...
(and the point of removing the hinderence of blowing things up is that my main interest is stalking the seas and sinking any ship i see without negative consequence, how i play is my bussiness how u play is urs leave it at that)Which is fine if you like "mind-numbingly boring finger cramping from excessive discharge of unlimited ammunition" type of play...

I'd rather watch a tennis match than play that way! :lol:

[Kptlt. Neuerburg]

I don't know if anyone has brought this up but what about good ole sub vs. sub warfare!! I thought that they would of made that possible in SH4 with the realease of the U-Boat Missions add-on. Not a bad idea huh?

[LukeFF]

The big advantage with being able to walk around would be while on the bridge. Instead of having a fixed camera view and having to clip out objects in order to allow the player to see what's around him, the player can simply walk around the bridge in order to gain a better vantage point. That would be the big benefit of having such a feature. This is something already available in SH3 via Sergbuto's Camera Mod. He destabilized the binoculars, made the crew visible in Binocular view and made it so you can move around to get a better view. Should only be a matter of time before someone does it for SH4.

It's already been done for SH4, and it works quite well. The problem, of course, is that it makes one feel like a disembodied spirit floating amongst the crew. :doh:

[LukeFF]

One other thing I think needs to be looked at, and it goes along the lines of making compressed air more an integrated feature: the pumps need to play more of a factor in maintaining depth. Right now, we can dive to the depths, hit Silent Running and wait for the enemy to leave the scene. Not so in reality - Silent Running meant shutting off the pumps; shutting off the pumps meant water slowly seeped into the boat, which in turn meant you slowly sank without turning the pumps back on. This is something Aces of the Deep modeled well, but I've not seen it in either SH3 or SH4, ever. Right now a damaged pump is just another object to repair and no big deal at that. It shouldn't be that way.

[Buffalo9]

I'd like to see brothel's at ports of call, maybe a tatto parlor also.

[Takeda Shingen]

Am I the only one who has never liked the idea of Silent Hunter going modern? I like some modern war games but more often than not i've found that any kind of conflict after the 1950s gets progressively more and more boring because their isn't really a "fight" to be had. You're either hiding or shooting. And the shooting part is over fast because as it turns out modern war is ultra high lethality. :)

LOMAC is a good game, but I got tired of it, like any other modern war flight sim, because it just gets predictable. Beep beep beep you're dead! Missile Lock = 99% chance you will die. Torpedo on the way? Consider yourself more or less boned. Dangerous Waters got boring fast for the same reason. Spend 2 hours staring at a radar screen? Only to fire a single torpedo with a high percentage of kill in one shot? No thanks. How about we hook up an old sonar and go dump some depth charges overboard? Exciting and a hell of a lot more challenging than "lock contact, click kill button".

Then again, maybe the early Cold War didn't suffer from all of the boring radar screen battle bull? :)

Have you every played Dangerous Waters? There's nothing easy or 'high percentage' about post-WWII naval combat.

[CaptHawkeye]

Have you every played Dangerous Waters? There's nothing easy or 'high percentage' about post-WWII naval combat.

Whoops where did all the sarcasm go? :)

Yeah I played Dangerous Waters. But I got tired of it and largely stopped playing because I got tired of spending most of time staring at radar screens and doing a whole lot of searching with about 10 seconds of actual shooting. I never said it was "easy", I just said it was stone cold boring most of the time. The time when it is exciting is over way too god damn fast. Just like LOMAC or Falcon 4.0

Turns out war where you spend 90% of your time hiding and 10% of the time using weapons of overwhelming one hit kill power doesn't strike my fancy? :)

[skwasjer]

I would like some help from the devs making S3D 100%. :arrgh!:
There's a couple of areas that contain some annoying bytes I can't break down at the moment.

[piersyf]

Ever try to hold a WWII rifle longer than say, 30 seconds? Your arms will tire and your aim will start to sway.

And yes, I'm a real-world soldier.[/quote]

er, yes. Well, sorta. When I was in uniform my personal weapon was an SLR, Australian version of FN. 7.62mm long rifle, weighed 10lb. If you train with it you can use it. I'm no Arnie (6'2 tall and 165lb) but I had no issues. Hell, at one stage I had a female officer in charge and she was about 5'6" and 90lb soaking wet and I watched her shoot an M60 with a 75rd belt attached from the shoulder STANDING. Training + Attitude...

As for immersion in the game, I'd just like one that doesn't keep crashing to desktop... that'd help with immersion a HEAP.

[Tebok]

Historical Number of ships. If you sink both Yamato class battleships, you wont see anymore... however, the Japanese may go ahead with the 3rd Yamato Class Battleship rather then converting it into the Shinano.

The above would of course mean that running into and attacking large battlegroups would be harder to do. Like it really was.

Historical Ship Movements. Have all the major Naval Battles of WWII take place.
I was dissapointed when I waited near Guadalcanal for the Battle of Savo Island to take place, only to have the Japanese Force never show up.

I'd really like to play as a Japanese Sub, with the ability to launch Kaitens. :arrgh!:

[Kapitan_Phillips]

More things to do on the boat. Day to day runnings would lead to various problems that need to be dealt with. Would be a nice distraction from the shudderings of 2048x.

[fireship4]

Yes making the running of a sub a full time job would be really interesting. Would need a lot of work to make it believable and not just repetative but it would add so much depth to have a patrol really last...

[Hartmann]

One other thing I think needs to be looked at, and it goes along the lines of making compressed air more an integrated feature: the pumps need to play more of a factor in maintaining depth. Right now, we can dive to the depths, hit Silent Running and wait for the enemy to leave the scene. Not so in reality - Silent Running meant shutting off the pumps; shutting off the pumps meant water slowly seeped into the boat, which in turn meant you slowly sank without turning the pumps back on. This is something Aces of the Deep modeled well, but I've not seen it in either SH3 or SH4, ever. Right now a damaged pump is just another object to repair and no big deal at that. It shouldn't be that way.

Yes , i remember well the command aces of the deep version with the bilge level gauge.
run in silent means no pumps and more water in the bilge, the only way to maintain the depth was using compressed air or engage the pumps again.

The three basic features for a future sim could be:

Full modeling of the boat, crew and compartments

Correct usage of dive planes, compressed air, RWR devices and other stuff and a very good damage model, for example no more instant death screens, option to surrender or abandon the boat.

Fully modable

[V.C. Sniper]

I would like to see maximum/crush depth accurately modeled for the Fleet Submarines.

[LukeFF]

I would like to see maximum/crush depth accurately modeled for the Fleet Submarines.

That is like trying to hit a moving target, because no two subs will have the same crush depth. The mods released so far have addressed this issue as best as can be. The best you could hope for in the future is a crush depth that is randomized +/- a given percentage from a given value, but beyond that I don't know what people really expect.

[fireship4]

Again on the earlier point of making it a full time job to run a sub - making decisions should be your job.reading a few sub diares should give some idea.

[THE_MASK]

All jokes aside , SH4 pacific with Ducimus/lurker etc and the uboat addon and gwx has at least another 3 years to run in my opinion before another silent hunter is even thought about .

[fireship4]

Really? You mean 3 years as a viable game or before a sequel will arrive? I expect viable game, seeing as people still play SH3.

[Sonarman]

All jokes aside , SH4 pacific with Ducimus/lurker etc and the uboat addon and gwx has at least another 3 years to run in my opinion before another silent hunter is even thought about .

I'm happy with that, and in the meantime the devs could be put to work on "Destroyer Command II" :up:

[mookiemookie]

Yes , i remember well the command aces of the deep version with the bilge level gauge.
run in silent means no pumps and more water in the bilge, the only way to maintain the depth was using compressed air or engage the pumps again.

The three basic features for a future sim could be:

Full modeling of the boat, crew and compartments

Correct usage of dive planes, compressed air, RWR devices and other stuff and a very good damage model, for example no more instant death screens, option to surrender or abandon the boat.

Fully modable

Quoted for truth. All of that would be awesome - could do without full crew and compartment modelling though. Eye candy for eye candy's sake takes away from functionality and features.

[Ian_L]

These ideas are very cool, but I'm intrigued as to how such ideas would actually be implemented. With SH4 now offering U Boats, and with a U Boat Atlantic campaign a modding probability within 6 months, it would make no marketing sense at all for Ubisoft to make a new WWII subsim as their next offering.

So are we taliking about possibly more patches/Add Ons for SH4? Are we talking about a Cold War scenario with these new features? Or is this just a "wouldn't it be nice" thread that two of the Devs are contributing to?

Interesting...:D

Perhaps a bit OT, but your post TDK was just along the same lines of something I was thinking about this afternoon. I am currently reading Churchill's WWII memoirs. I am in the third book, called The Grand Alliance, and he describes how German battle cruisers were somehow a headache also for the British command doing the same thing as the U-Boats: merchant hunting.

Could this not be a nice addon using similar SH4 engine? Imagine commanding the Hipper, or Scharnhorst and Gneisenau, and hunting shipping in the Atlantic while trying to stay hidden from the British battleships...

Perhaps all that would be needed would be better ballistics model, the player interface... I don't know. Perhaps too much work. But on the other hand, the strategic element would not need to be THAT different, in the sense that the player would still control a small fleet, hunting the enemy. Which, in my point of view, probably much more interesting than commanding a destroyer WAITING for U-Boats and such while escorting merchants at low speeds...

What do you guys think?

Ian

[Fincuan]

Could this not be a nice addon using similar SH4 engine? Imagine commanding the Hipper, or Scharnhorst and Gneisenau, and hunting shipping in the Atlantic while trying to stay hidden from the British battleships...
n

Something like this (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=134600)?

[piersyf]

I've had a look through the thread and for mine I think the following would be good inclusions...

Proper crew rotation and skill sets that mean something.

Actually manage the boat...morale issues that can affect performance (like exists in some games already). Imagine getting a morale boost from your crew for allowing 24 hours in port to restock with provisions as well as resupply? Or having to leave minus 2 or 3 crew because they've gone AWOL or turned up drunk?

A command crew. Sure the skipper is responsible for the boat, but he has to sleep. That's what the XO is for, as well as to give the XO command experience. Running aground should NOT happen just because of time compression. TC should stop before that happens. Same with battle stations. Only happens because of TC AND that we aren't actually looking inside the boat. I bet it would happen for real if the skipper actually did spend 2 days staring at a map. Same with navigation. Sure if you guys want to play with celestial navigation, go ahead, play Pirates of the Carribean because a sextant was about all they had. WW2 subs had gyro compasses as well as the sextants, plus you have other officers to confer with. A system like in B17 Mighty Eighth where you could get lost (or deviate from the track over time) depending on sea and weather conditions would be fine, but having to do it all from scratch? You don't need a full sky, just a few majors and that is already available (seen Celestia?). Something to add to the experience for sure.

I like the pumps idea. Should be modelled.

Messages that don't loop! I don't need the Pearl Harbour stats every 2nd day on a 100 day patrol.

Non stabilised deck guns

Realistic damage models and gunnery models. (a hard one. It is possible to take out a ship with a few well placed shots, but others need to be pounded)

Wounded crew as well as the morale thing. The model used in B17 would work.

Effective damage control teams. These aren't bad but don't seem to add much to what the departments can do alone.

Oooh, forgot! TIDES. Also, charts for the harbours. It's kinda embarrasing trying to sneak into a harbour to find it's too shallow to do submerged... a chart would tell me that before I try. Imaging sneaking in at high tide and getting stuck when you're in? Lying doggo waiting for the rising tide to attack then slip away...

[FooFighters]

Great topic :up:

I found some great issues here in this topic.
I understand the the devs cannot forefill everyone of them..
It would take far to long to have all sides and all theaters in one game.
When you do this this will kill the originaly of ports.
Moddeling all ports like they were is tons of work.

This is nothing new.. but it would make an awesome game !

* Choose 1 theater
* A choise of sailing with the axis or allies
* Please remove the jelly water. Dave/kriller and w_clear are both on the right track
* More control of the sub.. seperate engines, compressed air, more rooms ec..
* Make navigation harder, no more gps (or as option)
* More skins, new and rusty (would be great if it happens during the patrol)
* Less traffic and definetly more real (a bit less rusty).
* Change the way of sinking
* include all major battles in campaign
* Include the skipper in outside view ! (are we invisible ?)
* More weather changes
* Dying crew without gore
* AI in SH4 is better, but make it harder (or optional)

This is just my 2 cents.. if a game like this would come out..
I'll search for my sleeping bag and find a nice place near the store :D

[difool2]

I'd be happy with a reasonably realistic contact reporting scheme. Right now either you don't get very many contacts at all, or too many (depending on the game and the mod), and you can always trust the report completely, at least in terms of the report's position/speed/course at the instant of reporting (tho I believe there is some wiggle room with the speed).

Instead have some sort of possible error built in for all three parameters. Have the number of reports be correlated with the ups and down in the success of the codebreakers as the war goes on, as well as with the locations of friendly subs and other units. Hence if the campaign files have Thresher 300 miles away wandering into detection range of an enemy convoy, he should automatically transmit a report. And I personally don't mind reports given of far away contacts, as that helps immersion (tho I should be able to use my eraser to delete it if desired, since on my machine at least a lot of them lags the nav map when zoomed way in).

[Cipher]

Damage Control
:huh: More GUI in the damage control screen - it would just be cool to see your crew inside the sub on the cut-away view moving around and performing duties and see your damage control teams working in different areas (aka - pumping out water). Some of the most intense scenes you see in WW2 sub movies are with the crew dealing with the damage the sub has taken. I would say some better immersion with the crew - though it is really good, don't take that the wrong way.

:shifty: The ability to move crew around and other actions while paused would also be nice (single player of course).

:know: I would like it if they would show what was happening to your sub when it was destroyed. I would like to at least know if I hit a mine, or a torpedo got me. If you are not using an external view, you just don't know what did it. I mean, I know your supposed to be the captain and your now dead, but if you want to use that logic, why then is the captain never injured in air attacks? It feels more like you (the player) represent the sub than the submarine's captain to be honest.

:rock: I agree with some of the other posts I saw where they want to see more of the crew and no hull hit points. I hope the next version of this game that is released by this company has that target ship on fire with men jumping overboard and lowering lifeboats.

:p It would also be cool to get a cutaway view of a merchant vessel and what is involved when it takes a hit by a torpedo. Maybe like in submarine school. Something that can give the newer player an idea of how the ships employ damage control to stay afloat.

[OneTinSoldier]

Hi,


Wow, I have seen many great suggestions in here!



When SH4 was first released, I was ticked off. It felt like I encountered a bug every time I turned around. For our money, we were obviously handed a game that was still in beta stage. :down: I put the game away and went back to SH3, until now, when I caught wind of patch 1.5.

The good thing is that Ubi continues to support the game and release patches. :up:


I realize that sims are complex and many sims that have come out for the PC (Falcon 4.0 for instance) have been released in a bug-ridden state.

With that said...

What I would like to see is for Ubi to have a semi-open beta testing program(or semi-closed if you prefer) similar to the Microsoft Flight Simulator series. They invite people that have shown a great deal of knowledge and interest on forums, about the sim and the sim's subject matter, to participate in beta testing the next upcoming release in the series. That kind of collaboration results in a product that feels finished. Not completely bug-free mind you, but certainly a much more polished finish on it, rather than a dirty bug-riddled beta feeling to it.


The Silent Hunter series is great sim/game series, if you wait 6, 8, 9 months or even a year(patch 1.5) after it's been released. I would like to see the released product end up more like a finished product, rather than a beta that's being pushed out the door before it's ready.

Regards

[Seminole]

when I caught wind of patch 1.5.

I'm still running 1.4...but isn't version 1.5 only the U-Boat Missions add-on that must be purchased?


:hmm: A minor point but that is hardly a "patch" from my understanding of what patches have always been.


Are there features and improvements in the 1.5 version that make the purchase worthwhile even if you aren't interested in the U-Boat missions?


(I have always intended to buy the add-on just haven't been motivted enough yet to make the move)

[Sailor Steve]

when I caught wind of patch 1.5.

I'm still running 1.4...but isn't version 1.5 only the U-Boat Missions add-on that must be purchased?


:hmm: A minor point but that is hardly a "patch" from my understanding of what patches have always been.


Are there features and improvements in the 1.5 version that make the purchase worthwhile even if you aren't interested in the U-Boat missions?


(I have always intended to buy the add-on just haven't been motivted enough yet to make the move)
I don't want to seem overly rude, but don't you read the threads on this? I do, and my computer still won't properly run SH4.

To answer the question that has been answered many times, U-Boat Missions is a full-on patch that updates the American side of the game as well as adding u-boats. It changes enough that people are complaining that modders have stopped making mods for 1.4 in favor of 1.5, and the new mods won't work with 1.4. I haven't been able to get 1.5 due to technical difficulties, but I've still managed to pick all this up from what others have said.

Yes, even if you don't ever play the u-boats, this is a patch with upgrades and benefits.

[OneTinSoldier]

Seminole,

I will try and be clear here, which will probably be about as clear a mud. :lol:


I do not have SH4 currently installed. I just ordered the UBM addon yesterday and I am awaiting it's arrival from the store that I ordered it from in the UK before I install. But from what I have been reading my understanding is that, yes, the Patch 1.5 does come with some fixes to the game. Just have a read of the last few pages of the Realistic Sinking Mechanics v4.0 mod thread as one example that I know of.

Features added? Take a read in the last pages of jimimadrid's SH4 Menumaker mod thread, which had to be updated for 1.5, as one example I know of.


With UBM the fixes and features in patch 1.5 might be pretty subtle compared to past patches and the addition of U-boats. But I know this much for certain, enough has indeed been fixed/changed that the vast majority of modders are dropping support for patch 1.4 and only patch 1.5 will be supported in the future. I like mods, so it was enough to convince me to get the addon.

Regards

[Frederf]

As far as sales go, you can't attract Halo players with a subsim but you can attract the hardcore simmers (duh) and also the people who have a fascination with WWII history. The following are guidelines for making a good Silent Hunter game. I'm going to use the SH4 theater as an example.

#1 Make the Environment

A. The Earth is a sphere, start from there. If the map(s) are Mercator projections and the great circle lines turn out to be curves on the map... do it. Computers are smart and can handle curves. The basis of any good simulator is the environment. Start with a square ocean and you've already lost the war on day 1.

B. Make convincing weather. We all know SH3/4 weather makes no sense. It always starts clear with 0 winds on the first hour of patrol. Convienent?


#2 Connect the Player with his Boat and Crew

A. Maybe I want to set the TDC manually to 10000 yards range. Maybe I want to run only the electrics on the surface. Maybe I want to preflood the ballast tanks. Extra controls never hurt anyone. The beginner will just let the crew handle it and the advanced person will benefit.

B. Allow a written log to be kept by the player. This would be easy just have a big blank book with a "new entry button" that would stamp it with some basic info (position, torpedo count, fuel, time/date) and then let the player manually type in all the text he wants. Other automated logs such as navigation and maintanance would be nice as well.

C. Give the player more freedom in map drawing. The simple idea of placing an "X" mark on the map and having the text be player-typable would be one of the most hugely amazing things ever to happen to SH. Most attacks where drawn on an "attack map" why is the attack map the only one that we can't draw on?!

D. Set up orders or tasks. "Let me know if this warship changes course" "let me know when the bearing crosses 35 degrees" "Every 1 hour dive to 100 ft for a sonar sweep" "When surfacing make sure radar is turned on/off"

#2 Connect the Player with the Outside World

A. Sub command could be made a lot more interactive. In a war where a large part of the human population is fighting you feel terribly alone. When the torpedo problems were being hammered out you should get informed about what's new.

B. Use the radios. Shipping radio traffic would be interesting to intercept and it would be nice to drift in the broadcasting range of some of the island radio stations. This feature is there but completely not used in SH4.

C. Make giving contact reports and patrol reports more interactive. On higher realism settings contact reports must be manually entered and sent. Patrol reports could have a drop down menu for a few options for what conditions are like or any requests.


#3 Train the Player

Books should be available to read while on patrol, teaching sub tactics, historical facts, historical docterine, enemy sensor capabilities, etc. Make more books addable later with a simple HTML file and pictures in a folder method. Most players need information about how to play the game and often have long periods of doing very little.

Add in more and bettter training missions.


#4 Add in the Middleground Realism Mode

Right now realism options are either braindead or superman do it all yourself. Neither is all that correct. Say manual navigation is available, the settings would be GPS, nav officer, and full manual.

Make the crew matter. Make the player part of the crew team. The crew doesn't do all the work and neither does the captain.


#5 Use the Community

As a sim maker, you will make mistakes, bugs, and have factual errors. Look at what great mod makers do and take their good ideas (with permission I guess). Let the community point out factual errors in your sim and fix them. Let the game be easily modable.

[Seminole]

but don't you read the threads

:lol: ...no more than I have too...I actually play the game mostly ...I figure guys with 18k posts can do the reading and fill me in on what I need to know...and btw...thanks for reading so I don't have too...:up:

[Sailor Steve]

Thank you for taking my rant so gracefully. I'm the kind of guy who has to read everything I see, or be thinking I missed something.

But yes, there is new stuff in 1.5, or so I've read.:sunny:

[tomoose]

I've asked this question before and didn't get an answer.
What "new stuff" for the US aspect of the game is 1.5 bringing to the table?
Is there a readme or a list of improvements etc? I don't care about the U-boat campaign (SH3 did a great job with that once mods evolved). I'm enjoying 1.4 with TMO and RSRD and am looking for an excuse to upgrade but I've yet to see anyone articulate the improvements to the game with regard to playing the US side.
Anyone? Please?:-?

[Sailor Steve]

As I say, I only know what I've read. I haven't paid overly much attention to actual changes, since I can't get a copy and my computer hates SH4 (looking to upgrade soon). What I do read is that the changes are sufficient that mods developed for 1.5 won't work with 1.4, so if you want the latest versions of the mods you pretty much have to get the new one. Beyond that, well I may know in a few weeks, but since I've never been able to play SH4 I likely won't have the experience to know the difference.

I know that doesn't help, but folks who would actually know the difference don't seem to be reading this very old thread.

[Edit]Here is an older thread in which people discuss the changes:
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=132013

[Reise]

I think most mods are updated to use the 1.5 patch
It looks like most wont be releasing anymore for 1.4
Cant remember offhand what was fixed for fleet boats if anything
For $10 though not a great deal of expense especially as your favourite mods are using it as a base for future updates

[Sailor Steve]

WELCOME ABOARD, Reise!:sunny:

[Digital_Trucker]

@Reise Ditto the welcome aboard:up:

@Tomoose Straight from the 1.5 readme

The most notable changes are:

1. German campaigns are now accesible through the main menu button "U-boat campaign". To play a career with the US Silent Service, use the new "American Career" button. The included campaign focuses on German operations in the Indian Ocean and nearby areas.
2. When commanding a German u-boat it is possible to enable the Kriegsmarine Grid Quadrant Overlay over the Navigation map.
3. The Submarine upgrade system and screen has been improved
4. Improved crew management system
5. New player and crew abilities available via crew management system
6. New Type IX D2 Long range U-boot
7. New Type XVIII Walther U-boat with unique propulsion system
8. Player has been given limited control over allied units (naval and air), depending on his current rank.
9. Game loading time has been greatly reduced though dynamic loading.
10. Maximum render distance increased to 20 km
11.Water rendering improvements
12.New warships
-Graf Spee Pocket Battleship
-Black Swan Class Sloop
-River Class Frigate - with a correct 3d model this time
-J Class Destroyer
-V&W Destroyer
-Flower Class Corvette
-Fiji class light cruiser
13.New Merchant Ships
-Hog Island type A Freighter
-Charlotte Schliemann supply ship
-California Express Passenger Freighter
-War Melody
-Paula medium tanker
14.New Aircraft
-Ar-196
-Sunderland Patrol Plane
-Beaufighter fighter bomber
15.Added more Generic unit types improving campaign editing and unit appearance control. Iowa and Yamato are now "Super Battleship" class and won't spawn as "Generic Battleship".
Edit : I've only had 1.5 for a short time and haven't played it much (been too busy messing with it to play much:rotfl:), but I can vouch for the decreased loading times. If time is money, then $10 for the add-on is worth it in time saved over the life of the game. There is additional content other than just the Uboats. The list from the readme is certainly not all inclusive, either.

[RickC Sniper]

What I would like to see is for Ubi to have a semi-open beta testing program(or semi-closed if you prefer) similar to the Microsoft Flight Simulator series. They invite people that have shown a great deal of knowledge and interest on forums, about the sim and the sim's subject matter, to participate in beta testing the next upcoming release in the series. That kind of collaboration results in a product that feels finished. Not completely bug-free mind you, but certainly a much more polished finish on it, rather than a dirty bug-riddled beta feeling to it.



You don't think that Subsim members have been involved in beta testing the Silent Hunter series pre-release? They have.

Unless you are referring to something else?

[OneTinSoldier]

Hello RickC,

Nope, that was what I meant. Well, then... Ubi and the Devs need to something different, because it was in-your-face obvious that SHIV was still a beta when it was released. The thing needed a lot more time in the cooker.

Or, perhaps I just need to chalk it up to a lesson learned about Ubi when it comes to the SH series. They release betas and you should wait six months to a year before purchasing, unless you like being paying to be a beta tester. I would sure like to see them release something(on release day!) they can be proud of, rather than something that frustrates and angers quite a few folks because all kinds of things do not work properly or as designed.

Again, the good news is they supported the game, continued development for a considerably lengthy amount of time, and released patches during that time, which does have some mitigating qualities to the 'state of release' issue.

Cheers

[RickC Sniper]

Again, the good news is they supported the game, continued development for a considerably lengthy amount of time, and released patches during that time,
Cheers


That is pretty much all you can ask for today.

If we had not purchased the product when released they might not have bankrolled the programmers allowing them to continue working on said product.

SH2 was a poor product, and it never did really get fixed very well, but if it had not sold would we have gotten a SH3.......and then SH4?
:hmm:

[tomoose]

DT;
thanks for that readme list. Basically nothing earth-shattering for the US side except the crew-management and sub upgrade screens from what I can see. I'll switch eventually but TMO and RSRD for 1.4 are still keeping me entertained.

BTW, was the diveplane graphics glitch fixed in 1.5? Did they also put in the appropriate bumping sound for the rubber boat (spy drop off missions) instead of the horrendous ship collision sound?:hmm:

[Reise]

No the ship collision sound is still there for dinghy

[tomoose]

I thought that would have been a no-brainer!!! They didn't even fix that simple little glitch!?!???:nope:

[Lynx2069]

INTERNAL DAMAGE: I'd love to be able to watch my command room slowly fill with smoke as the fire in the engine compartment burns like a 4 alarm fire.

FULL 3D SUB, not just a command room and things, let me walk from the front tubes all the way through to the engine and see my crew in action. Everything from sleeping to eating to singing.

[UnderseaLcpl]

I really like the aforementioned ideas to have all sides in the war and include a "I have no life" realism function that can be enabled for those of us who want maximum simulation value.
I also want the pre-order of the game to include a "World's Greatest Kaleun " mug and a torpedo-shaped pen. A print of that Donitz photo from Das Boot would be nice too.


OOH I got another one. Maybe. I think this might have been posted already; Button to turn off "Ship sighted!" and "radar/sound contact!"
The most anoyying thing in sh3 and 4 is getting out of port or a friendly area and having some idiot enthusiastically scream out that he has spotted the ship you are berthed next to. Also this should turn off the TC reset.

[Fearless]

What I like to see is a combination of both in the one sim ie. submerged and surface type which give you the opportunity to play both sides of the fence and would make multiplayer much more interesting. If Dangerous Waters can do it why not this awesome WW2 sim. :up: