View Full Version : The most missing feature in SH III
With all the mods and workarounds around making this game already a good 400% better compared to the vanilla stock game, what would be the one thing you would like to change if you can?
- the weather model
- the incompetent helmsman
- the game telling you when the enemy lost contact with you
- more sub types
- the old graphic engine
- more compartments to walk around (diesels, torpedo room)
- interactive BdU orders
- multiplayer / wolfpacks
- enemy a/c mot using depth charges / Fidos
- better enemy escort AI
etc. etc., add your most wanted wish
To me it's the weather engine that drives me crazy :damn:. Four weeks of storm in a row with 15 m/s wind in the Southern Atlantic - that drives me crazy
Cheers,
nikbear
06-03-09, 04:16 PM
For me it would have to be Wolfpacks,when you think of the Atlantic War,its one of the first things that spring to mind:nope: Some of the other feature's I can understand not being in the game,time and the ability of PC's back then was a deciding factor I suppose when it came to deciding what went in,But....No Wolfpacks:nope::damn::wah::88) What were they thinking!:doh:
There crude workarounds for the weather problem. Not perfect, but reasonable. But for the wolfpacks there is no good substitute :damn: because you only can replicate the massive attack and only in those convoys that have AI subs added to them. But not the whole hunt, shadowing, coordination from BDU, etc.
To me wolfpacks is the key feature missing in this game yet.
When, and if, the GWX4 guys manage to implement a similar AI sub as we have today (thanks to sergbuto) combined with SH4's ability to actually call the pack, we will have done a giant step forward.
Bent Periscope
06-03-09, 05:11 PM
Wolfpacks!
For me it would have to be Wolfpacks,when you think of the Atlantic War,its one of the first things that spring to mind:nope: Some of the other feature's I can understand not being in the game,time and the ability of PC's back then was a deciding factor I suppose when it came to deciding what went in,But....No Wolfpacks:nope::damn::wah::88) What were they thinking!:doh:
I couldn't agree more. Whenever there is a post of this type I always answer the same. I would give up a lot of eye candy to have realistic wolfpacks.
Sgtmonkeynads
06-03-09, 08:27 PM
Packs would be THE game changer. I would like to see some different orders in the game, and acknowlegement for completeing them. By orders I'm talking about like when you begin prewar. you could have to go to Scappa and take depth measurements outside, inside, and around the enter points. Or you could, I don't know transport the Ark of the Covenant to secret location?
Hartmann
06-03-09, 08:58 PM
Another big problem is that IA boats donīt dive or surface, so in case of a wolfpack, they are sitting ducks in the surface or pinned down at periscope depth with the limited speed and range
Brer Rabbit
06-03-09, 10:33 PM
I think there is a place for a fatigue model, that does not require micro managing or sit-down strikes by the crew. The maximum downside for a fatigued crew shoule be something like a 50% reduction in effectiveness, i.e. loss of engine speed, longer load times, missed sightings etc
Jimbuna
06-04-09, 05:38 AM
Wolfpacks and fully working AI subs http://www.psionguild.org/forums/images/smilies/wolfsmilies/pirate.gif
What i miss about the lack of Wolfpacks is not the potencial offensive threat they represent, but the targets for the enemy escort they also could be. :D
With all the mods and workarounds around making this game already a good 400% better compared to the vanilla stock game, what would be the one thing you would like to change if you can?
1. Weather engine for the reasons said
2. Better shallow water operations. Ie. the difficult acoustic conditions, tides, ability to bottom to escape detection. Now it's exactly the wrong way around, it's much harder for U-boat to live in shallow compared to deep waters!
More intelligent ship behaviour (i.e. not just ship zig-zagging along a very predictable route) and better ship phisics, i.e. fixing the insane breaking/acceleration of large ships.
mookiemookie
06-04-09, 08:45 AM
Wolfpacks, definately. It's what U-boats were known for.
1. Weather engine for the reasons said
2. Better shallow water operations. Ie. the difficult acoustic conditions, tides, ability to bottom to escape detection. Now it's exactly the wrong way around, it's much harder for U-boat to live in shallow compared to deep waters!
:-? Not quite. Shallow water meant death for a submerged U-boat. In sub warfare, depth is your friend.
Wolfpacks and fully working AI subs http://www.psionguild.org/forums/images/smilies/wolfsmilies/pirate.gif
If GWX4 isn't giving us that, I would be very disappointed.
(Just kidding :smug:)
:-? Not quite. Shallow water meant death for a submerged U-boat. In sub warfare, depth is your friend.
It meant death if the opponent could find and fix you in the first place. In shallow waters with fresh and salty water mixing, different temperature waters etc. it was very hard to find a submarine, even during 1980's. Moreover, if there's a lot of skerries etc. even schnorkeling wasn't as risky as in open waters.
onelifecrisis
06-04-09, 10:42 AM
AI improvements (ships which are not so robotic) is at top of my personal never-gonna-happen-in-SH3 wish list.
The weather.
I am yet to see a fix that produces a good balance of weather.
FIREWALL
06-04-09, 11:06 AM
Currents and better thermal layers and all the above.
Warner Von Shultz
06-04-09, 12:41 PM
I would like to see something slightly more dramatic if you survive the war and you are out at sea than a BDU message telling the war has ended and ordering you to return to the nearest port and the game just ends.
I'd at least like to see the game continue to play until you get to the nearest port. I don't know what the GWX 3.0 mod does concerning the end of the war and I don't know if the date is hardcoded in the game; but if it isn't maybe there could be a status change for all countries and they will turn into nuetral targets and the date could be changed to end a couple of days after the end of the official war. Maybe a month after the war. It would give you time to at least disengage from combat if you are in a hunt and head toward some base of your choosing. You don't even have to be given enough time to head TO port. Just enough time to disengage and autoend your patrol.
Here is a list of things I would like to see:
1) Wolfpacks & fully functioning AI U-boats
2) Surface ships having the ability to launch torpedoes. MTB's would be a lot more of threat as compared to what they are now; a minor pest easily evaded.
3) More balanced weather. Although GWX did try to fix this issue it's still a pain.
4) The ability to choose the time of day when you start patrols.
5) Last but not least, more stable save game behaviour. I have never seen a game with so many issues around saving games. I don't have SH4 so I don't know how stable that is when it comes to saving games. If/when SH5 comes out I really hope these save game bugs get squashed.
Heavy and dynamic radio traffic.
This would be really nice to have on it's own, but if they involve real wolfpacks, it would even become a necessity, I think.
Wolfpacks FTW, totally. :cool: But also the thing that land mass is hard enough to collide with, but not hard enough to prevent you from beeing detected by the enemy... DD's hearing you, BEHIND an island....:hmmm::down: Not beeing able to use landmass to hide behind, is the most unrealistic thing IMHO.
Oh well, just my 2 cents. :ping:
I just remember a thing that annoys me all series long (ok, didn't care so much during times of SH1 as I was young and unexperienced back then).
But what they really need to do is to fix this constant discrepancy between things _you_ see and hear and those your crew does.
I mean, if _you_ see smoke on the horizon, why does it take your watchmen nearly until half the ship is already revealed until they would finally call out the sighting. Or their cat eye vision during the night. Spotting ships that would have been some blurry shadow to you at best (like all the other blurry shadows on the horizon, that aren't any ships).
And if you can hear it loud and clear via hydrophone that there's a ship nearby, why can't anybody else. And how are *more* crew members in the conning tower helping fixing this ? All those weird issues with this game...
The visual things might be dealt with by probably an algorithm that is able to evaluate the displayed color of smoke or a vessel on the horizon in contrast to the horizon itself and calculate from that whether your watchmen have a hard time spotting it or not.
And for the hydrophon issue: if a vessel is impossible to hear because your own engine/propellor noises are blocking it or the bearing is unfortunate than just implement it that way. Play blocking engine/prop noises of your own boat so that you can't hear what your crew can't hear.
It feels almost like cheating when you use the hydrophone like 200% more efficiently than anybode else seems to be capable.
Torplexed
06-04-09, 07:37 PM
My wish would be for something productive or entertaining to do in those long tedious periods between contacts.
My wish would be for something productive or entertaining to do in those long tedious periods between contacts.
I have got through many books in SH3 time.
Canovaro
06-07-09, 05:57 AM
1. interactive BdU
2. more mission variety
3. more reliable game, especially save games
4. more 'satisfying' death scene if you know what i mean
5. wolfpacks
list would be longer if there would be no mods that have fixed things
The_Blockade_Runner
06-10-09, 10:20 AM
Call me nitpicking but heres what I would have like ubisoft to have put in the game:
1: Besides seeing just land and ports on the map screen, how about a terriotry map showing land controlled by allies and axis.
2: When you return from patrol it would be awesome if there were a small newspaper article in your office updating you on whats happening in the war at the moment.
2: When you return from patrol it would be awesome if there were a small newspaper article in your office updating you on whats happening in the war at the moment.
Try SH3 commander. :up:
msalama
06-11-09, 12:01 AM
* Fleetboats ;)
* Wolfpacks
* Independent engine/motor, ballast tank and diveplane control
* Last but not least, a relatively BUG-FREE GAME
Still as we know there's a SH5 in the works, so one can always hope for stuff to be fixed... though I'm not holding my breath really, UBIs track record of producing manure and calling it "simulators" taken into account :nope:
PS. Wow, that was a bit cold, granted... well, maybe it's just me not having had my 3rd cup of morning coffee yet, eh :dead: :88) :lol:
Wolfpacks.
Realistic Repair Times (The Longer Repair Times mod is only a bad compromise, because it breaks the flooding behaviour).
onelifecrisis
06-11-09, 02:19 AM
My wish would be for something productive or entertaining to do in those long tedious periods between contacts.
My preferred solution to that problem would be to make the game so that it can do much higher time compression on reasonable hardware, combined with the ability to plot locations for things like hydrophone checks into a course. Start mission, spend 10 minutes plotting a detailed course including hydrophone checks in specific locations, even radar sweeps, whatever, then just hit TC and bam - you drop out when contact is made, or an important radio message comes through, or whatever. I'd prefer that to some sort of time-killing device, and I think it's be possible (especially on modern hardware) if they spend just a little time optimising their code and their... asset database? Or whatever it's called.
What i miss is more copartment inside sub and free walking inside it with full crew animated,
Jimbuna
06-11-09, 06:18 AM
What i miss is more copartment inside sub and free walking inside it with full crew animated,
That level of detail would more than likely only be feasible on high end spec systems.
mookiemookie
06-11-09, 06:42 AM
That level of detail would more than likely only be feasible on high end spec systems.
Not to mention that I don't think it would add much to the long term playability of the game in proportion to the amount of dev time it would require. Sure it would be cool the first couple of times you walked through your sub, but does it add much to the gameplay? No. And gameplay is obviously what has kept SH3 going all these years, despite dated graphics.
Wolfpacks.
Realistic Repair Times (The Longer Repair Times mod is only a bad compromise, because it breaks the flooding behaviour).
Oh, yes, that too. I remember AOD when repairing did took several hours and often was racing against time when oxygen did run low on sea bottom...
Leandros
06-12-09, 03:36 AM
My preferred solution to that problem would be to make the game so that it can do much higher time compression on reasonable hardware, combined with the ability to plot locations for things like hydrophone checks into a course. Start mission, spend 10 minutes plotting a detailed course including hydrophone checks in specific locations, even radar sweeps, whatever, then just hit TC and bam - you drop out when contact is made, or an important radio message comes through, or whatever. I'd prefer that to some sort of time-killing device, and I think it's be possible (especially on modern hardware) if they spend just a little time optimising their code and their... asset database? Or whatever it's called.
Why not the possibility to select to start in the assigned patrol area - just like start outside of port can be selected in the Commander. The AI could compute the time and fuel expended to get there, maybe randomly, according to the given period. After all, with maximum caution, it is usually not a problem to get to the patrol area if you do not wish to engage any targets enroute.
Repair times is possibly the least realistic part of the game. Maybe make this selective in several grades...?
Paul Riley
06-12-09, 05:53 AM
I know this is only a minor cosmetic issue,but I would like snow and ice (excluding icebergs) modelled in the game,and surprises me why the developers didnt include it.Would have made the arctic runs a lot more interesting and immersive.
msalama
06-12-09, 06:03 AM
Would have made the arctic runs a lot more interesting and immersive.
+1
Oh yeah, would add to the immersion a lot IMHO too...
msalama
06-13-09, 12:57 AM
Welcome Herr Kaleun! Valid points you make all around :up:
Do you use SH3 Commander, BTW? Has a nightclub and a ton of other fun and useful features as well. Thread here:
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=147237
Task Force
06-13-09, 01:07 AM
* Fleetboats ;)
* Wolfpacks
* Independent engine/motor, ballast tank and diveplane control
* Last but not least, a relatively BUG-FREE GAME
Still as we know there's a SH5 in the works, so one can always hope for stuff to be fixed... though I'm not holding my breath really, UBIs track record of producing manure and calling it "simulators" taken into account :nope:
PS. Wow, that was a bit cold, granted... well, maybe it's just me not having had my 3rd cup of morning coffee yet, eh :dead: :88) :lol:
Why would fleet boats be in the atlanic, i thought they were workin in the picific, you would have russian, british, and maby the random US sub pop up, but I agree, other sub traffic.
being able to interact with other ships at sea is anouther thing id like to see.
Refuleing from milkcows (uboat tankers.) and supply ships in stock.
historicly accurate ship movements. (gwx did a nice job with that.)
being able to have the crew on deck when running decks washed.
crew moral maby.
larger group of sub types.
interaction with bdu
animals
ect ect ect...
msalama
06-13-09, 01:29 AM
Nah mate TF, that was just a quip :salute: You see, I do like U.S. fleet boats per se, but still sort of dislike SH4 for some reason. Why? Hmmm... well I can't really put my finger on it, but it's a bit like there's something inert or somehow _dead_ in that game, modded or not! I nevertheless have it installed and play it regularly, because RFB the mod is naturally only available for SH4...
But to reiterate, yeah, I was just joking up there :ping:
Task Force
06-13-09, 01:40 AM
No big deal, just was talking about how id like enemy sub ai in the stock game, and that I didnt think fleetboats operated in the atlanic.
Agreed about that sh4 missing something thing. I feel the same way.:up:
Good points everyone.
I'd like to see the sub changing as the patrol progresses, becoming more rusty and weather beaten, with visible damage (that will not go away after you reload the game).
You leave the port in shiny, freshly painted boat, and return in something that barely looks seaworthy (after you took some serious damage).
Torplexed
06-13-09, 09:16 AM
No big deal, just was talking about how id like enemy sub ai in the stock game, and that I didnt think fleetboats operated in the atlanic.
US subs did operate for a time in Squadron 50 based in Roseneath, Scotland. They patrolled in the Bay of Biscay and took part in Operation Torch. Although one or two of the boats tangled with U-Boats and several shot at Axis merchant ships, postwar records credited no positive sinkings. In mid-1943 the boats were withdrawn and sent to the Pacific. Interesting historical footnote but doesn't seem to warrant a lot of effort to include them. :cool:
msalama
06-13-09, 01:23 PM
Interesting historical footnote but doesn't seem to warrant a lot of effort to include them. :cool:Of course not, although this indeed is an interesting tidbit and something I never knew about myself. Still I feel that SH3 is the better platform of the 2, regardless of all eyecandy etc. they put into the 4... And thus if someone modelled "the world" for SH3 so to speak the fleetboats would of course be very welcome! But alas, no switching of sides here AFAIK, so that just can't happen...
OK, so what I actually wish for in addition to what I wrote above is for UBI to take this kind of stuff into account this time. I mean, why limit yourself to just one theatre when there're several available?
PS. Got pwned this time around, too, so no surviving the war even against Stalin's boys when we hit late -43 it seems :damn:
pluskat
06-14-09, 10:14 AM
when I sink a BB such as Nelson I don't want to see it appear again
in the same place.In fact it should be wiped from the campaign once
sunk,maybe this is a stock sh3 problem .
Torplexed
06-14-09, 10:25 AM
when I sink a BB such as Nelson I don't want to see it appear again
in the same place.In fact it should be wiped from the campaign once
sunk,maybe this is a stock sh3 problem .
It is a stock SH3 problem. It's a stock SH4 problem as well. The only time the big capital ships are removed from the roster is when they were sunk historically, which sort of make one's contributions to the naval war in either theater seem irrelevant. :dead:
Petsman
06-15-09, 04:06 PM
Interactive BDU orders plus mission variarion like SH4.
Plus your achivements can change the outcome of war( sinking major british battleships)
Torplexed
06-15-09, 07:13 PM
Interactive BDU orders plus mission variarion like SH4.
Plus your achivements can change the outcome of war( sinking major british battleships)
While I think sunken battleships should be permanently removed from the game I would wonder about the realism of sinking a few more battleships affecting the outcome of the Atlantic war. By WW2 battleships had ceased to be the dominant factor in naval warfare. The balance was really tipped by the thousands of escort craft and hundreds of escort carriers pumped out by the Allies....not to mention what was happening on the Eastern Front which U-Boats were helpless to prevent or aid. Besides, if the game is constantly putting that many battleships in my periscope I would seriously question it's realism since the vast majority of U-Boat captains never saw one.
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.